The Express. — London, England, 1847-03-27 00:00:00

If they looked to individual distress in Ireland, he admitted that . profitable employment could not be found; tout if they took Ireland sa a whole he did not think that this was the case. He could not entertain • doubt but that there were means of profitably employiug the whole latentring population of that country. He could not believe that millions of the able-bodied hands in that great country would be supported in idleness by the rate payers, when they had inch opportunities of turning their industry to amount. If the people of that country were ill fed, ill clothed, and ill lodged, it as owing to the fact that the tallier of the people had not been called forth as it ought to have been, or was improperly directed. It was the misdirectios of that labour which caused the present distress. When they looked to the large amount of waste land there which was capable of improvement, the capacity of that which was under cultivation for further improvement, its mineral wealth, which was almost untouched, its great water power, and its fisheries, no man could doubt that the labour of Ireland, if properly employed end directed, would be sufficient to maintain her people, not only better than they were now, but in comfort and happiness. (Hear, hear.) No law could be paned in his opinion better calculated to the eetabliihment of such a state of things than • measure which would provide effectual means for the relief of the destitute. Such • measure was calculated to make the labourer try to get profitable employment, and it gave en inducement to the wealthy to employ him. (Hear, hese) Undoubtedly • great change of this kind should be made gradually and the assistance of this country should be given to facilitate it. That was proposed to be given, for they should remember that the poor-law was not the only measure before parliament, but was accompanied by others to facilitate the progress of Ireland through the crisis of this Mange. These measures, and thee efforts made to emigrate by the people of het ind in larger numbers than he could have ventured to antic pate, gave them a right to expect that great improvements would take place in the state of society in Ireland. But in advocating the poor-law, which he looked upon as tke one which would most contribute to stimulate the progress of Ireland, let him not he misunder stood as if he did not look forward to the future of that country with anxiety and apprehension. It was impossible for any man to look to what was going forward thin e with out feeling the deepest alarm. Although he considered the medium proposed by the government the wisest which could be proposed, and es well calculated as any which human wisdom could suggest for the improvement of that country, he was yet but too deeply sensible that no measure which it was possible to devise, that none which parliament could pos sibly sanction, that nothing short of a miracle could work en immediate improvement of evils of such long standing and inveteracy as those of Ireland. His noble friend maid that they would reduce the rate of wages in Ireland by this mea sure. Reduce the rate of wages us ,that country ! (Hear.) Was it possible to do so ? After the description which his noble friend gave of the habitual state of Ireland, after the report of the poor-laws commissioners, who stated that 2s. 4d. and do. fel. were the weekly wages of the labourers of 1836, he considered the notion of reducing the rate of wages the most extraordinary he ever heard. H's noble friend adverted to opinions exproised by himself and other members of the government in 1838, as being inconsistent with the present measure. There was no inconsistency in their conduct. In 1838 they proposed the existing poor-law, which they expected would have a more powerful effect than it really produced. That expectation was disappointed, partly because the local authorities to which the administration of the law was confided did not apply it with that vigour with which it was intended to be applied, and partly because it was not accompanied by those other measures which, as his noble friend knew, they meant to combine it, but which they were not in • position to carry. Experience lad dace shown, not that the measure was bed, but the necessity of proceeding further in the same direction. It was with that view that he proposed the bill about to come under their considera tion, and he would only further add, that while undoubtedly he felt great apprehension as to the future, still he saw nothing in the condition of Ireland that should lead them to despair, (Hear, hear.) She possessed all the elements of progress. If she was only true to herself—if she exerted herself as he trusted she would do, and as he believed the bill under discussion would have a considerable effect in enabling her to do, he saw no reason to believe that she might not emerge from the present dark season of misfortune to greater prosperity and happiness than she ever yet had known. That she might do ID was his most earnest prayer. (Cheers.) Lord BROUGHAM said he wished to state his opinions very briefly on the present subject, which was one of the most important and alarming that he remembered to have seen brought before parliament since he was a member of it. In the present emergency he was favourable to temporary and not permanent measures. In legiels flag within certain limits, and for a temporary purpose, they could wait and see the effect of the measures they passed, end extend them if found beneficial, but that was not the clue with a poor-law for Ireland or any other country. (Hear, hear.) Once pass it and they could not recall it. VOial irrevocabik verbum. Once see that the people of Ireland were to be fed without labour, and they could not atop till they had well-nigh ruined the owners of pro perty in Ireland, for whom he felt much—Gaughter); mad also the occupier and the tiller of the soil, for whom he felt more. With the one he felt politically ea a member of the nuns class; but with the other he felt as being of the same nature and SI a man to whom nothing was alien that con cerned their eommen humanity. The one class would be rained by the pillage of their property, and the other by the loss of their independence. (Hear, hear.) The question was, whether, if they had now to pass a poor law for England for the first time, they would pass such a Law as now existed, and which in principle they were about to extend to Ireland ? And if such a law was bad for • country like this or Scotland, sod all men admitted that it was no more nor less, it must be ten times worse for a country like Ireland. But, apart from this objection, he was strongly of opinion that this was not the moment at which the de. vision of parliament aught to be taken on this subject ; and, looking at the division in the other house on the clause which involved the whole principleof the bill, when 36 voted in the minority, 34 of whom were Irish members, against 242, who formed the majority, he could not look upon the result of that division as the deliberate opinion of the Com mons of England. It was a mere jest to Pay that any poor law could afford relief from the existing predure of distress in Ireland ; whatever its other merits, this measure could have no effect in meeting tke present crisis ; why not therefore postpone the subject until they could come to its consideration, uninfluenced by feeling. But he had other serious objections to the application of this principle of poor-law to Ireland besides that of time. He could find no machinery in that country capable of carrying it out; nor could he trust the authorities to whose hands its administration was to be entrusted. He was not disposed— and he spoke it with all respect—to entrust the powers of this act to Irish functionaries st all. (Hear.) If the act waste be put in operation, other machinery must be found than any that now existed ,• and the aid of government o ffi cers, of the oonstabulary, and probably of the military, must be called in, or the rates would never be raised. What was the case now? In the Castlebar Union, 1,1001. was due for poor. rates ; and, though the union was in debt between 3001. and 4001., no more than 351. could be collected. The same diffi culty was experienced in other parts of the country, and he was not disposed to think that that difficulty would be less ened by increasing the amount of the rate. If there was one thing more disagreeable to the Irish mind than another it was the payment of direct taxes. (A laugh.) That was the only reason for not applying the land tax, the property tax, and the assessed tax to Ireland. It was not from motives of mercy or regard that the several Chancel lors of the Exchequer had sacrificed the revenue which might be drawn from the extension of these burdens to Ire land, but the knowledge that the expense of collection would be so great, that the net proceeds to the exchequer would scarcely be worth the haring. (Hear, hear.) The workhouse test was peculiarly inapplicable to a country with two mil lions of mendicants (some said more, but that was sufficient for his purpose). To accommodate that number, more than 3,000 workhouse*, supposing each held about 600, would be required ; but no one dreamed of anything like this ; and the moment the workhouses became full, the orders of the eommissioners for giving out-door relief would, in point of fact, become the law. They must remember, too, that this measure was not experimental—it was final. He would not, then, enter into the general question of the poor-law; but he believed that its tendency was to destroy all feelings of kindness between the upper and lower classes; and that it led the pauper to believe and to act as though—end this was their language—he held a prior mortgage of the property of She country : M believed the tendency of that law was to sap the right of property; to diminish the stimulus to labour and exertion, even in an industrious people ; to create impro- vidence even in a naturally provident people ; and to put an end to that spirit of independence which alone made man worthy of the name. These were the consequences of • poor-law, and of the abuses to which it was inevitably liable. To such an extent had those abuses gone in this country— to such wreck and ruin was the industry and the land reve nue going—that in 1834 it became necessary to pass an act for retracing our steps, as far se we could do so. Suck was the result of going too far in a wrong direction. As to the manner now proposed, nothing but the mod ex treme necessity could ever reconcile him to it—but pass it when they would, they might depend upon it, that a supple mental power would be necessary to enable than to levy the rates, and other restrictions must be imposed to enable them to administer the relief with ordinary safety. For the rea sons he had stated, be implored them to do no more at this time then the emergency required, and to defer to a more favourable opportunity the measure (should it be then necessary) for the permanent arrangement of the poor-law. He wished to bear his testimony to the great humanity of the people of this country, and the admirably true represen tation of those human feelings exhibited be the present Hon se of Commons, as shown by their votes. 'But that was no reason why, under the prewar., arid stimulus, and ex citement of those feelings, so great, so fearful, and so irre vocable a change in our policy should be made. There was also another reason which operated with him against the bill. They were now touching on the end of the present parliament, and ho believed that the cry raised out of doors—a very natural one, he admitted, considering the burden imposed upon them by the influx of Irish poor—for a poor-law for Ireland, and the fear of the consequences of refusing it, when gentlemen approached the beatings, might have ope rated in influencing the opinion in favour of the proposed measure. This was an additional reason for not pressing such a measure at this time. (Hear.) The Marquis of LONDONDERRY end the Archbishop of Dusitim rose simultaneously; the former penbned in his right to sdelrese the house, but the call being very general for the most rev. prelate, the Lord Chancellor put the ques tion formally to their lordships, as to who should be heard, and declared the decision to be in favour of The Archbishop of DUBLIN, who said he felt called upon not to give a silent vote MI the occasion, in consequence of the peculiar connexion he had had with the subject under discussion—a connexion not courted by him, but forced I . . i ir e il r him, oh ipsic no a manner,ubt, recollected LatblichevOLC:a been one of the commissimiers appointed by a pre- sinus government to inquire into the state of the Irish pow. Than that commission, one could hardly be found leas likely to agree in any one erroneous view, fur it was composed of Protestants and Roman Catholics, clergymen, lawyers, and laymen, of men different in habits and educa tion, and differing alto on many questions of policy. The opinions of those oommissionen, however, the government did not think fit to secede to, or to rstify. There were dif ferences of opinion amongst them es to the establishment of such a poor-law as was afterward. established. They found a large majority of the Irish people, of all clause,, afraid of the experiment which the government decided upon trying; but all agreed—those who approved of the government poor law, and those who objected to it—that it was most essential not to establish the principle of out-door relief, which they said would be " ruin and confiscation," and that sentiment, l it appeared, had been repeated, not long since, by a leading member of the government. With those of the commis sioners who dreaded the proposed experiment (and he ad mitted he was one who did so), the chief ground of objection was the fear lest it should lead to the principle of out-door re lief. He, on other grounds, considered the experiment ha zardous, and not likely to be followed by the beneficial re sults others anticipated from it; but his great ob jection was, that it might lead to such a pro posal as the government had now brought for ward. In his own locality, every effort was made to prevent the people losing their habits of self-dependence, There had been hitherto in Ireland a great reluctance on the part of the people to enter the workhouse. lie looked upon this as a moist favourable symptom, and had encour aged it by every means in his power, because he feared that if it were once overcome the workhouses would be swamped, and the call would become general for out-door relief. He had made his labourers believe that they were doing a hard day's work, and fully earning their wages; but if they had believed they were entitled to out-door relief, any attempt on his Fart, or on that of his steward, to make them work would have left their lives not worth a day's purchase. (A laugh.) The English labourer, accustomed to comparative luxuries, might feel reluctance to accept out-door re lief; but to the Irish labourer, accustomed to a bare subsistence, it would be a perfect land of plenty, and would, in his opinion, totally supersede the necusity for work. The consequence of the government measure, should it par into a law, would be, that they would have, not two millions, but the whole population of Ireland throwing themselves on the poor-rate; in witness of which, he might, at this moment, point to the farms deserted, while the la bourers were Isnily performing half labour on the govern ment works. It was not from any wish to preserve the landlords' estates from confiscation—for confiscation it would be—that he deprecated the government measure. It was from regard for the unfortunate people themselves, who would be thrown by it into greater destitution than ever. (Hear, hear.) The rates in aid would icon be called for; then a second rate to get in the arrears of the first; and when the third was called for, there would be no response whatever. Finally, the hurthen of the rate would be thrown on the united empire. He wished that the people could be kept from destitution, even at the expense of half ruining the Irish landlords ; but it was phy sically impossible. The amount of destitution was more than the land would support ; so that even if no rent were asked, no man would farm it subject to the rate. It would be better if the government were to confiscate the land at once, and taking it into their own hands, to give to the owners such pensions se they thought sufficient for Irish landlords. (Laughter.) Even if possible, he would still deprecate it aa destructive of the moral character of the country. He believed that out door relief would, in three years, effect as much mischief in Ire land as it took three hundred years to effect in England In the former country there was everything to render the experiment doubly dangerous. In the first place, the people were improvident, and inclined to dependence to an extent he had never seen equalled in any country called cirilised. As an instance of this, he would mention that in a sea-coast village in Cork there lived a number of fishermen who were in the habit of getting abundance of fish at a bank about twenty miles from shore. Since the distress they had re mained idle, although the fish were swarming almost in Bight, fully satisfied with the miserable soup they received from charity. He had proposed to fit out these fishermen with food and tackling for the voyage, but had been told by persons on the spot that it would be no use, for that if provisioned and sent to sea, the men would land at night, consume their sea-store, and return to the soup-kitchens. They were, in fact, not fit to be trusted with a loaf of bread. (Hear, hear.) The present was certainly a time of great dis tress; and great sacrifice' must be made; but for the expe riment of out-door relief, he did not think that a worst time could have been selected. (Hear.) If it had been tried when the workhouses were nearly empty, he should still have deprecated it : but now, when they were full to over flowing, the experiment was absolutely perilous. (Hear, hear.) It might be said, that something must be done, and if not out-door relief, what eke ? He should recommend inquiry. If they did not inquire—if they took this leap in the dark—they would create nothing but confusion and dis content, and would have to retrace their steps at an enor mously increased expense. For these reasons he implored the house to steeds to the motion of his noble friend. The Earl of DEVON could not feel justified in denying to the people of Ireland that species of relief which was afforded to the people of England. (Hear, hear.) It was a great mistake to look upon this as a single measure. He shoal support the government bill, as one of a series of measures for the improvement of Ireland. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE repudiated the sug gestion that government, in this measure of Irish Poor Law, had acted without due deliberation, or upon the mere pressure of circumstances. The subject bad been for years past investigated in every possible way, and it was upon a careful examination of the merits of all such inquiries, that her Msjeety's government had proceeded. He hoped his noble friend would not press his motion. Earl FITZWILLIAM supported the motion. Earl ST. GERMANS said that the noble lords who had spoken against the bill could suggest no better measure, and the government having brought forward a proposal on their own responsibility, he thought it would be very wrong in him to give any vote which might have the effect of indefi nitely postponing its consideration by their lordships. The Earl of ROSSE was unable to collect from the speeches he had heard any suffic:ent ground for opposing this motion. _ . The Eul of MOUNT CASHEL said he should support this motion with great Irratilleatioa. Lord MONTEAGLE replied ; and their lordships' then divided :—Contents l2 Non-Contents Their lordships adjourned at a quarter to one. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FIuney, MARCH 26. The SPitazzi took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINM. SECOND READINOELAYr — Iiirb OUi, Ayrshire Roads, Champ cress I/Am se4 Perth Railway. National Manmade LID ANIMISM Itillardiele• Potteries Waterworks, Stockport Masseldlas sal 'mem Docks, Terringtnn Marsh Dirt. =....Alkiftsig. sal Wakefield Market, Wisbech Port and , 001CMITI5M—Onalasse Duties Bill. REPORT.—Paehisis Waterworks BM PUBLIC BUSINESS.' PORTIONS—Mr. BScrdaMJ,frOte. a iiimenting oonfregatice Is Mataimiald Sr J. farrsora, from Leicester; Mr. Y. BARRIO, kin Perlimob• Mr. IL CrAwroap, from two eoogeeoanone in Poshide ; Mr. MATEMIV, from hhdependenta of Aahloaree, and tram ear dews; Mr. C. 8r00m..., from two tk,.. Lord 'dogma, from orrer:ll l ll.art sad ether swegripMer In Yorkshire • Mr. A. Onamsa, from the slap - Haelgdoe; wad the Goverwaset plan of adsealkm. Oftlin latav,r, kte par law gradirms of unlona alwaseaushka, sed Worseeteneure, for repeal d Pea leasseel Ast. Mr. Ososam. frau Ilsillsaate, for waft arelneet d Vegmey Aet ; from Della. geranunent relearss blanewere. - Os Llama, fa. Siewarda sod other storm In Zak far bowed rammisratim to amerdate sellators ; from • pats Is tont. Mr random In taw of atesamg. Mr. 8. Cum-rows lin erllsseto Gera, meaty Wads* he Amor of • "mat apt. Mr. IL Ines lartherapica, le lad stop to twareels Metillata. (A ) Mr. *Ma; tram Trford, for War aplaiee 'labe@ d "Man. Mr. W. IL O'Hannt, fromadwor oarektn. d lavag agebed of their Hitt; as • Whit to =ale Ork par against the rears af as dasentel, against . allstslias la an Odle. Ilr e f=leaboatm Dreilares, le the amnia of Imo ; Boteodole, casne DaaY~ ad lakdalak_la all frail of Sella ; honk Linton sad Dada; ; bun Dararrbr tad Menforth, In the county "CT.& from lama Y law Isatealtko ; !o Cappereleag. Stem. ; trove Haft* Arlin; Nowak ; tram • sews. soden Is la art tom Ile earkel eisseeka OM mittee of tbe °aunty at Oreadeeph agate Ile govenaset edam of — War ILLOINGS.—ettes tirt Pawnll ; Illotims at Sol dier; daft Parliamentary Illullies; LEM Improve rEClßM. DLN GS. —Dealings at Lank; Anal Ihnise of Boys; Naval F, •; NI& COMITTILL—Harboora, Docks. Sr., Crum BBL THIRD 111ADINO.—Commtes Mamma (No. 1) 1/L NOTICE Of MOTION.-.-Amer limvica HOVILLD Dotor-m, or madoe tor going Into committee on Mb hilt to move that It be semi/red that day aim months. FLOGGING IN HONG HONG. Dr. BOWlElRDiigisiied;heTtiei tieCoionial-office had received any official accounts of the discontinuance of the practice of flogging in the oniony of Hong Kong Mr. HAWES replied that the government had received no accounts to that effect ; but they had reason to hope that a great amelioration would take place in the administration of the criminal law in Hong Kong. PENSION TO SOLDIERS. . . Colonel REID asked the Secretary at War whether it was the intention of her Majesty's government to advise her Majesty to mire the present rate of pension to the soldiers of the British army contemporsneously with the pairing of the Limited Service Bill into law ; and if so, in what manner, and at what periods of service ? Mr. F. MAULS said it was not the intention of govern ment so alter the present rate of pension. IRISH CHURCH REVEN U ES PRE SENTATION OF IRELAND. Lord J. RUSSELL (in reply to Mr. W. S. O'Brien) said that it was not the intention of the government to introduce any measure either for appropriating the surplus revenues of the Irish church, or increasing the number of representatives for Ireland. GAME LAWS. Mr. BRIGHT (in reply to Mr. Escott) said, that at an early day he would call the attention of the house to the evidence taken before the Game Law Committee, and that he hoped to be able to bring in a bill in the present session for the repeal of throe laws. ' —...--- , ARMY ENLISTMENT. Sir H. DOUGLAS naked the first minister of the crown whether the measure for limiting the time of service in the arm) proceeded with the full approbation, sanction, and ad vies of his Grace the Duke of Wellington, Commander in Chief of the British Army ? Lord J. RUSSELL said, that the plan had been sub mitted to the noble duke, with whom several communica tions had taken place on the subject; but being entirely of a confidential nature, Le must decline stating them to the house. Sir H. DOUGLAS imbed if the noble lord had any objec tion to refer the rowan to a committee up stairs. Lord J. RUSSELL declined dolor so. DURATION OF ELECTIONS IN IRELAND. Lord J. RUSSELL (in reply to Lord Castlereagh) said that the subject of shortening the period of el. enema In Ireland had been considered by the govensuent, but he could not pledge himself to introduce any measure upon it, irre speedve of the Mate of public business. THE REINDEbIi WEST INDIAN MAIL STEAMER. Mr. W. COWPER, is answer to a question from Mr. TOLLEMACIig, said that complaints having been made of the inefficiency of the Reindeer West India mail steamer, the company hat agreed to lay her up, and the Conway would be ready To supply her place next month. TIIE NAVAL COURT-MARTIAL AT PORTSMOUTH. Mr. WILLIAMS begged to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it was the intention of the board to carry out the sentence of death by hanging from the yard-arm, which had been passed by a court-martial on a private of marines, who was tried ten days ago for striking hiesergeant. Mr. WARD said that the sentence in question had been taken into consideration by the Admiralty, and they had recommended that the punishment should be commuted to transportation for life, which. , was already ordered to be car ried into effect THE ARTICLES OF WAR. Mr. WILLIAMS also enquired whether the Admiralty had under their consideration the Articles of Wu, and whether there was any intention to make any situation in them. . . . . Mr. WARD said, the articles of war had been under the consideration of the Admiralty, but he was not authorised to say that any alteration was about to take place, though he hoped that the board might yet agree upon some altera tion. HARBOUR Or REFUGE AT HOLYHEAD. . . _ Viscount SANDON asked the Secretary to the Admira lty whether any commission had been appointed to consider and take evidence on the plan to be adopted for constructing a Harbour of Refuge at Holyhead, and if so, whom they consisted of, and what would be their instructions. Mr. WARD said that a communion had been appointed to consider, not the comparative value of Holyhead Harbour as compared with any other. but on the merits and demerits of the plan of Mr. Rendel. THE LANOPORT UNION. Mr. ESCOTT begged to ask the right hon. gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department if, in consequence of a correspondence between the justices of Somenetshire and the poor law commissioners, an investigation had not been ordered into the management of the Langport Union ? He else wished to know if there was any objection to lay the correspondence on the table of the house. Sir G. OREY said that charges having been made against the administration of the Langport Union, an investigation had been directed by the poor-law commivaioners, and the result wu the dismisaal of the master and mistress of the workhouse. Other charges had been made against other officers of the union, which were now under investigation. There would be no objection to the production of the cor respondence after that was closed, but not at present. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. It wu ordered that the how*, at its ruing, do adjourn till Monday. CATALONIA. Mr. BORTHWICK, in consequence of the absence of the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, postponed the question in relation to the proclamation of General Breton in Catalonia. THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 27, 1847. of waste turned into the gutters. This made the charge bid. In Ireland, the distillation of corn spirit seas about two-thirteenths of the corn malted, therefore there was charged an amount equal to two-thirteenths. The malt duty being Is. 4d., it would give 21.1. a gallon for malt duty. A high authority on these matters in former times—Mr. Haslossen—maintained that the whole malt duty was in itself a heavy charge, but that the restrictions upon it added as much se the one half the duty to the real cost of malt. It depended upon the state of the wi ether how long malt ought to remain steeped. He believed that forty hours was the time allowed by the excise regulations, hut if the weather was cold—unusually cold—forty hours was not time sufficient to allow barley to remain in steep, in order to be productive to the distiller, because in cold weatoer within that period the essence of the barley . could not be extracted; whilst on the other hand, in hot weather, the barley would, in the operation, begin to sprout long before the forty hours had expired. (Hear.) If the barley should sprout, the maltster was forbidden from saving it from destruction, in consequence of the provisions of the existing excise laws. This was only one of many re strictions upon the trade of the maltster, and he (Lord 0. Bentinek) was assured that the common average loss arising from barley sprouting too soon, amounted to 2s. 61, on every quarter of barley submitted to the process. ( Hear.) Therm ire, he (Lord G. 13entinek) thought that Mr. Hus kisson bad good cause for the statement which he had made in that house, that the very least at which he could fix the cost of these restrictions tot e maltater was at 50 per cent. on the cost of the corn (so we understood the noble lord). He now came to that which among distillers was called "de cree/age." The duty was charged upon British spirits at the time it left what was technically called the spout, or the worm end, but with regard to ruin, the matter was en tirely different. Upon rem the duty was not charged uit left the East or West Indies—neither was it charged as it arrived its this country. Rum, when it arrived in this country, even when it had suffered from leakage, and the evaporation consequent upon a voyage from a hot climate, was put into bond, and the duty upon it was charged, not upon the quantity which went into bond, but nn that which came out of bond. Now, be found from returns which were laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed on the 29th of May, 1848, that the allowance made to the rum producers amounted, in England, to 3d. and six-tenths of a penny—in Ireland to 7d. and seven hundredths of a penny—and in Scotland, to &I. and five tenths of a penny upon each gallon. In England, the allowance to the producers of rum appeared to stand thus it appeared that 76,794 gallons had been allowed out of 2,411,000 gallons imported, and that the amount of duty re turned for "decrerwge and waste" was 36,2481. In Ire land the number of gal lone, as appeared from the same re turn, allowed was 737, upon 30,;17 gallons admitted for con sumption, and the money returned was 347!. While in Scot land the state of things presented these facts, that upon a consumption of 43,335 gallons which arrived, 3,287 gallons had been 'Bowed, involving a money return of 1,5341. Bat he (Lord G. Bentiock) was not about to adopt this calculation as to the position which would result from the reduction which the government proposed to introduce. lie now proceeded to the calculation of what would be the amount of drawback which, for leakage and evaporation, would be allowed to the rum producers in England, Scotland, and Ireland ; and he found that in Eng land the drawback (if such it could be called) to the rum producers would still, under the proposed arrangement, amount to 3d. and four-tenths of a penny; in Ireland, to 2d, and one-eighth of a penny; and in Scotland, to 4d. and three-tenths of a penny. (Hear, hear.) Now, the house would observe, that before this the duty on rum wan Bs. 10,1. per gallon in the three kingdoms; it was now. however, proposed, he believed, to be reduced to 85. 4d. in England, to 414. 2d. in Scotland, and to 3s. 2d. in Ireland. The result of the whole would be, that under these substantial restrictions, of which it was impossible to estimate the disadvantages, the Irish distiller would require a reduction of 111 and one eighth of a penny to be placed upon a par with the rum producers of the colonies. The British distiller was by law forbidden the use, for the purposes of distillation, of the very molasses from which rum was made ; and more than this, the distiller, the malutee, and the brewer of this country were engaged in the only trades which were restricted, by the operation of the excise laws, from improving their own manufactures. The conse quent loss to thine engaged in those trade it was impossible to calculate. He could, however, rs.fer to the improvement which had taken place in two other trades, when the excise duties formerly imposed were removed. In 1831 excise du ties existed upon printed cottons. In 1831 it was re moved, and what had been the effect? Why, in the course of the three years following the removal of those excise duties, the exportation of British printed cottons increased by 51 millions of yards, and in 181.5 that increase of 61 million yards was enh anced to the extent of 238 million yards. For this result, as well as for that which he was now about to allude to, the country was indebted to the course of policy pursued by the right hon. baronet the mem ber for Tarnworth. (Hear, hear.) The effect of the re moval of the excise duties on glass had led to similar results Even though those results had not realized the sanguine ex pectations of the right hon. baronet, new establishments in that branch of manufacture had grown up in Belfast, Dublin, Hull, and other places; and the only difficulty arose from the want of mechanical means, and hands to carry out the business which the removal of excise restrictions had brought ta the froteMilswieuts The want of skilful and expe7kaistsi el'e al2-Se wtz vi la, that =cm earn from 41. to 81. per week—in short, wages had increased 30 per cent., and still the masters wire unable to meet the demand upon tnern for supplies of the commodities they produced. On this he was justified in the supposition that if excise restrictions upon the distillers were abolished, an enormous increase on consumption would he the result. But, with respect to the case of the Irish distillers, in refe rence to the operation of the existing excise duties , was another consideration well worthy the attention of the house. It could not be doubted that whiskey was the drink of Ireland. Under the operation of the existing laws a very small portion of that drink was distilled from malt. Now he was not aware if hon. members were cognizant of the fact that but a very small portion of that drink was made from malt. Neither, perhaps, were hon. members aware of the further fact, that the advantage which arose from malting was to take from the grain the essential oil—that was to say, its poisonous qualities. Now, the effect of the present excise regulations was, that in Ireland only 100,000 gallons of whiskey were distilled from malted grain, and the remainder of the consumption in that portion of the realm was of the poisonous and unwholesome spirit distilled from corn. Another evil arising from the present system con sisted in the disadvantageous position in which the drawbiek allowed to the distillers of Oreat Britain and Ireland would be placed. The result of this system was, that whilst on the average of the lest three years foreign gin and spirits to the extent of 303,000 gallons had been exported, no British spirits of any description had been en abled re be exported from this country. (Hear, hear.) The case of the English distiller differed from that of the Irish distiller, inasmuch as the former could only employ one half the quantity of malt that the Irish distiller consumed; but, on the other hand, the English distiller was enabled to have recourse to the process of rectifying, in order to purify the spirits he manufactured. This made the trade of au English distiller a monopoly, because no man, unless pus eased of a large capital, could venture to engage in it. In England there were about six or eight distillers. They were not allowed to use the yeast of their own production, and they were obliged to increase the number of their " plants," each of which, he was informed, would cost 40,0001., in order to meet the trade, and on the whole, to protect the English distiller, there ought not to be a discriminating duty lengthen 131 d. and Meths of a farthing. With respect to the Scotch distiller more than two-thirds of the spirits distilled in Scot land were malt spirits, and, therefore, to them the principal question was the malt duties, and the result of the examina tion of the returns showed that for their protection, as against the rum producers, there ought to be a discriminating duty of 161 d. and 3-20ths of a farthing per gallon. These were intricate calculations, and he thought he had stated enough to show the necessity for an inquiry up stairs. Ile was no advocate for any prefereniwoor partiality towards either England, Ireland, or Scotland, over the colonies; he sought only equal and exact justice for all, and he was convinced that the only means prsctically to secure that justice to all parties was by the appointment of an impartial select com mittee to inquire into all these motions up stairs. With these objects he begged now to move that the Customs Duties Bill be referred to a select committee. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he thought his noble friend had shown most convincingly that the bill ought not to be sent to a select committee up-stairs. It was not a little remarkable that the noble lord had over stated the cue of the distillers; for they themselves had stated their claim at a much smaller amount, and in much more reasonable terms than those put forward by the noble lord. As to the privilege of distilling from molasses, it had been admitted by a large and eminent distiller that it could not be granted without running a great risk of fraud. The house would remember that, at the close of the last session, a re in ven ell u u e re an h eof t bee f i le in co t n su u rod L ie d e , but mu ch w h the the bene fi t West o l f th e n di body believed would be most detrimental to their interests. Up to this period, their fears had not been realised • but they had taken a course which ought to be followed by all protected interests they had consented to give up their protection, on condition that other interests should not re ceive protection against them. (Hear) This was a moat sound principle of free trade, and of freedom from commer . Mal restrictions, by which the public and the great body of the consumers would be most materially benefited. He trusted this course would be pursued on other occasions ; for the principles of free trade were now too thoroughly established ever to he shaken again. (Hear.) He had all along admitted that there were grounds on which the distillers were entitled to a differential duty; and though he had increased the amount of that protection from what was originally proposed, he thought he should be able to satisfy the house that it was not without good reason that be had fixed the lower sum, and that, in giving a dif ferential duty of 9d., he gave fully as much as, if not more than, could be shown to be claimed by the great body of dis tillers in the kingdom. There was undoubtedly a great difference in the way in which distillation was carried on in different parts of the country ; and hence, although rum would come into competition with spirits, produced in a dif ferent manner , it was perfectly impossible to impose dif ferent differential duties. For if this principle were adopted and carried out, a different duty must be imposed in Scot land upon the spirits distilled from malt and from grain, Though distillation differed in its circumstances in different parts of the kingdom, yet the spirits produced in different I Parts entered freely into competition with each other and with colonial spirits. Therefore, if he established his ease with regard to any one part of the country, he should claim to have established it with regard to all. As the spirits pro duced in Scotland and Ireland and sent to this country came into competition with English spirits here, it was quite clear that English, Scotch, and Irish spirits, competing with each other, must stand upon perfectly equal terms. In 1546, the quantity of spirits made in England was 6,264,000 gal lons ; imported from Scotland to England, 2,136,000 gallons, land from Ireland, 1,418,060 gallons. It was evident from these figures that the spirits made in Scotland and Ireland, ' paying the English duty, entered freely and fairly into competition with those produced here • hence, what was an adequate protection for the spirits iroduced in England, must be so for those produced in Scotland and Ireland, and an adequate protection for grain spirit' in Ireland and Soot land must be so fur malt spirits. (Hear.) He had not much faith in the statements that had been put forth by various parties, at different times ; for be found that, on whatever basis the calculations proceeded, they all arrived at the same result. When the Earl of Ripon was chancellor of the exchequer, the differential duty was fixed at 18d. • the duties were 18d . last year, and the statements wh ich he had received showed that the distillers claimed • pro tection of 18d., although on • totally different basis. In the statement of their claim of 18d., made by the distillery themselves, in 1830, they admitted that 9d. per gallon was claimed in respect of the duties on foreign corn. There being ne such duty at this moment, it was clear that 9d. a gallon war the maximum amount of protection to which on any . conceivable supposition they were entitled, even on ; their own showing. (Hear.) nerefore, in carrying the claim beyond ltd., the noble lord was contradicted by the evidence of the distillers themselves. Last year the duty had been reduced from is. 6d. to Is., which after some re monstrance was acquiesced in by the distillers, though they had laid claim to a duty of Is. 4d. It shocked his faith in those representations to find that Is. 4d. had been claimed, that it was admitted that Is. was a fair protection, and then that the noble lord came down and claimed a much larger sum, in making which claim he had shown a great want of discretion. (Hear.) He had claimed lid. a gallon for malt, the sum put forward by the distillers themselves ; but the precise equivalent was I id. a gallon. Fourpenct a gallon was claimed as excise restrictions; but this was coetradieteel by the excise returns themselves. The extraordinary per versity of the argument put forward by the distillers was shown by the fact that, in estimating their decreases, they assumed the same amount of decrease as took place upon rum, although the latter necessarily suffered a much greater leakage in crowing the ocean. Ile found, from the excise returns, with regard to six of the greatest distillers about London, whose stock was upwards of five millions of gallons, that their average decrease amounted to Id. and 48-100 tbs, being not quite Id. per gallon. The same return, taken about fourteen years ago, showed that the decrease was not quite so much as Id. 'gallon at that time. Upon the Scotch spirits, the actual decrease was about 19-100ths percent., or about id. a gallon; and in Ireland the allowance was id. and 15-100ths. Therefore, instead of 4d. or 3si. 9-10tIts per gallon, as estimated by the noble lord, Id. per gallon was the maximum allowance, which, upon any assignable calcu lation, could be claimed as an equivalent allowance for de creases. As to rectifying, he entertained very great doubts whether any claim could be set up in respect to that. Rec tifying was not carried on in Scotland and Ireland ; it was only adopted in England to suit some particular tastes ' • and why should a claim be set up here for that to which them was no corresponding process in Scotland or Ireland ? It was quite clear that I Id. a gallon was the full value of that process in Ireland, which might be considered equivalent to rectifying : and if this lid. a gallon was allowed, it was as much as the distillers were entitled to ; his own conviction being that they were not entitled to any allowance what, ever. Formerly, for the purpose of putting down illicit dis tillation, a drawback had been allowed in Scotland ; in 1832, it was found expedient to diminish this drawback from 14d. to Bd. a gallon ; but that produced no injury to the distillers of malt spirits in Scotland ; in 1829, the quantity of malt (not grain) spirits brought into consumption in Scotland, was 5,213,000 gallons ; in 1830, it was 5,529,000 gallons ; in 1831, 5,339,000 gallons ; in 1832, the drawback was reduced ; in 1833, the amount fell to 5,305.000 gallons ; but, in 1834, it was 5,466.000 gallons; in 1835, 5,486,000 gallons ; and, in 1836, 6,066,000 gallons. Thus, it was evident, that the diminution of the drawback had produced no pre judicial effect whatever on the quantity of spirits brought to charge,—the increase having been to the extent of 500,000 gallons in the four years after the reduction. But a considerable quantity of malt spirits was sent from Scotland te Ireland, and that quantity had much increased after the reduction of the drawback. In 1842 the drawback on malt spirits in Ireland was repealed altogether ; and then the distillers of malt spirits in Scotland had positively this most unfair advantage over the malt dis tillers in Ireland that they had a drawback of &I. • gallon in consequence of paying the malt duty, while the m.,lt distillers in Ireland had no suck drawback. Notwithstand ing this, the exports of malt spirits from Scotland to Ireland were increasing. Nothing could be more destructive of the claim made by the distillers to extraordinary indulgence. In 1840 the quantity of malt spirits sent from Scotland to Ireland was 427,000 gallons; in 1841, 432,000 gallons. Then the drawback on malt spirits in Ireland was repealed ; consequently the Scotch distiller ceased to be entitled to the drawback on the spirit sent there. In 1843 the quantity fell to 329,000 gallons ; in 1814 it was 399,000 gallons ; in 11845, 507,000 ; and in 1846, 624,000 gallons. Therefore, these much-injured aad much-oppressed people, with a bonus of Bd. per gal lon, were actually successfully competing with the malt distillers in Ireland, where there was no such bonus. He must confess he had been astonished by the claims that had been brought forward. He gave the distillers lid. a gallon in respect of the malt duty, Id. for decreases, and lid., to which, however, he thought they were not entitled, for the lois of rectifying, making 31d. 'gallon. The excise restrictions were estimated by the Irish diztillars st M. a gallon. by the English distillers at Sd ; bet as the hi, was the aatr a in both countries, the extra 2d. might fairly be struck off the claim of the Irish distillers. He had ascertained that the coot of producing spirits was 2s. the gallon, Is. bd. for the cost of the materials, and 6d. the cost of the manufacture; this he had from the distillers themselves. It was said that the cost of the manufacture was advanced by the excise restrictions; but when the actual cost of the manufacture was Gd., gentlemen would be more credulous than he was if they supposed that 4d. extra was to be added for excise restrictions. He believed that lid. would be the utmost, and that he did the distillers fair justice in giving them the differential duty of 6d.; in fact, 51d. was the utmost to which the Irish distillers could possibly make a claim. The documents from the Excise-office showed tke amount of malt duty, the proportion allowed for decreases (about which there could be no dispute, it being settled between the distillers and the excise officers themselves), and the process which was really equivalent to rectifying in Ireland; and these documents he was perfectly ready to lay upon the table of the house, sad have them printed. The facts of the case were perfectly understood by every one who chow to look into them. Lord G. BENTINCK Not entirely so. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ;said, that if the noble lord would not take his friend's statement of their own cue, as shown by printed document., he feared they should come to an agreement; but if the house was to take the statement of the distillers themselves, put forward in their own cause, there could be no doubt about the substaa'ial justice of the measure. (Hear.) He had now shown that there was really no difference in the cases of the English, Scotch, or Irish distiller ; and that in prov ing his case sa to one, he had proved it as to the whole. According to their own showing, sixpence was the amount they were entitled to : he did not think they were entitled to so much. At the same time, he had hoped that he might have brought this matter forward in such a way as to be sa tisfactory to all parties ; he was sorry to find this was not the case. He was convinced that the most reasonable of the distillers would be satisfied with the differential duty of 9d. ; the sufficiency of this it was ut terly impossible for them to dispute, as they had expressed themselves satisfied with a duty of lfid. when 9d. was allowed for the duty on corn. As they had made thin admission, how could the noble lord demand more than they did themselves ? The fears entertained on this subject were the most chimerical that had ever entered the mind of man. Looking at the enormous amount of British spirits consumed in this country, and the small amount of rum, the notion of the distillers being ruined by the importation of rum was too ridiculous to bear further notice. In 11445, the whole quantity of spirits consumed in the United Kingdom was 26,672,000 gallons, of which 2,400,000 gallons only were rum. Did any one suppose that that quantity could materially affect the consumption of British spirits, which amounted to 23,122,000 gallons (Hear.) But it was well known that every improvement made in the manufacture of sugar tended to diminish the quantity of the material from which rum was made. Sugar was the moat valuable shape in which the West Indian produce could be sent to the market ; and everything which improved the means of its manufacture and thus tended to diminish the residuum from which rum and molasses were made, had the effect of reducing the quantity of the rum produced. The West Indians preferred sending the raw material to this country to making spirits themselves. He would un dertake to say that the introduction of rum into this country would not injure the English distillers, who entertained the most vain fears on that question. He believed that he did ample justice to the distillers of this country, who, in his opinion, would not be injured whether the differential duty was either 6d. or 9d. The only parties to be affected by this measure were the consumer., who would by its mesas be enabled to get good and &mei/Ide rum instead of a bad mil -1 tare with • little foreign spirit to colour it. He concluded by saying that he thought this measure would be a great benefit to the consumer, and would not be injurious to the British distiller, or to the colonial interest. Mr. D. CALLAGHAN said that the right hoe, gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had in his statement mixed up the case of the Scotch distillers with that of the Irish dis tillers, and the case of the latter with that of the English dis tillers, and that they should receive with great caution the re marks which he had made. The right hon. gentleman would fail to show any instance in which the Irish distillers admitted that they were not disadvantaged to the amount of 9d. or Is. per gallon of rum introduced into this country. They clears claimed a differential duty of Is. 6d., and never made a claim under that amount. The Chancellor of Exchequer was unable to contradict the claims put forward by the Irish distillers lately. He did not know perhaps, that they were obliged to pay • higher rate of duty on spirits imported into this country than than was provided by the act of union. They were obi to pay the English duty at any of the ports from which they sent their cargoes, and those connected with the Treasury never took into account any loos or waste that may take place on the passage over. Mr. BERNAL said, that though be entered into the eon sideratien of this matter perfectly unbiassed, he could not but say that the West India or colonial interests were neither equitably of fairly treated in the present cue. The distiller in England, Scotland, and Ireland, had no' right to demand a higher discriminating duty than the mu pure of the duty he paid on malt independent of the duty he paid on the liquor distilled from malt. Let them show him what they suffered by the duty on malt and then he would say, so much and no more ought to be the duty paid upon the colonial spirit as compared with the British spirit. The discriminating difference between British colonial and foreign sugars having been destroyed, he was entitled aa a British colonist to that degree of justice which it was promised should be meted out. ( Hsu, hear.) That was the ground ipon which he stood, and he would not discus the fiscal part of the question lest he should weaken it by • coo Y ape, considerations. M r.t r ood . GR to o co O n A te N . , d w t h h o at wa th s e v co ery lon in is d t is h ti a n d elly we hrl .d , w ztat. de over the British distiller, inasmuch as he could use his IQ and ingenuity in producing an article at the lowa possibl e cost without any hindrance or disadvantage being thrown is his way, whereas the home producer was subject to the con trol, inspection, and interference of the excise at every step he took. Mr. BOUVERIE thought the problem to be solved ww the apportionment of the customs' duties on colonial produ w, and the excise duties on the home produce, so that all par. ties might have equal and fair play. (Hear, hear.) He did not, however, think that the larger portion of the Scotch di-tillers would be placed in that position by the propane! of ' the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ceders these circumstances, he could not support the propontioa of the government. ( Hear.) Mr. FORBES desirous of doing justice to all parties—te j] the colonial, as well as the home produce, would vole for the 111 motion of the noble lord, the member for Lynn. Mr. MOFFATT and Mr. BARELY likewise opened it. Mr. SHAW was assured by one of the most unhurt distillers in Ireland that the large capital invested them did not return them .5 per cent. ' and, if a dut yo f 9.4„ was imposed, the trade would be ruine d. Mr. GOULBU RN said, that as he had at an antecedent period attempted a reduction of the differential duties be. tween colonial and British spirits, and had th e subject on both aides much discussed before him, he might, perhaps, be able to give some infoomatioa to the house. The noble lord proposed that this bill should be referred to a select committee, but he (Mr. (Southern) thought from the speech of the noble lord that he made this motion under a misapprehension, for he would find that he would be precluded by the forms of the house from entering' into evidence of the minute details he had gone into, an this motion could not carry out his object. lie pr.-sumed he wished the committee to inquire into the whale subject a( distillery. To this he (Mr. Goulburn) objected, for then was nothing to be gained by it, which those who bad ion quired into it were not possessed of. Referring a question to a committee was generally known to be an endeavour, hy a keg and tedious inquiry to postpone a measure, and the 4ftt of this would be to defeat the change of duties for the present session, and to lease the matter in doubt and uncertainty; and this was more especially apparent when he considered the speeches which had been made to night, and the various subjects of inquiry soggetted by dif ferent members. Previously to the year 1826 there was no naminal distinction of the duty charged on British spirits and imported rum, for the same duty was charged on nun at proof as on British spirit at seven over proof, making a difference in favour of the latter of ltd., and this was at • the time that the corn laws were regulated by the act of 1815. The real difference of duty was then extremely low, and he adverted to this in order to calm the apprehension that the charge of this duty would inflict serious injury, :or British (mints still kept their hold on the market. In 1623 the quantity of rum consumed was 3,803,000 gallons, while in 182.5 it was 3,684,000 gallons, while the consumption a British Spirits, was, in 1823, 9,600,000, and in 1825, it was 18,928,000, showing that the reduction of the differential duty did not interfere prejudicially with the consumption of British Spirits. In 1825, Mr. Robinson introduced a new regulation of the duties on spirits so as to make what was thought an adequate allowance for the expenses incurred by reason of duty and restrictions. Of these Is Id. arose out of the duty on corn, out of the duty on malt I id., and the restrictions were eatimatedat 4d., making altogether, 10. 6.1., and with this the distillers were satisfied. In 1830, he (Mr. Goulborn) introduced a measure for reducing the differential duty on Rum to Is., but owing to the change of government, it was abandoned. They had then the diffeinet opinions of the distillers as to what amount of duty was assignable to the restrictions placed on them, and they stated that the burden imposed by the law for the regulation of the importation of corn was 91d. of the whole duty. If this was true, when the law of 1829, which allowed the duty en corn lower than that of 1815, was is operation, it followed that, in 1847, 94d. shouldbe de ducted from the duty of Is. 6d., which, in former times, wee imposed on the introduction of rum, and that the dirty ought not to be more than 84d., oa the showing of the die tillers themselves. In 1825 new regulations were imposed on the distilling trade, and they were obliged to have large additional buildings in their establiehnsents, and parts of them were separated from the others, which earned a large outlay of capital. That outlay, however, was stated by the distillers in their communication to him (Mr. Goal. burr) as amounting to 25,0001., one distillery with another. He ( Mr. Goulburn) came to the same eonclusioa as the right hon. gentleman, the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, that the differential duty of Gd. covered all the extra burdens imposed on the British distillers. It was said, however, that the right hon. gentleman had allowed 9d.; but he (Mr. Goulborn) concurred with the right hon. gentle. MD, that if strict justice was done 6d. was the utmost the distillers could claim. But when it was considered that be was dealing with an interest which had been very highly protected in England and in Ireland, and Scotland enjoyed a duty almost prohibitory, he thought the right hon. genie man was justified in dealing tenderly with the Ca.! With regard to Ireland, in 1830, when he (Mr. Goulborn) was considering the subject, the Irish distillers presented a me. morial, which set forth that they were ready to cone pete with any clan of spirit-makers; but to enable them to enter into ouch a competition they mug be unrestricted, and have all the advantages of free-trade, that the home-consumption and foreign market nn murt be open to them. if this was given to them :they ?, would be without complaint, but until this was so the same principle must govern the spirit-trade as governed others; and ' while their trade was restricted they must be protected, but if it was free they required no protection. He thought those arguments ought to apply now. With regard to the Scotch distiller, it was said, as he distilled chitfiy from malt, he paid a large duty of Is. 4d. upon it ; but it was not a fair calculation, because he obtained malt from other means then from grain, and got it at a far cheaper rate. Whatever might he the ground of alarm to the distillers, they still had a great advantage over the colonial producers. The right hon. gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was quite right in stating that the introduction of two and a half million gallons of colonial spirits would produce no per ceptible effect with reference to the price of the home pro duction. His (Mr. Gonlbum's) own views were, that each commodity should be placed upon the same footing of moo lity. This had been offered to the distillers of England and refused, and they now, therefore, had no right to claim a equalisation of duties. In 1825 a reduction was miggeolei and refused, and on all these grounds he should mesh* vote against the proposition of the noble lord the member for Lynn. (Hear, hear.) Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL supported the amendment, on the ground that the statements which had been made on both sides of the house, in the course of the pretest discussion, could only be sifted by an inquiry before a select committee. Mr. DISRAELI said that the right hon. baronet, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, after dilating upon the advan tages of free trade, had, in the course of his observations anight, put himself forward as the champion of protection, inasmuch as, prepared as the house had been to discus a differential duty, the discussion might have terminated, but that the government, through the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, had announced their determination to increr se the amount of protection. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. baronet, in a manner with which he (Mr. Disraeli) was not prepared to quarrel, had ahewn by his argument that the change from sixpence to a differential duty of nine pence was a fitting subject for the consideration of such a committee as that moved for in the present instance by his noble friend the member for Lynn (Lord G. lteutinck). t (Mr. Disraeli) thought that his noble friend had proved dist the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer need Pot XI have stopped short at the ninepence duty, but that in ma- • ing down from Downing-street, borrowing from his data. 111 might have prevented the present discussion by annoomag that the government did not mean to disturb the armee mint which had been made at the fag-end of the session of last year. He (Mr. Disraeli) concurred in the opinion which had been expressed, that protection ought not in any dips to be made en argument on the present occasion. "Tlee ma question was this is it possible with the present salts s y stem to permit free competition in those products often* facture in this country ? (Hear, hear). It was admitted that at the present moment, with the present excise laws, it was impossible that this could be done, and hem the question resolved itself into one, not of competition, but of compensation to those traders who were suffering under the operation of the excise laws, Remembering the law of last year—remembering the admissions made in the course of the present debate by free-traders, and especially by the hoec member for Leominster, it would seem that the emancipated ' commerce of this country concurred in the feeling that thn compensation ought to be awarded, and the only different between the movement made to-day by the free-traders sod the proposition of his hon. friend was now only a matter of threepence instead of sixpence, which he had anticipsted when he entered the house. What ought to be the just and exact figure of compensation to the English trader in these commodities, in consequence of the existing else* restrictions ? The late Chancellor of the Exchequer was the very person to select as an excellent mediator in this Fair jest. In 1845 an act had bean passed for the regulative ci these matter., in so far as the Channel Islands were con armed, and in that arrangement a duty of fifteen pence `www was fixed. Tho Inland of Sark was exempted. That V.t a great fart. But it was and that this question had been I settled in 1830 by the distillers themselves when at a meet ing of their body, they declared that Is. 6d. duty they con sidered to be a just compensation, but they at the sum time announced that 9d. of that amount was in consequent of the then existing duty on barley. At that time three of the most important of the distillery body had met as deputation. Their opinions had been referred to in the course w of the present debate. It appeared, however, that the opinion then had been reduced to writing, ton whet was the fad . Theta distillers denied that the statement of opinion so reduced to writing had been submitted to them, and as such it was not an authentic document. They protested against it, and one , of the body, though now eighty yearn of age, was prepa red to give his evidence before a "elect committee agamet a do n' meat which had been framed in the absentee o the deputy lion, and suggested by three rein. officer'. Surely teas d itself was a ground for such an inquiry as that sought II his noble friend the member for Lynn (Lord G. Bentinak). The greatest injury to the Englis h not permitted to rectify his spirits, and have a claim part for compensation. The whole question was one .! distiller was that o h n e w hi. for investigation before a select committee. It B was that it was now too late in the session to seize such an investigation to a select committee. "I UP* that as it might, this question was one which a committee ought to be appointed. report at the end of a week. How was the na g ce mittee going on—were they prepared to report onl Easter? (Hear.) The right hon. the Chancellor of tM Exchequer had alleged that 9d. per gallon of the p rottetix claimed in 1830, was in respect of the duty upon G? ieiga corn; whereas the price of barley at that time was ww atii! on ine committee eat every any they might bringn CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL. On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair on going into committee on this bill, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he thought it would be fairer at once to state the coulee he in tended to pursue in committee. He understood that his noble friend the member for Lynn intended to take the whole case by his motion. instead of taking it in detail, and I that the same question would not be renewed again. When he first moved the resolutions with regard to colonial rum, he stated that the duty would be 6d. higher than that on Bri tish spirits. Since then he had had interviews with distillers I and other persons interested, who contended that this duty I was not an adequate protection. He did not say that his own opinion was changed, for ha still thought a differential duty of 6d. would fairly meet the case. Still he had reconsidered the matter, and as lit was impossible to fix the precise amount on principle, he thought he might fairly give way to those representations. His intention therefore was, in committee I on the bill, to move that the duty be fixed at ninepence. lic would not go into the reasons one way or another, but he thought it fairer, before his noble friend rase to make his speech, to state what he purposed to do. Lord G. BENTINCK felt that be required the indul gence, he might say the toleration, of the house, in twinging forward the motion of which he had given notice ; for of all the dry and dull subjects—{great laughter)—which could be brought forward, he kad the misfortune to be about to deal with the driest and dullest—nor had he wit, talent, or inge- I nuity to enliven it. He believed it was the wish of his right boo. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to do justice to all parties; but he (Lord 0. Bentinek) did I think that he was mistaken in his judgment. (Hear, hear.) If the question was one of pounds, shillings. and pence, it would be dull and complicated enough ; but it was I narrowed down to pence, farthings, and fractions of far things. It was on this very ground, however, that he felt justified in his proposal that instead of going into • corn mittee of the whole house, the bill should be referred to • committee upstairs ; for Bever a subject required the calmest and most deliberate attention, it was this--of the differential duty between rum and British spirits. The case of the Irish and Scotch distillers differed each from the other, and one part of the Irish case differed from another, ar.ri one part of the Scotch case differed from the other. If he felt justified in asking for a select committee when he gave notice of his motion, he was far from being dissuaded from pressing it by the announcement of his right hon. friend—indeed he was encouraged by it to per severe, for it appeared that his mind was not made up—that the proper duty was ed., for he had consented to give way, and if he bad not changed his mind he had changed the measure of the government. He (Lord 0. Bennock) had therefore a good case for the appointment of a select committee is assess the proper duty which should be paid en rum and British spirits. He could assure his right hon. friend that if he (Lord G. Bentinck) was put on that committee, so little prejudice had he, Sr desire to give any advantage to the British distillers over the colonial producers of rum, that if he could prove either that • duty of 9d. or no duty at all was justice, he (Lord G. Bentinck) would be the first man to propose perfect equality. He could show to a committee upstairs, though not to one of the whole house, that the British distiller was entitled to a larger duty than 9d. Not long sixes an act was passed to fix the differential duties between spirits distilled in the Channel Islands and Great Britain. It was the 65th of 8& 9 Victoria, and was entitled en act to determine what should be the countervailing duty between Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, and Sark, and Great Britain and Ireland. That bill was introduced by the right hon. gentleman the member for the university of Cambridge, and it recited that la 2d. was a due countervailing duty on the spirits manufactured in the Channel Islands, and those manufactured in Great Britain and Ireland. Nothing had occurred since then to alter those duties, except the change in the corn-laws. To what extent had that change affected them? As the act in question was passed in 1845, the question must be decided under the duties imposed by the corn-law of 1842 ; and the average duty on barley from 1842 to 1845 inclusive was ss. I Id. A quarter of malt or grain produced nineteen or twenty gallons of spirits; and if the duty was 35., it would cause an addition of 2d. a gallon on spirit'; and if the duty was se. 11d., it would not be reckoned that more then half was paid by the consumer, and the other half by the producer. If so, 2.1. a gallon was all the difference that existed between the present duty and that of I 1845, when the government introduced the bill to fix the countervailing duties between the Channel Islands and Great Britain. He might, therefore, assume that Is. or 111 d. was a just assessment between rum and British spirits; because that very at recited in its preamble that its object was to determine to what extent the excise restraints went ; and by its enactment it was decided that the amount was Is. 2d. (The noble lord then read the sections of the act referred to.) lay this he had priesd fools evidence to show that parlia ment thought that 18.2 d., in 1845;was a fair duty in conside ration of the restrictions of the excise. But he was prepared to show that it was an inaccurate estimate of the real cost and expense created by the excise laws. It would be in the knowledge of the house that the excise laws were altered in 1823, not for the advantage of the distillers, but to secure the collection of the excise duties. The result was that every distiller who was put under those restrictions was no longer permitted to distil and brew at the same time, or to distil or brew at all on the same premises on which he recti fied. He was put under a vast number of other restrictions. But the effect was that she was not to brew and distil at the same period, it was necessary for every distiller to have a double plant and premises of double the sin, and a double number of coppers. The result was, a given in evidence before a committee that then pit, let the distiller whose business was previously carried on for 40,0001., required a capital of 80,000/. Ile was now speaking of the Irish case. A committee which sat in 1833 bad it before them in evi dence that an Irish distiller wko produced 60,000 gallons of whisky or corn spirit, and who previously required 5,0001. for a plant for that business, in consequence of the new restrictions, required 5,0001. mere to increase his plant. Ten per cent., which was • fair calculation on property of this perishable description, gave 5001. a year to be charged against 60,000 gallons, and this 5001. divided by 60,000 gallon., gave a charge of 2d. a gallon. This was the first item of excise reirLictien. The next item was a loss of material, arising out of these restrictions. It was well known to those engaged in distillation that those restrictions obliged the, distiller to brew at a certain gravity, and to give so many flays' and no many hours' notice of every movement he made, and fixed the time at which a brewery must be closed. It was necessary, therefore, to stop the works for twelve hours between each brewing and distilling, and the furnaces were extinguished, causing a loss and waste estimated at one twelfth of the produce. This item the Irish distillen esti mated at Id. a gallon at the lowest. Another important item was the loss in wages. For the samereason that it was necessary to double the plant, it was necessary to increase the number of palatine engaged. The same man could not superintend the brewery and the distillery and he was obliged to work double time, and received double wages. Another most remarkable item was that of yeast. In the course of distilling it was necessary to use yeast, but by one of the restrictions of the excise, the distillers were for bidden to use any article which was made in the same brewery, and they could not therefore use the yeast they themselves made. In order therefore that the excise laws should be carried out, every distiller let his yeast ran down I into the gutter, and went elsewhere to purchase it. He was assured that this was the case with the distillers of Galway, Belfast, Drogheda, and Cork. Those of Cork and Galway purchseed their yeast in Dublin, while throe of Drogheda and Belfast came to London for it, and the expense was Id. in the gallon. There were 26,000,000 gallons of spirits distilled every year in England, Scotland, and Ire land, and Id. a gallon charged on these amounted tolBo,oool.