The Express. — London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

a young lady playing ner pianoforte t (Laughter.) He hoped the fa Mon would be withdrawn. Sir R. INGLIS sa.d, he had heard no answer to the state ment of the hoe. member for Kendal, but If there was an ganderstandhg that nothing would be done for three weeks, he thought it would be better to have the motion and amend ment withdrawn, and the second reading flied for a future After a few weeds from Lord Monrirrn in explanation, Mr. S TIM M' was in favour of postponement. If the how.e paned the bill in its present state they would deprive the opposing parties of en opportunity of stating their case. If the lion. gentleman who bed moved the 1100.,Uti reading perd.ted in preying it, he could not support him. With the consent of Sir B. H -ALL, the bill was then post _ poised for a formignt. INDIAN SALT TAX. AN Hon. M wished to ask the right hon. gentle man the President of the Board of Trade • question re lating to the regulations for the importation of salt into India. It would be in his recollection that in December last, be received • deputation on the subject. He wished to know whether the governmi , nt had since made any com munication to the Governor-General on the subject, and if so, whether they would ley the result before the house. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said that in consequence of what his hon. friend had alluded to, the Court of Directors and the Based of Control had taken this important subject into their consideration, and had framed a despatch which ha be liend nut to India on the previous day, end the pur port of which he had not the leant objection to state. Cer tain regulations were framed in 1841, which, in the opinion of the importers of salt, bad very much impeded the impor tation of thst article. On examining the matter the other day it was the opinion of the home authorities that the com plaints msdo respecting those regulati ms were well founded. In consequence of this • despatch was prepared, ordering the government of India to mama those regulations, and to give to the importers of salt all the advantages of the sys tem of 1836, from which they were excluded by the act of 1811. RAILWAYS IN INDIA. In reply 10 a question from Lord MAHON, Sir J. C. HOISHOUSE said that the report of the rail way commission, which was sent out to India, in June, 1845, was presented to the Board of Control on the 4th of July, 1816, and he had no objection to its being laid on the table. Since that period there had been communications on the subject, the molt important of which was a minute of the Governor-General of India, which he was also willing to produce. In reply to a question from Mr. Heave on the same subject, :sir J. C. HOBHOIJSE a ad that the East Indio Company and the Board of Control had agreed on certain conditions which they had proposed to different railway companies. Until it was known whether or nut the terms would be ac cepted, it was twelve to frame any despatch. HOLYHEAD HARBOUR. Mr. W. COLLETT asked the Secretary of the Admiralty what steps her Majeatil. government had taken respecting the construction of Holyhead harbour, and whether any additional powers were required for obtaining possession of the lands adjoining the refuge harbour ; and, if so, whether the mini rantent were prepared with a bill for that purpose ? Mr. WARD said it was at first thought that an agreement might be made with the landowners in the neighbourhood which would obviate the necessity for an act of parliament ; but that expectation having leen disappointed, au act con- Wiling the necessary powers was is preparation. NAVIGATION LAWS. Mr. RICARDO rose to move for a select committee on the aavigation laws. The hon. member said that these laws having been framed in 1.561, no material alteration had since taken place. In 1815 the legislature relaxed the eystom as regarded the United States, and afterward' as re spected PortugaL It was not until 1822 that any star sman or individual was found bold enough to attack the law. In that year Mr. Wallace brought forward tire billy, the object of which was to amend sad explain various acts which had bees passed respecting the trade and navigation of this country. In 1824, he believed, Mr. Huskieson brought forward the famous reciprocity act, enabling the king in council to admit foreign shipping into British ports on the same terms as those on which British shipping was admitted into foreign. Since then there had been some trifling alte rations, including one,in 1845, relating to the island of Hong Kong. Now. he did not move that the act should be re pealed; he simply asked for inquiry. He thought his motion ought not to be opposed by hon. gentlemen opposite (the protectionists). In 1844 a committee was ap pointed, and two-thirds of the members belonged to the party . opposite. The committee reported that they had not found it possible to complete their investigation, and asked to be reap pointed at an early period of the next session. In the next amnion they were reappointed, and they reported that they had been prevented by unforeseen circumstances from going (tally into the inquiry, and submitted to the house the expe diency of their being again appointed at an early period of the following session. (Laughter.) This request was not granted, and he contended that they could not now consis wily oppose inquiry. So many of the evil results of the system had been already shewn, that he had a right to demand investigation. Mr. Soames was inked in the house by the honourable member for Gateshead if it would not be an advantage to the producer to have goods brought from India at the rate of 31. rather than 41. per ton. His reply was, "To those who had to pay the freight it would be an advantage, but, looking at it in a com mercial point of view, you ought to keep up your commercial marine.' It must be obvious that for eviry ton of shipping they drove away from their posts, they alike deprived the con sumer, the labourer, end the revenue of England of an ad. vantage. The merchant and his ship should, in his opinion, leo like • pedlar and his paek-horse, ready to sell to all who would buy, and ready to buy from all who would sell, and ft must be obvious that the more they interfered with his tease. actions the more they diminished his opportunities and deem. ecrib , d his profits. The Englishman wanted wine,the Spaniard wanted earthenware, and the Frenchman wanted sugar. LE them suppose • Spaniard to bring a cargo of sugar from Cuba to Marseilles for the Frenehman, and then to ship a oargo of wine to London for the Englishman. When be arrived here, our custom-house officer would say to him : "We cannot take your wine." " Why not ?" he would rejoin ; " you want our wine, and I want your earthen ware." " I cannot help that," would be the response ; " our navigation laws, which are the bulwark of our country, the wooden walls of Old England, and all that sort of thiig, prohibit your bringing French wines to our ports ; but I'll tell you what you may do : yen may take hack your wine to Span and land it there, and then reship it and bring it here again, and thea well give you some earthenware in exchange foe it." (Heir, hear.) Why,, could anything equal the absurdity of this arrangement ? There was actually a case the other day of a French ship which took a cargo to Mar seilles from New York, and not finding a sale for it there took it to Ameterdam; and NISI finding it without a customer, brought it to Liverpool, where it was actually subjected to aeis are. It was released upon petition, but on whatcondition ? Why, to add absurdity upon absurdity, on the sole condition that it should be taken back to New York in the same vessel. (Hear, hear). This was the way in which they destroyed that indirect or triangular trade, which was, as be believed, the most profitable.bnuich of our commercial marine. And if it was the moat profitable, why should they enact laws to obstruct it ? They might depend on it that human wisdom could never pall laws interfering with the natural regula tions of trade and commerce, without creating waste, loxes, and expense. Let them call it what they pleased—a naviga tion law—a charts, maritime—or what they would—this enactment only *sieved the purpose of protecting" the British shipowner by raising freights higher than they need be. Now if this were the case ; if freighta were raised by the operation of these laws, it was worth while waiting to inquire what was the result? In 1843, there were in the ports of Great Britain 7,181,179 tons of British shipping. If by the operation of this law, freights were raised only 10s. per ton, a tax would have then been imposed on the consumer of 3,590.000/. In 184.5, there were entered and cleared 8,546,090 tons, whiei, at 101, per ton, would create a tax of 4,273,0151. Now, he (Mr. Ricardo) was far from saying that the operation of them laws raised the price of freights at all. All he meant to lay down was, that If they were operative in any way, they were operative in raising freights. But he did not intend to stop at showing that these laws operated as a tax on England. Their evils were not peculiar to this country; they were equally felt and appreciated in our colonies. Many years ego, Mr. Marriott, a member of that house, had told them that " if they touched the navigation laws, the West India monopoly must go with them. ' The legislature had now begun at the other end. They had taken away the mono poly from which the West Indians fancied they derived ad vantage, and the colonists had now a fair right to say that, inasmuch as the navigation laws restricted them in their trade and opposed an ohetscle to the independence of their commerce, the trade in ',hipping ought to be as free as the trade in sugar. (Hear. hear) And he would remind the house that it was the .totem of isolating colonies from the mother country, which had loot the Brazils to Portugal and the United States to Great Britain, which had left Holland with Java as a solitary possession, and Spain with Cuba and Porto Rico, oat of all her immense dependencies. Was there, then, he would ask, any adequate motive of political expediency to justify this mischief and oppression ? But he knew how be should be answered. He should have mem bers on the other side quoting Adam Smith as an authority against him. (Hear, hear.) Let them remember, however, that, its this peculiar instance, Adam Smith had for on'*, contrary to his practice, made an assertion without an argument to support it. (Ministerial cheers.) It would be argued 090, he had no doubt, that our commercial marine was the nursery of our naval marine. He admitted that position also ; but he deed. d, stoutly and emphatically, that the way to encou. rage our isommercial marine was by upholding a protective system. (Cheers.) Protection meant scarcity; scarcity' meant inferior_fty. (Renewed cheers.) He could prove this posi tion. Why, at the present time, was our commercial ma rine inferior to that of the United States? Some one would reply, because timber was dearer here. Was that a foot ? lie (Mr. Ricardo) very much doubted whether, before a committee, the contrary could not be proved, at least as re garded eel( and teak. Some one else would probably ex dein " Wages." In our outoorta, however, ehipbuild, rs were paid only Is. 6d. to 4s. a day ; in London, where there was a combination against masters, they were paid only a day ; whilst, in the United States the average was two dollars, or nearly 7s. a day. (Hear, hear.) Then, 'se to iron and copper, no one could doubt that they were cheaper bore then in America. Canvss and cordage were alio cheaper. But others, probably, would talk of the com parative costs of no,. imoion, end would cite the Swedes end Dorn 3as classes of seamen who could be hired at lower waxes, nod whose cost of maintenance would be inflnitel Ins,s. But if the envoi went of foreign sailors wade Po Si, - ninon a cliff. Move, how was it that the American Marlow was filled with English tinhorn, and that our own shipmasters did not avail themselvee of t'e opportunity afforded under our navieatinn laws of employing foreigners to the extent iif onanurth of a Olio's crew ? (Hear, hear.) if the con.- , Mee was granted, he (Mr. Ricardo) would undertake to !ay bare the secret springs of all these mysteries. He would show that British shipowners and British seamen needed no protection ; that we could best the shipping of the world just as we beat the manufacturers of the world. (Chet rs) But he now came to • part of the suhj pecan which he must claim is slight indulgence whilst he entered into • few details. lie held in his hand an estimate of the comparative toona.e of British and foreign shipping in the British ports in 1814, the last year of the war ; 1624, the year of the first reciprocity treaty; and 1845, when 27 of those treaties were in existence. The return gave the following results : British. Foreign. lilt .... 1,797,320 4,310,858 TY, pregatioas being as follows : 1014 1821 „ „ 29 1853 The excesa of British shipping 7 in 1145 being double the amount of 1824, and nearly four times as much as in 1814. (Hear, hear.) But he had also • return of the ton nage of protected and unprotected shipping in the years 1828 and 1844, from which it appeared that there were, mea sured in tons: Protected. linproteated. In ISIS In 1814 ........ ..... .._ .. 3012.1 13 showing an excess of 1,233.254 twe or 69 per cent., as respected protected shipping, but of ea lees than 2,578,976, or 135 per cent. as respected unprotected shipping, just double the amount of increase in the other class. ilenid cries of "hear, hear.") These were facts which spoke fir them selves. They were facet, he believed, which clearly proved that protection had not answered its purpose, and that there were better and surer muds I of encouraging our marine than by systems of protection eel prohibition. (Hear, hear.) If our commercial =aim was a nursery for our nay', 1 what was the nursery of our commercial marine 1 The amwer was evident, commerce itself. (Ilea, hear.) If they stifled commerce they stiffed our commercial marine ; the two must go hand in hand together, and must prosper by each other's prosperity. (Repeated cheeriag.) And, that freedom of trade had been the best nouris' her of our mart- time navy, could be proved by several forcible illustration*. Let them take the cab of the timber trade. In 1843 there were 841 ships employed in the timber trade with Canada: in 1841, the very first year after the reduction of the timber dutise, the number of ships si emplod was 2608. (Loud cheers.) Take the Chita tr .de. Before that trade was opened, very few ships were employed in it. In 1835 the number was not 100; in 1843, it was 200. (Renewed cheers.) But he held in his hand a return before which these ratifi ers sunk into comparative insignificance. It exhibited the state of our trade in the years immediately before and after the repeal of many of our worn protective imposts. He found by that return that the amount of tonnage entered inwards and outwards in this country was, In 1144 4,352,821 tons. In 1846 (Loud cheers from the free traders,) showing an increase of no lees than 2711 ships. (Repeated cheers.) But he would not trouble the house with any more statistics. tithe facts he had stated had had the good effect of making an impression on the mind of any one who had heard him ; if he had been able to show that, even in the slightest degree , the operation of those laws was oppressive and unjust; if had raised a doubt as to the efficiency of the protection they affected to secure ; in either case he submitted that he had made out a case for gnawing this enquiry. One of two courses must be taken that night, either they must refute his facts and figures, or they must allow him to substantiate them before a committee of the house. (Cheers.) The hon. mem ber moved for a select committee to inquire into the ope ration and policy of the navigation laws. Mr. HUME seconded the motion. Mr. M. GIBSON, on the part of the government, was prepared to give the committee, and he hoped the house would add its assent. The motion of his hon. friend did not pledge any gentleman who sanctioned it to measures which his hen. friend might afterwards deem it expedient to pro pose ; it merely went thus far, that there was a ease for inquiry. In agreeing to the committee, the government , were acting in strict accordance with the report of the com mittee of 1845, the object of inquiry with which appeared to be just the same as that now moved for by the hon. gentle man, the business delegated to the comnutte., in the former case tieing to inquire iota the best means of extending and encouraging the employment of British shipping, and the proposed object here being to inquire into the operation and policy of the navigation laws, which laws w. re professedly IM the encouragement of British shipping. The committee of 1815 having, from unforeseen circumstances, brought its labours to an early close, recommended, in its brief report, that the inquiry should be continued by some suttee quent committee. In adopting the motion of the hon. gent., therefore, the house would be carrying out the views of the former committee. It must, besides, have occurred to the minds of most gentlemen that after the great commer cial changes of late years, it was desirable to inquire into the i present operation of those laws which regulated our trade with foreign countries. (Hear, hear.) The reciprocal treaties which had been alluded to had themselves been forced upon the country by the necessities of the time, and the changes which had arisen in the commercial relations between England and other countries. In assenting to the committee, the government were most desirous that it should he composed of men whose position and talents should en title them to the confidence of the country. Mr. LIDDELL felt himself called upon to oppose the motion. The hon. gentleman, indeed, said /hat he had no intention of abolishing the navigation laws, but he by no means desired to give the hon. gentleman an opportunity of effecting such an object, lest the intention should then occur to him. Ever since the reciprocity treaties, the British ship. owners had been complaining of a moat unequal pressure upon their industry in competition with other carrying nations, but it was not until 1844 that they could obtain a committee to inquire into the subject. That committee not having completed its labours on the close of the session 1841, obtained leave to sit again in the session of 1845. In the latter year, a gleam of prosperity for the first time shone upon the British shipping interest, a circumstance which rendered it less necessary to proceed with the inquiry. (A laugh.) And a serious &amity befalling the family of tie hon. member for London, the chairman of the cons mittee, at the juncture, the committee brought its labours to a close, and made the brief report referred to by the right hon. gent. The object of the committee of 1845 - , however, was quite different from that of the committee now moved for, the ultimate intention of the hon. member, as he and his Mends admitted, being the material modification, if not the entire repeal, of the navigation laws. When he and those around him supported the reasonable propoeition of the noble lord opposite forsumending the navigation laws for twelvemonths to meet a peculiar and pressing emergency, he little thoughtthat this sanction would be made a peg whereon to hang a propositioa tending to the entire abolition of these laws. U. really trusted the government would withdraw the sment they had, through the mouth of the right hon. gentleman, given to this committee. They were within a very few months of a general election, and meantime they had quite enough on their hands, without creating, at the sug gentian of an individual member of the house, the alarm and excitement throughout all the maritime districts of this country, which would be occasioned by the appoint ment of the proposed committee. (Hear, hear, hear.) He would quote the returns for the port of Hull for the year 1844, to show what had been the effect of foreign corn. petition on the shipping interest of that port. In 1844 there entered that port from Norway only two British ships with a tonnage of 116 tons, while of Norwegian vessels there were ' 29 ships with a tonnage of 3,043 tons. From Denmark in the ' same year there was not a single British ship, but there were no lee than 492 Danish ships with a tonnage of 34,445 tons. (Heir, hoar.) From Prussia there were 80 British ships, 10,812 tons, Prue inns, 222 ships, tonnage 32,698 tons. (Hear, hear.) With all these facts be fore them they were still ex pected to believe in the advantages of unrestricted competi tion. He trusted that the house would not be misled by the delusive statements of hon. members opposite, but would con sider the interests of British shipping and British commerce not wholly beneath their notice. Mr. Huskismn had estimated the amount of British shippiag in 1816 (which he admitted was immediately after the war, whin the whole carrying trade of the world was in our hands) and in 1826, ten years after. In the first of these years the tonnage was nearly three mil lions, and in 1826 it had diminished about 150,000 tons. In 1844, after many years of peace, the British tonnage amounted to only three millions. It might be said, we did well to keep up the amount ; but then it should he recol lected how enormously our rommerce and manufactures had increased in that time. (Hear, hear.) In 1816 we im ported 60,000,0001 M. of cotton; in 1846 our imports had increased to 646,000,00011 re., and every other article of im port in proportion. (Hear, hear.) It might be said in favour of this committee that there were many restrictions,' to which British ships were subject that required investiga tion and revision. Granted, but if reform in that direction was the hon. member's object, why not confine his inqui ries to that point? He trusted that the house would not consent to withdraw the reeled= under which our shipping had arrived at its premed megeitude. If we destroyed the main element of near national dehnees, the country might maintain or lessen Its opalsoat, bet where would be the security whisk inabial mi to enjoy it? Without our ships and ear semen we should be come an object of attraction to the cupidity of foreign nations, while we should be without any means of defence from their attacks. We should appear to them in the foolish light of having, in ohedienes to the wide spread theories of free-trade, abandoned tiMes advantages which had so long made us the envy and admiration of the world. Where was this to end ? If we made tide mostry one universal workshop, where woo we to rehdlmes our army or our navy ? Was it menegelles dented Inhabitants of our cities, or the *latched laboaram et the feetoriet? Nee bejuelens ens pareeffileas taloa wpm aaaska Posies t Peugsmente,fit Metspeem eel& __Nlll 4 dims: M regiseruss sensesis nentum Panes He trusted, then, that send Would be had to the great ins tenses of the country, ma else house would not, in a moinent of delusion, spat ittee now sought far. min Mr. HUME supportad motion for a committee. He was yet to learn what there was in Englishmen to prevent them competing on equal teems with men in any part of the world. (Hear, hear.) What had been the consequences of protection The Americans had acquired 'even hundred ship.. (Cheers from - the protectionist members.) Yes, it we. in consequence of our protective system. In fact, never hod a great interest been worse treated than the shipping intetest of this country, and this fact he expected to see elearly proved before the proposed committee. He held in his hand a copy of the report of the Montreal Board of Trade, from which it appeared that the principal grievances from which our colonists sought redress, were the repeal of WI 11:(fcrential duties, the abolition of the three shilling frontier duty on corn (these points had been conceded), and siieh a modification of the navigation laws, as would enable them to employ the cheapest vessels In the transit of 'heir productions, At present their corn was shut out of the Liverpool mcrket by the competition of New York, . ' THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1847. because from the latter port corn could be aseiSe s tl i Ter- the British sailor and to the e ffi cient maritime defence of pool at 24. Id, the barrel , while from the the patios. . 4s freight was 9d. Such had bent, , were Mr. HUTT said it was sever the practice of the house to still, the 'Wean of our restrictive wain. (Hear.) , confine inquiries of thin kind to the government of the day, If the moult of the inquiry should not be to peeve that the for on am occasion he obtained an inquiry into the operas removal of these rest.r:ctioas would tend to the inipsoveinent tion of the set of settlement itself. of the commerce, the trade, and the diseases tithe country, Mr. DISRAELI said he rose for the purpose of prevent he would be the first to admit his error; a' all event', it win ing any misconception ss to the grounds on which he and most desirable for all parties that the question should be set tease with whom he acted were going to • division. lie at rest. begged of the house tin observe, that in the vote they were Sir W. JAMES had heard no grounds which, in his about to give they were not going to vote for or agaiust the opinion, ought to be considered as sufficient for resisting the navitratioa laws. That cmcition they did not consider before proposed inquiry. The motion of the hon. member (Mr. the house. They were going merely to vote against inquiry. Ricardo) bore • striking re emblance to that made by Mr. (Laughter.) Some hon. gentlemen seemed to think there Cobden three or four years ago as to the effect of the corn- was no difference in the distinction, but he would show laws on labour, and on agricultural labour in particular, and that in that clutinction the whole question before the house he would my to his emottuents, and the shipping interest rested. Therighthon.gentlemanlaiddownthe broad priticiple generally, as was then said to the agricultural interest, "If that they should never refuse investigation in t o an y sub j ect you are wise and know your own interest you will not oppose which might be brought before the House of Commons. the inquiry." That appeared to him to be a novel and dangerous propo- Mr. Ald. THOMPSON took it for granted that the people sition—(hear, bear),—for he did not think the desire of in of Hull were desirous of seeing their harbour and docks vestigation ought to be morbidly encouraged. With respect filled with ships from Sweden and Prussia, but his bon. to the distinction which he drew between not voting on the friend must have perceived that those who were so eager for question of the navigation laws, and voting against inquiry, the committee had already made up their minds in favour of he did not pretend to say that gradual alterations • qualification, if not of the total repeal, of the navigation might not be allowed, but that the question was one laws. The hon. member (Mr. Ricardo) said that his motion respecting which they had such ample information, was founded upon the fact that the question had been gone that it was one, the principle of which had been into in the committee of 1844 and 1845 ; but the object of so thoroughly investigated and illustrated by statesmen I that inquiry was not the navigation laws, bet into the cause and public writers, and the details of which were so familiar lof the dreadful depression in the commercial marine of the to every member of that house, that it did not require country. In his evidence before that committee, the late further illustration. (Hear, hear.) He could not conceive Mr. Soames, after stating that British shipping had been in how the government which ma le those great alterations in a deplorable state for the last three or four years, the commercial policy of the country, which had been mode i produced • calculation, showing that while during in the few lest years, or the government now in office, which a period of twenty year., British tonnage had increased supported those changes, and were prepare dto carry them 42) per cent., the foreign shipping of the north of out, could have acted as they have done without having the Europe had increased 172 per cent. But if it were not ne- question of the navigation laws under consideration. (near, ceseary to continue the navigation laws fur the protection of hear.) Therefore he thought the government should have the British shipowner, he held that it was essential to do so come forward with • decided opinion ; and if they saw that for the security, the power, and the independence of the it was necessary to make alterations in the navigation laws, , country. (Cheer..) Free the British shipowner from the which was strictly a fundamental law of the country, they numerous regulations which compelled him to maintain a should have embodied their convictions in a bill, and brought numerous body of able and intelligent seamen—remove from the subject under the consideration of parliament. (Hear, him the oblig ition of taking apprentices, and building his hear.) When the noble lord asked parliament to suspend ships in a manner to be approved of by a public officer— these laws t. mporarily, in order to meet a preying emergency abolish the necessity of providing his ships with surgeons he gave no intimation of any intention on the part of the and medicines—a regulation to which foreigners were not government to make ulterior alteration. (Hear, hear.) subjected—and no lonoir call upon him to contribute ti the But now they were called on at the bidding of a private maintenance of disabled seamen, and the widows and children member, who as it were pulled the government after him of seamen, and they would place him in a better position to —(hear, hear, bear)—to say whether it was right—he need compete with ths foreign shipowner. But he did not believe not say whether it was decorous—that they ebould that such • change would be considered by any one consent to an investigation on the subject. No a dvantageoustothegeneral interesteofthecoup. Ifgovern. man was fit to be a minister who had not made meat considered that it would be wise and ient to alter up his mind on the subject one way or other. (Hear , the navigation law., let them come forwar boldly and at hear, hear.) They hail at least two hundred years ear once with a measure fur the purpose, and the house and the rience of these laws, and there way no subject on which country would know how to deal with it ; but to leave the there was more ample evidence. Here wail a law of a con. natter in a state of uncertainty for twelve or eighteen stitational character, not one involving mere commercial months, was both unwise and ungenerous to the interest principles, and surely a government ought to have some concerned. filed opinions respecting it. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BRIGHT thought that good reason had been shown Lord J. RUSSELL said he agreed in the statement for inquiring into the diversity of opinion which had of the hon, gentleman who had just sat down with been shown to exist on this question in the course of the respect to this question. It was not a question present debate. The 'even' changes which had already as to whether they approved or disapproved of , taken plum in these laws proved, too, that they were not as the navigation laws, but whether they would consent to they originally stood conducive to the interests of the inquiry. Though he agreed with the hon. gentleman in country, And the fact, that within the last few days the his statement, he came to an opposite coueluaion, because be house had suspended the navigation laws to some extent ins thought it was a question quite fit for inquiry. (Hear.) case of emergency, was a good reason for doubting their When he asked the house to consnt to a tempo utis ity, for it proved that under any circumstances they were rary suspension of the navigation laws, he did not do so with only fine weather laws, and not suited for tines of difficulty any ulterior views of a permanent alteration. Whether and danger. these laws were defensible er indefensible, he believed Viscount SANDON agreed with the hon. member for that a temporary suspension was necessary and jus- Westmoreland that if a question like this was brought for- tillable. (Hear, hear, hear.) He thought it was ten- ' ward it should be in the hands of the government. (Hear, possible for soy man to say as the honourable gentleman hear.) Whea they came to deal with a principle like this, seemed to sseert that these laws were of that constitutional not merely as regraded the commerce but the defence of the character, of that permanent and fixed 'nature, that it was country, it was the duty of the government to come for ward not possible to content to any alteration of them. He could and intimate an opinion upon it, nor was it right to not but reflect that a great many years ago Mr. Iluskisson leave a question like this in the hands of en individual thought it necessary to propose a modification of them, and member. This was not an inquiry which could be entered because he bad no other course to take. With regard to into, without disturbing . men's minds; and it was one which another part of these laws; which the hon. member for involved a great principle, and the government, by (once- Durham defended on the authority of Mr. Iluthinon, ding such an inquiry in the manner in which it had been done namely, that part of them which related to fisheries, by the right honourable gentleman the Viee President of the and upon which he pronounced a strong opinion, he Board of Trade, had virtually abandoned the law. (Hear, begged to remind the house that great alterations had been hear.) The Navigation Laws were not based on the ordi- made by the right hon. baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel), and nary principles of protection, but in them were involved the he did not think that these alterations were seriously opposed. defence of the country and the efficiency of the navy. He It generally agreed that circumstances required these ahem ' felt most reluctant to vote spinet aninquiry supported by lions; so that instead of the laws being of a permanent and the government, still he must confess that he did not think unalterable character, they were subjest to circumstances. the great interests at stake had been met with the consider- Mr. DISRAELI said the noble lord had mistaken his ar ation they deserved by being left to the house in the manner garment entirely. in which they had bean by the government. Lord J. RUSSELL : The hon. gentleman said the law Mr. LABOUCHERE would leave the house to judge was of a constitutional character—(hear, hear),—and being if the government differed much from the noble lord in think- of a constitutional character, it was not a subject for inquiry.f ing these laws a fit cue for inquiry. The noble lord But he (Lord J. Russell) concluded, from the policy o I admitted that reference being made to the commercial former times, that circumstances might require an alteration, change* that had taken place in this country, these laws modification, or a repeal—in part, at least—of these laws; must be modified, although it should be done carefully ; and, upon after - inquiry , it was generally agreed that the' but the noble lord said that the government ought not to alterations made were wise and salutary. (Hear, hear.) If throw the subject loose upon a cemmittee; but when it was they had proposed an alteration of them laws without in remembered bow many important subjects had been referred quiry, u the hon. gentleman mid they ought to do, the to select committee ., he hoped no government would ever answer would probably be—" Will you propose an alter. reply to any independent member who asked for inquiry on Leticia without inqutry / (Hear, bear.) Will you a subject that they would not grant it. The greatest guess not allow the shipping interest, which is so deeply tions had been so dealt with by governments and had been involved, to have a committee, before which they may constantly referred to select committees on the motion of state their case and their grievances before you consent to independent members. an alteration ofthie most important law 1" (Hear.) They , Lord G. BENTINCE. differed entirely from the right felt it would be to take that course, and, therefore, hon. gentleman, and he concurred with his noble friend the wheu his hon. friend proposed, in his able and very tetnpe member fur Liverpool in thinking that it was not becoming rate speech, an inquiry on the subject, it would have this in the government to permit a question of this kind—a ques- advantage, that nll parties interested in the question would lion of great national policy—to be sent for the consideration have an opportunity of stating their views before a coin of a select committee ; especially when the proposer and mittee, who would examine the persons best acquainted with seconder of this motion said that the shipping and manor- the matter, and bring out the knowledge which they pea cell interests of this country were to be compared to pedlars sensed . With re gard to any measures which might result and packhorses, and that the trade in shipping should ben from the inquiry, ecould only may that with regard to all sub free as the trade in shoes. When this was the spirit ject. they had made great changes of late years,which affected in which gentlemen opposite went into an inquiry so various interests, and very deeply the interests of the eolo important to the shipping interest, it was with an ales. Some of thoee colonies had said that it was not fair to animus very different to that in which the in- make these alterations, and leave them subject to the re. quiry was carried on in 1844. That was not an suiction of the navigation laws. (Ilene, hear.) Let them inquiry into the policy and operation of the navigation laws, hear the statement of these reasons and grievances. (Hear, but into the state of the commercial marine, with a view of hear.) But another part of the subject deserved inquiry, reporting the best means, not of discouraging, but of en namely, the state of the shipping interest itself. Several couraging the shipping interest. The hon. member for the committees had been appointed on this subject, but with a Potteries meant to reduce freights, to purchase sailors in the view, he believed, of going back to restriction and prom cheapest market', and to grind the shipwrights of London don, on the ground that the expense of building ships from 6s. • day down to 3s. 6d., and by a process like the was so great in this country, that they could not bear cam. Irish one of spending half-a-crown out of sixpence a day, to petition. Let them hear what these restrictions were—let diminish freights to 10s. a ton when they were now only the shipping interest state why their expenses were so great 7s. 6d. He said that England bad loet her North American —(hear, hear)--and what modifications or alterations it colonies by the (mention of the navigation laws, but he was possible to make by which the shipping interest, to which (Lord G. Bentinek) always thought they were lost on the country was bound to look as one main source of her account of a tax on tea which was imposed by a parliament political greatness, might be improved, and its prosperity in which they were not represented. He also said that promoted. (Hear, bear.) He did not agree in the ergo- Portugal had lost the Brazils through her colonial intern, menu which would carry them back to protection, but if but if he (Lord G. Bentinek) remembered right the elder they were to go forward in the way of freedom, it branch of the house of Brthanza, finding the interests of was desirable that every interest which might be af- Portugal falling, thought they had better select the Brasile fected should be beard, and that the benefits of that as • place of retreat. Without entering into the question freedom should be extended to other portions of the commu. he would take the same course as that taken by his noble nity. On the part, therefore, of the shipping interest, as friend the member for Liverpool and oppose this motion. well as of those who desired an alteration of the navigation Viscount SANDON—I only raid I was reluctant to vote law., he would support the motion for a committe and for it. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) though he was not prepared to propose a committee, he was Lord G. BENTINCA.—WeII, then, as he was loath to glad that an independent member of th, house, poeticised of permit it to be carried he should oppose it altogether. ea much intelligence, information, and knowledge of the Mr. MITCHELL supported the motion. subject, had brought the subject forward. (Hear, hear.) Capt. HARRIS thought no ground had been stated by After a few words from Mr. RICARDO, the mover and seconder of this motion sufficient to induce The house then divided.—For the motion, 15.5 the house to grant It. Against it .... 61-94 Mr. WAWN trusted also that the government would PENALTIES AGAINST ROMAN CATHOLICS. watch with jealousy the constitution of the proposed Mr. WATSON moved for leave to introduce a !till "for committee, in order to secure • fair inquiry, and one the further repeal of enactments im toeing pains and penal from which the interests of the British shipowners should ties upon her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects, on account not suffer. (Hear, hear.) of their religion." The hon. member said that the hill was Sir R. PEEL wished to sate very shortly hie intention to similar to that which he introduced last session What he give his support to the motion of the hon. member for Stoke reposed waesimply to repeal the remnant of penal laws affect (Mr. Hi ). He (Sir R. Peel) thought there could be ing Roman Catholics. The house bad already sanctioned no reason whatever why there should not be an inquiry into the introduction of such a measure by the course which it the operation and effect of the navigation laws—(hear, hear) took last session, and he did not apprehend any opposition to , —or why there should not be an opportunity afforded for his present motion. ascertaining whether the maintenance of those laws exactly Sir R. INGLIS mid there were two divisions on the as they at present exist was really for the interest of British honourable and learned gentleman's bill of late session, commerce, of British shipping, and, above all, whether they and the last was adverse to it by a large majority. are essential and necessary for the purpose of securing the In thew day, when any change in any department of the maritimeservice of the country. (Hear.) Hegave his assentto administration or laws of the country was proposed, the the proposed inquiry, not for the purpose of giving effect to mere fact that it was • change was, he feared, with the the particular views and opinions of the honourable gentle. great holly of the peconle, a sufficient recommendation. man who sought it by this motion—it was proposed by (Laughter.) In the beginning of the last pension, the hon. an Independent member of the house, and assent*: to by and learned gentleman proposed a bill, the object of which the government, and being so propo sed, he apprehended was to repeal the act of supremacy, to legalise the monastic that those who assented te the motion would in no degree orders, and to allow prelates of the Church of Rome to be bound by the particular views which that hon. gentleman assume the titles of English sees. The present bill, though proposed—bat he gave his assent to the inquiry, on the full in some respects preferable to the former one, legalised the understanding that it was to be a committee, not to give introduction of the monastic order'. ; and he should feel it effect to any particular preconceived notions, but before his duty to give it all the opposition in his power. which there should he • bona fide inquiry into all the Sir G. GREY hoped that the house, having allowed the bearings of this very important question. (Hear, hear.) hill to be introduced before, would not then refuse its On that understanding he gave his ready sseent to this consist proposal. It had been remarked in the course of this Mr. SHAW asked the hon. and learned mover to state debate that the navigation laws had endured for 200 what be desired to do beyond what had already been laears ; he, however, appreh aided that the principle of those socompliehed s ws was of a much older date, and that it was almost simul- Mr. WATSON said the bill which he introduced last sins taneous with the existence of commercial and maritime sion contained all that was embraced in the government bill, marine, and of an earlier period than the protectorate But and aim in that which he now sought to introduce. There whatever had been its antipathy to such a course, thiscountry were still certain infringementa of the Act of Supremacy had been compelled by necessity to relax those laws. In whish were offences at common law, and the main feature of 1815 why had they been relaxed I—not in any speculative this bill was, that it would repeal the penalties now affecting notions of any superior advantages to be gained, but because the regular clergy of the church of Rome. America had determined to introduced the same principles— Col. SIBTHORP was determined to oppose • measure to lay a duty on Britishislips and British goods, and, in point which tended to undermine the Protestant church. of feet, the question then was whether by rigidly maintain. Leave was then given to bring in the hill, which was in- ing the navigation laws this country would cause a prase &need with the names of Lord John Manners and Mr. B. once to be given to the manufactures of other countries Escott. in the American market, or whether by a reboot- TENANT RIGHT. in of these laws a considerable portion of the Mr. PINEY, in moving for lease to introduce a bill fee American trade should be enured. Again, in 1824, the improvement of agricultural tense- right, paid that he when Mr. Huakisson made a farther relaxation, he appres would not then explain the details of the measure, but he hended that right hon. gentleman did so because Prussia was could assure the house that in preparing them he had moo shoot imitating the example of the United States, as would earefully consulted practical men, both farmer. and land be found fro= Mr. Huskiseon's speech in 1826, on the ship. lords, and he had reason to believe that it would prove Wk. ping interests of the country, when he explained his motives factory to the tenantry of the country.—Agr ed to. in signing the Reciprocity Treaties with Prussia, Norway, CORPORAL PUNISHMEN I' IN THE NAVY. Sweden. and other northern European nations, in 1821. Mr. HUME moved for • copy of the returns of corporal It was the change in the commercial system at that time and other punishments on board e .ch of her Majesty's ships which compelled the relaxation of these laws. Then let the is the royal navy, in each year from the let of January, inquiry be made to ascertain whether the recent changes in 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846, stating the name, the commercial policy of this country may not have rendered it retina., nature of the offence, date rat punishment, the num. expedient to make some further change in the navigation laws, her of lashes, and remarks of co nmand, oin-thief or senior regard being had to the maintenance of the maritime defence officer, as to any excess of punishment, or otherwise, accord of the realm, and he hoped the government would take care log to the schedules published and ordered in the Admiralty that the committee should be so constituted, and the inquiry instructions, dated the lit day of Januiry, 1844, fur the -so directed, that, come to what decision and conclusion it government of her Majesty's nand service; stating, also, might, the dispassionate and impartial conduct of the tom- the number of seamen and marines employed in each year, mittee should moire to its final judgment as much authority and the average number flogged ; itirai guielaile those with in the county an that of any other 'nailer tribunal. With and then without trial by court-martial ; dieinmf shine the this understanding he fully concurred in the notion. (Hear.) number of commissioned eed warrant and potty officers; Mr. HUDSON believed that any alteration in the iodating alto, specifying the names of her Majody'e ships and vermeils, navigation law., would not only be injurious to the shipping and the names of the commanders, in which no corporal intersit, of which his constitueoto formed a part, but also to punishment. hase been inflicted in any of three years. The , N. Zile eivregg. MAILS. The moils for Vitus, Oporto, Lisbon, Madeira, Cadiz, and Gibes ltag y will be made up on the morning of the 17th February. The West lndut ,nails, Inziudlng these for Aeuou. Honduras, awl the llavannah, rill be made us, on the morning of the I;th February. Tb, or,rt.n t mails for Gibruliat , Malta, Greece, the tools,. Islands. Egypt, Aden, Ceylott, India, l long-Kol yr, and Clone, not Southampton. will be made up on the morning of the nth of February. The overland closed mitts, rid Marseilles, to the Moditerranson,, Egypt. Aden, 4:rvlort, Intl., !lung Kong, Ike., will be made up on tbs ermine of the 2.lth February. The mil. for Now South Wales, Van Theleen's Land, and New Zealand will be nude up on the evening of the lot March. The mils for British North America, !fermata, and the Mika @Mee will be made up on the evenum of the Led March. The tn.& for the Brazils. the River Plate, Monte V.deo, Perms. bow, Bahia, Ma tetra, and Buenos Ayres, will be made up on tha evenutg of the Ith Month. TO CORREPONDENTEL We mutant notice. ststaiwa), Lticovnnt s.-- Thfic;tdon that is sent bas anooyeinusly ; but those who choose to address us to eoundenee wtl end their confidence restarted. NEITHER CAN WE I;NDERTAILI TO RETC RN ANY NIANCSCRIPTA WIIATEVEIt. se Advertisements intended for The Repress, London evening paper s must best the 0150. by Two o'clock on the day of pubis:shoo. HIGH WATER AT LONDON-BRIDGE.. T.I. Der —Montlnt, 93 dn. Put 9; 99998008. S min. 9MI 2. To-919999w —Yards', 47 oh. past 9; Afternoon, 25 mu. put IR LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEB. 10. IN the House of Lords yesterday the Chelsea Pen sioners Bill went through committee, and the Buck wheat, &c., Importation Bill was read a third time. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from the church wardens of Manchester on the subject of the parochial funds received by the Dean and Canons of the colle giate church of that pariah, and who claimed to be exempt by their charter, on the payment of a fine, from residence and cure of souls. The Marquis of le essuowNE, in answer to the allegations contained in the petition, read a letter from the Dean of Manchester, a copy of which will be found in the parliamentary report. The LORD CHANCELLOR was of opinion that the object the petitioners had in view, was that the rectorial tithes should be appropriated to the spiritual wants of the parish, which co.eld only be effected by a special act of parliament. Lord BROUGHAM brought under the notice of the house the report of Captain Wynne on the subject of public works in Ireland ; which was followed by a discuasion on the subject of the reduc tion of the oluty on rum, as affecting the interests of the Scotch distillers, originated by the Earl of HOLM. TON ; after which, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, in answer to a question from the Marquis of SALISBURY, stated that it was not intended to take any step with respect to the law of settlement, until the committee appointed by the House of Commons had made their report, and it bad been considered by the government. In the House of Commons, after a discussion, the second reading of the Regent's Canal and Railway Bill was postponed. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE, in answer to an hon. member, stated that a despatch had been transmitted to India, reinstating the importers of salt in the same position in which they stood in 1836, but of the advantages of which they had been deprived by the regulation adopted in 1841. Mr. WARD, in answer to a question from Mr. W. CoLLErr, said, that a bill was in prepara tion for the purpose of effecting the enlargement of Holyhead Harbour. The CHANCELLOR of the Ex- CHEQUER stated, in answer to Lord CASTLEREAGH, that the government had caused an inquiry to be made with reference to Capt. Wynne's report on the subject of pub lic works in Ireland. Mr. RICARDO brourit forward his promised motion for a select committee on the Navigation Laws, which, after a debate, was resolved in the affirmative by a majority of 94. A debate ensued upon a motion of Mr. Humes for re turns on the subject of flogging in the navy, but which, for reasons stated by the SECRETARY of the ADMIRALTY ; were withdrawn by the hon. member. The reports on the Destitute Poor (Ireland), the Brewing from Sugar, and Distilling from Sugar, Bills, were received. I DEEP and universal, not only in the public, but amongst political men before the opening of the ses sion, was the aerate of the immensity of Irish distress, and of the necessity of not only relieving it tempo rarily, but going to the mot of the evil, and employing permanent, however costly, means of remedy. Such was certainly the feeling with which parliament met, such the conviction with which ministers met it. It might have been fairly calculated, and it no doubt was, that the influx of Irish members, fresh from the terrible scenes which they had witnessed, the eloquent narratives and conduct of gentlemen so deeply inte rested, would have had the effect of greatly increasing the existing sympathies for Ireland, of giving an im pulse to the determination, already general, to apply English energy, power, and capital, to the regenera tion of Ireland, and to screw up the courage of par liament to meet the financial sacrifices and difficulties incident to such an effort. Parliament is now some three weeks old, and we regret to say that not, perhaps, the sympathy for Ireland, but the impulse to deal largely and gene rously with it, has considerably relaxed. The recri minations of Irish landlord. the bluster of some, the timidity of others, the discordant views of all, except in matters immediately acting their inte rests as a body, have made a most unfavourable im pression. And all those of the permanent measures for Ireland which are based on advances to the pro prietors of the soil are beginning to be viewed with distaste, and scrutinised with severity. For our own part, we cannot but repeat the opinion that throughout the greater part of the south and west of Ireland, not only is the population so dispro portioned to capital, that universalemploy is hopeless; but it is so disproportioned to property, that no poor rate could meet the mess of deetitntioa. The permanent measures contemplated by governmentcould alone have restored somewhat of the right proportions. But of these Lord Jon's: RUSSELL himself almost despairs of emigration; whilst Sir Roemer PEEL, for the sake of a joke, has put an extinguisher on the Waste Lands Reclamation. As to advances to Irish landlords to • improve their own property, although such advances would be infinitely more to the immediate relief of the rustic population than rail-mad employ, still the very idea instantly recalls the necessity of a loan, and its effects on the money market. And hence a growing disposition to do little for Ireland beyond the exigencies of the sent famine. When the CHAN CELLOR of the Exciteutee shall Come down on Monday week with his deficit of ten or twelve mil lions, who will have the courage to add to them? Most English members seem to think that a good Irish Poor-law will prove the great panacea. The hosts of interests which start up hereat to insist upon conditions, will give an idea of the diffi culties of a poor-law. Lord CLEMENTS a fair representative of the better class of Irish land lords, accepts the poor-law, provided he have full power over his land, and the population on it. Others stretch this further, and demand that each estate should care for its own poor and no more, which means that the mass of poor, that belong to no estate, or what is tantamount to no estate, should be huddled into a poor-house, to be supported from English, or, as a more decorous phrase has it, from imperial funds. The only mode of avoiding this is by rendering Irish districts assessable to the one poor rate, large enough to contain a fair admixture of poor and rich proprietors, of domains and farms, hogs and vil lages. If this be not done, the poor law would . prove a mockery. There is an ably drawn-up paper in one of the Blue Books lately laid before Parliament, The Boned Works' Series of Correspondence re specting Relief," which seta forth the reasm of the Irish government for preferring the electoral to the town land division in levying the labour rate. " Let the tax raised from the townland be declared exclu sively applicable to the townland, and the restriction of its expenditure to the inhabitants of the townland will in evitably follow. • • • One district of the country will be marshalled against aaother ; and the destitute, who have become so because their proprietary are absent or neglectful, will be banned and excluded by the prosperous and im proving. The helpless and destitute population of ill-ma naged estates will thus be punished for the incapacity or errors of others, and the dispensation of Providence will be made to visit them alone because of their poverty. Nor are the tendencies of two systems of townland and electoral division less politically opposed. The distribution of assessment by baronies and electoral divisions is in many respects unequal, and might probably be much amended. The letter are said to be too large for practical purposes; the former generally are so. But they are public divisions, made irrespective of personal consideration ita public con venience and for public policy . Being fi scal, they imply re presentative control. They combine men of every illation for certain ends, and for other than sectarian cc party ob jects. They bring them periodically into each other's pre mace, and Teed them ti take measurea together for the public good of the locality, Are not tberi among the truest lesson% of political civilisation ? . hon. member said. that u it had been intimated that to give all the above returns would involve greet trouble, he would not press fir theatre, that extent, hut simply ask fur the return (as was understood) from January last year. He wished by the information obtained to do credit to those officers who had inflicted the least amount of punishmeut. He desired not to go into put proceedings, but to obtain the means of preventing improper proceedings in future. Capt. BERKELEY thought this constant endeavour to excite the feeling of the public on a subject which the British sailor had never complaiaed of himaelt was lik-ly to subvert the best interest, of the navy and bring the service into dis repute. Admiral BOWLES thought such a return would bring the navy into disrepute, although he was convinced that the kindest treatment was adopted by British naval officers to their Crews. Mr. WARD said, the Admiralty were quite prepared to do what had been agreed to be d o ne as to the army returns ; the officers of the navy ought to be prep tred to do what the officers of the army were ready to do. (Hear, hear.) He believed that publicity was a wholesome practice, and Its did not think it would at all make the good officers timid, but it might tend to make the hasty more cautious. Sir C. NAPIER acquiesced in the motion for the returns, but was sorry the hon. Secretary for the Admiralty had objected to make them retrospective on the grounti that the officers could have hod no notice—(heal, hear)—as he was sati-fled the greatest kindoeio and humanity had always been exhibited by them to their crews. (Hear.) As to reportiug to the senior officers all cotes of punishment to be inflicted, how was that, be should like to know, to be done at sea ? What was the captain of a ship in the Medi terranean to do with his admiral lying snug in the Tagus ? What was the meaning of these sort of returns he was sure be did not know. If the hon. member for Montrose was popularity hunting—(loud laughter) —he begged of him, at any rate, to hum for public approbatioa by some safer method than by depicting all the captains in the navy as tyrants, and exciting all their crews to mutiny. (Loud opposition cheers.) Admiral DUNDAS explained, that it was not intended that the order as to reporting punishments to admirals should apply to ships at sea. Mr. WILLIAMS was astonished to hear the galls,* member fur Marylebone argue as if flogging in the nu, was an essential part of the British entstitution. (Lora ministerial cheers.) He was thankful to her Majesty's go vernment for conceding this motion. Mr. S. HERBERT thought it as well to advise certain hon. gentlemen opposite that these were discussions better suited to a board than to that house, and that it would be well that they should make up their minds as to what they really intended as board before they came down there to explain their views. With respect to ft egging the re was no state of society in which, according to his view of the case, corporal punishment was not under some circumstances de sirable ; and the soundness of this view had been confirmed by the house when they passed bills under which such puniehtnentt were ordered to be inflicted in the cases of persons wantonly attacking her Majesty, in cases of wilful damage of public property, and in the cases also of juvenile incendiaries. Such being the case he must say that he very much objected to returns being made of corporal punishments inflicted. Mr. F. MAIJLE said that when he considered under what ;M;tan the question of corporal punishments had been brought f orward in the house last session, and what excitement wrs occasioned in the public mind upon the ques tion generally, he could not help thinking that the house and the government ought cheerfully to consent to the production of any returns of punishments in the army and navy, which were so framed as not to be calculated to do injury to the services. (Hear, hear.) Ile must say also that he adhered to the opinion he had previously expressed, that punishments in the army ought to be submitted to the test of public opinion. (Oh! oh!) He said it not only as • member of the house, but as an officer who had served in the army, that it was highly desirable that the public should be made acquainted, as far so possible, with the facts relating to corporal punishments in both services. Sir R. PEEL thought that the subject of military disci pline was one which was very fit fur consideration. It wail said that they should know what progress was made with re spect to the abolition of punishment, which they were all most desirous to see. Though he agreed with his hon friend to the extent that if the members of her Majesty'a government, having considered the matter, saw no objection to the returns being made, that they should not be interfered with, yet he thought that the modification proposed by the hon. g °Semen would be a dangerous one, He would much rather have a retura re trospective thin a prospective return. The Secretary of the Admiralty said that he would not give a return for the two plat years as he would for the future, because the *Blurs had not been cautioned that their names would appear be fore parliament. He thought that that implied • great reflec tion first on the naval service, and next on ohe Board of Ad miralty, under whose direction it was placed. He wu now s a Cil i kT i lp;: i n s tra m l e l t y it o . f desiretl i e ,ere cases in o w 7 i h c is h n w a i v o y ng to . headed individuals had carried the principle of corporal pun ishment too far, hut he protested against judging of them by these isolated ca - es. Ile was sure that that must be the desire of the Board of Admiralty, and they had the means of most effectually checking an act of impropriety on the part of a naval officer. (Hear.) y There were some cases in which that cliscipliue may be carried to too great a length, but in those rases the admiralty could mark their disap proval by removing their confidence from the officers. There was no better means of dealing with them. If they taught the naval service to look up to the House of Commons, instead of to the crown, for favour or approbation they would do a great deal of injury. (Hear, hear.) He thought that was a dangerous principle to act upon, which refund a return for the last two years which would be given fur the futur,‘, in order that the names of the officers should not be given before they were made aware that such would be done, and that then the House of Com mons would have the power of judging of them. Ile thought that that indirectly implied that the House of Com mons should have some immediate controul over the navy. Thee should throw overboard the whole matter rather than establish that principle. (Hear.) If the govern ment thought that there would be no inconvenience in pro ducing the returns, why of course they were the best judges. He hoped that in justice to the service, and in justice to the i Board of Admiralty, that the secretary of the board would not say that returns would be given in future which were now refused. Mr. W. COWPER said that the return agreed to be given by the government differed essentially from that of the hon. member for Montrose, in so much no the former did not contain the names of the officers nor the nature of each separate offence. His kon. friend could frame a return, no doubt, which would not be liable to the objections made by the right hon. baronet opposite. Is his opinion they should have the same legislation for the nary as they had for the army. Mr. GOUI.BURN said that there seemed to be among the very members of the Board of Admiralty such a differ ence of opinion as to the retina which they were prepared to give and the return moved for by the hon. member for Montrose that he thought that before the house came to any conclusion on the question the Board of Admiralty ought to be prepared to state to the house what were the returns they were prepared to give. When they bad that before them they could then see how far it was liable to the objec tion made. --- Lord J. RUSSELL said that before the motion was made he understood from the President of the Board of the Admi ralty, that he had the concurrence of the board in thinking that there would be no objection to giving a return of the punishments on hoard ships, as they were given with regard to regiments iii the army. Haring had that information from him who was responsible for the conduct of that de partment, and having no doubt that he seriously considered the matter, he expected that there would be no objection to giving returns of that nature. That did not imply that he was ready to grant them in the shape they were moved for, but that h • was ready to agree to the return of the number of offic rs and punishments in each ship. When the immediate and total abolition of punishment was urged last year his right hon. friend agreed to the re turn which was moved for by the member for Winchester. He was of opinion that there was more mischief done, and a greater feeling of jealousy created by discussions on such matters t• an by any refusal to produce such returns. He thought that his noble friend at the head of the Admiralty was quite right in consenting to the production of the returns. He saw no objection to their production. There was a short time ago an impression entertained by the Board of Admiralty that Captain Stopford had been guilty of undue severity, but when the matter was brought before a court-martial, that feeling was quite removed. lie trusted that his noble friend would withraw his motion, which ended with proposing to give the names of the com manders under whom corporal punishments have been in flicted for the lest two years. Ile trusted that the house would not object to a similar return to that which would he given with regard to punishments in the army. The noble lord concluded his observations by stating, that it was his firm conviction that if corporal punishment wan to be maintained in the navy, it was desirable that there should be no concealment of the facts connected with each CU., which, if published, would, he was sure, throw any thing but discredit on the officers. After a few words from. Col. T. Woon, Capt. Haunts, and Mr. realism), Mr. HU tdE said ahat after what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, he would not press his motion. Motion withdrawn. RAILWAYS. Mr. STRUTT postponed his motion for leave to bring in a bill for regulating the proceedings of the commiesioners of railways and for amending the law relating to railways. BREWING FRUIT SUGAR BILL. On the report on this bill being brought up, the CHAN CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated, in answer to an hon. member (whether suns, naannfactured from beet-root would be admitted 1 that the question was one of very con sidernble importance, and which would require much con sideration. NAVY ESTIMATES. Mr. WARD laid on the table the Nivy Estimates. The house adjourned St 20 minutes after twelve. NEW RECteRD OFFICEO.—We have reason to believe that the site of a new building Lir the general custody of the Public Records, is all but fixed, on the Rolls Estate in Chancezy-lane—and the plans for the structure hare, we believe .been preparcd.—.4t/sesontat. SALT VERSUS TUE POTATO DISEAnE.—AIIow me to suggest to those whose po•atoee are already forward enough, or as soon as they ere so. to try the effect of a slight top dressing of salt, and to publish the result. It would be interesting to know from correspondents residing near the sea if they can confirm or refute my statement in your paper of Deo. ii, that potatoes grown in the neighbourhood of enit-wafer were entirely or in most cues free from the pre vailing epidemic. —Gardeners' Gozette.