Star. — London, England, 1827-06-13 00:00:00

a t he price of wheat reached 665. but drat afterwards o hould be subject only to the same regulations at don directly imported for consumption. What was t h;s but to defer to an indefinite time what the present amendment prohibited altogether. What was the 1 „p objection to the present law ? Why, that it did not c ome iiito operation till the price of wheat had r eadied 80s. per quarter ; and in the same way the pro position of the Right Honourable Gentleman was ob." . eeticeo bte, which went to prohibit the taking corn J osss o f bond till wheat reached 665. per quarter. It Ins an indefinite period. It might be one year or teo, an d a permanent prohibition was preferable to this previous and indefinite enactment. Yet this temporal y prohibition bad obtained the sanction of the President irk Board of Trade, and be concluded also that of *Noble Lord, the Secretary of the Colonial Depart ment, The difference between actual prohibition and prohibitive duty was merely nominal. They must produce nearly the same efft, and he dee the most v o coo d political economist ec to define the difference between actual prohibition and such a duty as he had descr ibed. The Noble Lord then adverted to the limi tations to the Act authorising the importation of foreign silks. The importation of this article was confined to the post of London, and some kinds of manufacture were to t a lly prohibited. The present Warehousing Act gave a right to the Lords of the Treasury the poWn of determinigg what goods should or should mo t be warehothed, and in some instances the power o f fi s iag the duty at which they should come out, with out ttfavece to the circumstance of Parliament bein g ;; l iied or not. This power was left at the arbitrary discretion of the Lords of the Treasury. The Noble Lord inferred from these facts, that the amendment was in no degree repugnant either to the . general principle o f the present rne4sure, or to the spun by which the Legilliture had been generally actuated. Lord FALMOUTH did not rise to vindicate the No ile Duke from the charge of inconsistency, but to de clare that he intended to vote in favour of the amend- ■at. The Bill was impolitic and unjust, and the time Bits introduction appeared to him to be entirely ill. doom He would discharge from his mind all party antiderations, and give his most cordial opposition to netoessote. with or without the amendment. Lord DARNLEY did nbt intend to enter into any dicssiion of the prohibitive system. The question was, Whether they had hit upon the right degree of de. intim from shat system in the scale of duty? His opinion was, that the best way of obviating all in• convenience would be to fix the duty at the time of importation, and not to leave it to speculators to choose their owu duty by throwing it upon the market whenever they thought proper. It might be useful, combined with this, to adopt the amendment of the Noble Duke, so far as regarded the corn now in bond. There nrver was a period when the prospect of the harvest, at this season of the year; was more propitious than at the present moment. He thought it would be fair to the growers of coin in this country to give them time before they were exliosed to the permanent opera tion of this Bill. As a permanent me.uure it might be beneficial, but it would be materially amended by ap plying the amendment of the Noble Duke to the corn now in bond, and to fix the duty upon future importa tions at the time of the corn being bonded. His Lord. ship concluded by moving, or that the provision con tained in the amondsneot of the Noble Duke should apply to all corn in bond, and not to corn hereafter to le imported." Lord GODERICH said, that if he rightly under stood the amendment of the Noble Lord, at was to ad nit the corn to be henceforth imported accor dins to the provisions of the Bill, and to leave that now us hand abject to prohibition till the price reached 665. This nu a probosition to which he felt very considerable ob jections. It imposed a very considerable hardship upon the present holders of bonded corn. After some farther conversation as to the propriety of disposing sitlit smendment in the present stage of the discuss sa e the gees du was pot, that the word ~ after" stood part of the clause, which ws earned is the allirntative, and the amendment of the Noble lard consequently rejected. Lord CALTHORPE contended, that the landed interest was entitled to a protecting duty from the cir nontances of the country, which made the price of British corn frequently se high as to preclude its etpottuion. The propriety of admitting the impor tation of foreign corn at all was questionable. He vindicated the motives of the Noble Lord who pro posed and supported the Amendment, which was one tbat Lord Liverpool himself might have promoted without any impeachment of bin consistency. At the saroetime, as he thought the Bill upon the whole an improvement upon the existing system, he was an- Willing to endanger it, and should therefore vote against the amendment. The Earl of HAREIA'OOD said, that the Bill bad been brought in, and they were told that they were not *liberty to make any alterations. He would. ask whose fra!t was that ? It was the fault of the title and the hem of to e 131.1. He, however, regardless of this, and hiding an amendment proposed, which he really thought an improvement, would candidly support it. lle wished to be distinctly understood both in the House and out of it, and be would therefore declare why he thought the clause a good one. He voted fur it. be cause he wished to restrain the warehousing system, sat because in the event of a deficient harvest, he wished to give the landed interest the turn of the scale. The Marquis if LANSDOWN had too much respect foe the Noble Lords who supported•the amendment, to impute to them any other than the most honourable motives. And he admitted that it was the duty of those', who brought in the Bill so to frame it. as to afford every facility to the expression of its opinion by that House. But there was no title which could have been given io the Bill, and no form under which it could have been introduced which cJuld have admitted of the amendment which the Noble Duke had prevailed upon the Committee of that House to adopt. What that amendment was they already knew, but as to its effect and import, the opinion of the Noble Duke was exceed- Illy ciffeient from that of its other supporters. Ac t ring to he N o bl e D u k e, i t d i d not m i l i tate aga i nst t . ..e warehousi ng s y stem, while its supporters cherished !, upon the declared ground of its tendency to restrain tut system —a system, he must observe, which bad been sanctioned.. and matured by the wisdom of successive Parliaments, but whi c h N o bl e L or d s now , f or t h e fi rst rt imes and haying the benefit of the new light which had bredla) broke upon them—for new light was not eon to ~. - . the prcfessors of political economy—thought j it ,P T° Per to condemn. Wi t h respect to t h e measures wrilm cioss hadbeen alluded to by the Noble Ea r l up on t h e en , .h e must say, that they were inteuded to ' i g', and no t to restra i n, t h e warehousing system, ad g o', those of 1825, to which the Noble Earl ..."1 ' l rrht'l beets a party. The powers given to the Abe lea n• !Iliad. of the Treasury by these Acts were for the pair• pose of extending the system. and not for the purposed narrowing it. They were enabled to extend the system of warehousing to new pots, And the patticulareause upon which he had built his theory—that which enabled them to intercept the advantages of this system with respect to certain articles, applied only to *ltch articles as bad previously been excluded from the country. Lord BATHURST captained, sod referred to some of the classes of the said Aets. The Marquis of LANSDOWN resumed. He was - - not prepared to go into these Acts clause by clause, but he must re-assert his opinion that the object of the whole course of legislation had been to extend the warehous ing system, and that the present amendment went to limit, if not to destroy it. This amendment must have the effect of bestowing upon foreigners advantages which were taken away from the subjects of this country. The latter would be compelled to with draw the capital they had embarked in warehouses. —The whole term of legislation during the Admi niatration of the Noble Earl and his colleagues, and honoured them for it, had been in favour of this system, and the present was the first attempt which had been made to change the current. The Noble Lords who supported the Amendment appeared to him to look to the appearance rather than to the reality of things. As if they were to assign as the cause of rain not the stare of the atmosphere but the clouds which floated in it. Did they suppose that there would be less foreign importation because the warehousing system was discouraged or destroyed? They were greatly mistaken if they supposed this. The importation could not be prevented but it could be rendered less capable of a prompt and accurate adaptation to the circum stances of the market, and were likely to produce glut and the depression of price attendant upon it. The Noble Marquis dwelt at great length upon the advan tages of a regular and well adjusted supply, which depended upon the warehousing system, and upon the mischirfs of that supply alternately scanty and excessive which direct importation was calculated to produce. The evidence given before the Committee 'hewed that the frauds which were apprehended could not be pre vented by an amendment of this nature. The effect of the amendment was to supply motives and afford means to fraud. It consolidated the interests of great bodies of men, with reference to a single point, and thus gave others, a temptation to conspire. If he saw in the amendment the means of conferring, any benefit upon the country, he should not be deterred from giving st support by any apprehension as to what might be its effect in another place ; but he saw on the contrary, that the only effect it could produce was to counteract the be nefits to be expected from the Bill, at the same time that it exposed them to the danger of losing the present favour able opportunity of settling this great question altogether. A Noble Lord who had spoken early in the debate had expressed great anxiety that the value of property should not be precarious. The Bill was calculated to affect this desirable object, so far as it could be accomplished by legislation, and the amendment by producing alter nately scarcity and glut, had no other tendency than to produce uncertainty and instability of propertys With respect to Ireland, to which country allusion had been made, the population were not likely to be prevented from eating wheat by the cheapness, but rather by the dearness of that article of food. The letter which bad been so frequently alluded to of his Right Honourable Friend the President of the Board of Trade, had been ',represented. wished It did not contain a proposition which he to make, but it explained a sacrifice to which he was willing to submit rather than endanger the Bill. Neither were the propositions the same—the one was temporary, and the other permanent. The letter of his Right Hon. Friend differed, therefore, tato awls, from the proposition now under the consideration of the Hou e. If they looked back to the Acts of 1815 and 1822 they might by parity of reasoning say, that the Act of 1822 did not differ from that of 1815, as Well as that the present amendment was similar to that proposition contained in the letter of his Right Hose Friend. The present amendment annulled some of the most important parts of the Bill, and collaterally struck a violent blow upon the warehousing system. It would lead to the transmission of corn now in bond to Hot; I land, with a view to re•importation. This could be done at an expense of about Ss. per quarter, and the advantage to be gained by it would be 4s. After se veral other observations, the Noble Lord concluded by expressing bis anxious wish that the House would reject the amendment. Lord REDESDALIC contended that it was necessary for tko House to protect the agricultural interest of the country, by dudes approximating as nearly to prohibition u was consistent with the safety of that Interest. He declared his intention to support the unendment. The House then divided, when there were found to be— , Contents present 78 Proxies . 44 —122 . 85 . 48 —133 Not Contest Proxies Majority . . 11 Against rescinding the Amendment of the Duke of Wellington, which accordingly remains part of the Bill. On our re-admission to the House, we found— Lord GODERICH on his kgs, who was just observing, that, after the decision to which the House had come, it would be pre posterous in him to oppose any other amendment. Lord LAUDERDALE wished to be informed when the Noble Lord intended to propose the third reading of the Bill. Lord GODERICH was sorry to refuse any information which could contribute to the convenience of any Noble Lord, but in the position in which the Bill now stood, it must be supposed that he required d some time for coasideration. CLIFDEN said, that he had not the honour.of being of his Majesty's Colinas; but his advice to Ministers would be to throw the Bill away altogether, and leave to their Lordships' House the papules ity of having rejected the measure. After some further conversation between Earl STASXO,II, Lord Rissairs, and Lord Goomucti, the third reading was flied for Friday.—The House then aJjourned at &run °Timm. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Petitions against the TestaTitlC;rporatioti Acts were presented by Mr. Hamtwien from the village of Dawlish, In Devon ; by Mr. Pawn, from Ross, In the county of Hereford ; by Mr. F. Witeolt, f rom Ha rms by Sir W. Rowswv, from Bury St. Ed moods, Hadley, in the county of Suffolk, and Henly-upon- Muses ; by Mr. Gums from certain Dissenters in the county of Bedford; by Mr. Slam= from Hurkbam, in the county of Lancaster. Mr. STANLEY gave notice that be should, on Thursday week, submit a motion to the House relative to the Borough of Preston. IrilllYN. Mr. D. GILBERT preowned a Petition from the inhabitants of Penzance, praying that the elective franchise of Penryn might be transferred to the two adjoining Hundreds, containing a population of upwards of one hundred thousand, and two thousand freeholders. He had no doubt that the number of freeholders was at least 1500, and that in the event of the franchise being thus transferred, the re. preaentation would be as independent as that of any county in Eng. land.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. LOY D presented a Petition from certain Attornies in Ire. land, on the subject of Costs. They prayed for inquiry.—Ordered to lie on the table. _ Mr. HUME presented a Petition from Mr. Henry bills, of Islington, compWning t►at an individual named Warner was now under sentence of death for coloadlegt.w_geln ; setting forth that the mid sentence was contrary to law, •gesqing that the Legis lature woeli be pleased to Widmer an inquiry eft the sibjeet.— The Ron. Gemtleman then moved fora Return of the neiMeber of persons discharged under the Insolvent Act from 14115 up to t ' present time, distlngsistdisg those who have beet remanded, Ste.— The Hon. Gentleman also presented Petitions from til• Catholics and Protestants of Blackburn, praying fur a constitutieual Refarm in Parliament. orna CAXADA. Mr. HUMRpreeented a Pedtien from t►e descendants of Britons in Upper Canada. praying for the removal of all the disabilities under which they laboured. Mr. W. HORTON said he proposed to bring in a Bill this Ses sion to remedy all the complaints of the Petitioners. Sir RD WA RD KNATCHBULL presented a Petition from the Wool-growers of Kent, for a duty on Foreign Wool. CANTERBURY. Lord CLIFTON said, be rose for the purpose of pre senting a Petition of rather a novel kind. He did so at the desire of some of his constituents in Canterbury, and not from any feelingi of person al hostility to his Hon. Colleague (Mr. Lushington) The Petitioners stated that Stephen Lushington, Esq. had been lately appointed Governor of Madras, and that the appointment was virtually in the Crown. The Petitioners therefore con ceived it to be a violation of the spirit of the Act of Par liament that he should accept the office without resign. ing the representation of the City, which he seemed to have no intention of doing. Mr. LUSH INGTON assured the N able Lord he did not attribute any thing like hostile feeling to him in consequence of his having presented that Petition. In fact, were be himself to have chosen the person to pre► sent it, he would have selected the Noble Lord, be cause no person knew better than he did aho the petitioners were. Of the fifty•four freemen by whom the Petition was signed, there was not one of them who had given him (Mr. Lushington) his support, in the last three years. They were, the Noble Lord well knew, opposed to him. However much he (Mr, Lushington) might be disposed to respect their opinions as freemen of the city which he had the honour to represent, he could not take them as those of the whole boiy, of which they did not consti tute the fortieth part. From the great body of his constituents he had not yet heard on this subject, but whenever the time came that his constituents expressed a wish to have back the trust which 'they had given to him, he would be most ready to resign it into their heads. It was, however, a question with which, as be tween him and them. the House of Commons had at present nothing to do, and he would be governed in it by his own tense of what was fit to be done. unless he should hear from his constituents as a body respecting it. One circumstance, which had arisen oot of his ac- ceptance of office, he was anxious to explain. It had been stated that his recent absence from the House had been caused by his hostility to the present Govern ment. Nothing could be more erroneous. If domestic circumstances had not prevented him, he would long before the present moment have taken the oppor tunity of giving his support to the administration of which his Right Hon. Friend ( Mr. Canning) was placed at the head. He was certain that no man was better calculated to uphold the principles of the Noble Lord, the loss of his services they had all to deplore, than that Right Hon. Gentleman ; and he on that ground placed every confidence in his Administration--(Hear). Mr. HUME said he believed, that from the time the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lushington) arrived in India, and commenced receiving the emoluments of office, he would be considered as baying vacated his seat. His constituents had no right to call upon hins,to resign be fore. He saw no reason why, in this respect, any diffe rence should be made between an office under the East India Company, and one under the Crown. Mr. CANNING said, what the law was, and what it ought to be, were two distinct questions. He never heard any doubt expressed upon the subject in his life. Long after he himself accepted the situation of Gower not. General of India, he retained his seat in that House, and took a part in its proceedings. No doubt, during the time, arose, as to the propriety and legality of so acting. He did, indeed, communicate with his constituents, and say that he awited their convenience to vacate his seat, and in so doing he conceived himself to be perfectly justifiable. Sir .1. NEWPORT said, it was 'perfectly clear that by the law, as it stood, no Member vacated his seat by accepting a place is the service of the East India Com pany. Whether the law ought to continue so was another question: The Petition was ordered to be printmt Petitions against the Tess and Corporation Acts wire presented by Mr. Ailtlello3oll4 from Callan; by Mr. Mammas, from Om. port and Portsmouth; and by Mr. W. thews, from 140 persons, , the Deputies of several Congregations of Presbyterians, lade ; pendent., and Baptists, in and within twelve miles of Loam. A message was brought from the Lords, desiring a Copy of the evidence taken before the Penryn Election Committee. Mr. LITTLETON presented a Petition from a person named Barker, complaining of the evils arising from the present laws affect ing Ins olvent Debtors, and praying for enquiry.—Ordered to lie upon the table. setts crisLos . s. Mr. DAVENPORT presented a Petition from 9,000 Operative Weavers of Spit&Melds, praying for an inquiry into the causes of the distress under which they have been labouring for the last three years. The Hon. Gentleman regretted that a motion which be intended to have submitted to the House on this subject, on a former occasion, was delayed. He hoped, however, fur the honour of a British Howse of Commons, that full attention would be given to hiss on Thursday. He was told there would be no House, or that if he got a House, that the subject would pass unheeded. This was the rumour, but he hoped unfounded. At all events, he would not fail In being at his post to do his duty. Petitions against the Test and Corporation Acts were presented by Lord Maxim, from Halifax, Sudbury in Suffolk, Rusbworth, Sowerby, and various other places ; by Mr. Wilms!, from Hatfield, Wetberby, Bridgeborough, Barking, Wetbersheld, Stanmore, and Wyville; by Mr. W. Hoar's, from Newcastle-upon-Tyne; by Mr. HUiTHCOTS, from Boston; by Lord Smarter, from certain Diesenters in Manchester; by Lord W. Sawrince., from Holshana and other places in Norfolk ; and by Mr. Hummel, from certain bodies of Dissenters in Liverpool.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. WESTERN presented a Petition from the Owners and Oc , copiers of Land in the neighbourhood of Marlborough, praying for an additional duty on foreign wool.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. KENNEDY gave notice that be should, early in the next Session, call the attention of the House to the Law of Entail in Scotland, and propose a remedial measure on the subject. As the law now stood, it was productive of great inconveniences. COLONIAL SLAVERY. Dr.LUSHINGTON called the attention of the House to the situation of the free people of colour in our West Indian Colonies. The subject was one of great mo ment. The wealth of many of these individuals was considerable, and entitled them to the rights and privi leges of free men. He did not see why one class of free men should be treated worse than another, merely on _ . . account of their complexion. He deprecated the Act which passed the House of Assembly in the year 1814, allowing certain persons to bequeath their property to their own children,under cert sin restrictions, as flagrant, cruel, and oppressive upon the Natives. He admitted recent Acts had relieved the black population from some of the disqualifications under which they la• boured ; but still enough remained tocall for the prompt and decisive interlerence ut the Legislature. In 1826 ,the white inhabitants of St. Elizabeth petitioned in (favour of the people of colour, but the Ham of A • sembly rejected the Petitions, and conferred the pr • iri!eges desired on Jews. He would not exclede them ; but he objected to the exclusion of the Brown Cbtis• tians. The men of colour were excluded from hold. ing offices of State, from serving on Juries, and from the Elective Franchise. By the prevention from serving on Juries, it was tendered impossible for a Brown man, where a White was implicated, to obtain justice. A man of colour must serve in the militia; but if he was worth 100,0001. he could not rank above a serjeant. If a white reaa was disabled, be was al. lowed a pension of 751 a rear ; if a mm of colour eras disabled, his allowance was only 2'L a year. The widow and children of the one were provided for ; of the other, not. Notwithstanding that the number of the population of the brown people greatly exceeded the number of the white, the number of white cri. min oh far exceeded the number of brown. Far the last forty years only four people of colour had be:n executed; there had been ten white people' executed in the course of that time. At present there was a separation at Church, a-different place of burial—the men of colour were obliged to en ter the Theatre by a different door from the whites— there were, in fact, distinctions of all descriptions. In Jamaica particularly, marriage was discouraged. There was a sort of premium on concubinage, for if a &cr.- man had an illegitimate child by a White woman, the child was cadged to all the privileges of one free born ; but if he married the woman, every child he might then have by her would be a slave. He did not intend to propose any specific measure on the present occasion, because the present Colonial Secretary had not yet bad time to make sp his mind as to the course he should take. If he found hereafter that the subject was not taken up by Government, he would renew his exertions for his fellow creatures. He concluded with moving, that the Petitions be broogheop. The Petitions were then brought up and read, and were understood to have come from persons of colour in the island of Jamaica. Mr. PALLMER said, we should look upon the pa* state of the West Indies as matter of regret, but not as matter of reproach to those who, in latter times, were not allowing a year to pass without improving the con dition of the people of colour. The question in his mind was not whether the West India population should be admitted to the rights of freemen, but whe ther that important change should not be gradually brought about? In consequence of the gradual removal . of restriction, the people of colour had acquired a von mass of property which must avail them in obtaining their full freedom. It was a matter for consideration. whether on a population of 25,000 whites, 40,030 - blacks should all at once be admitted to an equal parti cipation of privileges ? and whether the more prudent mode would not be a gradual admission to privileges which they had not heretofore enjoyed? He did not believe that there existed any partiality in the West Indies in the admstration of justice between whites and browns, tho us justice, he would admit, was badly administered. He was satisfied - there was at present a very favourable feeli , g toward the brown population in the West ladies, and it would be a great calamity if any alteration in that feeling should be produced by any interference of that House. He conjured the Hon. Gentlemen who were taking . an ac tive part in the state of the West India population not to couple their propositions with threats, which must produce irritation—(Hear.) Mr. BROUGHAM said he was much disappointed at the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, who had made such assertion of his opinions and personal faith, but not a single fact of the least value in the case. He had not altered the facts— he had sot ventura to impugn the statement of his Hodourable Friend, by any counter statement—by nothing more than a declaration of his own opinion. He came' to the point at once, when he said, that be did not believe that the administration of justice in the West Indies was perfect. He (Mr. Brougham) was certain, not only that they had not justice, hut that it was morally certain they could not have justice. The Jurors by whom they were to be tried, were the alien, the stranger, the enemy. Would the Hon. Gen tleman like to be tried by a Jury of abolitionists ?—(A laugh). That House had a duty to perform; and whether the Assemblies did their duty or not, they must do theirs. Such were the disqualifying laws, that a brown man had no chance of justice. Mr. W. HORTON deprecated the discussion of these questions in a tone calculated to inflame the passions and prejudices which were but too apt to be mixed up in their consideration . . He thought that while keeping the hardships and the evils which the class who suffered under the system had to endure, they should never lose sight of theeomplicated circumstances under which that system had grown up, and of the important interests so deeply involved in the question. He certainly did not understand the speech of his Honourable Friend (Mr. Pallmer) to have been made in opposition to the object of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, but only as differing upon the means by which that object would be best and most safely attained. The Hon. Member then contended, that the Government had done all in its power by introducing the proposed ameliorations expe rimentally in its own colony of Trinidad, and that the best possible course was to usethe language of persuasion and concili Ation io the local Legislatures. Mr. W. SMITH said, that the opinions of the Hon. Gentleman as to the propriety of the conciliation and temperate measures towards the Houses of Assembly, were a direct censure upon all that had been done by the Government for the last three or four years. it was now forty years since this subject was agitated, and he thought sufficient time had been given to the local Legislatures, if they had the disposition to act as that House was determined they should. Mr. CANNING said, that as there was no question before the House which would require it to express its opinion by a vote, be could have be n well content that the speech of the Hon. and Learned Genii man who had introduced the Petition, should have been the only one upon the occasion. As the debate, however, had been prolonged, he would take that opportunity of making a very few observations. He felt it necessary to say, that the speech of his Honourable Fri. a f (Mr. Pallmer) had not produced the same effect on Lim as it appeared to have done on an Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Brougham) whom be did not see is his place. His Hon. Friend did not defend the system of slavery, as carried on in our West India Colonies, but, on the contrary,he lamented that it should ever have been adopted. What he contended for was, that the best method of further ameliorating the condition of ihe peo ple of colour,whether free or not, was by respecting the claims of the white proprietors, and not by endeavour ing to intimidate them by threats, or causee them by I I t! i t I 1 , i ‘i ' l .. 1 ' 1, 1 ( , .1, ~ - i 1 : i I I i TO I . I 1 . , 1 . , i ~..:, 1 1'1' I" ' 1 1 , t .r . . '1 4 ,. , ii.