The Sun. — London, England, 1860-08-07 00:00:00

AMERICA. SOUTHAMPTON, AUG. 7. The United States mail steam-ship Vanderbilt, Capt. Lefevre, with mails from New York to the 28th ultimo, has arrived off Cowes. She brings 235 passengers and 1,066,316 dols. in specie, of Which 383,500 dols. are for England, the remainder for France. The New York papers give full particulars of the entertainments given to the Prince of Wales at Newfoundland. Great enthusiasm prevailed. A ball given to the Prince on the 25th ult. was a, Most brilliant affair ; upwards of 1,000 persons were present. The Prince embarked on board the Hero on the 26th ult. and sailed at 11 o'clock for Halifax on his way to St. Peter's. The same ceremony was ob served as on his arrival ; the cheering was tremendous. A despatch from Toronto says—Various Indian tribes will meet the Prince of Wales, at Queens town. A telegram from St. John's of the 27th ult. says --The Prince of Wales squadron passed Cape Race at 5 o'clock. The Hero was boarded by the news Yacht, and messages from the squadron were landed. The City of Washington had arrived. On the 27th ultimo the number of visitors to the Great Eastern amouatel to 18,000. She was ex pected to visit Hampton-road on the 29th, and to proceed to Annapolis the following day to coal. The sugar market at Havanna was active. Vessels in demand. _ _ - Advices from Mexico state that Miramon had succeeded in getting back to Guadalajara, where, with 4,000 men, he was keeping at bay three times that number under Odazon. COMMERCIAL INTELLIGENCE. NEW YORK, JULY 28. Money plentiful, offered to brokers at 5 per cent. on call on Railway Stocks. Supply of paper fair. Good short bills go readily at 5 per cent. Bankers ask 109/ for 60 days' bills on London. Rumours are current that a large amount of cotton bills have been returned from Liverpool. As much as £75,000 of bills were received back by one house. There was no check to business in the Stock Exchange. Cotton firm. Flour easier. Corn firm. Pork less active, new mess at 19 dols. Coffee firm. Sugars steady. Freights firmer. Wheat to Glasgow and London at 10d. NEW ORLEANS, JULY 27. Cotton quiet. Middling is quoted at 10c. LONDONDERRY, AUG. 7. The Montreal Ocean Company's steamer Nova Scotian, Captain M'Master, from Quebec, on the 28th July, has arrived. She landed all the mails The Vigo, from Liverpool, has arrived out. On the 26th ult. a severe rain storm caused con siderable damage in New York and its vicinity Several houses were inundated, and one was struck by lightning. On the 27th the New York stock market was active, and prices higher. Money and exchange were unaltered. The flour market was heavy, but prices were not quotably lower; sales, 15,600 barrels ; Canadian dull. Wheat and corn were unchanged. Barley nominal. Oats were dull but steady. Lard firm. Whisky dull. _ _ _ NEW ORLEANS, JULY 25. The Cotton Market is unchanged. Sales, 1,000 bales. BALTIMORE, JULY 25. Flour is inactive. Wheat steady. Corn quiet. BUFFALO, JULY 25. Flour and wheat are dull. Corn closed higher, MONTREAL, JULY 28. The Prince of Wales left St. John's on Thurs day, and is expected at Halifax on Monday. The town is thronged with strangers. The 'weather is cool, but the accounts of the crops are favourable. The flour market is dull. Holders are firm, and do not press sales.—Superfine 5 dols. 45 c. to 5 dols. 50 c. Wheat sales of Upper Canada Spring have been made at 125 dols. Barley is held at 70 c. per 50 lbs. Oats firm. Potashes 5 dole. 85 c. to 5 dols 95 c. Pearls unchanged. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(This DAY.) The SPEAKER was in attendance at twelve o'clock, but did not take the chair until 25 minutes past, the house not having been formed before. PRIVATE BUSINESS. Lord De Freyne's Estate Bill was lead a third time and Passed. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL. The house went into committee on this bill, resuming at clause 5. Mr. SELWYN said that he was happy to say that the differences in reference to the bill were reduced to a very simple point. He defended himself from a charge made against him by the hon. member for Dundalk (Sir G. Bowyer) of having dealt unfairly in regard to his oppo sition to the bill, by stating that the measure was brought an at a time when it could not be fully discussed. He contended that the law had been strained by this bill in favour of Roman Catholics, and in the first place it was required by those who opposed the bill, that Roman Catholic charities should be placed on the same footing as any other charities. Having referred to the law prohibiting bequests of money for saying masses for deceased persons, or other superstitious purposes, he said by this clause that law was evaded. For instance, he would take the case of a bequest of £50,000 to a specific charity, for which only £lO,OOO wou ld be sufficient, the trustees would be empowered to apply the £lO,OOO remaining to those superstitious purposes what had been introduced by the existing law. He sug gested for the sake of the charity itself, and with a view to avoid it being subjected to expense, that an application in such a case should be made to the charity commissioners to deal with the remaining fund, as was provided for with respect to Protesta At charities. His third objection was, that under the provisions of this bill this measure would be injurious to the public interests as regarded bequests, as England should be free from any foreign influence. He maintained that it would be most dangerous to the public interest if in this matter any foreign jurisdiction or interference would be permitted, and if the clauses were not altered in the points to which he alluded he must op pose the present clause. After a few words from Sir G. C. LEWIS, the clause vas negatived without a division, with the understanding that it would be brought up with the report in an amended form. The remaining clauses were agreed to. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved, to substitute for clause 1, the following :—No gift or disposition made or to be made for any legal charitable purpose connected with the Roman Catholic religion shall be, either as to the whole or any part, unlawful or void by reason of any purpose, re quest, or direction, which may be deemed in law supersti tions or unlawful, being made part of or united with such gift or disr osition, but the whole of the property comprised in such gift or disposition shall be applied exclusively for such legal charitable purpose. Sir G. BO WYER moved the following addition—" Pro vided, that no such last mentioned trust, condition, or re quest shall in any other respect be rendered valid or legal. or invalid or illegal, or be otherwise affected by this Act." He took that opportunity of stating with respect to clause 5 that the object of the bill was not to make any difference between the law as relates to Roman Catholic charities and Protestant charities. B this measure Roman Ca tholics would be obliged to By the provisions of what was called Lord Hardwicke's Act, in the same way as Pro testants were compelled to do. Roman Catholic charities earits we re subject to disabilities from which Prot es t s wer e exempt, and as soon as th ese were removed, ' ' t as it was le proposed to do by the bill, and Roman Catholics placed i n the same position with reference to those charities - as Pro testants, that was all that would be required. IP, reply to Mr. ADDEILLEY Mr. and 0, BOWYER said that the result of this clause would be quite different to what the hon. members opposite apprehended. In the case of a Roman Catholic testator leav ing £lO,OOO for a school or the maintenance of a church, and £20,000 for masses for his soul, the latter would be invalid under this clause. No such case as that to which he al luded occurred, because be q uests were not made simply for the saying of masses for thesoulofofa th oh e ur el c o h no o r r , but were given for the maintenance a school or some other similar object, prayers for and merely e h r i e s ly soui a requestshould was made by the testator h be said. This clause had the full concurrence Roman Catholic body, and if rejected considerable difficul ties would be experienced. [LEFT SITTING.] A SNOW STORM IN THE DOG-DAY S.- -- On Satur day aft ernoon a very severe thunderstorm passed over Melton. and district, ending in a shower of snow and hail of fully a quarter of an hour's duration. The ground in the Derwent valley and to the coast was quite white , and on the Wolds it is said the snow was fully two inches deep in some places. In the neighbourhood of Sherburn, hail stones as large as nuts fell in vast quantities, and it is said the pea and turnip crops are very greatly damaged. On the Wolds several lambs were killed by lightning. A second storm of snow and hail occurred on Sunday.—Dar iington Times. THE CLAN CAMPBELL IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS. --On Monday, when Lord Clyde, the pacificator of I n di a , who has served with distinction in every great battle in which the British have been engaged since Coruna, was installed as a Peer in the House of Lords, besides the hero being a Campbell, the Lord Bishop of Bangor, who read prayers, was a Campbell, the Lord Chancellor, who pre sided on the Woolsack, was a Campbell, and the new Peer was introduced by the Duke of Argyle, now Lord Privy Seal, and Chief of the Clan.—Scotsman. THE LEIGH WOODS MURDER.-011 Saturday morning, as a man named Henry Mackay was gathering herbs in Leigh-woods, near Bristol, he found a large brooch, which has been identified as belonging to the unfortunal e Charlotte Pugsley, whose murder by John William Beale some three years since created ao much sensation. The brooch was lying in a hollow covered with weeds. The hair was slightly discoloured by water, which had penetrated it. The pin is missing, and the brooch has the appearance of having been violently torn from the dress of its ill-fated wearer. Knees lone. 14} el; / 2 osi • .__~ _~~ WOLTERIZAMPTON RACES.—(This Pay.) LET ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.] MEMBERS' PLATE. Earl of Essex Lava 3 Miss Julia Nine ran. CITY BETTING—YESTERDAY. READING. BERKSHIRE STAKES. 4to 1 agst Wallace (taken) 4to 1 agst Convivialist (taken) READING STAKES. 2to 1 agst Brown Duchess (taken) 7to 1 agst Overton 7to 1 agst Fairwater sr. LEGER. 3to 1 agst Thormanby (offered) 7to 2 agst Wizard (4 to 1 taken) 10 to 1 agst Wallace (offered) 10 to 1 agst Sweetsauce (offered) 10 to 1 agst Umpire (offered) 00 to 6 agst Stampedo (take 20 to 1) 25 to 1 agst Cape Flyaway (take 30 to 1) 33 to 1 agst Horror 33 to 1 agst Buccaneer 50 to 1 agst High Treason (taken) THE 7VAL W ORTH MURDERS. LAMBETH POLICE COURT.-(THIS DAY.) The second examination of William Godfrey Youngman, the person accused of the murder of four persons, at 16, Manor-place, Walworth, the details of which the public are so painfully acquainted with, took place this morning at the Lambeth Police-court, before Mr. Elliot. The court was crowded to suffocation, not the least pre caution seeming to have been made by the police to keep even the passages in the justice-room clear, and the seats at the table usually appropriated to solicitors (and reporters on special occasions) were filled by persons who had obtained orders of admission merely to gratify a morbid curiosity. The prisoner, who is in custody of Mr. Inspector Whither, walked into the dock with a firm step, and with out betraying the least concern. The first witness called was John Mathew Youngman, of No. 2, Francis-street, Newington Butts. He said the prisoner was his brother. The last time he saw his mother alive was at 16, Manor place, on the Monday previous to the discovery of the murder. John Youngman, the prisoner's father, then gave his evidence, which was merely a recapitulation of the evidence he gave at the coroner's inquest. Prisoner—Did you not make some observations to mother that made her cry on the evening previous to the murder Witness—No, nothing. I did not see your mother that evening. Prisoner—What, not about dripping ? Witness—Well now you bring that to my mind, I recol lect I did see your mother thatevening, and I did say some thing to her on that subject. The agitated state of my mind had entirely driven away all recollection of anything. I recollect seeing her, and she brought me a hat and asked me to try it on. She said, " Tom has been to get some dripping, and the cook has given him a hat." I did try it on, hut it was too small for me. More than that, I said Thomas should not go backwards and forwards to get the dripping for any one any more, as there was more trouble than enough. The boy had put the dripping into the hat and spoilt it. Prisoner —Are you sure you had no other words ? Witness —If you can bring anything to my recollection I am here to speak the truth, I will answer them. Prisoner—Did you not have words with her in the after noon. Witness—Yes. I went to my son John's, and had my dinner. They were not angry words. The reason I did so was that it was not ready at home, and I would not wait. While I was at home a person came to put a lock on your box. Prisoner—Did you give mother any money that day? Witness—No. I had none to give her. Prisoner—Did you give her any the day before ? Witness—No, but John gave her 2s. Money run short with me that Saturday night. It was 2s. I've got ls. 6d. of it now. It was found tied up in her pocket. I don't know who tied the pocket up. Prisoner—l've nothing else to ask you. Mrs. Beard next gave her evidence, which has already appeared in The Suta. The prisoner did not put any questions to this witness. Mr. Bevan, the landlord of the house, was next called. He said the only addition he wished to add to the evidence already given was, that the prisoner said in his hearing that his mother had committed the murders, and that he (prisoner) had killed her in self-defence. The prisoner here complained of the non-attendance of his solicitor, Mr. Neale, whom he had seen in prison, and who promised to be in attendance. It was here intimated that a gentleman was in attend ance from Mr. Neale's office. Inspector Dunn here recapitulated his evidence with re spect to finding the policy of assurance, and the letters of the prisoner to the deceased Mary 'Wells Streeter. He pro duced a plan of the landing with the position of the doors on the second floor of 16, Manor-place. Elizabeth Wootton, a servant at Mr. Duncan's, said the prisoner lived in that service about three months. He left about a fortnight ago. The letter dated July 13 she be lieved to be in hi.; handwriting. [This letter referred to her fellow servant as the person who was to act as brides maid at the prisoner's wedding with Mary Wells Streeter.] The other letters produced she also believed to be written by the prisoner, as she had seen him write, and he had told her he was writing to Mary Wells Streeter. She had heard him talk about insuring her life. The letters produced at the inquest were then read by the clerk. Mr. Tanner, clerk in the Argus Life Assurance office, next gave his evidence. This has also been published. [To be continued in our Late Edition.] POLICE INTELLIGENCE-(THIS .DAT MARLBOROUGH-STREET. ROBBERY OF DIE IMPRESSIONS BY A WORKMAN. — John Gardner, an envelope stamper, in the employ of Messrs. Ortner and Houll, engravers to her Majesty, 3, St. James's-street, was charged with stealing a quantity of writing paper, envelopes, &c., of the value of £lO at pre sent ascertained, and bearing illuminated impressions from dies the property of his employers. Mr. Evan Ortner said the prisoner had been for some time employed by him, and from information and suspicion he went to Messrs. Edwards, in Regent-street, and there found a quantity of his property. He then applied to the police, and accompanied Sergeant Silverton to the pri soner's lodgings, at 13, Heddon-street, Regent-street, where, in a drawer, he found a number of envelopes, &c. bearing impressions from dies, his exclusive property. He could positively swear to some of the impressions as they were from a die, a design of his own, and the work, which was for the brother of the Earl of Ellesmere, had not yet been sent home. Sergeant Silverton. 16 C, said the prisoner denied having any of the prosecutor's property, but in a drawer found a quantity of paper and a specimen book, all which the pro secutor identified. The prisoner begged forgiveness, say ing the paper was his (prisoner's) own, but the dies were his master's. Prosecutor said the prisoner, unfortunately for himself, had forgot to take his (prosecutor's) name off some of the paper. Sergeant Silverton asked for a remand, which was granted, Mr. Tyrwhitt refusing Mr. Lewis's application to take bail. THAMES. EXTENSIVE EMBEZZLEMENT BY A CONFIDENTIAL SERVANT. —George Hill, aged 33, late foreman and super intendent in the service of Messrs. Walton and Gowland, coal merchants, ship-owners, and wharfingers, of Keepin Wharf, Broad-street, Ratcliff, was brought before Mr. Yardley charged with stealing five tons of coals the pro perty of his employers. Mr. Fearnly, solicitor, conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Gomm, from the office of Mr. Young, solicitor, defended the prisoner. wharf. The Theprosecutors prisoner acrr v hadon ab been n r largey in t bu siness at t tenK eyeepai:, and had been gradually raised from a subordinate to a very important position, with a liberal salary and a resi dence on the wharf. The charge against him on the police-sheet was for stealing five tons of coals, but he had in reality carried on his peculations for some years, and Messrs. Walton and Gowland had set down their losses by the prisoner's frauds, at least, £2,000, and had no doubt he was in collusion with others to cheat them, and that one of the principals in the nefarious scheme died about three months ago. On Saturday week, the 27th ult., the prosecutors discovered that the prisoner had sold five tons of coals to a dealer, had received money for the same, and appropriated it to his own use. Messrs. Walton and Gowland then believing that that was the only irregular transaction of which the prisoner had been guilty, dismissed him, and did not take any proceedings against him or give him into cus tody until they discovered there was an overwhelming mass of cases. The prosecutors have several classes of customers, householders who pty for the coals ordered on delivery, and other householders to whom credit is given, dealers who are supplied direct by the firm, and dealers who are ,supplied by the firm through the instruction of others. As regards the householders the prisoner was unable to commit any frauds, but vast quantities of coals were supplied to dealers and their agents, customers of Gowland, for which the prisoner re ceived 10th of July 57 tons of coals had the end of June and payment and never accounted for the same. Between s b ßrooks, r m through erly ca r a t e dM forrs. Messrs. Walton namedse hu Forward, a widow, w 22 tons had been accounted Walton and Gowland, and only been delivered to a man ho for by the prisoner, who about £4O in six weeks. Mrs Forward's transactions only, ed to prove the deli veryhad put into his pocket, through Numerous witnesses were examined with and his dispensing ployers for the money he received, with the of coals by the prisoner, his not accounting to . his era tickets from the counting-house, in accordanceKupin wharf. regulation s of the firm, before he permitted coals to leave Mr. Pyn, the chief clerk, having comp leted the volu minous dep os iti ons, t h e pr i soner was com mitted for t rial at the sessio ns . The court w as crowded to excess. THE SUN LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, AUGUST 7, 1860.- IiNIPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.) ROYAL COMMISSION. The Royal assent was given by commission to the follow ing bills, viz.:— Court of Queen's Bench Amendment. Inclosure (No. 2). University and College Estates. Friendly Societies Act Amendment. Isle of Man Harbour. Dominica Hurricane Loan. Local Board of Health. Jews Act Amendment. Census (Ireland). Census (England). Adulteration of Food. Queen's Prison. Highways (South Wales). Manchester Cathedral Church. Postage (Army and Navy). Medical Act (1858) Amendment. Highway Rates Act Amendment. Burial Grounds (Ireland). Criminal Lunatics Asylum. Nuisances Removal Act Amendment. Heritable Securities (Scotland). Turnpike Acts Continuance. Bank of Ireland. Sheriffs Court Houses (Scotland). Common Law Procedure Act Amendment. Copyhold Inclosure Commissioners. Turnpike Acts Amendment. Municipal Corporation Act (Ireland) Amendment. Augmentation of Small Livings. Infant Marriage Act Amendment. Bleaching and Dyeing Works. Registration of Births (Scotland). lonian Islands'Marriages. Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway. Hay Railway. Horsham and Guildford Direct Railway. Macclesfield Gas. Athenry and Tuam Railway. Bedford and Cambridge Railway. London South Western Railway (Kingston Extension). Wigan Water. Lincoln's-inn. Monklands Railway. London, Chatham, and Dover Railway. Fergus River Navigation Improvement. Llangollen and Corwen Railway. Highbridge Markets and Gas. Burnham Tidal Harbour and Railway. London, Chatham, and Dover Metropolitan Extension. Boschetti's Estates. Daniel Stewart's Hospital Estates. The Royal Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Viscount Sydney, and Lord Monteagle. LAND LOAN AND ENFRANCHISEMENT ACT. The standing orders were suspended in order to enable this bill to be proceeded with. INDUSTRIAL MUSEUMS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee. TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND (IRELAND.) On the motion that the report of the committee on this bill be received, Earl GRANVILLE moved an amendment relating to one of the money clauses of the bill. The Marquis of WESTMEATH denounced the bill as a most unjust one, and said he should give it all the opposi tion in his power. He should oppose the insertion of the clause. After a short discussion their lordships divided, when there appeared— For the clause (contents) Against it (non-contents) Majority The clause was then agreed to. LANDED PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT (IRELAND) BILL. The committee on this bill was postponed till Thursday. NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL. This bill was reported with amendments. SENIOR MEMBER OF COUNCIL (INDIA) BILL, The house went into committee on this bill, when it passed through; as did also the Admiralty Jurisdiction (India) Bill, and Superannuation Act (1859) Amendment Bill. SYRIA. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY put the following ques tion to the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Was it to be understood that the forces to be sent to Syria on the present occasion were to be employed solely for the purpose of maintaining the peace of the country, and that the authorities in command were not to interfere, directly or indirectly, with the administration of the civil and religious affairs affecting either Moslems or Christians of the Turkish Government. He would not disguise that his desire for an answer arose from the insuperable distrust he entertained for his Majesty the Emperor of the French, and from the great fears that he and others entertained that the wise and vigorous policy instituted by Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, arising out of his influence with the Ottoman Porte, in matters of civil and religious liberty, might at the present moment be disturbed. The policy, however, pursued in these regions by the Emperor of the French was by no means the policy inaugurated by Lord Stratford de Red cliffe. They knew that for many years past the activity of the French agents in that country had been singularly great. He had it from a gentleman who had resided for more than 20 years in the north of Syria that French agents in great numbers were openly declaring that if the Moslems and members of the Greek Church would but fall off to the Latin Church they should receive full and ample protec tion both to their persons and property from the Emperor of the. French. Six or seven months ago in the Island of Candia nearly 40,000 persons fell away to the Latin Church, and that was entirely owing to the solicitations and promises of French agents. When these promises were made so lavishly, and so fully responded to by this falling away to the Latin Church, it might clearly be seen how the French would establish their influence in the East, and furthermore when they found the Emperor of the French sending out 6,000 troops unattended by the troops of any other Power it would create a strong impression as to the extent of his power, and would add greatly to the influence of the Emperor of the French in these regions. Lord WODEHOUSE said the main object of the con ventien was to send out 12,000 European troops to contri bute to the restoring of tranquillity in Syria. There was not, however,:the slightest intention of interfering with the civil and religious administration of those provinces. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE supported the views which had been taken on this important subject by the noble earl opposite (the Earl of Shaftesbury). To limit their interference to the purposes stated by the Govern ment would be utterly unbecoming the dignity of Christian Powers—(hear, hear) --and he thought the Parliament of this country ought to make known before they separated that they were prepared to meet these constantly recurring difficulties, and to exact substantial guarantees against the repetition of the cruelties and disorders that had lately come to their knowledge. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.--(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Mr. ALDERMAN SIDNEY took the oath and his seat for the borough of Stafford. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the following bills were con sidered and agreed to :—Border Counties and North Bri tish Railway Companies, Farringdon Railway, and Lon don Railway Depot aad Storehouses. The Brandon Estate Bill and the Caithness Roads Bill were read a third time and passed. ROYAL COMMISSION. Sir A. CLIFFORD, Usher of the Black Rod, summoned the members to the Upper House to hear the royal assent given by commission to several bills, for which see Lords' report. ternational copyright—that is to say, under treaties of con siderable standing, having no connection with _the legisla tion of the present year, we propose to leave liable to pay the same duty as is now charged--15s. per cwt. Paper hangings are placed in this list at 14s. the cwt., that is the duty to which they are actually subject by the law at this moment; but it is a law of the present session, the ar rangement having been made under the commercial treaty with France. The same arrangement applies to paste board, which is placed at 15s. the cwt., and which was fixed at that rate of duty early in the session, with reference to the commercial treaty between this country and France. All the rest of the items will sufficientlyexplain themselves; and it will be seen that they correspond to this general view—that whereas the excise duty on paper chargeable in this country is 14s. per cwt., with the addition of 5 per cent., bringing it up to 14s. Bd. and a fraction—we propose to add to that sum about 15 3 / 4 d., as compensation to the paper maker for the disadvantages of the excise system, so far as they can be appreciated, and for the advantages which the foreigner enjoys under the existing law, so as to make the amount as nearly as possible equivalent to the amount of the excise duty. The committee will observe that the original resolution has been divided into two resolutions. Each of them is an exact counterpart of the other, except ing that they relate to importations taking place from diferent countries. The first resolution relates to those importations which might take place under the treaty with France. The second resolution generalises the particular covenants to which the treaty would bind us, and, if adopted by the house, would establish one rule of impor tation for the whole world. The reason why the Govern ment have divided the proposi ion will, I think, be suffi ciently obvious. There are certain considerations of the highest importance applicable to the first resolution exclu sively—l mean those considerations which grow out of the recent treaty with France, and the steps which have been taken by the house in relation to th it treaty. These con siderations have no bearing on the second resolution, which is a pure matter of commercial policy, and does not arise out of any treaty. In consequence of that difference in the motives by which the votes of hon, members may be guided, the Government thought that it would be most fair and most convenient to the committee to have the subject sepa rately presented. The question which we have to discuss to-night is, in my opinion, and in the opinion of the Go vernment, a very small and minute question as respects re venue, and as respects directly the trade with which it is connected. As respects the revenue, only a few thousands a year have been received from the duty upon foreign paper. The effect of the diminution of that duty, inasmuch as it is a differential duty, would, of course, be to increase the cus toms revenue and the general revenue from paper by stimu lating the consumption. At the same time, though the effect is favourable to the revenue, I do not dwell upon that as a matter of importance which need weigh materially in form ing the judgment of the committee. Neither as regards the trade, so far as our investigations have led us, should we be justified in representing to the committee that we are going, by this change in the law, to effect any great or ma terial revolution in the price of this important article, whatever the exaggerated anticipations of a particular class may fabricate—and in speaking of them I speak of nothing peculiar in that class—l speak of that tone of exaggeration which has influenced, one after another, almost every class of producers in the country, and which has led them into such excessive delusions that nothing but experience has served to dissipate them ; and when I speak of those anti cipations I admit that those cor cerned in the trade draw dismal pictures of the ruin that is about to fall upon them. If that ruin were about to fall upon them it would only prove that they have heretofore been taxing the public to an enormous and unjustifiable amount. (Hear.) But in point of fact I think that no impartial examiner of this case, which has had the advantage of the light thrown upon it by all previous discussions similar in their object, can pos sibly arrive at such a conclusion. Setting mere opinions aside, there are facts, undeniable, indisputable facts, which will support irrefragably the opinion I now state. But if the Government be asked, "What, then, is the fiscal ad vantage that you expect from the disturbance which you have given to trade—what advantage is the British public to reap from the change in the law now proposed ?"—I say we do not stand mainly or exclusively upon the advantage which the British public is to reap from the change in this particular law—at the same time that some advantage will be reaped in certain branches of the trade, and particularly at a time of special demand, when the purchaser and con sumer of paper in this country will have the very same ad vantage that the consumer of every other article has— namely, the advantage of calling in aid of the productive power of his own country the productive power of foreign lands, and reducing an undue pressure upon the market by a resort to sources where the article is to be had in greater abundance. (Hear.) But, however small this question may be when it is intrinsically regarded, it is great from its con nexion with principles of high importance. (Hear, hear.) Those principles are, in the first place, obligations, which we think to be of honour, in connexion with the treaty of commerce which has been concluded with a foreign coun try. And not obligations only of honour, but obligations of policy, for this question will be a test of the real opinions and convictions of the present House of Commons in regard to that system of commercial legislation which, triumph ing over all resistance, has now become established in the country, and has held out a noble example to the world. (Hear, hear.) And again, in connexion with the applica tion of those principles to policy, I shall have to refer to certain considerations of justice—justice to a particular class of interests which will suffer, not under the legisla tion of foreign countries, but under your legislation, unless, listening to the plea of the Government, the committee shall think fit to adopt the resolutions which I now propose. I come first, then, to consider this question as it arises out of the commercial treaty with France ; and I therefore speak of it as most important, both on account of the deli cate nature of the consideration s it involves, and likewise because it has undoubtedly been the immediate occasion of making at this particular moment the proposal which is now before the committee. It was only a very short time ago that the entire world heard with great surprise that there were gentlemen in this house who doubted whether the treaty of commerce concluded between Great Britain and France bound her Majesty to propose to Parliament that the customs duty upon foreign paper should be re duced to a level with the excise. I will not encumber the question with any reference to the small addition which may be charged in consequence of the indirect expense of the excise. But I confess it was with surprise I heard that we could have so entirely failed to convey into the form of direct stipulations the manifest intentions with which the negotiations with France were commenced and con cluded. I shall first refer to the articles of the treaty them selves ; and, secondly, to such indirect and collateral evi dence as can be brought to bear on them. The articles in the treaty relating to this question are the 7th, Bth, and 9th. By the 7th article her Majesty's Government pro mises "to admit into the United Kingdom merchandise imported from France at a rate of duty equal to the excise duty which is or shall be imposed on commodities of the same description in the United Kingdom." And then it goes on to make provision for the augmentation of that amount on account of the indirect excise charge. I will not venture on the dangerous ground of French scholarship, but for those who wish to enter upon that ground it may be well to inform them that there is a French version of the treaty, aco -ordinate version, which is as much binding upon us as the English version. 6 6 Merchandise" is used in the English version, without any epithet which qualifies or limits it, but in the French version the definite article is used, which evidently points towards the particular class of commodities to which the article refers, namely, those which are subject to duty of excise. The words themselves, therefore, may prima facie be taken as bearing clearly ewe that class of articles which are subject to excise duty. In the Bth article we find an enumeration of five particular commodities, and with regard to these more specific provi sions are made than by the 7th article of the treaty. When we come to the 9th, we then find new stipulations, which provide that if either of the two high contracting parties shall think it necessary to establish an excise tax on any article, such article may be immediately liable to an equal duty on its importation. That is the meaning of the 9th article. It refers to a long list of commodities contained in the prior articles of the treaty with regard to which we had made definite stipulations that they shall be admitted into this country free of all duty whatever. If the treaty stood thus, as these articles are not now subject to excise, it may appear that we were precluded from charging duties of excise on any of those articles and balancing it by any countervailing duty. Therefore the 9th article was intro duced, which gives protection and liberty to the Imperial Legislature in this respect ; and the very fact that it was introduced is a distinct witness to the meaning of the 7th article, and shows that it refers to those commodities that are now liable to duty of excise, whereas the 9th article re serves the right to bring into that category articles that are not now comprehended in it. But I am told that the 7th article precedes the Bth, and that the Bth article enumerates exciseable commodities to which the 7th refers. But let us see what those commodities in the Bth article are. The 7th article, be it observed, embraces all commodities subject to duties of excise, and those commodities alone. It m ay be said why have you the Bth article at all. Why was it not enough for the French Government to accept the 7th article and the general stipulations it contains ? For the plainest possible reason. That Bth article is in every case, or in the stipulations it contains, favourable to the French, mere favourable commonly than the 7th. The 7th lays down the general principle, which was adopted at our suggestion. The Bth article sets forth certain particu lar commodities with regard to which the French enter tained a special interest. The 7th article leaves the duties of excise variable. The Bth article—not in every case, but in most—reduces them to an absolutely fixed standard, or to a maximum. The 7th article gives the French Govern ment the benefit of indeterminate stipulations ; for, under that article it remained in the discretion of the British Go vernment to say, what was or was not the proper addition to be made to the duties on excise on account of the excise charge ; but the Bth article specifies what the positive amount of duty shall be. It either disposes of what the French call the surtax altogether, or restrains it within the amount of a particular sum. Therefore, there was a particular and s pecific reason in every s in g le case why certain commodities should be specified in the Bth amid, of the treaty, for there is net one of them which does nel give the French security and advantage over and above what they would have had wader the 7th. Take for example the case of spirits. Under the Bth article it is only in our power to charge a surcharge of 2d. per gallon on spirits. Suppose the Bth had not ex isted, but only the 7th article P The distillers showed that they were entitled to a surtax of 5d., and if it were not for the Bth article we should have been authorised in charging sd. or 6d., or whatever else we thought fit, provided it was a bona fide charge. But as the Bth article binds us, it was not in our power to do any such thing ; nor could we make any alteration till after a distinct appeal to France, while it would be in her power to decline if she thought that we took undue advantage of her. The next article is French colonial spirits. Here the stipule tion is that French colonial spirits shall be admitted at a duty entirely and exactly the same as that on spirits of the British colonies. The third article is paper hangings imported from France. We stipulated there absolutely to admit French paper-hangings at 14s. per cwt., which is a duty lower than the duty of excise levied in this country. I will not enter into that question now ; and I only mention this as one of the articles in which France, having a consi derable trade, took this security on her behalf. The next article is cardboard, and a similar provision is made with respect to it. No duty is to be levied in this country upon cardboard which shall exceed 15s. a cwt., so that if the House of Commons should think fit to double the excise duty on paper it would not be in their power, without the permission of France, to • make any augmentation of tho duty now chargeable upon cardboard. The last article is that of gold and silver plate, which is again a commodity, though not an exciseable one at all, with regard to which France has a special interest. The French Governmeat placed more clear and full reliance on these determinate engagements and specific conventions of the Bth article than they did on the comprehensive but vague stipulations of the 7th : and, therefore, when I am asked what is the object of the Bth article of the treaty, I have not the slightest difficulty in replying. According to this, the 7th, Bth, and 9th articles must be taken together. The 7th makes provision for articles which are now subject to excise duty, and lays down the principle on which competing articles are to be introduced from certain countries. The Bth makes certain stipulations in regard to some particular commodi ties imported from France more definite than they were by the 7th, and the 9th makes provision for the liberty of both legislatures with regard to the imposition of domestic or ex. cise duties on articles not now subject to those duties. When I say that this is the reasonable construction of the Bth arti cle, I may go further and ask of what other is it suscepti ble ? Of what use is the 7th article of the treaty if all it contains is in the Bth as some contend ? (Hear.) It is rational to suppose that it is there without any sense or meaning whatever ? But, further, we are not entirely reduced to the necessity, though it is not a very hard one, of looking to the plain and obvious meaning of the treaty itself. We have, besides, the indirect evidence of the cor respondence between the two Governments as to their intentions. I shall quote two very short passages from it, one which lays down the general principle, the other which explains distinctly and positively the policy and office of the 7th article of the treaty. The general principle is this, and it will be found in the middle of the third page of the correspondence. On the French side it was "to be a general transition from prohibition and high duties to duties of a moderate rate." On the English side it was to be " the total abolition of customs duties on French products wher ever fiscal considerations will permit, and a reduction to the lowest practicable point, together with an entire abandon ment of any protective imposts on behalf of British and against French commodities wherever fiscal considerations will not allow total abolition." (Hear, hear.) I address my self to the candour, ingenuousness, and honour of an as sembly of British gentlemen, and I ask whether they will not admit that, as far as the intentions of the two countries are concerned, as far at least as the intention of Great Bri tain is concerned, it is beyond the possibility of dispute that our intention and meaning was to part in every case with every vestige of what may be called protected interests. (Hear, hear.) That is the general principle ; but that is not all, for in page six of the correspondence my noble friend issues this instruction in paragraph C : "To frame an ar ticle by which her Majesty's Government shall engage to propose to Parliament that the duty of customs generally ox articles imported from France to this country, but which are subject here to duty of excise, shall be reduced to a rate as nearly as may be equal to the duty of excise, together with reasonable allowance for the costs which such duty of ex cise may be shown to entail." I ask, would it be possible to give a construction more accurately and absolutely corre sponding with that which I myself ventured to put on the 7th article, than by simply reading the very words in which my noble friend recommended that such an article should be drawn and inserted for the purpose of regulating the ar ticles of the treaty as far as the duties of excise in general were concerned. (Hear, hear.) That is the indirect evidence bearing on the subject immediately before us as to the meaning of the treaty. But I have spoken thus far of the treaty without reference to the ques tion whether another part of the treaty is or is not supposed to bind us to the immediate execution of all its parts. After the grossly erroneous misrepresentations which have gone abroad, I feel bound to say that her Majesty's Government have been careful to the best of their ability that this house should in no respect be entrapped by general words into giving a sanction to the arrangements of this important treaty further than they were absolutely conscious of at the time. This house has given a general sanction to the treaty —it has given a specific pledge, entered into engagements, and taken the steps necessary to give effect to that treaty. When did it enter into that engagements ? Not in the dark. The right hon. gentleman opposite recommended the house to commence with the general affirmation or re• jection of the treaty. One of the objections of the Govern ment to that course was that we felt it would be fairer to the house to allow it to discuss one by one the stipulations of the treaty than to challenge its general verdict on the whole treaty at first. That was the course taken, and Ido not know that, with the insignificant exception of hops, there was a single stipulation of the treaty on which a dis tinct vote of the House of Commons was not taken before my noble friend the member for Middlesex (Lord Enfield) moved the address to the Crown approving of the whole treaty. It had been said that at the time the house gave its general sanction to the treaty it had been misled by the general assurance of my noble friend that he French Go vernment was about to remove the prohtbition on the ex port of rags. (Hear.) There are many ways of making mountains out of molehills, but there never was a more signal example of the facility with which that operation can under favourable circumstances be effected than in this particular instance ',of the prohibition of the export of rags. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) We believed that the French Government used its best ability to carry out a legislative measure for the removal of that prohibi tion, but the Protectionists of France had for the moment proved too strong for: the influence and efforts of the Government. I hope that the example which will be set by this country on this occasion will, like the example which it has now been setting for 20 years, afford no confirmation and no encouragement to these French protectionists, but that they will strengthen the hands of the Government of France and of those enlightened leaders ofopinionin France who have fought the:battle of free trade in that country. (Cheers.) With regard to this question of the prohibition of the export of French rags, there is none more insignifi cant to the British papermaker..(Hear, hear.) But ragged as this whole case is, there is no part of it so hollow and so trivial as that which relates to the export of rags from France. (Hear, hear.) Why, if you wish to reverse the free trade market, and desire to go to the dearest market, by all means purchase your rags in France. (Hear, hear.) France is by no means a cheap country for rags. (Hear, hear.) And though France might be able to export rags under peculiar circumstances, that is no reason why it ought to be a cheap market. The communications between the French andßri tish Governments with regard to the treaty of commerce have been conducted in a spirit of mutual accomodation and a desire to forward the great purposes for which that treaty was designed. This is not the first time that the French Government have given evidence of their desire to carry out the treaty in that spirit, and I am persuaded that in exhibit ing that disposition they are doing that which is agreeable to the enlightened opinion of both countries. (Hear, hear.) This is not the first time that the treaty has been exposed to these criticisms. If we go back to the month of February last, we shall find there was an assault made with regard to ships, under the daring leadership of my right hon. friend the member for Stroud, and although the article of coal called up such a storm, such a tempest,such smoke—(a laugh) —yet the French Government made known to us that they were willing to accede to the alteration we proposed in order to secure by the treaty the immense advantages to both countries which, in our opinion, that treaty was calcu lated to bring about. (Hear, hear.) We have the very same liberal conduct repeated on these occasions. The pro tectionists have a faculty and power of making a very con siderable noise, and of giving an impression to those at a distance that where there is so much noise there must be at any rate some kind of reason for it ; but the French Go • vernment have intimated to us now, as they did in the article of coal, that they would not, if it was and esirable, press for the immediate fulfilment of that part of the treaty. The answer we made is the same. I must say, that the fight which was made respecting coal has this ennobling feature about it, that while my right hon. friend the mem ber for Stroud did not come forward as the advocate of a class interest, and that he did not rest on those narrow arguments which are meant to sustain a particular trade or branch of industry as against the general public, he came forward and said, with respect to coal, we were promoting the undue interests of a class, as no doubt we were, but we were sacrificing an important interest of the country. We did not admit that representation, but I think it due to him to notice at all events the difference between that case and this, for even when he was able to urge that we were put ting in hazard an important interest of the country, and when we were able to inform the House of Commons of the disposition of the French Government not to press for that article if it were likely to create any difficulty in giving effect to the instrument as a whole, even then neither the Government or the House of Commons would take advan tage of that handsome conduct on the part of France, nor seek relief from an obligation which they believed to be sound, right, and just. (Hear, hear.) Now, if it be true that we have, whether advertently or inadvertently it matters not—that with respect to this article of paper we have involved ourselves in an agreement to do that which is wrong, that which is oppressive, that which is unequal as regards the great British producer, then, indeed, let us accept the boon of the French Government; let us go to them to request that we may be released from this pain ful at ad Anxious engagement, although I must con fess th at such a request is reasonable between the Govern ments of independent states, because they may tend to compn omise that attitude of dignity which such states ought to maintain. But still, if we have committed our selves to an injustice, then by all means let us beg to be re lieved from this painful and onerous obligation. But if, on the contrary, the obligation we have contracted is one agreeable to justice, agreeable to prudence, agreeable to preced ant, agreeable to undisputed principles of legislation, and demanded by the most absolute considerations of jus tice te. other classes of British producers, and if the release that If as been generously offered to us would have no other effect than the prolongation of a paralysis and an uncer tainty, so that, instead of being a boon and a benefit to those for whose interest it might be intended, it would be, in poi nt of fact, an injury inflicted upon them far greater than can occur under the stipulations of the treaty—then I say 'the offer of the French Government, although it may deserve our acknowledgment, is no reason why we should stop short in that path of beneficence and that path of wis dom along which we have travelled with so much advan - tags to the country, and is no reason why we should not be just in the case before us, as we have striven to be in other cases. (Hear.) I have stated to you that in respect to the comparative interests of a class nothing could be more unfortunate, in our opinion, than that we should avail ourselves of the permission of Francs, which we know would be given to us, not to carry into effect at the present moment the reduction of the customs duty on paper. (Hear, hear.) We find that in every case of this kind the alarms of the protected class have been awakened by the prospect of an intended change in the law; that those alarms have proved to be utterly groundless and grossly exaggerated when they came to be tested byexperience, and that being so, there could be no greater cruelty to the paper makers than if the motion of my hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire (gr. Puller) was carried—if it will be carried—namely, that of keeping them in a state of suspense between this late session of Parliament and the next, which I hope will not be an early session of Parliament, for it is during these few months alone that they could—shall I say enjoy or suffer ?—the benefits of my hon. friend's protection. (Hear.) And 'this engagement, which we should thus have postponed, would come back upon us as all engagements are apt to come back upon those who are not prompt to discharge them, and nothing would be realised by my hon. friend except the interposition between the present and the final settle ment of the question, or the prolonged stagnation of busi ness to be measured in its amount, not by the real conse quences, small and remitted, of the change we are now pro posing, but the enormously enlarged and extended, and vague and visionary notions of those consequences which are at present bewildering the imaginations of the paper makers, and have taken possession for the moment even of the usually sound judgment of my hon. friend. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Therefore, on the ground of huManity, if I may say se, for it is humanity to save a man from being the victim of his own cruel alarms—even upon the ground of humanity to this protected interest—it is well this matter should be speedily brought to an issue. Here I would say to my hon. friend, that if by a favourable vote to-night he could get rid of this stipulation, then I could understand his course. But all that we shall gain by this handsome proceeding on the part of France would be, in the first place, the offer of a short respite, and, in the second place, a distinction on the part of that country which is also an swered in our own bosoms, and sustained by the unani mous and undoubting opinion of all the legal advisers of the Crown—(hear, hear, and a laugh)—that this question is within the treaty ; and to those two or three gentlemen who seemed to sneer when I referred to the opinion of the legal advisers of the Crown, I may say that the question of the interpretation of the treaty is not like the interpre tation of an act of Parliament, when the Attorney-General that is in and the Attorney-General that is out may bandy opinions to and fro ; but that the parties to constitute the instrument are two Crowns, and the interpretation fixed upon this treaty by the Crown of England, acting upon the advice of its legal authorities, be the same as that of the French Government. Of course Ido not enter into the question of how far the House of Commons is bound by an opinion of that kind with reference to the construction of its own resolutions. That is a matter entirely distinct; but I mention it as being material to keeping it in view by those who approach the consideration of this question for the pur pose of advising any particular course. This, however, after all, I suppose, is a subject which, independent of authorities, turns very much upon considerations which have long been familiar to the mind of every British Parliament—l moan considerations of policy. I find that a kind of touchstone is now going to be applied to the profession both of old friends of free trade and the new friends of free trade. At the commencement of this year free trade received some illustrious accessions. Gentlemen on the opposite benches, who had never before made any similar declarations, made their profession of free trade faith in the months of January and February last in terms the most unrestrained and unlimited. There are gentlemen on both sides of the house who for many years, and some of them all their lives, have promoted free trade principles, but somehow or other were always met with a tendency to deny in particular cases that which is admitted in the general. It is just like a confession of sins—nobody has any difficulty at all in making general confessions of being very unworthy, of falling greatly below the standard of duty, but touch him by pointing out to him some par ticular act he has done that is wrong, and immediately he is in arms for his own defence. And so it is with protection. I admit there are some distinguished exceptions—that there are men who would be free traders in their own case, but they are the exceptions to the rule, and exceptions which prove the rule ; for unquestionably the pdople of Ragland have not been free traders- each man in his own case. Those at any rate who have been connected with any particular kind of industry have uniformly entertained this originally respectable, but now I must say, after so much experience, very chimerical apprehension of mischief, and even of utter ruin that was to be brought upon them by the enforcement of the free trade principle. There is a certain kind of consistency and coherency to be found even in the wards of a lunatic asylum, and in the arguments of these gentlemen there is the same coherence and consis tency to be found ; but I never saw a class which was not devoutly persuaded that its own case was in its nature a special exception, and of course every trade has got some feature or other that belongs to itself, and is not partaken in precisely the same form by others. They uniformly fix— that is the form the malady takes—they uniformly fix upon that particular feature, and say that though free trade is perfectly right in every other case, yet that by reason of that particular feature it is not applicable to their case. (Hear.) I believe it would be perfectly possible for an in genious man to frame a schedule of those protectionist argu ments with blanks to be filled up, ono day with paper, ano ther day with corks, another day with shoes, another day with silks; but still, fill up the blanks as you may, the ske leton of the argument—the bone and substance of the argu ment—is always precisely one and the same. Now, what are the facts of the case ? We have been engaged for 20 years, or 40 years, in introducing progressive and extending principles of free trade. Now, no persons, or very few, deny the abstract truth of these principles ; but it must be ad mitted that in a country blessed or cursed as the case may be, as ours has been by a highly protective system, when yen first commence the application of free trade to a parti cular class, it operates rather harshly, because that particu lar class is exposed to a competition of what it produces be fore it gets the benefit of the competition of what it con sumes. But as you go on with the operation, as you proceed from class to class, as you liberate one branch of trade after another, that difficulty diminishes; and when freedom of trade has become the general rule, then instead of its being harsh to apply the principle to the remaining cases it would be an enormous injustice to decline to apply it. And what is now our condition ? Are we now at the commencement of the process, or have we arrived at its close ? At the begin ning of the session I ventured to say that our old friend, protection, was reduced to such extremities that, instead of living in general fallacies, he was obliged to lurk in holes and corners, and here is the last of his holes and corners. There is not, I believe, an article with which it remains for us to apply the principle of freedom and equality of trade, except the article of paper, and what is the speciality of this article ? The speciality of the case of paper is that certain European countries have thought fit, in prosecuting what they deem a wise, but what we deem an unwise, policy, to prohibit altogether the exportation of rags. The paper makers say, although I am bound to admit that this is not the statement of the whole body, for there is a minority of the paper makers who, instead of concurring in thedoctrine of their brethren, are amongst the most energetic opponents and remonstrants of that doctrine ; and these are the men to whom we shall in the main ultimately owe the exten sion, the prosperity, and the power of what is to be this great manufacture—but the majority of the paper makers say, " We cannot go to Germany for rags, because they are saddled there with a duty of £5 or £lO a ton ; we cannot go to France for rags, because we there find the door shut in our face, although we should not often have recourse to the French market, even if the prohibition were remoaed, and therefore we ask to be protected in the British market against the competition of paper from foreign countries." Now that is the principle they want the House of Commons to adopt. But has that principle any ground in our legisla tion ? Have you given to any other class the benefit of that principle ? (Hear, hear.) When you abolished the cheap, compulsory, and servile labour of the West Indies, did you, in consideration of your interference having made labour dearer, continue to the West Indians a monopoly of new markets ? When the West Indian pleaded that he was about to be put in competition not only with slave labour but with the slave trade itself, what was your reply ? Your re ply was that it was impolitic for the British Legislature to regulate its commercial laws by a reference to foreign le gislation; steadily, unflinchingly, invariably, without tion, and withoutexception, you have ac ted on t at principle. h During a l o ng course of years, at first wi th doubt, but ulti mately with an absolute certainty founded upon a growing experience, you have refused to take inviewth e legislation lation. of foreign countries, and you. have determined your n commercial laws. You said, "It is unjust to the consumer of a commodity that while he was liable to a competition for what he produced a particular exceptionshould be made against him in reference to an article which he consumed." You said that the British consumer was entitled to every advantage you could give him by the removal of fetters, trammels, and taxes on his trade. What hays you done to the paper maker? He seeing a country where it is so disadvantageous for him to make paper, has not he the be nefit of the whole system of free trade ? Is there an article to which it has not been applied ? In other countries the machinery of the paper maker is subject to a heavy tax. In this country it is subject to no tax at all. (Hear.) In fo reign countries the chemical appliances of the paper maker are charged with taxes, not one farthing of which has to be paid here. In other countries every commodity which the paper maker uses is commonly charged with an enhanced price arising from restrictive legislation. In this country the paper maker wears shoes, and Northampton trembled at the change in the tariff under which foreign shoes were to be introduced. The paper maker wears gloves, and Yeovil and Worcester trembled at the import ation of foreign gloves. The paper maker drinks wine —(a laugh)—and wine is now for the first time brought into cempetition with British beer and spirits. Under these circumstances, un sustained by a single precedent, but with every precedent against him, the paper maker comes to the Legislature and says, " Reverse the whole principle Upon which you have acted for the last 20 years in order to continue to me an ad vantage which is necessary for my existence, but which in every other - class of producers has turned out be a delusion and a snare." Let us consider now what is the speciality of the papermaker. I saw a paper in one of the daily prints from a distinguished champion of the paper makers. It was a statement to the effect that the case of the paper makers is not like that of the corn growers, and setting forth that the corn growers bore no special burdens. Well, I must say I was rather amused at that. Ido not know whether that paper maker was born since the corn-law controversy, in which case he weuld be a very precocious youth. (Laughter.) But if he knew anything of the controversy which raged from 1838 to 1846, I think he might have heard something of the special burdens of the corn growers. I believe that argument will not be re echoed from the benches opposite. I invite hen. gentle men opposite to say whether the corn growers have special burdens or not. I was always of opinion that the corn growers had special burdens. lam still of that opinion ; but, notwithstanding his special burden, his protection has been taken away ; but the paper maker says, " Notwith standing these special burdens, because the Government imposes a duty which you have no power to alter, be so good as to recompense me for what I lose." But there is a challenge which the paper-maker makes. He says : " There is no instance where the export of the raw mate- Hal is taxed abroad, and where you are to admit the manu factured article into England without duty." Now, lam much surprised at the ignorance —or not to use a harsh term, at the defective information of that. assertion. (Laughter.) His challenge is so distinct that I will gives him a case. His doctrine is this—there is no instance in which the raw material is taxed on export abroad, and. where the manufactured article is admitted into England without duty. I will give him a case, viz., the important. article of leather. I will not stop to refer to silk, though there is a duty of lts. 6d. on waste silk impor6d from France to be woven, and the Spitalfields manufacturer will tell you that he has also to contend against the manufactured article. In the case of leather, hides on export from France are taxed at the rate of 25 per cent. on the value -much about the same as is alleged to be the effect of the tax upon rags—and bark, that important and indispensable element in the trade, is positively prohibited to be exported from France. Yet the boots and the shoes and the gloves of France are all of them admitted, or at a term now rapidly approaching are to be admitted, free of duty. (Hear.) I deny the necessity of producing such a case. I stand on the principle that we have nothing to do with foreign legisla tion, but let us endeavour to do justice to our people. (Hear, hear.) But, nevertheless, this is a case where the exported article is either prohibited or restrained by taxes, and the manufactured article is admitted into this country absolutely free of duty. (Hear.) I need not detain the com mittee long up ,n this subject, when for the last three or fear months there has been such a mass of debate and discus,- sion upon it. Of course it is said to be doubtful from wb: i eh side the misrepresentations and misstatements have pro ceeded, but both sides agree that there has been me end of them, and though the matter might have been. ;disposed of in five minutes five months ago, yet it has gathered mag nitude since, and it is now necessary to deal, tla it in de tail. But, sir, the truth is that the whole Inflater is funda mental in its elements. The case is so stated as if it were a trade with regard to which we were dependent upon a foreign supply in order to enable us to compete with the whole world. This is the basis of every newspaper article, of every argument, and every speech that has been made. It is said "here is an article with respect to which we can not supply our own market except by means of withdraw ing the raw material from abroad." Now, sir, I meet that assertion with a flat and a broad contradiction. We are not an importing country of the material of paper. I could show the house letters from various paper manufacturers which declare that, if we go rightly about it, the material of paper is cheaper and more accessible here than in any other country. (Hear.) One manufacturer says " There is no scarcity of rags and never was in this country. It is • true we import, but it is a particular kind for a particular purpose. The best of all material for all kinds of paper is worn out ships' rigging. So abundant is it, that on the 6th of last month I attended the dockyard sale at Portsmouth, and I bought the best and cheapest I ever had." (Hear.) It is admitted on all hands that the material of paper— these rags which were so inaccessible have grown much cheaper in this country of late years. I think I can prove that fact from the most conclusive evidence. In the year 1840 you exported five million lbs. of paper and imported 20 million lbs. of rags. You now import 32 million lbs. of rags and export 20 million lbs. of paper. Your export of paper has consequently increased by 15 million, lbs., while the import of rags has increased by 12 million. lbs., and 12 million lbs. of rags represent 9 million lbs. of p aper. Con sequently your supply of rags from abroad has not grown to the same extent as your export of paper, wad while you have increased the export and enlarged the circle of trade, you have at the same time diminished the price. (Hear.) Gentlemen conversant with this subject know the mean ing of these statements, and they know that the whole of this cry is a delusion and an error on the part of those who make it. (Hear, hear.) The proposition I make is simply to this effect :—We are not an importing country ; we ex port at this moment in paper more than we import in rags. Our importation in rags is about 12,000 tons, that is to say, after deducting the quantity we export back, we import about 12,1100 tons of rags a year. We import 12,000 tons of rage, which make about 2,000 tons of paper, but we ex port 12,000 or 14,000 tons of paper, so that we actually send out a great deal more rags in the form of paper than we import. (Hear, hear.) Not much more than half of all the 1 paper we make is made of rags at all, and yet because nearly half is made of rags, and there is a duty on it abroad, my hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire insists that we should tax all paper whatever it may be made of. The posi tion in which we stand in respect to rags is this : Ruin from the French paper maker is what is apprehended. The French paper maker is to come in like a flood, and he will shut up all the mills in Ireland, the owners of which pre sented the affecting petition we heard read to-night. We have an opportunity of bringing this miserable fallacy to this test—What becomes of our exported paper ? In the first place, it is singular enough that the paper we export is that very description of paper which is made from the fine rags imported from abroad. (Hear, hear.) It is not the coarse paper nor the straw paper, but the fine paper made from these fine rags that we export. How comes it that we export it ? Does it pay ? I presume it does pay or else we should not continue the trade. Where does it go ? I will tell you where some of it goes. One of the principal places to which it goes is the United States of America, but I suppose that Frenchmen are likewise free to send their paper to the United States. According to my hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire our paper makers are to be ruined if these resolutions are adopted. Now is it not a most extraordinary thing that if, immediately our duties are brought to an equality with those of the French man, he is to rush in and to flood us with his paper, we should be able to send paper away now and meet hire in the open market ? (Hear, and cheers.) Our exporter generally pays the duty in advance, and having done so he must lay out of his money until he gets it returned ,from abroad, and he has also notices and delays to meet, and forms to comply with, so that he is heavily burdened on exporting, and yet, marvellous as it seems, notwithstanding the terrors the Frenchman now brandishes in his eyes, he is able to go to America and sell his paper at a profit in the teeth of every competitor. (Hear, hear.) But there is yet one point more to bring the representation to its climax, and it is this —Strange as it must sound, after all the misrepresentations, which have been dinned into our ears for some months, England at this moment sends more paper goods into the American market than France. Last year, while France exported 178,000 dollars worth into America, we exported 230,000 dollars worth of the same goods. (Hear, hear.) I am ashamed to occupy so much time of the committee, but for two or three minutes before I sit down I must le theat tention to a very peculiar point in the case. paper-makers demand from you compensation for o f t o h r or th ol e asse s un equal legislation of foreign countries, thy th a demands of a who appear before you as petitioners with demandß of a character very different, and I think mu ch more reasonable. theo g e n ie legislation e ; ar b s u h t a i s t character very different, and I The principle of British legislation been to decline to take notice . has also peen to give to B rf ri a t o i t s l h y s j u us bj t e a ct n s a , s e o ci f u l as it laws. Now offorefi upon us,cal the eburenaefittetnetfioPzei for a moment to the position of let tho mseegentlemen—a class of great enterprise and merit who are engaged in supplying the people with publications not of a low order, but yet at a low price, which are intended to be sustained by extensive circulation. Let a man endea vour to establish an undertaking of this character, and to bring out for the advantage of the people an edition like that I hold in my hand—an annotatededition of the :Holy Scrip tures, or any other publication needing an extenusiive sale--- it is not too much to say that it would be hard en that man to be compell e d t o purc h ase hi s p a p er in a protected market at an exorbitant price. But this is not all. The Me ssrs. Cas sell, whose p e tition has been presented to-i day) pure chased paper for an annotated and illustas .ted Bible they are now engaged in bringing out. They must urer chase their paper in the British market, or else . p a y per cwt. on paper imported, say from Geer a The ye consequence is that however dear the British cannot afford to go to Germany, unless they are what position Messrs. Cassell Aced 111 r,esp e 23s. 4d. .p n tarket is they 9 prepared to pay this tax of 235. 4d. per cwt. Now, let : me ask in et to the PAPER DUTY. Mr. Vance presented petitions from paper manufacturers, and Mr. Black from Edinburgh, against the repeal of the duty on paper. Petitions in favour of the repeal of the duty were presented by Mr. Bright from the Messrs. Cassell and other printers and publishers in London ; by the Chancellor of the Exchequer from the silk hat manufacturers of Benton, near Manchester; and by Mr. Gibson several other petitions, pro and con, were also presented, WESTMINSTER BRIDGE, &c Mr. HANK EY moved for returns showing the amount expended year by year on Westminster Bridge and the approaches, since the report of the committee of 1856, when it was stated that £50,000 had been expended; the expenditure on the bridge and on the approaches to be stated separately ; stating from what funds such expendi ture has been defrayed, stating separately all grants by Par liament; copy of the latest report from the engineer or clerk of the works, as to the progress of the works ; returns of the further estimated expenditure for completion, and to what extent it will be necessary to apply for parliamentary grants; stating when it is expected that the bridge and approaches will be completed, and of the name of the engineer and also of the contractor, and the width of the bridge between the side parapets.--Ordered. THE SUBMARINE LINE TO AMERICA. Mr. BERKELEY asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whether, in consequence of the failure of the At lantic Telegraph Company in their attempt to lay down a submarine line to America, the agreement entered into between them and her Majesty's Government had not be come void. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was not aware that the contract had become void in point of law, but ;t was inoperative. There was no exclusive agreement with the Atlantic Telegraph Company which would pre vent Government entering into another contract, but he did not consider a similar contract with that of the com pany in question would be offered. CUSTOMS ACT.—THE PAPER DUTY. The house having gone into committee, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—Be fore I comment on the resolutions of which notice has been given in my name, I may perhaps do well to explain one or _ _ two points of detail iu the arrangement of those resolutions which may have suggested doubts to the minds of those hon. members who are not minutely acquainted with the causes of that arrangement. It will have bean observed that a variety of articles are specified in the resolutions ; and in general those articles are placed at a duty of 16s. the cwt., but that there are certain exceptions the reason of which I will very briefly state. Books admitted under treaties of in- LB} Ti 31k len 191 11