The Sun. — London, England, 1848-06-30 00:00:00

years ago there was slave-grown sugar, and that it is within the last year that it has made its appearance, and that the alteration of the law has affected Cuba much more than Brazil; for there was not for the previous is months a single slave brought into that island. lie did not at all agree with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) when he stated that there was an apprehension of reaction by this opposition to the Government, for he thought that it was the Government who, by their al teration of free-trade principles, were the party who would create a reaction, it any such thing should arise, and he did not therefore think that the Hon. Gentlemen who brought on this opposition were - to blames but the Government who introduced the alteration . : He con sidered that there was a great difference of .4inion between the Right Hon. Gentlemen of the Government (Mr. Hawes and Mr. Labouchere). The first considers that the wages of labourers is not sufficiently high in those colonies, while the other is of a diametrically opposite opinion, because he (Mr. Labouchere) says that we should rely on an increase of consumption. He considered that the cause of ruin to the colonies was the taking off the restrictions, and allowing for the use of breweries an influx into the market of slave-grown sugar. He was astonished that, when the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) referred to the proceedings of the Com mittee, he did not say something of himself and of another Hon. Gentleman on that Committee; and also, why he did not explain the reason that Government de parted from the resolution laid down by that Cointattee, in which they stated that the West Indies were`- in a most pitiful state of distress, and recommended imme diate relief. He should add, that the resolutions of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) went even be yond those of the Committee. He (Mr. Labouchere) said that it was essentially necessary for Parliament to afford the colonies relief, which perfectly agreed with the resolution of the House. Mr. LA BOUCEIERE said that he moved that reso lution as the basis of the report. Mr. GOULBURN said that the object of that resolu tion was, that immediate relief be given, particularly to those colonies which were in such direful distress. Another Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hawes) said, that nothing was more unjust than to give this relief indis criminately to all the colonies; but that those colonies which were in distress should be attended to. The ob ject of the resolution was to afford relief for such a length of time, not for two, three, or four years, but until our colonies might be able to compete with foreign colonies.—(Hear.) Between the conflicting opinions of the Government, one being for the improvement of the colonies, while another relied on the wicked doctrines of political economy, that never looks properly to casual and unforeseen circumstances, the condition of the colonies was totally lost sight of, and thus was ruin brought on them. He should again refer to a very great cause of the injury sustained by the West Indies as being occasioned by that Act of 1846. It allowed the importation of slave-grown sugar, and consequently when our colonists came to the market with their ar ticles they found it fallen in consequence of such an un fair competition. Now when such distress prevailed, he would ask what was the plan of Government for its relief ? They promise a loan of 500,000/. on the security of the colonies. He thought that there was something ludicrous in such a proposition, when the landed pro perty of the colonies was so low, and when there was scarcely any demand for the articles of produce, and also when the colonies were not able to pay their ex penses. He considered that such an offer amounted to nothing, however the country may think about it. He thought that it was the duty of Government to compen sate those colonies for the losses and ruin they had sus tained by the Act of 1846, and did not believe that the additional shilling of differential duty, on which he could not rely till carried, would be anything commensurate with all the sufferings that the proprietors of these colo nies have hitherto undergone. Sir ROBERT PEEL then rose and said—Mr. Speaker, I should most imperfectly express my real feelings if, in the course of the observations which I am about to make, were I to come to a conclusion, or even utter a word which might appear to others that I was indifferent to the welfare or importance of our trans marine possessions. With the depressed state of the colonies, with the difficulties and embarrassments of the landed proprietors, I fully and deeply sympathise.— (Cheers.) Sir, I should be justly sorry to incur the reproach which has been directed by my Right Hon. Friend the Member for the University of !Oxford against some, that they were disposed to prefer mere pecuniary material interests to the higher considerations of public policy which are interwoven with this great question.—(Cheers.) Sir, it would be utterly incon sistent with the spirit with which a great empire has been founded—(Hear, hear)—it would be utterly incon sistent with the spirit by which a great empire has been maintained—were we now, in a time of the depression and distress of the colonies, to enter into cold calculations, whether it was for the pecuniary interest of this country to maintain our connexion with them. Sir, I repudiate entirely such views and such considerations. Nor could I entertain them when I remember that these colonies have stood by us in times of national danger and dis aster—(Hear, hear)—when I remember that they stood by us during the great conflict which involved Europe for the last century ; when I recollect that they stood by us during the struggle which ended in the year 1708 by the declaration and concession of independence to many of the provinces of this empire. In that time of difficulty these colonies stood faithful.—(Hear, hear.) Nor can I forget that during the greater conflict which ended in the downfall of Napoleon, and the establish ment of the peace of 1814, these colonies bore the brunt upon many occasions of the struggle, and were the means of averting the tempest of war from the shores of this nation_ Sir, I cannot forget that they shared in our failures and our defeats—in our hopes and our despondings—no, I will not do them the injustice to say that they desponded—they were animated with the true feeling of an Englishman, and only saw in failure and defeat but new motives for re newed exertion.—(Loud cheers.) When I recollect all this, I feel that those higher considerations ought to prevail over mere pecuniary and material interests.--(Hear, hear.) I think, independent of all this, there are great social considerations which would require us to extend a fostering baud to our West Indian possessions. And here I must be permitted to say that I utterly reject the doctrine that because 95 per cent. of the population are prosperous, that w e therefore can dis regard the welfare of the other five.—(Cheers.) Why, sir, in my opinion the smaller the white population is, the more incumbent is it upon us to cherish them. — (Loud cheers.) I cannot conceive a greater misfortune than the loss of the white population. No matter what may be the prosperity of the negro population, I can not conceive a greater misfortune than their disappear ance, whether you regard it as having reference to the progress of religion, humanity, or civilization. I believe the white population to be a barrier to the spread of bar barism.—(Cheers.) If they should, from any reason, disappear from the colonies, the cause of civilization, humanity, and religion will materially suffer.—(Hear, hear.) It is with these feelings, then, that I approach the discussion of this great question. Sir, their distress is admitted upon all hands, and upon all sides has a sin cere desire been evinced to provide for it. I shall not op pose to that remedy any of the ordinary objections which upon other occasions, I might have been disposed to offer, I have always felt that the case of these colonies was peculiar—(Hear, hear)—and that they were ex empted from the regulation of the ordinary principles which should direct your legislation, if it really could be proved that their evils arose from your legislation.— (Hear, hear.) Not a word shall I say about the con sumer of this country, or the produce of that, because I 'believe that the interests of the consumer are identified with the interests of the colonists; that is, if you intend to cherish and maintain them, which I trust you will do. —(Cheers.) In this condition of admitted distress, pro posals are made by her Majesty's Government for the application of remedies to that distress. Those proposals are met by a proceeding justifiable under certain circum stances, but which at the least are of a novel character.-- (Hear, hoar.) It is proposed by the Honourable Ba ronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington), that we should assent to a proposition to refuse a consideration to the plan of her Majesty's Govern ment, to send it back as utterly inefficient—(Hear)—in fact, to say to them, " Take back your plan, it is so worthless that it does not deserve considera tion. We beg you either to come back with a better one, or assent, to that which we shall propose." 'Well, that is a very important statement.—(Hear, hear.) You are not satisfied with remaining as you are. You are not content to be passive.—(Hear, hear.) You all admit that some decisive step must be taken, and that the present law must be altered, but you refuse to enter into any consideration of a plan proposed by the Go vernment.—(Hear, hear.) Recollect the state of the West Indian colonies, recollect that they are in a state of great distress, that they are impatient for a remedy, and that they are anxiously looking to you. The reso lotions of my Hon. Frien d admit that this distress can be remedied by legislation, if they did not, they would have been of no effect whatsoever. But they do not say that these calamities are beyond the reach of legislation, and that those who suffer must patiently submit.—(Hear, hear.) The amendment of the Hon. Baronet says, the plan proposed i s utterly unworthy and inefficient. —(Hear, hear.) Vote for this amend ment and there may be great triumph. The result will be . wafted than those on wings swifter of the wind. _(gear will bear (bliacekar thehear.) .But the next returning Why have you re fused this plan? ghat t a q r u e e the other measures which you are prepared to you must be prepared ttoor replace itjwith? To that question give G an answer. Noble Lord (turning to answer, Sir. I have read the re ' pa , l , tri:oof Lord Bentinck) can give an Now the over which he so ably presided, occupied although Committee. by attendance on several other Commufttee was b o t c‘ l that report on account of the vast ject ; and I must state that a new light Z i e ic n h t thrown upon the state of the West Indian colonies not have been thrown were it not for the assiduity,ewrzodeual, intelligence, and knowledge of the Noble (Cheers.) (Lord G. Bentinck acknowledged the .com pliment in a marked manner.) The Noble Lord is ready to propose an amendment. I read the r eso l u .. tions and the draft report which he proposed, an d I can fully understand the expectations which he raised by them in the minds of the colonies. But unless you are prepared to do something of this kind, the result of all your proceedings will be only to aggravate their discontent.—(Hear, hear.) I must, there fore, be premitted shortly to review the present position of the West Indian colonies. What is it you can offer to the West Indians by way of relief? Can you go back to the measure of 1845? Can you establish the distinc tion between sugar the produce of slave and suiar the produce of free labour? Sir, I regret that a further ex periment of the Bill of 1845 was not permitted.—(Hear, hear.) I am not satisfied with the arguments which have been adduced, that the opening of the markets of Great Britain and Ireland was of no advantage to the iproducer of slave sugar. I am not satisfied that the free-labour sugar which I took from the Continent by the Bill of 1845, to supply these countries, that that vacuum was supplied by slave-grown sugar.— (Hear, hear.) I find evidence to the fact, whatever may be the theoretical opinions of some, that the measure of 1846, which opened these markets, has given encouragement to slave producers in Cuba and Brazil—(Hear, hear)—and that they did consider it a practical boon, which was of greater advantage than the indirect bounty which they received from the fill:me of the vacuum which arose in the continental supply. If I had to direct the counsels of her Majesty, I would leave advised a longer continuance of the measure of 1845.—(f - fear, hear.) I assented to the measure of the Noble Lord, proposed in 1846, on the ground of public policy, because public faith was pledged to the mainte nance of the exclusion of the produce of Cuba; I must therefore take upon myself whatever blame may attach, for I do not shrink from the vote which I the n gave, and I thought that the removal of duties from other articles would have made the consumer more willing to exclude slave-labour sugar. Besides, her Majesty's Ctovernment might haee changed, and you could not eensistently have passed any other than an annual sugar Bill. The colonists would have dreaded the result of such a proceeding. The Noble Lord offered a permanent sugar Bill, and I believed th tt it would be better to avoid an annual conflict, which would have been detrimental to the interests of the colonists. Although you might have defeated the Bill of 1846, it would have prevented the application of capital to your colonies. These considerations, ad led to my unwillingness to dis turb the Government, induced me to support the Bill of the Noble Lord. But can you now revoke that settle ment ? The Hon. Member for Oxford thinks you can. But he is one of a very few who think so.—(Hear.) The Crown has admitted the sugar of Cuba, Venezuela, and the United States. I have endeavoured to give an impartial consideration to every measure which has been proposed. I will take one of them—the reduction of colonial expenditure. After having read the evidence upon this subject, it has left an impression upon my mind that colonial expenditure can admit of very great reduction.—(Hear and cheers.) Those establishments, founded on considerations of imperial policy, which are part of our imperial institutions—connected as they are with our system, it is impossible that there should not be in our dependencies some servile imitations of them ; and when I see the enormous expenditure of the Mau ritius, of Jamaica, and other colonies, I am prepared to hold out to the colonies the prospect of relief, and that there shall be a most determined attempt to reduce the expenditure within the narrowest limits.— (Loud cheers.) Now there is no necessity in a time of their distress, to keep up this unnecessary ex penditure.—(Cheers.) I wish to see the colonies main tained. I wish to recognise them as subjects of the Queen, entitled to every consideration to which the in habitants of Lancaster are entitled.—(Loud cheers.) I also admit that it is of the greatest importance, for the purposes of defence and national policy, that you should place in the administration of colonial affairs the very best men. I think that it would be a miserable economy, fer.ahe sake of some 2,0001. a year, to deprive this empire of the abilities of such men as Lord Dalhousie, Lord Harris, and Lord Elgin. I think if you deprived the co lonies of the presence of men of such ability by a shabby economy, it would be very injurious. But I greatly doubt with respect to the salary of the governor whether it would not be prudent that this country should take the payment upon itself.—(Hear, hear.) I think that the governor should be independent of the colonies. I think that he should be enabled to favour the colonies, and that he should be able to offend them, did the discharge of his duty require it, without having his worldly means impaired. But with respect to other salaries, such as a secretary's at 4,0001. —(Hear, hear)—l would: make very great reductions in such.—(Hear, hear.) I do not blame the Govern ment for not having done something of this kind ; I am ready to share the blame in not having given the ques tion an earlier attention. But Ido say that if you had these salaries reduced, it would be very likely to please the colonist by placing these positions within his • own rsach.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not mean that you should exclude all persons who have no local interest to influ• once them, but some of the salaries attached to the offices appear to admit of reduction. I am only speak ing of the principles generally, and in doing so I must say that every reduction which can be made consis tently with the defence and the special local interests of the colonies themselves, ought to be made, and whatever relief you can afford them from retrenchment, is relief to which the colonies are entitled.—(Hear.) That principle, Sir, I apprehend her Majesty's Government admit. I do not understand that that source of relief was excluded from their plan. Well, then, as to police laws for the prevention of vagrancy and squatting, we are also agreed. Whatever you can do consistently with justice and the real freedom of the negro, that we are all agreed ought to be done. Of course, the question of how it is to be done is one, without local knowledge, of difficult solution. But we shall, lam sure, concur cordially with the colonies in administering what relief can, under that head, be granted to them.—(Hear, hear.) I now, then, come to the grievances alleged by the colonists and their demands for relief. There was a petition presented from the district of Hanover in Jamaica so recently as December, 1847, and in that petition I find that the in habitants of Jamaica—merchants, planters, and others— demand " the removal of the . protection which our fel low-subjects in Great Britain enjoy," and then the peti tion goes on to explain the nature of that protection, stating that the English distillers, in addition to other advantages, " enjoyed a protection against our rum of 9J. per gallon." Now I understand that amongst the measures of her Majesty's Government is contemplated the reduction of that differential duty from 9d. to 4d. per gallon. I cannot hold out to the colonists any hope of a greater reduction, and 1 apprehend that Govern. ment will have serious difficulties in carrying what is ac tually proposed.—(Hear.) Well, the next grievance com plained of is this. The memorialists state "that the British shipowner is protected by the navigation-laws, and compels your petitioners to pay a freight of nearly double the amount which they would pay if they were permitted to ship in other vessels. A large amount of American shipping leaves Jamaica in ballast, and but for the protection of the British shipowners your petitioners would be able to obtain their staves, provisions, and other American commodities at cheaper freights, as well as to enjoy similar advantages in transmitting their sugar to this country." Well, Sir, I think that that is a very reasonable complaint, but tt is disheartening, when we are compelled to admit the complaint to be just, and when a remedy is proposed to be applied, to be told that the removal of the navigation-laws would be of no be nefit to us—that the produce of Cuba and the Brazils would derive greater advantage from the change than we.—(Hear, hear.) That is a considera tion which discourages me from holding out to the West Indies too sanguine prospects of relief—because when I did, so lately as December, 1847, the inhabitants of Jamaica distinctly declare that the remedy proposed will be of no avail; for though the statement may be brief, the argument is cogent, and I, for one, am willing to afford a remedy. I say, Sir, looking at all this, it is discouraging to be told, that the remedy which amid great opposition you propose to apply, will be of no avail.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, it is difficult to take any ge neral view of the position of the West India colonies, and the remedies to be applied to them, because one great element in the consideration is wanting. It is difficult to give an opinion as to what course ought to be adopted with respect to the squadron on the coast of Africa. A Committee is sitting upon that subject—important evi dence is being taken, and I could wish that we knew the result of that evidence, the opinion of the Committee, and the intentions of the Government. A large expense is borne by this country for that squadron. Now sup posing it to be found ineffectual, you still would be:com pelled to maintain a certain force, in consequence of ar rangements with America and France. But, at the same time, if you can convince America and France that you sought relief from that burthen, because the united squa dron ss as of little avail, I cannot doubt but that they in turn would be influenced by similar motives and would consider some more •effectual means of gaining the end in view. I myself give no opinion otetheimatter; I am, indeed, inclined to doubt whether 'the sudden withdrawal of the squadron would not increase the evils of the slave trade.—(Hear, hear.) But if any material saving could be effected by such a withdrawal, I greatly doubt whether this country would not willingly consent to forego the direct pecuniary advantage, and apply the money saved, or a great deal of it, to the furtherance of other means for suppressing the slave trade.—(Hear, hear.) Any view of the matter, however, must as yet be imperfect and premature. Now, Sir, there are only two other suggestions of very considerable importance. The one is, that there shall be a great increase of immi gration, so as to increase the supply of labour ; the other is, that direct assistance shall be given by means of protective duties. Now, as to immigration, the Go vernment have, T think, admitted the principle that this country shall, by way of loan, immediately pro vide the means of increasing the supply of labour. As I understood it, 500,0001. is to be ad vanced for this purpose. Now, lam bound to say that I do not attach the importance which some Hon. Gen tlemen do to an increased supply of labour.—(Hear, hear.) What are the facts? The population of the West Indies is in all about a million. I quote the evi dence of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Bristol (Mr. Miles). Well, he says that he has no great con tilence in the efficacy of immigration. There are a million of inhabitants, and the quantity of sugar pro duced is only about 140,000 hogsheads —a conclusive proof of their being labour enough. Well, but then the question seems to be, how are you to get access to it? It is said, " threaten the negros with the importation of fresh labour. That will operate as a moral check on idleness. When they know that you have access to labour, they will behave themselves." But it requires the utmost tact to apply this consideration.—(Hear.) To pour in upon the colonies tens of thousands of coolies or negroes from the coast of Africa would be a very clumsy, even supposing it to be a very effectual, mode of operation. But what might be the result? Why this—that you would have added to the number of labourers, without providing employment for them— (Hear, hear) —that you would have added to the number of strangers unaccustomed to the colony, brought from many t housand miles awa y; and even should the plan prove successful, and compel the negroes to work, thatsti haveyou a would notwithstanding, and by your own acts, still superabundant supply of labour on your hands.—(Hear, hear.) No; if you are to have im migration, I greatly doubt whether it ought not to be lerttittoo ttahkeinsgpeecvuelary tionofindividuals—(Hear, hear)—the s precaution against abuse—determin ing fr om What part of the African coast Government negroes should be taken—that is to say, what parts are inhabited by tree negroes capable of forming a judgment on the subject, and of understanding the nature of a con tract.—(Hear, hear.) Government ought, I think, in addition, to take on themselves the responsibility of en tering into communication with the sovereign and Native chiefs, explaining the object of the immigration, and offering to become responsible for the good treatment of the negroes on their arrival in the West Indies. But for the Government to undertake more than this will be for it to undertake schemes which I fear will end in disap pointment. As I said, I should be very much disposed to facilitate the enterprise of individuals whose estates wanted labour, the Government taking every precaution against abuse. But, do what you will, do not subject this country to the imputation of—under any pretence— originating and encouraging a new slave trade.—(hear, hear.) I trust, however, that her Majesty's advisers will not insist upon applying the 500,0001. to the pur poses of immigration. I believe that there are some other modes by which temporary relief can be given to the West Indies more effectually than by the plan pro posed. I have read the evidence as to the condition of coolies upon their arrival in the West Indies, and that evidence is conclusive as to the sufferings which they must have endured upon the passage. But if Govern ment, on the other hand, Ce willing to admit the prin ciple of temporary pecuniary relief—and I heard the ad mission with great satisfaction—then I hope that they will consider the most effectual mode of applying that relief. Now, in some of the colonies there are great obstacles in the way of extending drainage and irri gation; but in others the process would be azy, and the benefits to be derived from it, especially in the way of preventing the conse quences of drought —very great. Now, in the most recently-taken evidence, I find that of a British Creole —a great proprietor in Jamaica, I mean Lord Howard de Walden; I have also the evidence of the Hon. Gen tleman who complained of the slumbers of the Nable Lord the Premier—by the way I beg for a moment to interrupt the slumbers of the Hon. Gentleman himself, b it —" bane veniana petimusque, damusque vicissim."— (Nluch laughter, in the midst of which Mr. Bernal who was thus apostrophised, and who had been apparently asleep on a Ministerial bench, awakened up and looked about him, while Sir R. Peel resumed.) Lord Ho.vard de Walden says:—" There is a district between Kings town and Spanish Town, where a great deal of the finest land could be brought into cultivation, by making a cut from Springhead to the river Coo. The estimated ex pense would be 4,oool.—three estates would be benefited while the expense of the drain weuld be repaid in a, year." Now why have not the planters of Jamaica been reclaiming this magnificent district, and making a drain themselves? The answer would of course be, " We are so much impoverished that we cannot make it; we rely on the British Government." But then we say again, " Why did you not make it in the time of your prosperity?" It was because you relied on pro tection.—(Cheers.) Because you relied on a factitious stimulus, on the factitious aid of protection, you have not made this improvement, which you would have made if you had been subject to the wholesome influ ence of competition. Here is a drain which, being made, would benefit three estates. The estimated expense is 4,0001., and the work will pay at least fifty per cent. on the outlay. In a year or two you will be paid. Why, we are draining in England if the operation pays us only four or five per cent.; but in your case you have the expense repaid in a year or two.—(Hear, hear.) Then the lion. Member for Rochester told us of estates in Porto Rico. He told us of an estate to which irrigation had been applied, and what was the result? The production of the estate was at first under 100 hogsheads. Well, the pro prietor wants to compete with us; he tries irrigation, and lie raises his produce the first year 100 to 200 hogsheads, the next year to 300, the next to 500, and in 1847 he has his estate producing 900 hogsheads.—(Cheers.) This is what can be done by irrigation—by pooviding against drought. Well, if by such simple means such great profits can be derived—if by attending to irrigation such great results can be attained, why should not I trust that when the West Indies recover from their pre. sent depression, the natural result of being forced to make a great exertion will produce a corresponding ad vantage?—(hear, hear.) But we have evidence of Lord Howard de Walden, which is still more important and striking. He says—" A great deal might be done by draining and irrigation;" and then he goes on to state that a " tramway of eight miles, costing 150,0001., would benefit sixteen estates, and that there is no question hut that the proprietors of those estates would pay the ex pense, but that there are difficulties in the state of the law." Here, however, is the case of a tramway, giving increased facilities for communication, costing only 150,0001. Well, let Government, being willing to aid the West Indian body, apply some portion of the 500,000/., not to increase the supply of labourers, who may become a mere population of surplus paupers; but let them take a❑ extended view of the improvements which might be made, and endeavour to benefit the West India body by aiding i❑ their accomplishment. Well, Lord Howard de Walden, as I have said, gives de cisive evidence as to the advantages of draining in many parts of Jamaica. He does not approve of small drains, which may be stopped up by. the vegetation and the roots of plants; but large drains, running through dis tricts, which, he says, may be formed with great advan- tage. Now, here is shown the necessity of - competition. It is only under the influence of competition that you can hope that these improvements—these drains and modes of irrigation—will be had recourse to. Let that competition be applied. There will then be improve ment, there will then be a demand for surplus labour, the cutting of drains and the excavation of reservoirs, salubrious labour, very different from cane planting; and alt this being effected, as I believe it can be effected, under the guidance, and by the advice of a paternal Go vernment, the foundations may be laid for great local pro,perity. And now I come to the most important con sideration of all—Will I consent to give 10s. protective duty for six years? If I consent to that proposition, I vote for the amendment.—(Hear, hear) Yes, the reason why I differ from my Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn, we believe,) is this, that I cannot vote for the last amended resolution of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for D:oitwich without encouraging a, belief on the part of the West India body that lam prepared to give them 108. protective duty.—(Hear, and "Oh.") Yes, I think the very minimum amount you could offer, after voting for this resolution, is 10s. for six years.—(Hear.) Well, Sir, alter a full consideration of the case, that is a proposition to which I am not prepared to accede—(Hear, hear) — and I will not accede to it, not only on account of the interest of the consumers here, but from a sincere and conscientious belief that it would not be for the benefit of the West India body themselves.—( Hear.) Now why do I say that my Hon. Friend's last resolution implies a protective duty of 10s. for six years ? He is not a simple Member of Parliament. He was on the Committee— he was acting with others, and he voted for the• Has. duty. Well, he has proposed three resolutions. The first was, that no remedy could be effectual which did not give 10s. protective duty. The next was, that any remedy proposed which was not in conformity with the recommendation of the Committee would be ineffectual—that recommendation being 103. for six years. And then, ultimately, the resolution was changed into its present form. But I put it to the West India body whether they would not say, " Why, the wording of the resolution was changed for mere party considera tions, with a view to a division; but we consider that it still means 10s. for six years, and if we succeed in de teating the Government plan, that is the amount of protective duty which we shall expect from you."— (Hear, hear.) Now, I cannot consent to that amount of protective duty, and for these reasons—the West India body is distressed by want of labour. But I am there fore called on to give protection in favour of cobnial produce—not the produce of the West rndies alone, but 10s. of protective duty on that of the East Indies and the Mauritius, in both of which British possessions there is no want of labour. They are, in fact, to have the same advantage as the West Indies, without having the same grounds of complaint.—( hear, hear.) Then, what is the necessary consequence ? You admit, in these very resolutions, that a very considerable time must elapse before you have any increase in the supply of labour in the West Indies, but the stimulus of protection to the East Indies will be immediate, while the amount of available la bour there is enormous. Why, you have the valley of the Ganges, with, it is said, 500,000 square and labour at the rate of 2d. per day.—(oh, oh.) I am speaking from the evidence—it is not my statement. There is a large track, and there is no deficiency of labour there. There is certainly some impediment on account of the rent of land, but that can be removed ; but yet the East Indies and the Mauritius are to re ceive an encouragement to compete with the West Indies, though not labouring under the same disadvan tages, which competition will be as injurious to the West Indies, in a pecuniary point of view, as foreign competition.—(Hear.) It is admitted by this resolution, it•hanat n the perhaps lv e s t t w l o n d y i e e a s r s p r s o h c a u l pa r l e thatss over before supply of labour th , b t o hey ur, but in this interval they are to be incited to competition with other portions of the British colonies which labour under no such want as they endure.—(Hear, hear.) This is to expire at the end of six years, and let us con sider, if we grant this temporary protection, what object it will ensure.—(Hear, hear.) The West Indians will not enjoy it for more than three or four years, for they will not have the supply of labour to enjoy it for a longer period. And what will the Cubans say? Now, I suppose that you are in earnest in this proposition, and that when you propose " six years," the proposition is not made with the lurki ng intention of continuing it afterwards.—(Hear, hear.) It is a proposition for pro tection for six years—to come to an abrupt termination at the end of that period—and after six years there is to be unqualified competition with the produce of the whole world, slave labour and free.—(Hear, hear.) Will the Cubans, do you think, relax?—(Hear, hear.) Will they not say that they have a guarantee from the British Parliament that at the end of six years they will have unlimited access to the British market.—(Hear, hear.) How would slavery be discouraged by a proposition of that kind ? You tell them, wait for six years, and you will recover your position ; but what will the West Indian body be doing in the meantime ? I find an ex planation of it in the observation of my Hon. Friend (Mr. Barkly), and I must say that I was not surprised at the clearness with which he spoke on the subject.— ( htwh H ei et e snr a aee r yss ) sui nli th H aofn e afsy s wo p geu o rrr k e at e oot f w etax i h t epp h reqo a ruit facility snopd t f throughout : which was only na A the lyet dmmeans nas presentofpu Struggleamm putting n o gto t e hnet reduce costin rodu wages,ct colonies on whatHHe He does a i y s s a , whichwo f e sugar arien s et ohne a sound and satisfactory basis. I think the effect of a differential duty to that extent for so long a period, would be at once to decide the struggle in favour of the negro."—(Hear, hear.) Well, the last man I think you should have any sympathy for is the negro demand. ing extravagant wages.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") I have a sympathy for the West Indians, but the conse quence of giving this temporary protection will be to decide that struggle in favour of the negro. Tou have decisive evidence of the consequences that will result from this proposition. It will decide the struggle in favour of the negro. I think he would get his own way, and get it, probably, to the amount of the increased price of the produce. In fact, increase of wages will be tantamount to the increase in the price of produce, and therefore the benefit will go into the labourers' pocket.--(Hear, hear.) Then my Hon. Friend says the effect of the 10s. protection would be to raise the price of sugar 4s. a hundred weight in the market. And who would gain by it? You would thus terminate the struggle between the West Indian and the negro in favour of the negro. You raise the price to the extent of 4s. a cwt., and you get the slave-grower perhaps a better price. If the price of sugar be raised 45., and you tax him 35., that must he the result, and at the same time Sou subject the West Indian to this disadvantage, that the negro with whom he is struggling for a reduc tion of wages shall have the advantage over him. And recollect he will have that advantage, because you are paying an additional 4s. to give relief to the West Indians.—(Hear, hear.) My Honourable Friend says, " There would be an increase of wages tantamount to the increased price of produce, and therefore the benefit would go into the pocket of the labourer, for though it were coupled with unrestricted intercourse with Africa, it would be some time before that came into play; the inducement to extend cultivatioir. would keep up the i w ih ig o e u s re b r e s y , o v n e d ul t d h h e a e l ff ,e 7 ” t w l, h iy ich no tl a m ea i r m a p b o le rt F a r ti i o e n ad o further says, says, "I have not now been in Jamaica for more than eight years, and the accounts given to me of the island represent it to be in a much worse condition, not only than it was then, but than the rest of the West Indies ; almost in a hopeless state ; therefore I do not wish to damage their chance of obtaining additional protection by anything I may say. I believe that it would be of assistance to the present proprietors of Jamaica if they got such a protection as that, but if it had the effect of increasing the production very largely, and bringing a large quantity of produ ce f rom I n d ia , the Mauriti us , an d othr colonies, it would not permanently benefit even the island of Jamaica; it might benefit the present pro prietors, who might perhaps get out of their properties with a sacrifice." Now, with all the sympathy I have with the present West Indian 'proprietors, the object at which I aim is not to put some money into the pockets of those proprietors, but to lay the foundation of national prosperity.—(Hear, hear.) If I aim to pay him a sum of money, ten thousand times would it be to put it into his pocket directly, rather than do it in the way in which you propose to do it by this proposition to raise the price of sugar and enable the labourer to put it into his pocket. —(Hear, hear.) It appears tome that there is an objec tion to this proposition for a 10s. duty for six years on various grounds. It will end the struggle of the pro prietor with the labourer, and decide it against him; it will increase the price of sugar and it will offer no dis couragement to slave sugar.--(Hear, hear.) On this further ground, I cannot consent to the proposal to raise the price of sugar 4s. in the British market to give temporary assistance to Jamaica. It is my belief that the way to benefit the West Indian proprietor is to reduce the cost of cultivation, and enable him per manently to enter into competition with the foreign producer; and it is because r Cannot hold out to nim the expectation that I can fulfil the hopes to which I would give rise by voting for the proposal of my Hon. Friend, that I must give to that proposal a negative.— (Hear, hear.) I say nothing now of the immediate pro posal of her Majesty's Government. I leave that for further consideration; but this I say, that I have a sin cere desire to enter into the consideration of their plan without reference to party considerations.—(Hear, hear.) I am prepared to discuss she details of their measure, and to extract from them as much benefit as we can without loss to the revenue of the country, and with the hope of affording relief to the West Indians.—(Hear, hear.) Our object I think ought to be to encourage the means of future competition, for I see many causes con tributing to the depression of the West Indians at the present moment, for which, I believe, legislation could provide no remedy.—(Hear, hear.) Of this lam con vinced, that if by means of protection, you give the monopoly of the British market to your colonial pos sessions, you do not advance a single step towards advancing their permanent prosperity.—(Hear, hear.) My Honourable Friend has referred to the Committee who sat in 1832, to inquire into the cause of the distress that prevailed in 1830. And what was the cause of the distress in 1830? It was over-production ; there was a greater supply than the home market could take, and the report of the Committee in 1832 is well worth the most attentive perusal.—(Hear, hear.) You will find that, for some years before 1832, there was a gradual increase in West Indian production. There was a num ber of hundred weights increase, from four millions to five millions ; and that was more than the British market could take off when it came into competition with foreign sugar in the European market ; and that Committee said the only way of affording the means of effectual re lief was, to enable the British producer to undersell the foreign producer in the British market. Well, they got the monopoly of the home market ; you had not a single hundred of foreign sugar brought in, and see the inef ficacy of such regulations. In like manner, your ten shilling duty may now increase the supply, and you may impose a protective duty that will exclude foreign sugar, and yet do nothing to ensure per manent relief.—(Hear, hear.) You may increase the supply, you may have more sugar produced than the de mands of this country require, and then we will begin to have signs of depression.—(Hear.) Look, for instance, to what took place under the corn-laws in the year 1836 and in the year 1823. Exactly the state of things I have described took place, there having been a more abundant supply than the market could take off.— (Hear, hear.) In each year you have had Committees to consider the causes of distress. The markets here were dull, not a single cwt. of foreign corn was intro duced, and each of those Committees came to a conclu-. sion that legislation was of no value. The price of wheat was 395. in 1335; there was an abundant supply, and a complete monopoly of the home market; there was no competition with the foreigner, and yet com mercial distress prevailed. And so it will be with sugar, if the factitious stimulus of protection is applied to it.— (Hear, hear.) I feel it important, after what has taken place, not to unduly burden the pur chaser; but, in the case of the West Indies especially, I would not depart to the extent of one fraction from the principle that ordinarily prevails; for I have come to the conclusion that the protection demanded would s e f ocihvscss n slifpai e o uagsuiaat t ibvnnhrsit ear.se b e)C. e tolechluif f ate, Hb o oNhbtrat r mheoi eoh. n r umwe h ikrs r i notn ih s ocsedou b arakeek e l dtntes t n andtHto e io% Ihuq fi sfbo. eluh t wcytiw ' eio l shmmsamthatrh C caai tpdioae l : isetlnendhetNlmai:aewt. account cwo , ebissbotnllt h thieuaeae e bwtnl v a redeLtiee r met 0 . sobohn)paftlrf that respect dthnnthtalahtdhtteatsiethistiwonnhelsoaedi conditiontl sdutehace.lesve_ldyd foreigner,snt t o eo t m tb d hoe e lately s a ( t l pia a ll rat b mie e o d a a u oo r na r f : that island, and v em L r sa o ek r e d ers othf Howard eafna Il ea d sa e t, a W t ge a w l s d at e as n t e , om a b ag e r te, recent asked visit t Cuba, he e Being o ei g rig o armed? he answered, " Yes, I believe, invariably; the overseer had a cutlass and dagger, and three bloodhounds at his heels close by him. I understand it was the custom of the island that no white man belonging to an estate should go wholly unarmed. They would not go on foot to any distance, but even on horseback they have always their pistols at their si'es."—(Hear, hear.) When you look to the United States, are you sure that the status of slavery can always be maintained ? Do you believe that the inhabitants of the United States are easy and confident under the maintenance of it ? What is the reason all discussion of it is put down, and the abolition of it is apprehended ? It is on account of the growing antipathy to slavery ; and my conviction is, that that country cannot be blessed which maintains this cursed slave trade.—(Cheers.) For a considerable time there have been f requent complaints of it, and they have led to its gradual a b o li t i on. They must ultimately lead to its total reducti on , b ecause there is a blot upon the land that has s l avery on i t.—(Cheers.) The unhealthy and unwholesome relation in which the proprietors and their slaves stood towards each other led to constant complaints ; but now they possess the means of security. —(Hear, hear.) I hope you do not repent of the efforts and of the magnificent determination you evinced in the sight of Europe to put an end to it.—(Cheers.) It is true that those men who favour it are pos sessed of great riches ; but I hope we will not have to say that it is in vain we cleansed our hearts and washed our hands of the stain of that crime. —(Hear, hear.) Under no circumstances and at no time can that country feel secure in which the system of slavery is permitted to continue; and I, for one, do hope that no Government will give encouragement to such a trade, affording its advocates a hypocritical pretence for de feating free trade, and assisting this cursed traffic.— (Hear, hear.) I hope those who uphold it will be wise in time, and see the consequences that may ensue from the continuance of it. If I thought that a measure pro posing temporary protection would have the effect of impeding the slave trade, I would vote , for it at once; but your temporary protection expiring at the end of six years, and then bringing you into competition with foreign sugar, would be of no avail.—(gear, hear.) But at no time, under no circumstances was this system of slave trading secure, and have there, I ask, any events occurred which have a tendency to add to that insecurity?—(Hear, hear.) There has been a mighty convulsion in Europe, and the man would be considered a mad speculator who, in speaking four months ago of the events in Paris, would prophesy that they would involve Vienna and Berlin in anarchy and confusion. He would be thought a very unwise man who said it, but still that has occurred, and the mi g hty heaving of the convulsion is already felt at the oth er r: hear.) Look to th e state the Governments of B raz il a nd furnishing saifdMartinique, t 1 ea a sa n sd t o i ca remember( which of Cuba —aye, and of the United States —should learn, and, in fact, are learning. — (Hear , hear.) My opinion is, that the events which are happening in Eu rope must precipitate the time when there shall be a lle also that these e ven t s are final extinction both of the slave trade and of the slave.—(Hear, hear.) This state of things should be met by timely precaution on the part of this country. There will beincreased sympathy with the condition of the slave ; and he who traffics in human blood and brings the slave to Cuba and to Brazil from the coast of Africa , may find, notwithstand ing his present prosperity, and the price he sets on sla very, that his prosperity may come to an end.—(Cheers.) to an end, through wise and provident legislatio n, It is my hope that it 1 : 11 ay come but whether it be brought to 'dent legislation or not, I be end by wise and pro lieve its doom is s ealed.—(Cheers.) an I d —(Cheers.) I believe that it cannot long survive, and that the slave at no remote pe riod must be emancipated .—( Cheers.) To use the mag nificent language of Curran, which was expressed in words worthy of the aspirat i o n : "No matter in what language the doom of the slave may have been pro battle his liberty ma} no matter in what d isastrousy may have been cloven down—no matter what complexion incompatible with freedom—an Indian or an African his brow, the time is fast sun may have burned upon walk abroad in hisna tiveapproaching when his soul shall hen his body shall swell beyond the majesty—when measure of the chain which bursts from around him, and he shall stand forth redeemed, regenerated, and disenthralled by the genius of universal emancipation." Mr. URQUHART moved the adjournment of the de bate amid loud cries for a division. Mr. ANSTEY seconded the amendment. Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the House would come to a division before they again separated.—(Hear.) s;! -p his amend ksx assent to the' Mend to the ge- • 44iht the comii meptional case. ' 4itse, by assent- Onet to save outs Ot'so imminently Mr. URQUHART, having withal ment, proceeded to say that he could, Government proposition. He was ne neral principle of protection, but he t tion of the West Indies presented an —(Hear, hear.) He c a lled upon the i] ing to the amendment of the Hon. Bp West India colonies from the destruct threatening them. t• A. , The Marquis of GRNBY denied Flint the distress , of the West India planters arose fro nar recent coin,- mercial depression. If so, how w as !, ;that tiro same' cause had not operated upon the imp ; lntions to thiits country of Brazil and Cuba sugars ? I;:ny pursuing th e course pointed out by the Right Hon. 5- net the:wageil of the labourer were to be reduced, we i . the planteras be enabled to take advantage of that; :Auction ? HO at once said no ; the only mode of bell ring the plan ters was by giving them protection, p i , ...encouraging immigration of labourers. His Right i ~ 1 . Friend the Member for Ripon had asked the othet . p liglit how the West Indies could contend with the sla I:grown Sugars produced at 15s. 9d. under the 103. prio 'ire duty pro - by the West Indian party ? If hey could not k contend with these sugars at such a 9f,- how much !eis could the West India planters cum • at the diff.:- rential duty proposed by the Governmen 'Of 7s. They t certainly could not do so. Were they i . consider the 1 great question before them on party: . tives ? Ile protested against entering upon such aco se,,and befoie he sat down he must intreat the House , remember that in 1834, when the interests of the 0 rmiei and j humanity were antagonistic and opposed; ~ each other the Legislature did n o t h es itat e t o i n d em ' — Ow planter, end now when the int eres t o f th e co l on i e e ed hum of hu.- t nity were identical, it was still more i nc? . ent on than to have a regard to those two consideratt sk,. and not to expose the West Indies to certain ruin by &wing iree competition with them the cheaper pre de of slave holding colonies. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the sulk , before - he House was one well worthy of its most;•. ious cersi &ration. After hearing all the argu ' is that aad been urged during the debate, he had co' 'to, the same conclusion that had already been stated • e courso.of the discussion—namely, that the motio4tafk the Hen. Baronet had only embarrassed the qua'tion -withcat affording the House the means of comingijto amortect conclusion as to the real subjects at issue. rlf the LOD. Baronet had moved an amendment on the ropositica. of 4 the Government to the effect that no quate relief 0 could be afforded to the West Indians sa - ..y the atop tioa of the recommendations of the West ~, ,e 3 / 4 Commit tee, he (Lord J. Russell) was ready to •Itithat the House would then be on the road towards ~ , gto some conclusion on the question before them. i > , e . the Hon. Baronet's amendment merely went the 'i ;: tlr. of con demninz the propositions made by her Maj : •• ''s Goiarn , ment. If be had even allowed it to bejlipposed that the present was a party movement for t urpoie of o unseating the Government, he (Lord J. spell) Mould have understood the proceeding. But it hatViken.cliarly shown that whilst there were many who w.ie dis?osed to vote for his amendment, they comprise4t* inconsi derable number of Hon. Members who alt ' et .;iiap proved of the views entertained by the H .11trcuet ; and therefore, although be might succeed., . destroying the Government, he would not make any ogress to wards giving relief to the Westindiaes. ' Abe lion. h Baronet's amendment was affirmed, he wosed film! the Right Hen. Gentleman the Member for Oiffird Ur-ver sity and the Right Hon. Gentleman thecifembe! for Cambridge University both alike ready tO toppost his 10s. protection duty, and to declare it to be ;more than the House could consent to ; and one of ose Light Hon. Gentlemen would inform bim that the. etion of T thu the 14s. duty to 10s. would be dangerous to e revenue. How then would the question stand in the inient Of the amendment being carried ? The Govern i' .t would thereby have a negative put upon their . ..oskions, and the Hon. Baronet's proposal would mieet with a similar reception, and the Right Honourgile Gentle man the Member for Oxford Uuiversityt; would be ready to bring forward his views, which it . ht be ad• vantageous to discuss, but which could not the be entered r upon. The on ly r esu lt w hich th e Ho n . B a net would i arrive at would be that the propositions of 140 Govern ment being rejected, and none others b4ing been adopted in their stead, the West Indians, tfould find themselves, after so many nights' discussiop landed at the scale of duties which would come into operation on the sth of July. Was that the Hoe. Barenefs mode of coming to their assistance and relief? Having said this much with respect to the probable results of the affirma tion of the amendment, he should take that opportunity of making a further statement respecting the, views en tertained by the Government on the subject under con sideration. The great changes which had tkizen place in the West Indian colonies—first, in the emancipation of the slaves; subsequently, in the admission. of foreign free labour, and then of slavlabour sugars into the home market—had made an immense change in the condition of the planters and proprietor": of those islands. Those changes—more especially! the first— called for corresponding legislative measures on the part of the Government. Those measure had been projected and brought forward, but they met with every species of obstruction and delay, by which ,means they were prevented from proving so beneficial as they ought to have been to the West Indian Colonists. He would first allude to the Vagrancy Act, and the means proposed for regulating the employment of labourers in those islands. Having been for some time Chief Se cretary for the Colonies he was enabled to state from his own knowledge that the difficulties which had been put in the way of passing those laws chiefly referred to the fears that an infringement of the Emancipation Act was contemplated. There was at that time a very strict and zealous supervision exercised over the colonial legisla ture by the anti-slavery party in this country., , ,and this supervision was carried to a very high pitch of jealousy and watchfulness. But that feeling was a very natural one, resulting, as it did, from the long and arduous struggle that had been made between the party seeking to perpetuate slavery and the emancipation party. But be that as it might, the contest certainly had the effect of preventing the free course of legislation, and the speedy passing of the vagrancy and employment Act; and the constant reports sent home by the ; stipendiary magistrates respecting the treatment of the labourers in the West Indian islands created and maintained a great degree of irritation. He only referred to those topics in order to show that the Emancipation Act could not be considered complete unless it was accompanied by other laws, regulating the state of free dom in which the negro population were to exist. Another and a more important question came to be con sidered at the same timo with the preceding one. The West Indies were in a condition, owing to the large amount of capital poured out upon them, to compete with Cuba in point of production, notwithstanding the advantages which the latter island possessed over the British West Indian planters. But the great want ex perienced by the latter was that of continuous labour. Great objections had been raised to the importation of any labourers from Africa, as that, it was feared, would endanger the liberty of the negroes. He had tried to promote immigration into the %Vest Indies from Sierra Leone of liberated or free Africans, but few went. European immigration was next resorted to, and failed. The Coolie immigration also failed. The want of continuous labour had existed for upwards of ten years, and yet that want had hardly had its full effect, and under this belief he thought it fit that the Legislature should enable the colonists to increase their stock of labourers—a measure that would be highly beneficial, as a small number of imported la bourers thrown into the market would stimulate others to work. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had not estimated very highly the utility of the proposed advance of 500,000 i. for the purpose of im migration, and he had asked whether a portion of that sum could not be applied to other purposes. If he (Lord J. Russell) were to assent to this proposition, he should be leading the House to think that the Government was prepared to advance money on loans to the West Indian planters upon a plan similar to that by which the land owners in Great Britain and Ireland obtained loans for the purpose of draining, and such a course with respect to the colonies was almost impossible to follow. As they advanced money to Canada for public works, so, it there were any works in the West Indies, such as those to which the Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded—the making of canals and tramways and great works of drainage which would be likely to increase:the produce of those,colonies—he would have no objection to extend the appropriation of the 500,000/. to such works.— (Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentle man the Member for the University of Cambridge attributed the whole of the distress in the West Indi es to the Act of 1846. It did not appear to him that the Act of 1846 was the principal, though it might be one, cause of that distress. In stating the prob a bl e e ff ects of that Bill at the time he introduced it, he stated that 240,000 tons might be introduced from the British pos sessions, 20,000 tons, the produce of free labour, a n d 20,000 of other foreign sugar, making altogether 280000 own possessions He did not expect that the produce o f t h eir possessions would ha l ve been increased, but it happened that their produce last year reached 280,000 tons, and this, together with 48,000 tons, the produce of other countries, caused a very great depression of prices. Th e increase of their West Indian colonies alone, as appeared by the returns moved for by the Hon. Member for Leo minster, was from 2,000,000 cwt. to 2,200,000, 2,500,000 cwt , 2,800,000 cwt., and last year it was 3,202,775 cwt. That showed an enormous increase of production, though he admitted to the Right Hon. Gen tleman (Mr. Goulburn) that this increase was not to be attributed to the Act of 1846. But it showed an im mense increase of production; and if that had been con comitant with the high prices which prevailed in the time of monopoly, he believed it would have caused as much distress as prevailed at the present time. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford, did n o t concur i n t h e proposal of a 10s.duty, neither was he i n f avour o f t h e p l an of a 7s. duty as pro posed by the Govern men t. H e must therefore suppose that the Right lion. Gentlema n was in favour of some intermediate scale between 7s. and 10s. That would only make a difference of ls. 6d. or 2s. at the utmost, and he owned that ; it might be fairly taken into consi deration in Committee. Another lion. Gentleman was in favour of the 10s. duty, but for three years only, be cause, if the 105. duty were:to exist for a longer period —for 10 years—it would raise the rate of labour. If the Hon. Gentleman was right as to the effect such a measure would have on the rate of labour, he (Lord J. Russell) did not see why it should not have the same effect, though the duty was to continue but for two or three years. He believed that such a proposition would give rise to fresh speculation and compe tition, and that at the end of the three years the West Indians would come to them with the same com plaints that they did now. In the midst of the various schemes proposed, that of the Government seemed to him to combine every advantage. lie did not think, in the face of the distress of the West Indians, that it would be right to allow the Act of 1846 to come into further operation. What they proposed, therefore, was to give immediate protection to the planters by increas- Ing that protection for a time, and to increase that ad vantage still more, ani at the same time to benefit the consumer by lowering the duty. He expected that the consumption would oe greatly increased by this plan, and he believed the only chance of the planters con sisted in that great..!onsumption. The recommendation of the Committee leld out the same advantage, but at a sacrifice to the revenue of 960,0001. He would not then go into the question of the probable increase of consumption, but it was calculated that the revenue would not suffer to the extent of more than 30,000/. or 40,000/., and ultimately it would not be less than it was at present. There remained the objection that the measure would encourage the slave trade. If it were now a question proposed for the first time, that no sugar, the produce of slave labour, should be admitted, he would admit that was a fair ground of objection.—(Hear.) But the proposition the House had to deal with was not that of admitting slave labour produce fur the first time. It was a question of increased protection in favour of their own colonies. If the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) would repeal the act of 1846 al together, and totally prohibit slave-grown sugar, he could then admit his argument against the present plan; but his Hon. Friend must be convinced that it would be a vain and fruitless effort. If hie Hon. Friend were to succeed in his views, and that sugar became dearer in consequence, it would only occasion a fresh struggle and fresh agitation, which would place the West Indian body in the worst of all positions—namely, in the uncertainty as to the amount of protection that Parliament could ;:fiord them.—(Hear.) his belief was, that they adopted a sound system when they said, in the first place, that hey would not admit slavery iu any British possession, and in the next place, when they said that they would nut consider the institution of slavery as a bar against the admission of goods the produce of slave labour. It was said that the Act of 1846 was inconsistent with the Acts for putting an end to slavery; hut, in his opinion, the inconsistency was far greater in making a distinction between sugar and other articles which were produced by the labour of slaves, excluding one and admitting the others.—(Hear, hear.) His belief was that these distinctions of tariffs were not the mode by which they could attain the abolition of slavery in the world. He rather thought if they relied on the progress of opinion, on the impatience that there would be on the part of the slaves themselves retained in slavery in Cuba and Brazil, when they saw the inhabitants of Jamaica and Trinidad, and in the neighbouring islands, in a state of freedom, that they would go on a better basis than by giving protection to the West Indians. Setting aside the question of slavery in the United States, of which he was not able to see any satisfactory solution, he died ex pect that slavery in Cuba and Brazil would be abolished —abolished all the sooner if they did not make it a matter of tariffs and regulations—if they said, We have abolished slavery ourselves—we stand free from any stain of this kind—we do not inquire into the insti tutions of foreign countries—we wish to see freedom prevail —we leave it to its own strength and security, and we leave to you the time and manner in which you will follow our example."—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MUNTZ said he had voted for the Bill of 1846, because he understood it was to be a settlement of this question. He would now vote against the proposition of the Government because it was an unsettlement of it. —(Hear.) He supported the measure of 1846 on free trade principles. There was no doubt the question was one whether they would have free trade or slavery, or whether they would give up their colonies. Her Ma jesty's Government proposed a measure which was no thing in itself. It deranged everything and arranged nothing.—(Hear.) It was said that it would give time to the planters. The planters would be in the same po sition in 1849 as they were now. It was a question of whether they would kill them at once or bleed them to death.—(Laughter.) Because he voted for the amend ment of the Honourable Baronet it did not follow from that that he was going to support any proposition he was going to make. He was going to vote against the pro position of the Government because he considered it futile, peddling, and trivial—(Hear)—and was a depar ture from the Act of 1846.—(Hear.) Mr. ANSTEY rose amidst loud shouts of " Divide," and " Oh, ob." He looked upon the present question as a question of justice. As an Irish Member he protested against the degrading offer made on the part of her Majesty's Government by some agent, that if they sup ported the Government on this question they would not be too firmly bound by the measure before the House.— (Oh, oh.) The Hon. Member fbr the West Riding must look on this as a question of the dismemberment of the empire, because in a pamphlet called " England, Ireland, and America, by a Manchester Manufacturer," supposed to be the Hon. Gentl eman , h e says t h at t h e colonies are an encumbrance to this country; that it was desirable they should get rid of the colonies; that America had said that; and yet that America was their best friend. Such were the opinions of the free-trade school of Manchester. Honourable Members on that side of the House had prophesied the results of this measure, and now they might be recognised.— (Cries of " Question.") The Hon. and Learned Member continued amid much noise to quote from Mr. Cobden's pamphlet, with a view of proving that the policy of the flee-trade school tended to the sacrifice of our colonies and the dismemberment of the empire. The impatience of the House increased to such a degree that the Hon. and Learned Member was unable to obtain a hearing, and, in consequence, he moved the adjournment of the House. Mr. FORBES seconded the motion. Colonel DUNNE emphatically denied that any bar gain had been effered by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer to the Irish Members, or had been accepted by those gentlemen, respecting the differential duties on rum. Lord J. RUSSELL appealed to the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal to withdraw his motion for adjourn ment, and to allow the House to come to a division on the main question. Mr. ANSTEY having complained of the interruption, explained that he had made no charge against the Irish Members, of which body he was one himself. All he had said was that an imputation of compromise had gone abroad, and he had felt it to be his duty to stand up in his place and repudiate it. Having withdrawn his mo tion for adjournment, the Honourable and Learned Gen tleman proceeded. With respect to the main question, he conjured the House to pause before they voted for a policy which might involve the destruction of some of the most important of our colonies. It was hard that the West Indies, which for 150 years had been the vic tims of a most rigid restrictive system, should now be cast off and exposed to poverty and ruin, in compliance with the new-fangled doctrines of free-trade policy.— (Loud cries of " Divide.") The House divided, when there appeared— For the original motion 260 For Sir J. Yakington's amendment 245 Majority --15 The announcement of the numbers was received with loud cheers by the Protectionists. The House then went into Committee, Mr. R..-ERNAL in the chair. A resolution to the effect that the duty to be imposed on July, foreign lB49 r b g e a r l9 f s r . o m 6d . t h p e er s t c h w o t f . J f u r l o y m , 1 t B h 4 e B n , c t eo to t he j s u l t y h of 5, 1850, 18s. per cwt.; from thence to July 5, 1851, 16s. 6d. per cwt.; and after that date 15s. per cwt., was then read, and the Chairman immediately reported progress, the Committee to sit again to-morrow (this day), when the resolution will be discussed. Mr. M. GIBSON intimated that Mr. Bright intended to propose his amendment, " That it was not expedient to alter the Sugar Duties Act of 1846" as a substantive motion. Mr. WARD obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regu late, for a time to be limited, the premiums and annuities of the Naval Medical Supplemental Fund Society. The Bill was brought in and read the first time. REPRESENTATIVE REFORM—MR. HUME'S MOTION. Mr. OSBORNE begged to ask his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose what he understood was to be done with regard to his motion. A number of gentle men had come up to town on purpose to be present during the debate, and being one of them, he wished to know if the motion would positively be brought on on Thursday next. He could assure his Honourable Friend he was losing his division by thus putting off the motion one day after another.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME said, if his Hon. Friend had been in the House at five o'clock he would have known he had no alternative but to put off the motion. He could only say, in answer to the question that had been put to him, the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had assured him he would not interfere with Thursday. Mr. MUNTZ did not understand these sort of ar rangements Last week the Noble Lord gave up to morrow; then he took it back, and now wished to defer the debate till Thursday. A week ago the Hon. Mem ber refused to put off his motion, yet now he postponed it in the face of the Noble Lord's own direct acknow ledgment that he should have to. morrow. Mr. WA WN said they had LI, en sitting for six months, and done very little. Mr. MUNTZ wished to put another question to the Hon. Member for Montrose. It was not yet fairly settled when the subject was to come on again. It might be deferred again, supposing it were fixed for Thursday; and he again asked his Hon. Friend whether he had come to a positive understanding with her Majesty's Go vernment that the debate should be resumed next Thurs day ?—(Hear.) _ _ Mr. IIUME' could only say the House had directed the debate to be resumed next Thursday, but whether it would come on then, he could not tell. He should certainly endeavour to bring it on. There was some thing unreasonable and unfair in the proceedings of his Hon. Friends, because they had stated publicly their impressions just as if he had taken any part in post poning the subject. The fact was, at the commencement of the sitting ho had protested against the postpone ment ; and he considered it extremely unfair in his Hon. Friends to argue as if he had agreed to the post- ponement._ Mr. OSBORNE—You gave up. Mr. HUME—I did not.—(A laugh.) If his Hon. Friend had been in the House at five o'clock, he would have found that the House agreed that public business should go on to-morrow. It was unfair in his Hon. Friends to go out of town themselves, and then reproach him for not bringing on the question. He would tell them, however, he did not want them.—(A laugh.) It appeared to him that they only wanted to hold him up to the country as a traitor; but he was not, and he never would be.—(Laughter.) Mr. BROTHERTON bore testimony to the efforts of his Honourable Friend to bring on the motion, and he added it was unjust for Members who bad scarcely been in the*House [once during the session, to assail his Hon. Friend for not being successful. The fact was, it was the duty of all Hon. Members to attend in the House constantly, and not come up to town from the country just when they thought a particular motion was coming on.—(Hear.) Mr. HUDSON thought the llonourable Member for Montrose was entitled to the sympathy of the House. —(A laugh.) I n hi s di ff i cult s i tuat i on as h ea d o f a pro visional government, it was a little unfair for his friends to attack him, fur he (Mr. Hudson) could bear testimony that he had done everything in his power to bring on the question. The lion. Gentleman certainly ought to receive the sympathy cf the House in his new atutdiffi cult position; but be (Mr. Hudson) hoped he would here• after contrive to keep his friends in better order. The Hon. Member, however, was a little harshly dealt with by his friends.—(A laugh.) Mr. MUNTZ had made no attack upon the Hen. Member for Montrose; but he must say this, that if he (Mr. Muntz) had received a note from the Prime Minister, fixing a certain night for the discussion, the Prime Minister would have found considerable difficulty in persuading him to depart from the arrangement. Mr. HENLEY said the Hon. Member (Mr. Hame) seemed to him to have done all in his power to please all his colleagues or subjects by bringing on the measure, but that did not appear to suit them. They seemed to press the Hon. Member to say—" I will not bring it on, because you want to go out of town." After a few words from Mr. Wawn, Sir G Grey, Mr. o,l4)rne, and Mr. Aglionby, the subject dropped. The [louse adjourned at Two o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DI IrI#SIONS. ( From the Votes and Proceedzngs of the House of Commons.) THURSDAY, JUNE 29. SUGAR DUTIES. Order read for resuming adjourned Debate on Amendment proposed to be made to Question (June 19) " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair;" and which Amendment was to leave out from the. word " That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words " this House, consider• ing the evidence taken during the present Session before the Select Committee on Sugar and Coffee Planting, is of opinion, that the remedies proposed by her Majesty's Minis ters for the great distress in the Sugar-growing Possessions of the British Crown, which that Committee has unani mously declared to require an immediate application of relief, will neither effect that object, nor check the stimulus to the Slave Trade, which a diminution in the production of Sugar in those Possessions must inevitably occasion," instead thereof,:—Question again proposed, "That the words pro posed to be left out stand part of the Question." Debate resumed :—Question put, " That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." The House divided MAJORITY—AYES, 260. Abdy, T. N. Freestun, Colonel Ogle, S. C. Adair, Hugh E. French, F. Ord, W. Adair, R. Shaft* Frewen, C. H. Owen, Sir J. Aglionby, H. A. Gibson, T. M. Paget, Lord A. Alcock, Thomas Glyn, George Carr Paget, Lord Clarence Anderson, Arthur Grace, 0. D. Paget, Lord G. Anson, Colonel Graham, Sir James Palmer, Roundel Anson, Viscount Greaten, C. Pascoe Palmerston, Via. Armstrong, Sir A. Orenfel , Charles W. Parker, John Arundel, Earl or Grey, Sir George Pearson, Charles Bagshaw,lJohn Grey, R. W. Pechell, Captain names, M. T. Grosvenor, Lord R. Peel, Sir Robert Baring, Mom,. attest, sir J. Perfect, Robert Baring, Sir F. T. Hall, sir a. Peto, Samuel M. Barnard, E. G. Hallyburton, Lord Philips, Sir G. B. Bellew, R. M. Hanmer, Sir J. Pigott, Francis Berkeley, Captain Harcourt, G. Pilkington, James Berkeley, H. F. Hardcastle, J. A. Price, Sir R. Bernal, Ralph Hastie, Alexander Pugh, David Blake, M. J. Hastie, Archibald Pusey, P. Bolling, William Hawes, Benjamin Raphael, Alexander Bouverie,'E. P. Hay, Lord J. Reynolds, John Bowring, Dr. Hayter, W. G. Ricardo, J. L. Boyd, John Headlam, T. E. Ricardo, Osman Boyle, Colonel Heathcoat, John Rice, E. R. Brand, Thomas Ileathcote, G. J. Robartes, T. J. Brocklehurst, John Heneage, G. H. W. Roche, E. B. Brotherton, J. Heneage, Edward Romilly,;Sir John Brown, W. Henry, Alexander Russell. Lord John Buller, Charles Heywood, James Russell, Edward 8. Butler, P. S.: Hindley, C. Russell, F. C. is. Callaghan, D. Hobhouse, Sir John Rutherfurd, A. Campbell, W. 'F. Hobhouse, T. B. fealwey, Colonel Carter, John B. Hodges, T. L. Scheletield, William Caulfield, Colonel Hodges, T. Twisden Scrope, G. P. Cavendish, C. C. Hoilond, Robert Seymour, SirlH. Cavendish, G. H. Howard, C. W. Seymour, Lord nießrneneetehl.' jr: J. Cavendish, W.G. Howard, E. G. Shafto, R. D. Childers, J. W. Howard, Sir R. Shell, R. L. Cholmeley, Sir M. Hughes, W. B. Shelburne, Earl er Clay, James Humphery, Ald. Sheridan, R. B. Clay, Sir W. Jervis, Sir John Simeon, John Clements, Charles Kershaw, James Slaney, Robert A. Cobden, Richard Kildare, Marquis Smith, R. V. Cockburn, Alex. King, Peter John Smith, John A. Coke, Edward Labouchere, Henry Smith, J. Benjamin Colebrooke, Sir T. Lacy, Henry C. Somerville, Sir W. Collins, W. Langston, J. H. Spearman, H. J. Cowper, W. F• Lascelles, W. S. Stansfield, W. R. C. Cialg, W. G. Lemon, Sir Charles Stanton, W. H. Cubitt, William Lennard, T. B. Strickland, Sir G. Currie, Raikes Lewis, Sir T. Stuart, Lord D. Dalrymple,,Captain GrT. 0 Lewis,wis . C. Stuart, Lord 3. Dashwood, G. H. Litueron, E. R. Talbot, C. R. Davie, Sir Henry Loch, James Talfourd, Sergeant Dawson, T. V. Locke, Joseph Mackinno_n, ur.„- .. Denison, W. J. Denison, J. E. Divett, E. m.cullagh, W. T. T Ta h n ie c kn red esa , H. B. A. M'Gregor, John Douglas, Sir C. Maitland,;Thems.s TTTohel IV Taggart, Sir Thompson , Colonel 3. Thompson, George Douro, Marquis of Maher, N. Duff, G. S. Thornely, Thomas Duke, Sir James Marshall, J. G. Towneiey, John Duncan, Lord Marshall, W. Townley. R._G. Duncan, George Martin, John Townshend, Captain Duncuft, John liertin,lC. W. Traill,lGeorg e Dundas, Admiral Martin, Samuel Trelawny, J. S. Dundas, Sir D. Matheson, A. Turner, E. Ebringtou, Viscount Matheson, James Vane, Lord H. Ellice, E., jun. Matheson, Colonel Verney, Sir 11. Elliot, J. E. Maule, Fox Villiers, Charles Enfield, Lord Melgund, Viscount Vivian, J. H. Estcourt, J. B. B. Milner, W. M. Wall, C. B. Evans, Sir De Lacy Milnes, R. M. A Ward, H. G. Evans, John Milton, Viscount Watkins, Colonel Evans, William Mitchell, A. T. Westhead, J. P. E wart, William Molesworth, Sir W. Wilcox, Brodie Fergus, John Morpeth, Viscount Williams, John Ferguson, Col. Morison, Sir W. Wilson, James - Ferguson, Sir R. Morris, David Wilson, MattlAw Fitzpatrick, J W. Mostyn, E. Wood, Sir Charles Fitawilliam, G. W Mulgrave, Earl Wrightson, W. R. Foley, J. H. Noel, Gerald J. Wyld, James Fordyce, A. D. 7 , lorreys, Lord Young, Sir John Forster, M. Norreys, Sir D. Fortescue, Chichester O'Brien, John Fortescue, J. W. O'Brien, Timothy Fox, W. J. O'Connell, H. J. MINORITY—NOES, 245. Fagan, William Napier, Joseph Farnham, E. Neeld, John Ferrer, James Nee ld, Joseph Fellowes, E. Newdegate, N. ?timer, Sir E. Newport, Visct. Fitzr•y, Henry Nugent, Lord Floyer, John O'Brien, Sir Lucius Forbes, William O'Connor, Feargias Forester, G. C. Ossulton, Lord Fox, S. L. Oswald, A. Fuller, A. E. Packe, C. W. Galway, Viscount Palmer, Robert Haskell, J. M. Pattison, James Gladstone, W. E. Peel, Colonel Godson,lß• Pennant, Colonel Gooch, E. S. Pigot, Sir . R. Gordon, Admiral Plowden, W. H. Gore, W. 0. Powell, Col. Goring, Charles Powlett, Lord W. Goulburn, Henry Reid. Colonel t Granby, Marquis ef Rendlesham, Lord Greene, John Renton, John C. Greene, Thomas Repton, G. W. Grogan, E. Richards, Richard Gwyn, Howe! Robinson. George Haggitt, F. R. Rolleston, Colonel Hale, R. B. Rufford, Francis Halford, Sir H. Rushout, Captain Hall, Colonel Sadleir, John Halsey, T. P. Sandars, George Hamilton, G. A. Scott, F. Hamilton, J. H. Scully Francis Hamilton, Lord C. Seaham, Viscount Harris, Captain Seymer, Henry Ker Hayes, Sir E. Shirley, E. J. Henley, J. W. Sibthorp, Colonel Herbert, Sydney Sidney, Alderman Berries, J. C. Smyth, John G. Hervey, Lord A. sraythe, George Ilildyard, R. C. iiimollett, A. Iliidyaref, T. B. Somerset, Captain Hodgson, W. N. Somerton, Viscount Hood, Sir A. Sotheron, T. H. 8. Hope, H. T. ; Spooner, Richard Hornby, John Stafford, Augustuill Hotham, Lord Stuart, Henry Hudson, George Stuart, J. Hume, Joseph Sturt, H. G. Ingestre, Viscount Sullivan, Michael Inglis, Sir' R. Sutton, H. M. Jocelyn, Viscount Taylor, T. E. Johnstone, Sir J. Thesiger, Sir F. Jolliffe, Sir W. H. Thompson, Alderman Jones, Captain Thornhill, G. Keogh, William Tollemache, John Knightley, Sir C. Trevor, G. R. Knox, Colonel Trollope, Sir J. I...wanes. E. Turner, G. J. Legh, G. C. Urquhart, David Lennox, Lord HG. Verner, Sir W. Lincoln, Earl of Vesey; T. Lindsay, Colonel ' Villiers, Viscount Lockhart, A. E. Villiers, F. W. Lockhart, W. Vivian, J. E. Lowther, Henry Vyse, 11. Mackenzie, W. F. Waddington, David M'Naghten, Sir E. Waddington, H. B. Mahon, Lord Walpole, S. H. Mandeville, Viscount Walsh, Sir J. B. Mangles, 11 - D. ' Walter, John Manners, Lord C. Wawn, J T. Manners, Lord G. Welby, G. E. March, Earl of Williams, T. P. Masterman, John Williamson, Sir H. Maxwell, J. P. Willoughby, Sir H. Meux, Sir' Henry Wodebouse,E. Miles, P. W. S. Worcester, Marquis Monsen, William Wortley, J. S. Moore, George H. Wyvill, M. Morgan, 0. Mullings, J. R. • TELLIss. Muntz, 0 F. Pakington, Sir J. S. Mure, Colonel Buxton, Sir E. TELLIMI. Tufhell, Henry Hill, Lord Marcus Acland, Slr T. D. Adam, Viscount Adderley, C. B. Anstey, Thomas C. Archdall, Captain Bagge, William Bagot, William Bailey, Joseph, jun. Baillie, H. J. lialdock, J. H. Baldwin, Barry .. . ~. Bankes, G. - Barkly, Henry Baring, Thomas Barrington, Viscount Bateson, T. Beckett, W. ilenbowPohn Benett, J. Bennet, Philip Bentinck, Lord G. Bentinck, Lord H. Beresford, William Berkeley, Grantley Birch, Sir Thomas Blackall, S. W. Bourke, Richard S. Bowles, Admiral Bramston, T. W. Bremridge, Richard Broadley, Henry Brooke, Lord Bruce, Lord E. Bruce, C. L. Bruen, Colonel Buck, L. W. Buller, Sir J. Y. Buribury, W. Burghley, Lord Burrell, Sir C. Cabbed, B. B. Cardwell, Edward Carew, W. P. Charteris, Francis Chichester, Lord J. Christopher, R. Christy, Samuel Clerk Sir:G. Clive, R. H. Clive, Henry B. Cochrane, A. Cocks, Thomas S. Codrington, Sir W. Cole, H. A. Coles, H. B. Compton, H. C. Conolly, Col. Copeland, Alderman Corry, H. cotton, W. H. giourtenay, Lord Currie, Henry Darner, Colonel Davies, D. A. S. Devereux, J. T. Disraeli, B. Dod, J. W. Dodd, George Drax, J. S. W. Drumlanrig, Vis. Drummond, Home Duckworth, Sir J. Duncombe, A. Duncombe, 0. Dundas, George Dunne, Francis P. Du Pre, C. G East, Sir:J. B. I dwarcls, Henry Egerton, Sir P. Egerton, W. T. Emlyn, Viscount Euston, Earl CHELTENHAM ELECTION. CHELTENHAM, THURSDAY EVENING.—TDO polling commenced at eight o'clock this morning. The Hon. C. F. Berkeley kept the lead all day, and at the close the numbers were as follows Hon. C. F. Berkeley Mr. Gardner .... Majority for Mr. Berkeley 76 A good deal of excitement prevailed throughout the day. HORSHAM ELECTION. The polling for this borough took place yesterday. At four o'clock the Under-Sheriff declared the result to be as follows : Mr. Fitzgerald Lord E. Howard Mr. Fitzgerald having been declared duly elected, thanked the electors for the honour conferred on bum. Lord E. Howard likewise thanked his supporters, who, with only two or three exceptions, had recorded their votes in his favour uncanvassed and unasked. FORGING OPERA ORDERS.—We have been re quested by Mr. Grogan, of the firm of Grogan and Scott, Strand, and of the Lyceum Theatre, to state that Alfred Grogan, who was committed from Bow-street the day before yesterday on a charge of forging orders for her Majesty's Theatre (an account of whose examina tion appeared in T he Sun o f yesterday), is in no way connected with the business in the Strand, or with the Lyceum Theatre. [ADVERTISEMENT.)—Cured by Holloway's Oint ment and Pills Wounds in a Leg after more than Three Years' Suffering.—The wife of Mr. James P. Springle, schoolmaster, of the town of St. Patrick, Grenada, had been suffering with an ulcerated leg for more than three years, which was so bad that it baffled the skill of all the professional practitioners in the island, who could not possibly heal it; after every other remedy had failed, Holl owa y's Ointment and Pills were resorted to, and by their powerful efficacy, the wounds were soon healed, and a perfectly sound cure effected. These medicines excel all others in the cure of Scrofula, King's Evil, Glandular or other unnatural swellings. Sold by all Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establishment 244, Strand, London. 41 II