The Sun. — London, England, 1848-06-23 00:00:00

$O4 _,Se is not i n a con di t i on to decide until we are in pos -44112_51011 of the whole government plan. It occurs to me Ot the su bj ect started by the lion. Baronet the Mem 'rfor Clar e goes t o th e ver y g i s t o f the whole question. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Noble Lord had r i e d at lYmisunderstood him. What he (Lord J. Russell) said was that Government, in their propositions, , be guided by the public interest alone, and the Zple Lord pretended to understand that something like ( iergain had been entered into with Irish Members.— e er, hear.) When a government plan had been once 04°Pounded to the House, it was not unusual to confer t he details with parties interested, but he repeated Est fiti th e u l t i mate d ec i s i on o f G overnmen t would be in -I,keeed only by considerations of the public interest. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (who 4 , Nat entered the House) said, the facts of the case IF these yesterday heard that a deputation of Irish d:tbers wished to see me respecting the differential 1 4 t ," on rum, and on other matters, respecting which I 4 previously had an interview with the Irish distillers, an allowance on wastage when taking British 'b?; l ts out of store. My Hon. Friend opposite (Sir L. 44.i rien) end five other Irish Members waited on me bad stated:their opinion, founded on repr esen tations they b i ;! received from the Irish distillers, that reducing the serenti a l duty on rum from ninepence to fourpence ih e tild b e pre j u di c i a l to t h e I r i s h s pirit trade. I heard 4,deputation with deference, stated that I would sub their views to Government, and that, as to the snd portion of their request, that respecting t h e l tige, I had for some time had it under con ertition, and would, if it could be sa fel y done concede it. It was certainly intimated to Si t that the votes of these gentlemen would depend j, „ to ) answer, and I said that I had prepared what ia l etnd best adapted for the public interests, and . that ' 4 4 the v o t es , Hon. Members must take t he course l i e l Y thought fit; that I could not make terms, and that i l ,ad given them the only answer in my power.—(He ar, , l. .) I came down to the House early' to answer the 4 4 tion of which I had received notice from the Hon. s e but as a railway debate was going oI returned e tier "'owning-street where I have been boily engaged since. 4 4 r. DISRAELI said that the Irish Members ha d not Yet r ece i ve d t h e answe r they required.—(Hear, hear.) Tae Government had announced their plan, and should tlitere to it, and not call upon the House to deba te a ?,estion, a most important feature in which was con irsedly s till under Cabinet consideration. He thought bli b ut right that the House should be informed as to at really was the government plan. 1414 . C. BULLER complained that the Noble Lord the t Zttiber for Lynn was most reckless in his imputations the Government. The Noble Lord had accused the ileesernment of making a bargain with the Irish Mem hir,,i; In his (Mr. Bailer's) opinion there never 11 `! -been made a more extraordinary bargain than that 2 01 the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Bucks ke ened inclined to make with Members whose views re *diametrically opposed to their own , mere l y for the Bl o3 e of catching a few stray votes. — ( Hear.) The ifge had the authority of the H on. Baronet the ember for Clare as to the fact that no bargain had - cen entered into. 441 r. BAILLIE said that one of the Irish Members th informed him that the Chancellor of the Ex irequer bad told them his views were in concurrence h h t ems, and that he would use his influence with h eolleages to bring them round to a similar o p inion. si lr• HERBERT, as one of the deputation w hich had toted on the Government, denied that any bargain had e entered into. h s 4 4 tr• NEWDEGATE said it appeared to him that it thin thing very like a bargain had been going on, not 1144tanding the virtuous indignation of the Hon. Mem for Liskea.rd.—(klear, hear.) The answers of the Cerent Members of the Government reminded him o f e old proverb : " When caps amongst a crowd are thrown, 4Each man picks up and fits his own." e Mouse could hardly proceed with the debate in ig rttnee of the government plan. h HORSMAN did not think the explanation which been given at all satisfactory.--(Hear, hear.) He °ll ght the House should be informed whether Govern -1:14 Meant to proceed with the plan as origin all y p ro- Led or not.—(Hear.) r. FAGAN d en i e d that any bargain had been pro bz4 d or acceded to. 4‘ be CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said kat the point respecting which he had expressed his thlieurrence with the deputation was the wastage, and 4 1 ",.. 4 was an Hon. Member behind him wh o could con- Li his statement. r• J. O'BBIEN confirmed the statement of the Sir of the Exchequer. ttil' i r L. O'BRIEN said that the Right Hon. Gentleman 4 j . left the House without information on the most im '7,l,lint point. ei 4110 CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could -t ti e no further answer. v," 4 . URQUHART was strongly of opinion that a ktall bargain had been going on between the Irish ellbeikand the Right Hon. Baronet. It would appear Is t s ibn Right Hon. Gentleman had b een throwing dust their eyes, and, therefore, ho (Mr. Urquhart) should we his vote for the adjournment of the debate. tZit INGLIS did not think the q uestion which the y h: been discussing for two hours wa s so connected with resolution as to require the exp enditure of so lon g a lit e •--(Hear, bear.) k tl ., r• BERNAL differed entirely from his Hon. Friend, Nm`considered that a nearer assimilation of the duties on ( 4 41 bad a very close connexion with the question.— l im. ,t l r.) When they went on with the debate he wuuld ti, ; 4 ,t4e Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the tsriequer to the proposition he made. He would ab soite his Right Hon. Friend from any intention to de tOP, or from entering into anything like a bargain with to ? Irish Members, between whom, it was said, a kind of lnetting was carried on.—(Hear.) ti t t t r. J. STUART said the question they bad to con liz„er was, whether the remedy proposed by the Govern set for the relief of tha West Indies would effect its t• Hew could they go on to debate that question i ii `nout knowing whether the Gavernment would adhere 16 t beir proposition ? The Government had a right to , 3 0me answer, as upon it the votes of some Members I , lll d depend. 4,7 r. LA BOUCFIERE was sorry to be obliged to inter ts„s'' in a discussion which had been already to o lon g pro lseted.—(Hear, hear.) The Government, in listenin g s p . t ,ne represent a tion of those who had objection s to ur g e C ost a measure proposed by the Government affectiug htrade o f th e cou n try, had but followed al l former e :edent, and his Right Hon. Friend the Chanc el lo r o f pExchequer had only adopted the usu al course in 4 i ng consideration to the statements of those whose ti °rests were affected, and in saying that he would lay b 0 the made to him before the Ca binet, and hii 6. tbe parties the opinion of his colleagues as well as t t ° wn. If this was to be made a pretext for st o ppi n g %ill, they never could come to a decision on measures cli ity e ting the trade of the country. The question of the en rum was an important part of the subject, but it L 1 vain to say that they could not discuss and decide te ir pestion of the scale of the duties on sugar without G o t 'g an absolute assurance, on the part of the e tliment, whether the duty on rum was to be 4d. or s li b j 4 0 1846 they received deputations likewise on the sp y eet of the sugar duties, but they did hot depart from ileraportion of the plan proposed. Nothing was more or unjust than to represent a Government as Ittt en !ting and uncertain because they gave a respectful w ee ‘ lOl l to the acre presentation of parties who would be hy th c(11 V iz % GOULBURN said the question before the n 9Us e . Was in many respects different from a pure ise r • aft "on of trade. The question was how they could th„ td relief to the suffering West Indies, and before Came to a decision it was important to know aether the-differential duty on rum was to be 4d. or 4 --- that is, whether an additional duty of fifty per t ' was to be allowed or not.—(Hear, hear.) With t being informed on that point, he did not think the e pl c a o n. uld confidently pronounce an opinion on the 4 , Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought the Government :InUld say whether they would adhere to their original Prop os i t i on , Lord J. RUSSELL said that his Right Hon. Friend Labouebere) had given the proper reply to the statements which had been made. But as the question %tomd at present, the proposition of the Government, as originally proposed, must be considered as the question More the House. The motion for the adjournment was then withdrawn. Mr. GO ULBURN wished to know from the Noble Lord w h e ther he had considered the sugg es t ion of his . Friend the Mem ber for Liver p ool with re g ard to '4llthe introduction of a temporary Bill for the continuance l i the existing sugar duties for a limited period. He Da bo ught it scarcely possible, with every activity on the ti rt_of the House, that the Bill could receive the Royal s r ent before the sth of July, when the duties would .:urther lowered, t 7 41 J. RUSSELL said that when the House came , to /I,:eision on the motion of the Hon. Baronet (Sir J. th;"ngton), he would then consider the proposition of i i Poe. Member for Liverpool. kit r. , CARDWELL said that where a Bill was a money ev,„ t ut) House could only take one step every day, and ti.' if the House came to a division on Friday night— Oi g i l i t *as not expected that the House would divide that t" - -the Bill would afterwards have to go through . t ; . . other stages before it reached the House of Lords. fe r :e, Noble Lord waited for the issue of the debate be asiii t he House before he took the first step in introducing it j: k r t Bill of the nature he stated, he would not have " w is power to pass such a measure before the sth of ord.! about an unprecedented violation of the standing of the House.—(Hear.) „s member of the Government having replied 4 4 • G T *0(11,i give said he hoped the Goverment 1 , 11 . an answer, as the subject was important. Ci (l ,, e e CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the tp on r nment could increase as well as diminish duties The a vote of that House. 3v adjourned debate was then resumed by se re r • MoFFATT, who said that the effect of the mea the eproposed by the Government would be to increase kei t , rt of sugar to the people of this country without Plaet u g any corresponding relief to the West Indian /P oUld rs. For the first year the cost to the country thi rd 00 250,000/ ; for the second, 500,0 001 .; for the 75 0.000/. ; for the fourth and two subsequent A so a . , 1,000,0001; making for the six years that the Bill 44 0 ,,t0 be in operation a total cost to the country of t qn4 rt o ool. With respect to the reduction of the diffe- Nee s al duty on rum, he thought it was a just and wise ttat er " „r e, and would prove a boon to the West India int er es t . without (doing permanent injury to the distilling that ea t in this country. He approved of the 500,000/. lab nu N43 to bo given to promote the immigration of reli ef s, hut it would prove of little use unless the 1 1)4 , 44 i ntended by it was promptly afforded. The in °F Protection given by the proposition was more nett *4B suppos e d, because the duty on the sth of July wOuld be 14s. for colonial sugar, and 18e, 6d. for foreign. By the pr iposed duties it would be 13s. for colonial, and 20s. for foreign, making an in crease of protection fro n 33 to 54 per cent. That was a material increase, end oie which was likely to have con siderable effect in dininishing the supply of foreign sugar to this country. He would not object to this il the measure was likely to be effectual in raising the condition of the sugar-producing colonies. But ho did not think it would be productive of benefit to them. In his opinion there was no justification for the measure as one of remedy for the West India distress. All the witnesses who were examined before the Committee concurred in stating that the great difficulty the planters had to contend with was the want of labour. It was the duty of the Government to supply labour to the colonies, at any cost, particularly as it was the Government that disabled them from having a sufficient supply. lie thought that the colonists allowed themselves to be too much frightened by the cheapness of slave labour. Statements had been made that sugar could be produced in Cuba at ss. 6d. a cwt. But the truth was, that the cost of producing yellow sugar there was from 13s. to 15s. The latest accounts from Brazil showed that the cost of yellow sugar there ranged from 14s. Id. to 18s. Bd., and that the planters lost money at these prices; for the very last mail brought the intelligence of the failure of one of the principal planters anti slave dealers there.—(Hear, hear.) Great complaints had been made with respect to the classification of sugars, which had proved ruinous to some of those engaged in the East India sugar trade, and the doing away with that classi fication would prove beneficial. Great complaints were also made of the cost of the respective Governments of the Mauritius and the West India colonies. In 1832 the cost of the Government in Demerara was only 56,0001.; hilt, in 1847. it was 225,0001.—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry that the Government had given no indi cation of an intention to reduce the cost of government. He was also sorry that that they did not propose to carry on some large improvements which had been suggested. For the reasons he had stated he could not support the proposition of the Government.—(Hear, hear.) Before he sat down he thought it right to bear his testimony to the untiring exertions and the great zeal and activity displayed by the Noble Lord who conducted the Com mittee. He only wished that the West India planters would exhibit a little of the same zeal and activity. Mr. GLADSTONE said that though he should feel it his duty, in the course of the remarks he was about to make, to express his dissent in important particulars from the plan of the Government, and though he felt unable to vote for their proposition, yet he hoped in so doing that there was nothing inconsistent with the ad mission he must frankly make, not only that he be lieved the' Government were actuated by a sincere desire to deal justly pith various interests, but that they had to consider and treat a question of extraordinary diffi culty.-.--(Hear, hear.) Few questions could come before Parliament involving such a variety of complex conside rations, or one with regard to which the utmost patience, the utmost care, and the utmost ability might find such immense difficulties in producing anything like a satis factory solution. He felt himself under considerable difficulty, in consequence of the forms of the House. His general objection to the Government scheme was that as a measure of relief it was utterly insufficient, whilst as a measure of finance it was open to ob jections utterly insurmountable. But to these views he could not, according to the forms, give adequate expression. He could not vote a negative to the Speaker leaving the chair, because that would convey disinclination to reconsider a very difficult question; nor could he vote for the resolutions, because that would convey opinions he did not entertain. But these diffi culties did not prevent his fully explaining his views upon the question. Considering it as it affected the West India colonies, he was bound to say that he entirely adhered to the principles on which he had always acted on that question. He could not found his argument on the mere consideration of protection. He thought they were working out a great social problem in our West India colonies. It was impossible to consider this ques tion without considering the position of 90 per cent. at least of the population of the islands. But he held also that whites in the West Indies had a claim of the most distinct nature on the humanity, equity, and justice of the House.—(Hear, hear.) lie thought they had a right to ask for public money as sufferers at the hands of the Legislature. In the case of the apprenticeship we had abolished a system which was as much a part of the compensation to the West India planters as the twenty millions of money voted to them. Even in Jamaica no option could be said to have been left to the planters as to whether they should or should not abolish the apprenticeship two years before the statutory period for its abolition. Then, as to immi gration, the West Indians now find the people of Eng land willing to vote money for that purpose. But the West Indians justly observed that they had been agitate ing this question for 12 years, and that every restraint and restriction had been interposed. We at first prohi bited wholly the removal of coolies from the East Indies. Then we fixed the period for which contracts might be made with them at no more than one year. The Noble Lord, to his honour, tried hard to restrain that sort of philanthropic movement, but ho was beaten by the op position of Members who were now the ministers for colonial affairs.—(Hear.) The West Indies now said, you offer us what we asked too late; we have been ex hausted by the efforts of the intermediate period. There could be no doubt that this was true, and on these grounds, therefore, the West Indies had, in his opinion, a good claim upon the state. He now came to consider the mode in which her Majesty's Government proposed to meet and satisfy flit claim. As he said before, he did not think the amount of relief by any means adequate to the necessity. Their object, he thought, ought to be to induce the people of this country to give a fair and full trial to the system of free labour as carried out in our colonies. He did not think it was well to adopt that principle without going to the full length that justice and policy permitted. Then came the question as to the form in which relief should be given. Some Members thought it was de sirable that we should retrace our steps with regard to the question of protection. He felt, however, that there would be great difficulty and delicacy in im posing again a very high protective duty. He could not but think that a great reaction with regard to protective duty would diminish very much the care and the caution with which estates were worked and labour employed in the West Indies. He was not of opinion that it would be wise to take a backward course with regard to the scale. But, at the same time, he should prefer to the Government plan a simple suspension of the existing scale of duties. He thought it by no means desirable that we should have minute subdivi sions and alterations of descending scales. The propo sition we wished to make was not the sort of proposition given by the man who wished to teach his house to live upon a bean a day. Our proposition should rather be that of encouraging the importation of labour and ma chinery.—(Hear, hear.) He must also say that he thought the reduction of the duty upon colonial sugar from 14s. to 13-i. was most impolitic as a question of finance. In consequence of that minute distinction the Noble Lord, it was said, was about to prohibit once again the use of sugar in breweries and distilleries. This added very greatly to the impolicy of the mea• sure. Then, again, he was not by any means satisfied with the declaration of the Noble Lord respecting va grancy and squatting in the colonies. The Noble Lord said they would be prepared to receive suggestions on those points. It was rather the duty of the Under- Secretary for the Colonies to prqpose such measures than to sit in his office, as the Noble Lord had pictured him, in order to " receive suggestions."—(Hear.) Then as to the loan. He could not help regretting that an exclu sive direction had been given to the employment of the loan. The mind of the West Indies was quite sufficiently directed to the subject of immigration relatively with other questions; and he thought the money might be as usefully applied in improvements as in immigration. He then came to a very important part of the subject, upon which he must say that he did wish some intention had been intimated on the part of the Government to give the colonial legislature a greater discretion with regard to their expenditure. In British Guiana, he believed, it was absolutely declared that one-third the revenue was swallowed up in the expenses of Government. The ex penses of colonies in which there were no local govern ments were considerably less than in those which had such an established authority. The sacrifice we were going to make, whilst it would not save a fraction to the colonial legislature, would, on the other hand, add, be yond all measure, to the burdens of this country. Would there be any increase of consumption sufficient to compensate for this by raising the revenue in Great Britain? He believed not. He had observed that whenever such reductions of duty were made a very small increase of consumption followed. Next year they would lose 240,0001., unless consumption increased ; that was the immediate sacrifice. They were going to exclude sugar from the breweries. It was said 12,000 tons were consumed in these establishments. That would involve a loss of 150,0001. more. Then, in future years, this lose might be expected to be still greater.—( Hear, hear.) And under what circumstances was this great sacrifice proposed ? If they looked at the finances of the country everything was deficiency. Their financial state was most serious, and it was growing more and more so every day. They would not be doing their duty to the country without looking that part of the question in the face before the expiration of the session. They must provide relief for the colonies, but they must pre. viously see how that relief was financially to be afforded. He knew how unpopular a proposal of relief to a class interest was ; but when Members took him to task, a s they probably would do, for advising it, let them meet the claim upon the ground of justice, upon which alone he rested it. Let it not be said that when we set the great example of emancipating our colonies, we took all the honour to ourselves, and left all the cost and respon sibility to the West Indians. Mr. J. WILSON said he had listened to the speech little more e interest, nri oos and much surprise. Nothing an c w ou it ld h n b n e of the Right Hon. Gentleman • He the vote' he proposed to give. e the measure with than to reconcile, if it were possib e, objections to should be very glad if he bad to meet no greater o b • jections to the plan of the Government than the objec tions of the f o r voting for that 10 s. duty reason had he assigned Right Hon. Gentleman. What sin g le which was the object of the am end m ent? The Right Hon. G e ntl e man thought much of what were called West Indian gr i e vances; but what grie vances had %Vest Indi an com pl a i ne d of a few years since that Th e had e ' not been wh o lly or p ar tially removed? prohibi tion of purchasing except in British markets was removed—the rum duties had been reduced—the juice of the cane was admitted—and the West Indians were permitted to refine in their own islands. But it was complained that immigration was checked. Why, Honourable Gentlemen would not recollect the facts. As far back as 1840 facilities were given for im migration, and almost every year those facilities were increased. There were really no grievances, therefore, which had not been removed, or which were not in course of removal. But at the same time it was thought that the distress, from whatever cause arising, was very severe in the West Indies. Measures of relief were to j be applied to it, and the problem they had to solve was. in which way they could apply them most usefully to thi colonists and least detrimentally to the mother-country. In the course of tho debate reference had been made to the state of our West India colonists, and an alarming picture was drawn of their condition because the average of the sugar produced in the two years 1846 7, in Ja maica, was 225. 61. per ev:t. But the year 1816 was a year of great drought, and a year, consequently, when the crop was much less than the average. He knew cases of estates in Jamaica where sugar was made at 4s. 6d. per cwt., Bs. a cwt., 9s. a cwt., and 10s. a cwt. ; and he believed in not over favourable. years the cost of production had been not above an average of 16s. a cwt. In 1846, however, there were estates where the sugar cost more than 31. per cwt., and he verily believed that the drought of that year had more to do than almost any other cause with the depres sion in the West Indies at the present time. Now, look ing at Demerara and Essequibo, he had a return in his hand showing the numbers of estates sold in consequence of bankruptcies, and it was curious that during the last two years the number of such sales was much less than during any of the six preceding. This was a fact of some importance. Let him mention another cause for the depression in the trade. In consequence of the ad• mission of sugar to breweries and distilleries large im ports had been made of foreign sugar last year, and the consequence was, a very considerable reduction in price We imported in the first four months cf last year 79,000 boxes of sugar from Cuba, whilst in the same period of this year we only imported 8,000 boxes, showing that last year the foreign trade was unduly stimulated. — (Hear, hear.) From 1834 to 1841 the state of the sugar trade in the West Indies was very depressed ; but from 1841 to the present time their produce had been annually on the increase. He believed there was indubit able proof of the progressive improvement of the West Indies.—(Great laughter)—Gentlemen might laugh, but he believed such to be the fact. The re-establishment of a system of protection would be most injurious to the colonies. Had not there been a struggle going on in them for effecting a reduction of wages, and were not Hon. Gentlemen aware of the par tial success that had attended those efforts? In the colo nies of Barbadoes, Antigua,_ and Guiana—(No)—the reductions in wages amounted to from 25 to 50 per cent., and would it be wise, in the face of these efforts, to re duce the cost of cultivation to re-establish protective duties, and thus to afford to the negro labourers a pre text for insisting upon their former high rates of wages? Nothing could be more prejudicial to the West Indies than to follow such a course. The great difficulty, as he apprehended, in dealing with the colonies, was in stimu lating consumption, so as to keep pace with their con stantly increasing amount of production. The consump tion of sugar within the last three years had increased from 207,000 tons to 290,000 tons, and this was one of the direct and palpable consequences of the reduction of the duty in 1845 and 1846. Suppose, instead of re ducing the duty, it had been increased, and the production of sugar had gone on at tho same rate as it bad done, what would have become of the 70,000. surplus tons of West India sugar thus throwli upon the English market ? Could they have been sent into the foreign European market to compete with Cuba and Brazilian sugars ? Then, again, let him point out to the House the tact that there were vast tracts of virgin soil in Trinidad and the West India islands which had never been cultivated, and which were capable of producing any quantity of sugar. In Trinidad one-seventh only of the land was cultivated as yet ; whereas, the sugar lands in Cuba and Brazil were worn-out soil, and not able to compete with the rich alluvial soil of the West Indies. The same was true of the land in the East Indies. The possibility of re storing protection under these facts was out of the ques tion ; and if, by encouraging a system of emigration, additional labour was thrown into the West Indies a fresh stimulus was given to production, what, he might ask, would be the condition of the planters generally, if with an increased production of one half of the present amount, there were to be no home consumption equal to the additional quantity thus thrown upon the market ? How, therefore, could the planters expect that the home consumption would keep pace with the production unless at prices which placed sugar within the reach of the mass of the people ? and how could those prices be kept within reasonable limits if increased protection was to be granted on those sugars which were the principal article of consumption in the home market ? There was not a man who had sat on the West India Committee, and who took a candid view of the whole question, but what was persuaded that, take what mea sures they would for giving protection, the West and East India colonies would annually produce more sugar than the consumption of the kingdom could keep pace with. Therefore, he said that there was no possible safety for the British planters but in throwing them open to their rivals in sugar-growing, and thus stimu lating their powers of production to the utmost. En tertaining these views, he was not able to support the motion of the Honourable Baronet the Member fur Droitwich, for the first effect which his proposition would produce, would be to raise the price of sugar, and thus to diminish the consumption of that article. Moreover the proposition, if adopted, would injure the revenue, either by diminish ing the duty received on West India sugars, or else by greatly lessening the quantity consumed. And on one or other of these grounds he, as a member of the West India Committee, felt it his duty to reject the motion. He would now proceed to say a few words on the proposition of the Government, and to endeavour to show how far it was more advantageous than that of the Protectionist party. The first object which Government sought to attain was to give such en couragement to the growth of sugar in the British pos. sessions as would promote a superabundant supply for home consumption. The mode of beat effecting this important object was, in the opiniou of the Government, by means of a gradually decreasing duty, and thereby gradually stimulating consumption. Looking at the in crease, in this respeet, that had resulted from the re duction of the duty in 1845 and 1846. the Government was, in his opinion, acting wisely in enabling the con sumer to look distinctly forward to the day when all protection ceased in tuto. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxford University had stated that he ,hould have preferred suspending the duties for six years from the present time to making a permanent and gradual reduction in them. But he knew, as all who heard him did, that the price of sugar was regulated by the amount of the foreign duty, and not by the colonial duty. The suspension of the duty for six years would cause the consumption of that necessary to remain stationary and stagnant for that space of time, and thus there would be no means whatever left the Go vernment of providing for the consumption of the steadily proceeding annual increase in the production of free la bour colonies in the British dominions. Besides, there was another objection to the Right Hon. Gentleman's plan, which was, that at the end of the six years the sudden reduction of the duty would paralyse the sugar market, and throw the whole trade into confusion. The propeisition of the government was therefore far prefer able to that of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Another of his objections to the Government scheme was, that ac • cording to his view of the Chancellor's statement the Government was about to exclude sugars from being consumed in breweries and distilleries as soon as the plan proposed should come into operation. He was glad to correct this misapprehension on the part of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and to inform him that the Chancellor of the Exchequer merely proposed to shut sugar out from breweries as soon as the duty fell to that degree at which a loss would be incurred by its superseding malt, and thus reducing the receipts of the revenue from that source. But this would not be as long as the duty was at or above 12i.; therefore, three years yet remained before sugar would be thrown out of use in breweries. In distilleries it, would continue to be used. With respect to the duties on colonial rum, the planters had already been relieved to the amount of 50,0001. by the recent reduction, and taking into account the former reduction of sd. per gallon, the whole amount t I t n o d i t a h n e s w w r i e o s , e o n o t o e i d . t ir o h t i ll e, e o former reductions, would swell the gratuities presente d than th u s added Wes a h s o I n : amounts less su o tu f to the planters to between 300,000/. and 400,0001., taking the whole export of rum from all the colonies into the account. He had felt great surprise when he heard the Hon. Baronet opposite make such statements as he had done with respect to the cost of producing sugar in Cuba, Bahia, and Porto Rico, because the returns from consular authorities in other places, printed in the report of the West India Committee, showed that the figures of the Hon. Baronet were not correct. The consul-general for Havana, Mr. Crawford, states that the cost of producing sugar there, including export duties, was 17s. 6d. per cwt., and this without freight and charges, or the cost of replacing negroes. In Bahia, Mr. Consul Porter states the cost of production to be 17s. 6d., with the same limitations; and at Porto Rico, Mr. Consul Lindegren gives the cost of produc tion as 12s. 6d, per cwt., without adding anything for replacing slaves, interest of capital, and other charges. The average cost of producing sugars in these three slave colonies, therefore, instead of being 6s. 1O d., as stated by the Hon. Baronet, was in reality 155. 10d., and if estimated without adding the export duties, which might at any time be repealed, the minimum cost of pro duction in the three slave colonies was 14s. Bd. per cwt., and that was to be looked at as extending over all the three qualities of sugar produced in those colonies. He regretted that he had so inadequately expressed his opinions. There were many topics whieh he had un avoidably omitted, but at that late hour be could not think of longer detaining the House.—(Hear, hear.) He should only say further, that he felt firmly con vinced that there could be no more effectual way of en couraging slavery than to restore the protection of co • lonial sugar. On the motion of Mr. W. MILES the debate was adjourned to to-morrow (this day). BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. WAWN, who had risen several times while Mr. Wilson was addressing the House, and who appeared much excited, complained, amid,loud cries of " Question, that one of the Hon. Members for Berwick had just ad dressed the most offensive language to him, and had, in fact, threatened to strike him within the walls of the House.--(Laughter, and cries of " Qestion.") He thought it his duty to call the attention of the House to the matter. He was quite ready to meet any complaint of the Hon. Member out of the House, but in the House he thought himself entitled to the protection of the Chair. No notice being taken of the Hon. Member's obser vations he immediately left the House. AMENDMENT OF THE POOR-LAW. Mr. C. BULLER moved for leave to bring in the fol lowing Bills:—A Bill to alter the provisions relating to the charges for the relief of the poor in unions, and the mode of payment thereof, and to provide for the relief of the poor in extra-parochial places ; a Bill to make provisions for the payment of parish debts, the audit of parochial and.union accounts, and the allowance of cer tainshateA therein ; a Bill to amend the law for the forthation of districts for the education of infant poor ; and a Bill t 9 authorise the payment of superannuatiqa allowances to officers engaged in the administration of the laws for the relief of the poor. lie promised the House that if permitted to bring in the Bills they should have ample time to consider them before he asked for another stage. After a few words from Mr. HENLEY leave was given. SUPPRESSION OF PIRACY. On the motion of Mr. M‘GREGOlCleave was given to bring in a Bill to amend the Act of the 11th and 12th ) ears of King William 111. for the more effectual suf pression of piracy, and for affording additional protec ion to merchant seamen. CONSTABULARY (IRELAND). On the motion of Sir W. SOSIERVILLE leave was given to bring-in a Bill to amend the Acts relating to the constabulary force in Ireland. The House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock. PARLIAMEN TAR Y DI VISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceeding s of the House of Commons.) THURSDAY, JUNE 22. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (BRANCH FROM SLOUGH TO I VINDSOR) BILL. (Queen's Consent signified); M o ti on ma de, and Question proposed, " That the Bill be n ow rea d t h e third, time:" —Amendment proposed, to leave ou t t h e wor d " now," and at the end of the Question to add th e wor d s " upo n this day six months."—Question put, " That th e wor d ' no w' stand part of the Question." The House divided:— MAJORITY—AYES: `24. Abdy, T. N. Foley, J. H. Osborne, Ralph Acland, Sir T. D. Forbes, W. Ossulton, Lord Adair, Hugh E. Fordyce, A. D. Adair, R. Shafto Forster, M. Anson, Colonel Fortescue, J. W. Anstey, Thomas C. Fox, W. j. Archdall, Captain Frewen, C. 11. Armstrong, Sir A. Goddard, A. L. Ashley, Lord Grace, 0. D. Baines, M. T. Granger, T. C. saldock, E. H. Greenall, Gilbert Ipirr r irllurhe a o, i l' iire,,l:: : f atte n, r i de,:gs g :: Di, t ont Richard: ° J sr,i n I . lvß:, ' vl:i ColoneldV.Si T . i . : Jamesu K j J. Baring, Henry Greene, John Pusey, P. Barnard, E. ,G. Greene Thomas Rendlesham, Lord Barron, Sir 11. Rale, R. B. Reynolds, John Bellew, It. M. Hall, Sir B. Ricardo, J. L.. Bennet, Philip Hall, Colonel Ricardo, Osman Bentinck, Lord 11. Hanmer, Sir J. Rice, E. B. Berkeley, Captain Harcourt, G. Rich, Henry Berkeley, Grantley Hawes, B. Robartes, T. J. Blackall, S. W. Hay, Lord J. Buford, Francis Blackstone, W. S. Hayes, Sir E. Rusbout, Captain hilandford, Marquis Hayter, W. G. Russell, F. C. Blewitt, Reginald Heathcote, G. J. Rntherfurd, A. Boldero, H. G. Heathcote, Sir W. Salway, Colonel Bouverie, E. P. Henley, J. W. Scully,Francis Bowles, Admiral Hill, Lord E. Seaham, Viscount Bowring, Dr. Ilindley, C. Shafto, R. D. Boyd, John Hobhouse, T. B. Shell, It. L. Boyle, Colonel Holland, Robert - Shelburne t Earl of Brand, Thomas Hood, Sir Gexander Shirley., E. J. • Brotherton, Joseph Hope, H. T. Sidney, Alderman Bruce, Lord E. Hornby, John Slaney, Robert A. Buller, Sir J. Y. Horsman, Edward Smith, R. V. Buller, Charles Howard, C. W. Smith, M. Tucker Burke, Sir Thomas Howard, E. G. Somerset, Captain Carew, W. H. Polo Hughes, W. B. Somerville. Sir W. Cavendish, C. C. , Hume, Josepll.l Sotlieron, T. H. S. Cavendish, G. H. Ingestre, Visct. Spearman, it. J. Charteris, Francis Jervis, Sir John Spooner, Richard Clay, James Jolliffe, Sir W. H. Stafford, Augustus _ Clive, R. 11. _ Kerrison, Sir E. Stansfield, W. R. Clive, Henry B. Knox, Colonel Stanton, W.,H. Cobbold, John C. Labouchere, Henry Stuart, Lord J. Cobden, It. Langston, J. H. Talbot, J. H. Cochrane, A. Lemon, Sir Charles Talfourd, Sergeant Cocks, 'I homas S. Littleton, E. R. Tancred, H. W. Codrington, Sir W. Loch, James Tennent, I, J, Conolly, Col. Lushington, C. Thicknesse, Ralph Cotton, W. H. Lygon, General Thompson, Colonel Courtenay, Lord M'Cullagh, W. T. Thompson, George CraigeW. G. Maher, N. Thornely, T. Dalrymple, Captain Maitland, Thomas Tollemache, F. J. D'Eyncourt, T. Marshall, J.IG. Trelawny, J. S. Divett, Edward Martin, C. W. Tuthell, Henry Dod, J. W. Maine, Fez Turner, Edmund Duckworth, Sir J. Meux, Sir H. Urquhart, David Duff, George S. Miles, P. W. S. Vane, Lord H. Duncan, George Milei, William Verner, Sir W. Duncembe, 0. Mitchell, T. A. Vesey, Hon. T. Dundas, Admiral Moffatt, George Villiers, Viscount Dundas, Sir D. Molesworth, Sir W. Villiers, F. W. Dundas, George Monsell, William Vivian, J. E. Ebrington, Viscount Moody, O. A. Vivian, J. H. Edwards, Henry Morgan, 0. Vivian, Sir R. Elliot, John E. Morpeth, Viscount Wawn, J. T. Estcourt, J. B. B. Morris, David Williams, John Euston, Earl Mostyn, E. M. Williamson, Sir H. Evans, Sir De Lacy Mowatt, Francis Willoughby, Sir H. Evans, John Mulgrave, Earl Wilson, James: Evans, William Mulhngs, J. It. Wilson, Matthew Ewart, William Neeld, John Wood, W. p. Fagan, William Sorreys, Lord Worcester, Marquis Fagan, James Nugent, Lord Ferrer, James O'Connell, N. J. TELLERS. Ferguson, Sir R.- Ogle, S. C. Barrington, Viscount Filmer, Sir E. Ord, W. Walpole, Spencer MINORITY—NOES, 97. Adderley, C. B. Gladstone, W. E. Milner, W. M. Baillie, H. J. Glyn, George Carr Milnes, R. Jlonckton Bank es, G. Gooch, E. S. Muntz, G. F. Benbow, John Gore, W. 0. Newdegate, C. N. Benett, J. Gouiburn, Henry O'Connor, Feargus Bentinek, Lord G. Grenfell, C. Pascoe Packe, C. W. Beresford, William HaWord, Sir 11. Pendarves, Edward Broadley, H. Hamilton, Lord C. Pigott, Francis Brown, H. Hamilton, J. H. Richards, Richard Bruce, C. L. C. Harris, Captain Sadleir, John Burghley, Lord Hastie, Alexander Sanders, George Burrell, Sir .C. Heneage, Edward Scott, F. Campbell, W.P.F Herbert, Henry A. Seymer, Henry Ker Cardwell, Edward Herbert, Sidney Smyth, John G. Chandos, Marquis of Hervey, Lord A. Smythe, G. Chaplin, W. J. Hildyani, R. C. Smollett, Al Childers, J. W. Hildyard, T. B. Stephenson, Robert Christy, Samuel Hodgson, W. N. Sullivan, Michael Clay, Sir W. Hope, A. 7 aylor, Thomas E. Clerk Sir G. : Houldsworth, T. Towneley, Charles Collins, William Hudson, G.: Townley, R. G. Cubittt, William Inglis, Sir , R. Trollope, Sir J. Currie, henry Johnstone, Sir J Tyrrell, Sir J. Douglas, Sir C. Jones, Captain Vyse, R. 11. Drummond, Henry Keogh, William Waddington, David Duncan, Lord King, P. J. Waddington, H. 5, Duncuft, John Lacy, H. C. Wall, C. B. 1)u Pre, C. G. Lincoln, Earl o Welby, G. E. East, Sir.J. B. Locke, Joseph Westhead, J. P. Egerton, W. T. Lockhart, W. Farnham, E. Mahon, Lord TELLERS. Forester, G. C. Mandeville, Viscount Disraeli, B. Fuller, A. E., Mangles, R. D. Reid, Colonel Galway, Viscount Manners4Lord C. HORSHAM WRIT. Motion made, and Qmestion put, " That Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a Nw Writ for the electing of a Burgess to serve in this pre sent Parliament for the Borough of Horsham, in the room of John" Jervis, Esq, whose Election has been determined to be void." The House divided : MAJORITY-AYES, 54. Adderley, C. E. Drummond, Home O'Brien, Sir Lucius Anson, Colonel Edwards, Henry Pilkington, James Anstey, T. C. Fuller, A. E. Rendlesham, Lord ' Baillie H. J. __ Galway, Viscount Renton, John C. Baldock, E. H. Godson, R. Robinson. George Baukes, George Goulburn, Henry Seymer, H. K. Benbow, .fohn Hawes, Benjamin Sidney, Alderman Bentinck, Lord G. lliidyard, R. C. Spooner, Richard Beresford, William Hobhouse ' T. B. St a fford, Augustus Blackstone, W. Hodgson, W. N, Stuart, J. Bremridge, Richard Mernby, John Talfourd, Sergeant Bruce, C. L. Hudson, George Tancred, H. W. Buller, Charles Ingestre, Viscount Urquhart, David Burrell, Sir C. Inglis, Sir. R. Vyse, H. Christy, Samuel Maitland, T. Willoughby, Sir 11. Codrington, Sir W. Mandeville. Viscount Waddington, 11. S. Cubitt, William Miles, Philip W. 8, TILLERS. Dod, J. W. Napier, Joseph Goring. Charles Drax, J. S. W. O'Brien, John Newdcgate, N. MINORITY-NOES, 50. Raines, M. T. Herbert, H. A. Pilkington, James Barnard, E. G. Herbert, Sydney Richards. Richard; Bellew, R. M.; Hervey, Lord A. Hill, Lord MarcusSSatulwarteY;LCorodloDne.l Bowring, Dr. Brotherton, J. Hood, Sir A. Stuart, Lord J. Clay, James Horsman, E. Thicknesse, It. A. Cobden, Richard King, Peter John Thompson, Colonel Craig, W. G. Langston, J. 11. Thornely, Thomas Currie, Henry Lushington, Charles Tufnell, Heary Dundas, Admiral Mangles, R. D. Turner, E. —...... Evans, John Maule, Fox Wawn, J' T. Fox, W. J. Moffatt, George Williams, John Gibson, T. M. Mowatt, Francis Williamson, Sir H. Gladstone, W. E. Muntz, G F. Wyvill,Marmaduke Greenall, Gilbert Nugent, Lord Ilanmer, Sir J. Pearson, Charles TELLERS. Gestic, Alexander Pechell, Captain Bright, John Ilayter, W. G. ' Perfect, It. George Thompson, BRITISH AND FOREIGN SCHOOL SOCIETY. —The annual examination of the boys educated in the Model School of the British and Foreign School Society took place yesterday, before a large and crowded assembly. The Duke of Argyle presided. Among the company present were the Bishop of Norwich, Viscount and Lady Ebrington, the Duchess of Argyle, Sir Walter Stirling, Bart., Mrs. Opie, Sir John Boilleau, Bart., Charles Hindley, Esq., M.P. ; Professor Pillano, of Edinburgh ; Professor Laing, of Glasgow ; Dr. Hodgson, of Liver pool, and a large number of the influential friends of the society. The children were examined in all the usual branches of education, and distingUished them selves as heretofore in arithmetic, mathEinatics, his tory, geography, and grammar. They also proved themselves to be thoroughly acquainted with the pro• phecies, facts, duties, and d oc t r i nes o f the Holy Scrip tures. A vast number of sp ec i me n s of drawing i n p en and ink, in crayon, and in c o l ours , w ere exhibited, some of them displaying gr ea t t a l en t. The Duke of Argyle being obliged to leave before the conclusion of the ex amination, was succeeded in the chair by the Bishop of Norwich. Both the Duke and the Bishop expressed Ithe high gratification they, in common with the. rest of the company, had experienced. On Tuesday last, the Chinese Junk 46 Keying," was honoured by a visit from her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent accompanied by their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess de Nemours and family, and at tended by Lady Augusta Bruce, and Sir George Cowper. The Royal party came in two carriages and four an d spent fully an hour in inspecting the interesting vessel. The Mandarin was introduced to the distinguished visi tors in the saloon, and had been previously under the impression that the Queen Dowager, whose visit took place some time since, bore the relationship t o h er Ma jesty appertaining to the Duch ess of K ent. Th e R oya l party expressed themselves h i ghly pleased w i t h their Ladyarcl "ißivers, and Marchioness Lady M ary visit. The vess e l h as within the last few days b een visited by the P r i nce d e Joiaville, the Duke and Duch ess of Sutherland, th e D u k e a nd Duchess of Bedford, the Duchess of A rg yl e , th e Marquis and Marchion ess o f of Kildare, Lansdowne, Lord C a o bde Lady mi , fr a e o , i t e h t e , Howard, Hon. Mrs. and Lady Caroline Lascelles and of family, L a dy C onstance Gower, Baron and Mada me V an de Weir, M r . an d L a dy Elizabeth Grey, Sir F. a n d L ady Cochrane, &c. MULREADY EXHIBITION. — The Society of A r t s , yesterday.rooms i a e t d the by Mr. M o sal at r eoaf th e pro prietorsdy , R.A., placed th e p i cture s its pan painted for an evening exhibition, when a large and fashionable assembly attended. Among those who have already visited this collection have been--The Duchess of Suther land and Ladies Howard, Duke of Ar gyle, Duke of Cleveland, the Countess Grey, the Marquis of North ampton, the Lord Colborne, Lord Gwyder, Lord Emlyn, Lord and Lady Colborne, Lady Houlston, Lady C. D e _ nison, Sir Robert Peel, Bart., Sir J. Swinburne, Bart., and Miss Swinburne, Sir G. and Lady Clerk, Si r J . P . and Lady B o il ea u, the Right Hon. C. S. Lefevre, Dr. Harding, &c. DEATH OF THE MARCHIONESS DE MESSINGT DE LA PIERRE.—This lady, the daughter of Sir Charles Henry Coote, Bart., late M.P., Premier Baronet of Ire land, died on the 9th inst., at Nice, after a short illness. Sir Henry Meux, Bart., gave a white bait dinner last evening to the Prince Metternich, Lord Brougham, and a distinguished circle, at the Trafalgar Tavern, Greenwich. HER MAJESTY'S DRAWING ROOM. The Queen held a drawing-room (the third this sea son) yesterday afternoon, in St. James's Palace. Her Majesty and Prince Albert arrived from Buckingham Palace, attended by the royal suite, and escorted by a party of the Life Guards. Her Majesty and his Royal Highness were received by the Lord Steward, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, and the Groom of the Stole to the Prince, and were conducted to the royal closet. His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, at tended by Mr. Edmond Mildmay, was present at the drawing-room. His Royal Highness Prince George and his Royal Highness Duke George of Mecklenburgh Strelitz also attended the drawing-room. The Queen and Prince Albert entered the throne room accompanied by their royal visitors. Her Majesty wore a black silk train, and a petticoat covered with crape and richly ornamented with bugles. Her Majesty's head-dress was formed of black feathers and lappets. In attendance on the Queen and the Prince were the Mistress of the Robes, the Viscountess Jocelyn (in wait ing), the Duchess of Norfolk, the Countess of Gains•- borough, the Marchioness of Douro, the Countess of Charlemont, the Viscountess Canning, and the Countess of Desart, Ladies of the Bedchamber; the Hon. Miss Cavendish, (in waiting), the Hon. Miss Macdonald (in waiting), Lady Caroline Cocks, the Hon. Miss Stanley, the Hon. Miss Paget, and the Hon. Miss Kerr, Maids of Honour; the Hon. Mrs. George Campbell, Lady Gar diner, the Hon. Mrs. Brand, and Lady Caroline Barring ton, Bedchamber Women; Lord Elphinstone, Lord in Waiting; Lord George Lennox, Lord in Waiting to the Prince; Lieut. Colonel the Hon. Robert Boyle, Groom in Waiting; Colonel Wylde, Groom in Waiting to the Prince; Colonel Buckley, Equerry in Waiting; Colonel Bouverie, Equerry in Waiting to the Prince; Messrs. Forbes and Crofton, Pages of Honour in Waiting. The Foreign Ministers and their ladies were intro duced, when the following gentlemen had the honour of being presented to her Majesty the Queen and his Royal Highness the Prince in the diplomatic circle:— Le Baron H. de Plessen, by the Count Revsntlow, the Danish Minister The Prince Constantine Soutzo of Bucharest, by the Prince Callimaki, the Turkish Minister. Mr. Jay, by Mr. Bancroft, the American Minister Le Baron d'Ugglas, by Baron Rehausen, the Swedish Minister Tne Count Desgeneys, by the Count de Revel, the Sardinian Minister. The following ladies had the honour of being pre sented to her Majesty The Hon. Georgina Leigh, by her mother, Lady Leigh Hon. Mrs. Byron, by Lady Byron The Marchioness of Miss, by the Duchess of Suther- land The Honourable Clara Brownlow, by the Countess of Darnley Mrs. Charlton, by Mrs. John Walter Mrs. Butt,,by Lady Cottenham Frances, Countess of Waldegrave, on her marriage, by her Grace the Duchess of Sutherland Marchioness of Thomond, by the Duchess of Leinster Lady Alice Douglas, by her mother, the Countess of Morton Viscountess Nevill, on her marriage, by the Countess of Abergavenny The Lady Walsingham, on her marriage, by Sophia, Lady Rendlesham Lady Romilly, by Lady Cottenham. The Lady Keane, on' her marriage, by the Countess of Kinnoull Lady George Quin, on her marriage, by Countess Spencer Lady Anne Tufnell, on her marriage, by the Countess of Roseberry Miss Sumner, by Lady Copper Miss Fanny Elwes, by the Hon. Mrs. John Talbot Viscountess Enfield, on her marriage, by the Lady Catherine Cavendish Lady Charlotte Chetwynd, by Lady Chetwynd. Lady Murray, of Clermont, by Lady Vassal Webster Lady Ellis, on becoming Lady Ellis, by Lady Webster Mrs. Leeke, on h e r marr iage, by the Countess of Aber- gavenny Miss Scroope (of Danby), by Lady Camoya Mrs. Augustus Morgan, by Lady Morgan Mrs. Simeon, by Lady Clifford Mrs. Hayes, on her marriage, by the Countess of Eglin- town - Tho Hon. Eliza Stonor, by her mother, Lady Camoys Mrs. Peter Wells, upon her marriage, by her aunt, Lady Shelley Lady Francis Maynard, by the Duchess of Atholl Miss May, by Lady Gore Booth Miss Mary Lefroy, by her mother, the Hon. Mrs. Lefroy Miss Patteson, daughter of Mr. Justice Patteson, by the Dowager Lady Crewe Miss Crewe, by her mother, the Dowager L a dy Crewe Miss Emily Percy, by Lady Lovaine bliss Willock, by her mother, Lady Willock Miss Aldridge, by Mrs. Vernon Smith Miss Albinia Suliven, by Mrs. William Stuart. Miss Munro, by the Hon. Mrs. B. Jonston Miss Fanny Gilbert, by her mother, Mrs. Gilbert Miss Gertrude Townsend, by Lady Morgan Miss Geraldine Townsend, by Lady Morgan Miss Burgoyne, by the Duchess of Richmond Miss E. Thornhill, by her mother, Mrs. George Thorn hill Miss Thornhill, by her mother, Mrs. George Thornhill Miss Augusta Frederica Frere, by her mother, Mrs. William Frere Miss Mure, by her aunt, Mrs. Compton Stansfield Miss Jane Packe, by Miss Packe Reading Miss Alice Spencer Stanhope, by Lady Elizabeth Spen cer Stanhope Miss Charlotte Buller, by her sister, Mrs. W. H. Pole Carew Miss Mary Buller, by her sister, Mrs. W. H. Pole Carew Miss Walker Heneage, by her mother, Mrs. Walker Heneage Miss Prodgers, by her mother, Mrs. Edwin Prodgers Miss Ellice, by Mrs. Ellice Madlle. de Coigny, by the Duchesse de Coigny Miss Fletcher, by her mother, Lady Charlotte Fletcher Miss Mary Pakenham, by the Hon. Lady Pakenham Miss Frances Horne, by Lady Horne Miss Horne, by Lady Horne Miss Mary Clive, by Lady Harriet Clive Miss Calthorpe, by Lady Charlotte Calthorpe Gough Miss Blanche Calthorpe, by Lady Charlotte Calthorpe Gough Miss Maria Lister Kaye, by her sister-in-law, Lady Lis ter Kaye Miss Louiss Lister Kaye, by her sister-in-law, Lady Lister Kaye Miss Emily Sumner, by the Countess of Egmont. Miss Adele Scrope (of Danby), by Lady Camoys Miss Morgan, by her aunt, Lady Morgan Miss Jane Murray, by her sister, Mrs. Mackenzie Miss Mackenzie of Kilcoy), by Lady Anne Mackenzie Miss Henry, by Lady Grey Miss Murray, by her mother, Lady Murray Miss H. Boddington, by Lady Vassal Webster The Dowager Lady Crewe, by Mrs. Shirley The Lady Katherine Balders, on her return from India, by Lady Alfred Paget Miss Selina Burgoyne, by the Duchess of Richmond Miss Duppa, by Mrs. Savage Miss Ellen Duppa, by Mrs. Savage Mrs. Seymour Allen, on her marriage, by Lady Cour tenay Miss Parker, by her mother, Mrs. Hyde Parker Miss Caroline Parker, by her mother, Mrs. Hyde Parker Miss Georgians Colville, by her sister, Viscountess Newry Miss Bourchier, by her mother, Mrs. Bourchier Miss Thackeray, by Lady Rodd Lady Elizabeth Thackeray, by Lady Rodd Lady East, by the Lady Leigh Lady Eden, by Lady Augusta Milbank Lady Henley, on her marriage, by her mother, Mrs. Peel Lady Louvaine, on her marriage, by Lady Margaret Littleton The Hon. Emily Twistleton, by Lady Emma Vesey Lady Seale, by the Countess of Morley The Duchesse de Melfort, by the Duchess of Atholl Miss Clissold, by her mother, Mrs. Henry Clissold The Countess of Portarlingtoe, on her marriage, by her mother, the Marchioness of Londonderry Miss Mary Pakenbam, by the lion. Lady Pakenham The Hon. Victoria Susan Talbot, by her mother, Lady Sarah Ingestre The Hon. Mrs. Bradshaw, on her marriage, by the Mar chioness of Douro The Hon. Sophia O'Grady, by Viscountess Guillamore The Hon. Emily Twisleton, by Lady Emma Vesey The Hon. Miss Pennington, by Lady George Quin Mrs. Farquharson, of Invercauld, by the Duchess of Atholl Mrs. Compton Domvill, by Viscountess Canning Mrs. Connell, by Lady Charlotte Copley Mrs. Munro, by the Hon. Mrs. Butler Johnston Lady Hervey Bathurst, by her sister, Lady Brabazon Lady Harriet Elliot, by Lady John Russell Lady de Vere, by the Hon. Mrs. James Marshall Lady Workman Macnaghten, by Lady Byron Lady Macneill, by the Viscountess Jocelyn Lady Willock, by Mrs. Higford Burr • Mrs. Ward, by Lady Hastings Mrs. George Thornhill, by the Marchioness of Douro Mrs. Macneil, by the Countess of Darnley Mrs. Farmer, by the Countess of Egmont Mrs. Henry Clissold, by Lady Byron Mrs. Turnbull, by the Duchess of Richmond Lady de Tuyll, by the Hon. Mrs. Berkeley Paget Mrs Tyringham Bernard, by Mrs. W. G. Hayter Mrs Robert Bellinturn, of New York, by Mrs. Bancroft Mrs. Mackenzie, by Lady Anne Mackenzie Mrs..Toup Nicolas, by the Countess Spencer Mrs. Gerard Gould, by the Lady Augusta Gordon Hal lyburton Mrs. Smith Barry, by Lady Brabazon Mrs. Lockyer Freestun, by Viscountess Palmerston Mrs. Wyld, by Lady Grey Mrs. Russell Skinner, by Mrs. Pringle Taylor Mrs. Milner, by the Countess Grey Mrs. O,win Cresawell, on her marriage, by the Duchess of Argyle Mrs. Dottin Maycock, on her marriage, by the Baroness de Clifford Mrs. Preston, by the Countess of Charlemont Mrs. Hyde Parker, by Mrs. Charles Begot Mrs. Bourchier, by Lady Camoys Mrs. John Jay, of New York, by Mrs. Bancroft Mrs. John Hale, on her marriage, by Lady Vassall Webster . Her Majesty and Prince Albert, attended by the royal suite, returned to Buckingham Palace after the Drawing Room, escorted by a party of the Life Guards. LADIES' DRESSES. The folloping are a low of the principal dresses : lUR ktAVEsTir wore a dress of black crape, orris mented with bugle fringe, over a black silk slip ; tram of black crape, lined with black silk, trimmed round with bugle fringe, rosettes of crape, and bugle ornaments ; body and sleeves ornamented with bugles. Headdress, black feathers, crape lappets, and jet ornaments (the whole of British manufacture). MARCHIONESS OF AlLSA.—Train of white brocade (British manufacture) lined with white glace, and trimmed with tulle, and bouquets of pink roses and lilies of the valley ; petticoat of white tulle over glace, with magnificent flounces of Honiton lace. Headdress, feathers and lace lappets ; ornaments, diamonds. MARCHIONESS OF BREADALBANE.—Train of pink tulle over white moire, trimmed with pink 'roses and white wheat-ears; Honiton lace berthe; petticoat of pink tulle over white glace, flounced with magnificent Honi ton lace. Headdress, feathers and lace lappets; orna ments, a tiara of diamonds, and necklace and stomacher of turquoise and diamonds. MARCHIONESS OF WATERFORD.—CORIt dress of rich white Irish tabinet; skirt ornamented with four rows of superb gold trimming; train to correspond, gold berthe and lappets; the whole of British manufacture. Head- dress, feathers, pearls, and diamonds. . . COUNTESS NELSON.-- A most beautiful court dress, of the richest British manufacture; dress of rich white glace silk, covered with tulle, and tastefully trimmed with ruches and the choicest blue and white flowers; train and bodice of splendid Spitalfields blue and white damask silk, lined with white glace, and elegantly finished with tulle and roses; Court tucker and runes of the finest Honiton point. Head-dress, blue and white wreath, with blue and white ostrich feathers and choice Honiton point lace lappets; ornaments, diamonds and pearls. COUNTESS WALDEGRAVE.—Costume de Cour, oom posed of a train of the richest silver grey satin, lined with white satin, elegantly trimmed with silver and bouquets of variegated silver flowers; body and sleeves trimmed with costly Honiton lace, and stomacher of diamonds ; skirts of tulle over white satin, with silver lace ; bou quets of silver flowers, and magnificent agrafes of dia monds. Headdress, ostrich feathers, Honiton lace lap pets, and diadem of splendid diamonds. LADY JOHN RUSSELL.—Dress of Limerick lace, trimmed with flounces looped with bouquets of white flowers and silver wheat, over a rich white silk slip; train of rich white satin, trimmed with silver chef; body and sleeves ornamented with lace and flowers. Headdress, p a L i t A i n D g Y 6 feathers, white flowers, lace lappets, and diamonds. F f . tulle and ornaments, over a rich black bugle s of black . tulle, trimmed with glace silk slip ; tr •trimmed wit h in of black glace silk, tulle and bugles a to correspond. Headdress, feathers, lace lappets and diamonds. Mits. Cpink and whitask, o u rt costume: train of very rich e damask , trimmed with bouillonnes of tulle and coques o f i withbbon ; corsage drape; petticoat of rich white sati n , pink and white al' two tunics of tulle, looped with lappets, and wreath of a" Head dress, pl u me, Honi ton MßS. YARD E B zaliast ornaments, diamonds. ULLER.—Tr a i n with tulle and ribbon ; • of white glace, trimmed glace, trimmed with sa ti n ribbo n . of white crape over and lace lappets; ornaments, diam onds. l2.Headdress, feathers MRS. SIMEON.—Train -of b lue tulle and ribbon; petticoat of e w e h glace, trimmed with flounced with British point lace. w hite over glace, Headdress, feathers and lace lappets; ornaments, diamonds. MRS. BAGOT.—Train of white moire, trimmed with tulle; Honiton lace b er th e; petticoat O f over glace, flounced with H on i ton lace, and ite cra p s trimmed with roses. Headdress, f ea th ers an d lace laPPets; or naments, diamonds. MISS MACKENZIE.—Train of rich White moire silk, elegantly trimmed with tulle ruches, and white satin ribbon; a double jupe of white tulle, over rich white glace, trimmed with ruches en feston, and looped with two beautiful chateline bouquets, composed of dew grass and holly, being the Mackenzie distinction. Headdress of the same, plume and blonde lappets; ornaments, dia monds. MISS TALSOT.—Manteau and dress of the richest white glace, elegantly trimmed with ribbon and flowers, tunic of Honiton lace; borthe to correspond. Head dress, feathers, Honitan lace lappets, and wreath of flowers. The whole of British manufacture. Miss SUMNERS.—Costume de Cour, composed of a train of rich apricot glace silk, trimmed entirely round with British lace and bows of ribbon; a dress of Lime rick lace, over white glace silk; a lace berthe to corre spond with the train, with a wreath and bouquet of green leaves and berries. Headdress, lappets and fea thers; ornaments, diamonds. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OP THIS DAY. TlMES.—Hitherto the characteristic feature of the English people has been their practicality. It is that which has distinguished them from their French and German neighbours. They have 'for the most part eschewed the coxcombry of sentimentalism and the affec tation of philosophy. Whilst other states were dream ing of government England was practising it; whilst others were groping in the will-o'-the wisp flickerings of Utopian speculation, England was walking in the com parative daylight of free institutions. Inheriting the genius of ancient, and the experience of modern Italy, England trained her people by the liberty which had made Florence and Genoa rich to the same course that had made Rome great. Starting with principles which repelled the pedantry of codification, she, like her great prototype, found in their elasticity the reconcilement of the most rigid Conservatism with the most politic expansion. Preserving the spirit, she changed the ma chinery of her institutions with the vicissitudes of sea sons and the exigencies of empire. She has essentially, if not formally, the same regal succession, the same co ordinate branches of l eg i s l a t ure , the samehierarchy, the same common law, the same judicature, the same tribu nal of appeal, the same maxims of polity in these days of railroads, cotton, and Chartism, that she had when Edward refused homage to France, and Henry spurned the dominion of the Triple Crown. Change has suc ceeded change, dynasty has superseded dynasty, en croachments have been made on what were deemed the bulwarks of our establishments—new classes have come into existence, recognition, and power— s till th e essent i a l elements of our politi ca l fabric have remained the same amid the rust and the crash of more than five centuries. How is this? Why, when we have grown in material and natural strength—in extent of territory, of population, and of wealth—why is it that we retain so much and have added so little to the constituent por tions of our system? The answer must be found in our national character. We are less sentimental than ima ginative; less imaginative than reflective, We don't love change for the sak e o f c h ange; and when our ma chinery, whether in clocks, railways, or government, goes right, we are unwilling to sacrifice a real good for a theoretical improvement. Occasionally, indeed, we have diverged from the beaten track, but, whenever we have done so, it has for the most part been with a greater reluctance than that with which we have re sumed it. This is our history in epitome :—Pro gression animated and sustained by the spirit of conservatism. But violent, precipitate innovation— innovation without reflection, purpose, or prudence— innovation for a name, a shadow, a phantasy, a sentiment, or a lie—has been ignored by all who have fought the battle and pleaded the cause of our constitution. The traditions of our history have a reality and life about them which makes us revolt at fictitious grievances and despise imaginary remedies. After all the great strug gles which they have immortalized, all the sufferings which they have consecrated, and the courage which they have hallowed, we turn with something like dis gust from the parade of a platform quackery and a joint-stock agitation. We have no wish to speak with disrespect of the sentiments uttered, or the grievances denounced by any large body of our countrymen. Far be such presumption from us. The deliberate opinion of any large body of men is always entitled to the courtesy of deference. Even when it is wrong as a conclusion of reason, or erroneous in its statement of facts, it deserves, for the honesty of its purpose, to be met with consideration and respect. But, then, it must be their deliberate opinion ; a hasty, fortuitous ebullition of querulousness of passion deserves no respect and no attention. We will not say that the sentiments which Mr. Hume expresses are of this kind ; we will not brand them as the inconsiderate jargon of an un thinking multitude ; but we must beg leave to doubt whether they ought to be received as the deliberate opinions of an intelligent majority of the people. Having ourselves pointed out the anomalies of .our representa tive system, w e must disclaim the allies who m M r. Hume impersonates, and the grounds upon which that confederacy rests. We must disclaim connexion with men who rant about the " yoke of the aristocracy," and cant about the " slavery of the people ;" who in the same breath display the profoundest ignorance of political history, and claim new privileges for their assumed enlightenment. The representation requires some remodelling. It is partially incompatible with the soundest basis on which a repre sentative, system rests, viz., contribution to the funds of the State. It is, moreover, occasionally inconsistent with itself. Necessarily arbitrary in its restrictions, the Reform Bill is even more capricious than it is arbi trary. It excludes men, by its indirect action, whom its professed- intention was to invest with the privilege of the suffrage. Its exclusion of small leaseholders and yearly tenants from the rights that it gives to a 40s. freeholder, as well as of tenants of chambers and lodg ings in London from the privileges which a 101. house holder enjoys, is foolish, frivolous, and mischievous. We grant this - but we ask why complicate a truth with a falsehood, a grievance with a lie, an evil with a quackery ? Why repeat the nauseous dose which even the lowest reader of the lowest print has begun to loathe ? Why talk about the yoke of the aristocracy? Who groans under the yoke of the aristocracy ? Does Mr. Tomkins the grocer, or Mr. Hopkins the chandler, or Mr. Dobbins the shoemaker? How and in what way are Dobbins, Tomkins, and Hopkins oppressed ? Is the Peerage against them? Is it the country gentle men? Again, whom do they mean by the aristocracy? To hear some speeches and read some books one might imagine that we were living in Venice, under a narrow, inapproachable, unelastic aristocracy—a class despotic in government, unpopular in character, and uncongenial in blood—a caste incapable of fusion or of access, and raised at once above the sympathies and the alliances of the commonalty. Now. that the reverse of this is so every schoolgirl that has read a novel and every mother that has thumbed the " Peerage" knows. What, then, can be thought of the intelligence of persons clamouring about the tyranny of the aristocracy ? Does not every man know that his children may—if they work hard enough and learn enough, and have health, wit, and strength enough—sit , in the august House the carving and gilding of which in spires their admiration? Or have they yet to learn that of the leading statesmen for the last 160 years one half sprung from the untitled gentry of England, and one half from its commonalty ? Did Walpole belong to the aristocracy of the day ? Did Hardwicke ? Did Chat ham ? Did Clive ? Did Nelson ? Did Burke ? Did Sidmouth ? Did Eldon ? Did Canning Wilber force ? Did Brougham ? Does Feel ? Does Glad- Mr. Cobden Mr. Card well •,~~ Jo. stone ? Do Hume and Cobden ? Whetwas I don's grandfather ? What Sir R PeelW `What Lord - Melbourne's ? Why, the most superficial kliewiedge of the most recent history might inforni a Moit,that, so far from the aristocracy oppressing or keepingidroiskib er people, no class since the brightest periotta ,Rontu policy has been so elastic, so adoptive, ant 'lo` po pular, as the aristocracy of England. Well, under such rule as we have had, we have suffered from wars, and the cost of wars. We have so; and what is the inference? That the aristocracy are accountable for a great waste of blood and treasure. Is this quite just? Let any one who wishes to know the truth consult the annals of the 2d and 3d George. Walpole driven from power —not by faction, but by the people—for pa cific counsels; Chatham supported by the voice of the people as a "great war Minister;" Pitt, struggling in vain for peace, egged on by the approbation of a national majority to an obstinate war with France;—these are the instances which history supplies of aristocratic oppression and love of war. For the interference of this same class in the pacific policy of past generations, we must look to the despotism which inflicted the omniscient genius of Burke, the sparkling wit of Sheridan, the gorgeous de clamation and statesmanlike acuteness of Pitt, the com bined wit, eloquence, and logic of Canning, the judicial impressiveness of Grant, and the fervid eloquence of Brougham upon a House of Commons which, but for men like these, would have left no track of light be hind ; and when we remember that these men are gone from the scene of their glory and their achievements with scarely a successor or an equal, let us ponder on the wisdom which rails at the past, and would cut up the traditionary landmarks of England into departments for hireling agitation and the display of such enlighten ment as Mr. Hume and Mr. Bright afford. HERALD.—Probably it may be fairly objected, that we have no right to feel or express any disappointment with reference to the First Report of the Select Com mittee on Commercial distress. Having been plainly told, from the beginning, that the whole affair was a sham ; that the results of the " inquiry " were fully known before the Committee had once met ; and that the only real object of the Government in granting the Committee was, to turn some gentlemen into an upper room there " to exhaust their garrulity,"—having been, warned more than once, that this was the real and the only drift of the whole affair, we may be held to be " estopped " from any complaint, that the said Com mittee has not done, what it was never intended or pro mised that it should do. Nevertheless it is certain that unfairness cannot be fairly worked out. The original plan and purpose might be bad, but the performance is, if possible, still worse. Suppose that a City house, Messrs. A. B. and Co., is charged with an unfair pro ceeding. " Let the matter be submitted to any three respectable persons, as arbitrators,"—it may be said. But what would be thought, if Messrs. A. B. and Co. insisted upon it that the three arbitrators should consist of-1, their broker, 2, their attorney, and 4, some indifferent person, to be named by the complaining party? The matter in dispute on the present occasion was the working of the Bank Restriction Acts, m ore especially of the Act of 1844. That Act was the work of Sir Robert Peel; it had been warmly approved by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer; and it was the declared purpose of the Government to maintain it. And who, then, were the arbiters to decide this ques tion between the leaders of the late and present Govern ment—both committed to the measure—and the cora mercial world, which uttered loud complaints of the working of that Bill? The Committee nominated con sisted of twenty-six Members. And thus it was con stituted 1. The Chancellor of the Exchequer. 2. Lord John Russell. 3. Mr. Labouchere. 4. Sir W. Clay. Here are three leading members of the Government, and a subordinate. Next, 5. Sir Robert Peel. 6. Sir James Graham. 7. Mr. Goulburn. 8. Mr. Cardwell. Being four members of the last Government, whose measure was under examination. Then, 9. Mr. Home Drummond. 10. Mr. Beckett. Two regular Peelites; and 11. Mr. Cobden. 12. Mr. Thornely. 13. Mr. Ricardo nait.l3a vvh andos 0 Three members of t h e League. Thus' half of o Mr. theT endnivei , th Committee consists, a t start i ng, of safe votes; men. wh o e e in n a a m y e b n e e r v e e l r i e oc u dn s in Then any comes One of whose absence, from whatever cause it arose, makes the thirteen a sure majority. Next we have Mr. James Wilson, who is currently held to be either in possession or in expectation of a place, and now we see that the result is easily to be reckoned on before the Committee begins its work. But now, who are the other members of this Committee? Here are their names: 16. Mr. Herries. 17. Mr. Cayley. 18. Mr. Glyn. 19. Mr. F. T. Baring. 20. Mr. Thomas Baring. 21. Lord George Bentinok. 22. Mr. Spooner. 23. Mr. Disraeli. 24. Mr. Hudson. 25. Mr. Hume. 26. Alderman Thompson. And we beg to ask, whether the real strength, the prac tical utility of the Committee, did not consist entirely in these last eleven names? Well, then, what is to be said, when we find the official men and their retainers always voting on one side, and the eleven independents always voting on the other? Here is the first division, May 26: AYES. Mr. T. Baring Lord G. Bentinok Mr. Spooner Mr. Herries Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn Mr. James Wilson Noss. /Chancellor of tho Ex c h equer Sir Jgmes Graham ISir Robert Peel 'Lord John Russell Mr. Cobden .Mr. Beckett Mr. Goulburn ,Mr. Cardwell Mr. Labouchere i Mr. J. L. Ricardo Mr. Thornely 'Sir W. Clay Mr. Home Drummond. May 30:— __ Here is the second division, AYES. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir James Graham Sir Robert Peel Lord John Russell Mr. Cobden Mr. Beckett Mr. Goulburn Mr. Labouchere Mr. Thornely Mr. James Wilson Sir W. Clay Mr. Home Drummond And here is one of the last divisions, June 6:- 1 NOES. 'Lord George Bentinck Mr. Spooner Mr. Beckett Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn Mr. James Wilson. AYES. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir James Graham Sir Robert Peel __ NOES. Mr. Thomas Bating Lord George Bentinek Mr. Spooner Mr. Herries Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn. . Lord John Russell Mr. Goulburn Mr. Labouchere Mr. J. L. Ricardo Mr. Thornely Sir W. Clay - Mr. Home Drummond Thus, throughout, it is the official men—the very parties who were on their trial, who bear down by their packed majority the whole of the independent members of the Committee. The packing of the witnesses, too, was as gross as the packing of the Committee. Mr. Cayley made this the subject of a specific resolution, moved by him on the 6th or June, in the following terms:—" An other amendment was proposed to be made, by adding at the end of the paragraph these words—` The evidence of all the witnesses engaged in commercial undertak ings (except the Deputy-Governor of the Bank), is unanimous as to the disastrous effects of the Act of 1844. Four witnesses, indeed, out of seventeen, have defended the system on which that Act was founded; but of these four one is generally believed to be the author of the system, another was the Governor of the Bank, consulted by the framer of the Act of 1344, and the remaining two are the present Governor and Deputy- Governor of the Bank. It appears, however, that the opinion of the Bank directors is nearly balanced as to the successful working of the Act of 1844." This amendment, though containing merely an undeniable statement of facts, was not allowed to pass. The truth. was too inconvenient to be thus plainly spoken. The result of the whole we are content to give in the words of a Ministerial journal of last night:—" The first report from the Secret Committee of the Commons upon commercial distress has been commented upon with much interest to-day, and as a large number of practical men in the City desire a change, much disappointment is expressed that none is recommended by the Commit tee." The disappointment, as we have said, may be natural, but it only proves the want of foresight in those who feel it. EDUCTION OF THE DUTIES ON RUB[.--A depu tation from a meeting of Irish Members waited on the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday, on the subject of the proposed reduction of the differential duty on rum. A long discussion took place between the members of the deputation and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but no definite result being arrived at, it was resolved at at a meeting of the Irish Members subsequently held, that Sir Lucius O'Brien should, in the House, demand a declaration of the intentions of the Government. It will be seen, from our Parliamentary report, that the question was put, but no answer returned beyond the vague assertion that the matter was " under consi deration." REVIEW OF THE SECOND LIFE GUARDS.—The re view of the 2d Life Guards, which was lately postponed, owing t) the fatiguing duty the corps were compelled to undergo durieg the Chartist disturbances, is definitely fixed w take p flee to-morrow, in the presence of several royal personage. and a brilliant staff of officers. The regiment will be oant noonthe ground in Hyde-park, opposite Grosvenor-gate, The Duke and Duchess of Norfolk, Countess of Lincoln and family, Lord and Lady Beresford, Marchio ness Cornwallis, Lady de Burgh, Marchioness of Clan ricard ,e Lord X 0 intcharles. Lady Hogg and party, Hon. Mrs. Hamilton, Hon. Miss Dillon, &c., visited the Colos seum, Regent's-park, on Tuesday last. SAGO FLOUR.—An arrival of 3,492 bags of sago flour has taken place by one vessel, arrived from Singa pore, and another from the same place has brought nearly 3,000 begs of the article. These are unusually largeimportations of this description of flour froze the Place mentioned and are of interest.: