The Sun. — London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1848. 4,weraMent which existed were in favour of recipro i_and both i gnorant of the di ffi culties they ha , i t W c 7, 14 . 1 1 (1 With in that resp ec t, did th e y not think that it her be mor e p ru d ent to keep t h e present sys t em ti'l bette4Lajesty's Government had made themselves a little a cquainted with the facts and matured their 'on a little more?.--(Loud cheers and laughter.) ertt e de Whole thing proved that the measure was fliA 111 conception, and that it was tampering and tri th,s with the national interests; because there was no :11110re fatal than the recklessness of ignorance.— ey en t'i °beers.) Everything else might be endured — The the tyranny of men who had a system.—(Laughter.) h itt Y Might establish despotism and yet preserve order; 4 0 ,, a P2rinet who called on them to legislate without a ii' e vne of the circumstances could only produce le teejee anarchy which must eventually plunge the com tri4fand political interests of the country into incx eteleo• confusion,—(Loud cheers.) He could easily ere the state of blank surprise in which the new tii4il'resident of the Board of Trade found himself with bo wl smiles of Mr. Bancroft on one side, and the 4 4 : a :dagger of the Chevalier Bunsen on the other.— reitt n r' er .) They were not opposed to going into Com Qua Committee; but when they were . told b y t h e p-Zer that they were going into Committee for the tape of abrogating the navigation-laws, it was a iid eri sqJ to tell them that it was for the purpose of con tee to them. They did not object to go into Commit toMinprove the navigation-laws, but they objected to aith„ Committee to abrogate them. Now, one word ei tti : l gard to the question of the national defences ; be iato; he did not mean to enter at that time of the night atir4e evidence of that very ingenious person Sir J. ma n 'who had a plan for manning the fleet without l 'h u r b atuch laughter.) Nor was he going to sing .u titannia," for fear of distressing the Honourable et tlber Would for the West Riding..—(Loud cheers.) He m erely read a communication from Jamaica, of ii , a ppeared i n th e N ew Y or h S un , dated the 12th dis ee t It stated that even in Jamaica symptoms of tail!), ; _ l• .`"eat showed themselves; that while " Rule Bri tsatn was received with solemn silence in the (141, `", "Yankee Doodle " was loudly called for.— Doc To-night they had again heard " Yankee exil ed loudly called for, but he hoped, though loudly .--(l7 k fo r, that it would never be encored in that House. °Tem -A t ilt° , r.) The late Vice-President of the Board 4ilit„—et in a glowing peroration, dwelt with his usual . Pre,,f h ,.° o the blessings of peace, and of internal un- Id% A s a It was surprising how men differed, but his bel,• that these were not the characteristics of the ete 3 , — which they lived.—(Laughter.) If instead of Isi ae r k roe he s a id i t was t h e age o f no t ra d e , if i ns t ea d o f title he said it was the age of intended war, and if toe.:7" Of internal p e ace he s a id it was the age of coin trtTe t bands pulling up railways, he would be near the keet' - ;( 11 ear, hear.) Notwithstanding the announce *biota' the mill enn i um an d t h e re i gn o f un i versa l peace %tad t hey had been promised a short time ago, he L li ewes att help thinking, after all that had occurred, with re em `",, a state of Beige, Paris in insurrection, Vienna ties f e w„"land Berlin barricaded, with four pitched bat ‘liite fi ght in eight weeks, and the Baltic and Adriatic forblockad e d— t h at the Hon. Gentleman the Member !lith e th° west Riding was not now so devoted a believer 4 1 ? l ag* gentium sine armis. He did not pretend to the 11 blame t o t h e present power w hi c h di s tinguished teeth: Gentleman and his school, yet, sometimes, in for th e t he past, one m a y find some instructive monitor tlitl e ,„•' c onduct of the present and the future ; and foe tl iug so--in reading the history of this country—he ti lilitat °ll3 ason to withdraw his allegiance from that ote at J Power in England which had at the same time ass e E" empire and cherished liberty.—(Cheers.) And I tee - Zt the fall o f th rones an d t h e crus h o f em pire s , he Ittaa °I. 40 circumstance more remarkable than the *hie anarchy and demoralisation of those vast armies reeh ist ° bee were con s id ere d the best security, and the tre at L I Y„ of those institutions—when they saw the thei r mat'itary powe of Fance and Austria deserting tam ma sters in thei r need, r what Englishman could re km with other feelings than pride and satisfaction 14 °Lir legions reposed upon the deep?—(Loud cheers.) bit g least w ou ld not i ncur t h e res p ons ibility, even by L_ u llible vote, of endangering that empire which had "yea • saeohgenied by so much valour, and guarded with so both ~Y ig ilance—that empire which was broader than t r Americas , and extended farther than the far s_thein,-:l3d--that em ire which had been foreshadowed by let - the of a Blake, and consecrated by the blood of a le-the empire of the seas.—(Cheers.) ott an i. ' WILSON explained that the return he had quoted toa, n ge in 1824 and in 1846, were, in both cases, the "age inwards and outwards. Si r p NPEEL, who rose amidst loud cries of " Divide," la that if he could acquiesce in the opinion of the e a ° ,,, bl e Lord and th ose w ho agreed with him, that the ti e f -n ence of the last two years had been sufficient to htr a strate the impolicy of those principles on which, s an e years 1842 an d 1846, the commercial tari ff of this 41t rY was revised and regulated, he should not be need at their conclusion, not to apply those prin.. lIV to our commercial marine; but, notwithstanding a l , ; .7perience of the lastt e w r o years, his opinion re d A from the Protectionist and cheers fro Lu m aht the Ministerial benches)—as to Principles by which our commercial intercourse with d erth nations should be regulated.—(Hear,. hear.) If h e l o Would reject from consideration the pec u liar e . ombi ! n of . circumstan ces t which had prevented a fair trial Atha thqinwceipulledseenstiarbellyshed in the years he referred to I omit from their consideration l i lt, in addition to any other causes of commercial de. Bement, all operating simultaneously not only in our 1; 91 1 1 . Country but in every other country in Europe with ei t eli we had commercial dealings, they had been 4, l „ t e,d by famine—if they would omit from their consi pltion that that surplus capital which was heretofore I,4' lo able to the procuring of luxuries or conveniences 1 . 1 , I , l _ o w necessarily applied in averting the sufferings ea a ' i e t, famine engendered—if they would reject all these (k,7"erations, it was easy to draw that conclusion.— th e ' n , l4 9 But it was incumbent on them in that case to eee t " 1 ° what respect there was a connexion in the pre ilsal ° offerings of this country, which he admitted and lei a °4 d, and the principles on which, in the tariffs of As a And 1846, they had proceeded.—(Hear, hear.) It Ott e litl t because we had admitted the raw materia l . . for f: lan ufactures without duty.—(Oh, oh.) His op i nion t b e „, erroneous, but surely those who though t . _ be 1; 4 ,._ 0 0 confidence in the strength of theirs if they had (Ch e :ber answer to give than boisterous clamour.- -- 2 8 lead cries of " Oh.") The principles on which they te atr Zted in. 1642 and 1846, in the first place, removed 41 4t s :! ° °, 3 from commerce, and, by diminishing the *441,7 'tit he raw material, enabled our to t manufacturers . 410 competition with their foreign rivals with 41 ereh t e rttParative advantage ; they simplified t he f foo d a nd e4 de 115 to the entry of all articles of oo 1 414 laiketure. No one could say that the tariffs o f 4 842 tkets 46 ,Lnitiriously affected the country in these they wi .. " - kttear.) It might be answered so far . t „latir an s , e, but they were wrong in admitting foreign - "urell in competition with our own in this coun petto4Cheers from the Protectionists.) That was the t eta t , . 0 f objection. Every article of foreign menu tthrehtlitroduced under those tariffs, it was said, had ttialea w t of employment thousands of our own coun te seo:.who would else he engaged in manufactures of • t e tl rto tlie: f it _ l bd•— • (Hear, hear.) . Why, what a doctrine tt i alehe e 4 h_ ree i ; i l :lB great manufacturing ation ?—(Minis ue.t. ownxptig 58,1./00,0001. a year the 2p 0 rt 4 f , of its manufacture . s, and which, by 441 0 those manufactures, was interfering with e ver C ° Ylnent of every country in the world. If itla ti e r '? r itrY were to adopt that view, they would look We instead of as the benefactors of mankind, as I t elltest impediment to human happiness.—(Hear.) of .17Perted A llo t g i Perhaps to the extent of a million a year ere v _ eves woo ll en, and cotton manufactures ; and do h Lie ' N igotm e a °ol [ l tries which sent those articles here to be because they threw out of employment a 41 , ° Yecip liu Mber of artisans here, who might else be era -mitet,„ But in estimating the quantity of foreign goods bet f under ill (*g et r the tariffs of 1842 - and 1846, they must e, 6 6iti ta ,„t° o quantities which previously came in in an ft ) se 4 ,7 anner. The increase in the imports o 0000 idles et ear th Was only apparent. We exported h. of brass and co pper ma nufactures , 1,000,0001 t/r eote.. t—t lleare ate of co tto n goods, 6,000,000/. o f I and besides large quantities of woollen, linen, 1 , oth er "uer manufacture, interfering with the industry L ott to ._eountries in every direction ; and yet we were de all7 4: l oemn other countries because they asked to llee 1 0 s L° supply us in some subordinate and inferior Ptltte e °me of those few articles which they. coul a ot gla to che aper than ourselves. It was impos. assign the distress under which so me r MeeseOperatives were undoubtedly labour i ng .. ett a • i 33l Ports 44 Pe,, 14 everts. Let them look to the progressive in ofne-ee w , -ports under free-trade, and let them not 'ate " Were ruined because , from a combination Nl lat 44 dinstr ahr tatty , 7 circumstances, distress , existed in this lit e a te e " K mg the first five years fr om 1827 our yjea re tis Porta were 37,000.000/4 dur ing the next ..re th`, 44 th e , "e3' were 43,000,0001.; in the fo ll ow in g five th t eed Were 49,000.000/., and in the last fi v e y ears Iv e heat hereased to 55,000,000/.—(Cheers.) And in re Si t, Y 9 ,, e y ar, 1 847, a year of severe depressionstoheg. 1 „. 11 of fr _ . l '°°ol. And yet it was said that thepri non e nd trade had failed—that we did nothing tsw b .t nt Zelit,;(64rethat we had to purchase our imports ex with t1 1 : 41 oft h! Fat and cries - of "Question.") h r e 4 it ". last two years had served to con vince T him li te as 10 a • ° at II for • diminished price of food, and the pa h, 11 0 ,, 5 ., Its continuance, that we must rest 4,„ Go pea of increasing prosperity.—(Cheers . ) I , s nid mein now proposed that the House te e Ltati a , 3 :r° to a proposal for considering the ". Net i a. " with a view to extensive and perioduiprovement. He thought they had arrived ei r " s ( lesly . w hen it was desirable to consider this motion f ro , l a the When he looked to the position of our colo h,ek the,_ abrogation of the principles of free-trade „ hi ': pr i ed h bee, the state of many European coun t,4 tion c laimed from us the same advantages in na elitle -e insisted on with them—to our reciprocity s Mid the multitude of conflicting claims arising s at ,'Lo u o i "lad to the mutilated and shattered state Or the titeition-law as it existed, he found many ma % 4 00. 1 ,„ng that law into consideration. The speech ett aa. lilleember for Bucks had scarcely touched the the n Etyi he could have shown that the relaxation • eh ° oto t t def Ration -la ws would diminish our means of ' , d i pce, and endanger the national security, he : 11 , 13 e, r f a r t e i r l i ng in this respect from the Honourable 4 14 . 41 obj ee ,. e West Riding, that a powerful, perhaps • t :o w see taon might be urged against sacrificing the 4189 w i hd n , might to : any interest. But it was necessary for them echr.Maintained that view to show that these laws nab to u e : : t hat end. The amendment called upon e ar lgatia n . l al tltain the fundamental principles of the th a lgatiose..i i " vs ' Now what were those principles? The C y ' ) Pow er 8 were established to destroy the meri t,: the bo°c_tbe Dutch ; but what was their effect? To th e °e wi th t ea a direct advantage over us in the inter • et y Rav e the - United States.—(Hear.) Therefore aft tle tr oi u t 8e f ormidable competitors the whole trade ed S tatea.—(Hear.) Now, the prinles Ration ''ziws, as laid down by Adam S mi th, iapplied to the coasting trade, the fisheries, the carryine trade, and colonial Intercourse. The coasting trade and fisheries were to be preserved by Government. At pre sent the carrying trele was reserved for British vessels, Or for foreign vessels carryin , :- the produce of their re spective countries. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that he had conferred with Mr. Huskisson; and that he was ready to carry reciprocity further than it was car ried now. Why, there was no greater breach of the fundamental principles of the avigation laws than that very system of reciprocity; and how could the Right Hon. Gentleman ask them to preserve the fundamental principles of the navigation-laws, when he himself ad mitted that he had laboured day and night with Mr. Hus kisson, and was even now prepared still further, to un dermine the very principles he was so anxious to up hold?—(Cheers.) He observed the Right Hon. Gentle man shake his head; but ho would convince him at once by the arguments of those on whom he himself relied, that reciprocity treaties were breaches of the fundamen tal principles of the navigation-laws. Mr. Young was asked before the Committee if he thought the British shipowners sufficiently protected? He replied " No; his protection was invaded by the reciprocity treaties." Mr. Richmond, another very able witness, said that " He could not consider the navigation laws afford' d the shipowners much protection. They were com pletely mutilated by the reciprocity treaties. Every treaty took something away. He could not have con ceived that those treaties left so little of the navigation laws as he found remaining. In fact those laws were virtually repealed." And yet in the face of this the Right Honourable Gentleman came down there and exhibited his " fundamental principles"—(Loud laugh , ter)—and asked them to pass an instructio n to the 1 Committee that those principles should be observed. —(Cheers.) Well, then, as to the colonial inter course. When Adam Smith wrote on that point, about 1775, he did not foresee the separation of America and the circumstances which had since occurred. From that period scarcely a year had passed without an infringe ment of their " fundamental principles." And he must here observe, that on the occasion of every such in fringement there was precisely the same sort of outcry of " ruin to the shipowner."—(Hear, hear.) In 1782, when they wished to admit Ireland to participation in the colonial trade, the shipowners loudly complained ; and those of Liverpool, in a petition which they ad dressed to that House, declared that " if any such thing were permitted, Liverpool must inevitably be reduced to its original insignificance."—(Hear, and laughter.) So it was in 1825, when the House, not acting on theories, but driven by the necessity of the case— for the question was reciprocity or retaliation — adopted the principle of reciprocity treaties. So it was on every other occasion when relaxations were adopted. In 1833 the Shipowners' Society absolutely declared that " declining quality and extent of Bri tish tonnage, the embarrassment, decay, and ruin of the British shipowner was now an incontrovertible position."—(Hear, and laughter.) Be it so; that was proof that they ran no risk in modifying these laws. But the fact was, the Shipowners' Society was wrong. In 1833, when " the decay and ruin of the British ship owner was an incontrovertible position," the British ton nage on the register was 2,634,000 tons, whilst in 1846, under the application of the free-trade principles, it was 3,817,000 tons.—(Hear, hear.) What, too, did Mr. Richmond say? " I am sure," he said, " that I do not exaggerate when I declare that half the capital embarked in shipping during the last twenty-five 'years has been lost, and that the other half is to a very great extent totally unproductive of profit." He was certain Mr. Richmond would not say a word he did not believe. He took his statement as a great authority; and if that was the account of what protection had done for the ship owner, surely there was nothing in the statement to show that it would not be for his benefit that there should be a change. Could that change be made for the benefit of the merchant, the capitalist, and the manufacturer, without injury to the shipowner, or to the naval superiority of the country? If it could not, he dropped the whole ques tion; but he thought it capable of proof that it could. In 1836, the tonnage of this country was 2,792,000; in 1842, 3,619,000; in 1847, when free trade ought to have been fatal, 3,952,000. Our seamen numbered in 1841, 117,000; in 1827, 151,000; in 1842, 214,000; in 1847, 232,000. It was in the extent of our commercial marine and the number of our seamen that our main reliance was placed in war. As to impressment that system applied equally, whether the navigation-laws were maintained or not. But had not the time arrived when it was incumbent on them to consider whether it would be possible ever again to put that system into operation.—(Hear, hear.) Let them consider the changes which had taken place in our naval as well as our commercial marine. After a long peace it might be expected that the men serving in our commercial marine would be much less qualified to perform the duties of a man-of-war than the men who served in merchant vessels only during the short intervals of peace. Then consider the progress steam navigation bad made—how little reliance could be placed on their being able to work steam-vessels by men taken by chance from our merchant-ships. The value of im pressment, therefore, was much reduced; but in either case, as he said before, the value of that system would depend upon the strength of our commercial marine. Now what would be the effect of a change upon that branch? What did we fear? The Member for Buck inghamshire, said of the Baltic ports, that they were closed by the ice during four months of every year. Compare our highly-favoured position with that of those countries?—(Hear, hear.) Take France. France had a strict navigation-law. Had it improved her commer cial marine?—(Hear, hear.) Did it not, on the con trary, suggest a doubt whether naval superiority did lot depend on the habits, pursuits, inclinations, and associations of a people rather than on any code of laws whatever?—(Much cheering.) Then, as to the United States : now there was examined before the Committee upon this subject a Captain Briggs, " hailing," as they call it, from Baltimore, but who was employed as the master of a liner between the United States and this country. Captain Briggs was as good a witness as he ever saw. He was examined as to any circumstances which could entitle our shipowners to any protection as against the shipowners of the United States. He was asked what were the wages of ship wrights in the United States. He answered 10s. a day. Our wages were only 6s. a day. It they talked, there fore, on the argument that the Norwegian vessels could be built at a much less price than our own on account of the lower wages of the shipwrights, they had at least no cause to fear the United States. Captain Briggs was then examined as to wages. He was asked how much he paid American seamen? He replied 645. a month. He was asked if he always employed American seamen? He replied, no; that he came to Liverpool and engaged British seamen, to whom he paid 50s. a month. Well, then, there was at once a difference between English and American vessels to the extent of 14s. in favour of our own country. Then, as to ship-building: let them see whether there was a chance of our being able to com pete with the United States. The evidence of Captain Briggs was to the effect that, for ship-building purposes, the Americans obtained canvass and copper from Eng land and cordage from Russia, but paid 10 per cent. more for it than the English. Shipwrights' wages and those of seamen were higher, and timber was nearly on an equality. Under all these circumstances, what fear was there of competition with America?—(Hear, hear.) Captain Briggs also stated as his opinion that we could build a twelve years ship as cheaply in England as they could a ten years' ship in America. But the Americans had some advantages. They had advantages in the greater intelligence and activity of the masters, and in the temperance and morality of their seamen, but in none of these points had we any right to claim pro tective laws.—(Hear.) Take, then, the case of our colonies. If freight could be had cheaper at New York than at Montreal how much longer could we re sist the claim of Canada for the removal of the present restrictions.—(Hear, hear.) On the grounds he had stated he had come to the conclusion that the time had come for the consideration of the navigation-laws with a view to their extensive alteration. With respect to the policy of excepting our coasting trade, and also that of obliging our shipowners to have their vessels three-fourths manned with British subjects, he should reserve himself for a future occasion. On the question of reciprocity treaties, he thought it was deserving of consideration, whether they were not in themselves often causes of great embarrassment. They appeared per fectly fair and easily managed in theory, but when they came to be reduced to practice, they often gave rise to questions of very great difficulty. In his opinion, the great advantage lay in independent legislation on these matters. lie feared that the power proposed to be given to the Crown of re-establishing restrictions after a trade had once been opened would be most difficult in opera don. It looked very like inverting the usual order of the constitution. The House of Commons would relax while the Crown would restrain, and he reared that that was a position which the Crown would find difficult and unpleasant.—(Hear, hear.) He .thought it would be much better to give a temporary force to the Act. Suppose it were sent back to the House of Commons at the end of five years, would not that be better than a continual multiplication of treaties ? He should advise those gentlemen who were anxious to exclude all improvement to consider the great truth, that the pros perity of a commercial marine depended, not on a navi gation-law, but on the prosperity of our manufactures. Whatever tended to promote the prosperity of your commerce and manufactures could not fail to be bene ficial to your shipping interest. Great reliance had been placed on the authority of Mr. Huskisson, but instead of relying on any particular dictum of Mr. Huskisson they should look to the great principles he had laid down, and which were of universal application. Having quoted at some length Mr. Huskisson a, opinion as to the advan tages of gradually removing all restrictions from our colonies, and citing the advantage which relaxation bad proved to India, the Right Hon. Baronet concluded by saying that our duty to our colonies was, to bring them ch as possible int o contact with the nations of E principleu counw h i i e e s h w h i a trespect had heretofore to regulated toth the abandon conduc t that a of al l tr their e colonies—that o f makin g their interests subser vient to those of the mother country.—(Cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL —I have been saved, Sir, by j t u h s e t s s p a e t e d c o h w o n f the mR any g n h y t nlieocensosuirtyabe Gentleman olf detaining the w hasho House whyhigeohinthgeipnrtoopaosdalesfeonfctehoefGtohyee r i e m t detail s o t should t h e be means b carriedy out. I find myself relieved by the consideration, also, that, after the very fullest attention to a very long de bate—after h ear i n g in the course of this ni g ht various speeches of two hours' duration against the measur es of i the Gover nmen t, t h at th os e speeches conta in more n re lation to oth er su bj ects th a n that upon the particular proposition before the House, and especially with regard to the defence of the navigation-laws very little argu ment indeed was used.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Noble Lord who began the debate to-ni g ht went rather into hi s own peculiar vein of argament with respect to those measures of free trade to which he was opposed—questions which do not all affect this question of the navigation-laws ; and as cordine: to promise, he told us that the whole advantage of such a measur would go to the foreigner, and that none would go to the people of this country. But, Si,. the Noble Lord's view of foreign commerce is so narrow and confined, that he argued thus :—Speaking of our trade in America, he said, we took ice from the Amer-- c ins as some sort of return for our trade. As if our taking ice was a great favour to the Americans, and not a thing done for our own benefit. Why, sir, ice is an article of luxury with us. Lord G. BENTINCK—Rice—I said rice, not ice.— (Great laughter.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—WeII, whether rice or any other article, it is the same. The Noble Lord ar gued as if it were a favour we were doing the Americans in taking it. Now, Sir, we take these goods for our own advantage—(Hear, hear)—and if we take their goods for our advantage, they in like man ner take our goods for their advantage ; and it seems to me that the advantage of doing away with the difficulties is so apparent, that we need not de tain the House upon that part of the question. The whole question really turns on whether these laws are necessary for our naval supremacy or not.—(Hear, hear.) I really think that a weight which hardly belongs to it has been attached to the long existence which,these laws enjoyed. I have no doubt myself but that these laws were adopted by Protector Cromwell as a protection against rival nations. The object in their adoption was to injure ourselves in order to effect a greater injury upon our rivals, and no doubt that object was effected by them. But I very much doubt whether, if Protector Cromwell heard what the effect of these laws at this late period were, then he would think it desirable to keep up that protection in order to prevent the descendants of the Puritans, who were driven to the North American colonies in his time, from enjoying an unrestricted trade with the people of this country.—(Hear, hear.) But in treating this question as a matter of naval defence, we must consider it in the light in which it has been viewed by the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last; namely, as to whether it would enable foreign Powers to supplant our commercial marine by engrossing the trade of this country. Now, in considering that question, there are evident indications why we should not fear such competition. In the first place, with regard to the building of ships, we know that with regard to iron, canvass, copper, and other articles, we seem to have the advantage over every other country. In the next place, as regards labour, it is most true, as has been frequently asserted, that English labour is not dear, because the work which is done is superior to that done by the people of other nations receiving a smaller amount of wages. For instance, a comparison has been drawn with regard to work done at Bombay; but if a certain quan tity of work be done for 65., it is the same thing whether that work be done, as it will be, by one man in this country, who gets 6s. for it, or by six men at Bombay who are paid only ls. a day.—(Hear.) If one man earns 6s. and another earn only ls., it is a com parison between the quantity and fitness of the work which each man performs ; and if the one man who gets 6s. performs as much work as the six men in Bombay who earn only one shilling each, it cannot be said that labour in this country is dearer than it is at Bomhay.—(Hear, hear.) Then, again, with regard to the United States of America, it is proved that their ship-building must be as dear as ours, and it is proved also that the wages of their seamen are higher than the wages paid to seamen in this country. Then there are other indications also on this subject. There is this indication, which is a great test—that with regard to a great part of the trade with foreign nations, with re gard to the trade carried on between one foreign nation and another, British ships do compete suc cessfully with the ships of foreign countries ; that they carry, for instance, to; St. Petersburgh and to Ilamburgh, goods from various parts of the world in which they have no navigation-laws, or no protection in their favour; and that, in doing so, they ',compete with the ships of other countries with complete success. The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire stated that at Rio there was a greater number of British ships than of the ships of any other country; and at Ham burgh, it appeared from the returns for 1846, that there were 995 British ships there, and only twelve American ships, and so with regard to other years. That would not be a fair comparison between England and America, but as regarded the trade of Rio and Hamburgh, it cer tainly is a satisfactory proof of the ability of this coun try to compete with America.—(Hear, hear.) There are, therefore, these two indications, first with regard to the building and navigation of ships, and next with regard to the state of the actual commerce of the world. But I take it that there is another and a stronger reason for believing that our naval strength will not be diminished by the repeal of these laws, and that is the main consideration of the character of the people of this country, and of the ex tent of capital which we command.—(Hear, hear.) I can imagine a country having a great deal of capital and commerce, but not being trained to marine pursuits, allowing its commerce to go into the hands of another nation, and I can also understand why a country having no capital, but with a turn for naval affairs, should also allow its commerce to get into the hands of another country ; but when I find a nation at once possessing great capital and great powers, and proverbial for its habits in naval pursuits, I cannot doubt but that such a nation must maintain a large commer cial navy.—(Hear, hear.) But what are the :conse quences experienced from these laws ? It has been said, and I think fairly, that the reciprocity lAct of Mr. Huskisson abrogated a very great part of the navigation-laws with regard to those countries with which we have formed reciprocity treaties ; and, as far as I have been able to farm a judgment of the results of these reciprocity treaties, I am led to think that the benefits of the navigation-laws were, in point of fact, illusory, and that we were left nothing but the bark of the oak—the trunk being entirely destroyed. —( Hear.) Looking back 24 years hence I find that in the 21 years between 1803 and 1823 the increase of our commercial marine was from 339,000 in tons, and 12,000 in men, up to 1,446,000 in tons, and 67,890 in men, showing a vast increase in the four years under the re ciprocity treaties, compared with the twenty years before the reciprocity Act was passed. Such being the case then, I can have no doubt—not the smallest—that if we abrogate the principal part of the navigation-laws that are remaining, our commercial marine will increase further than it has already done. I cannot doubt but that these restrictions being removed, we shall continue that which I believe to be the foundation of a great and powerful navy, namely, a strong commercial marine.— (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I quite admit, with my Right Honourable Friend, that if there were the least reason to suppose that our maritime strength would be, not destroyed, but even diminished by a measure of this nature, it would be unadvisable for this House to adopt it; but my belief is the other way. Seeing that every measure tending to relax and not to increase re strictions, has had a tendency to increase our commer cial marine instead of to injure it, I cannot but believe that similar relaxations in the same direction must be attended with a like tendency.—(Hear, hear.) An Hon. Member who spoke during this debate mentioned one of the securities for having our navy well manned, as being destroyed by the proposal of my Right Hon. Friend, because it was intended to do away with the ap prenticeship system in the mercantile marine. But I believe that there never was anything more injurious or unjust than putting a tax on the commercial marine, by compelling the shipowner to have a certain number of boys in his ship whether he wanted them or not, in order to furnish the navy with men, and I cannot understand how those who profess to be the advo cates of the shipowners and of the shipping interests of this country, should come forward in support of a restriction naturally so glaring as that of obliging the shipowners to have a number of apprentices and boys in their service that did not suit their convenience or their necessities.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, who spoke in this debate, made what I consider was a statement unworthy of his position in this House, when he laid such blame on certain officers of the Board of Trade who had laid returns before this House and the other House of Parliament, and who had this evidence before the Committees of both Houses on this subject.—(Hear, hear.) I think that when these gentlemenin the se v h e have furnished me n r t e s t , r e n r s a h s y k e d for jstiem Members s Ministers n f this oae Y ta r they h House, exactly in the form required, and that they gave in everyuae— .most intelligent nolige means ntevid of defence in this evidence ;andwhenwe consider (twuha hear)—l think that under such circum stances, to turn the indignation of the House upon them, and to represent them as making interested statements, is a course unworthy the position of the Hon. Gentleman. —(Hear.) And then the excuse for them is, I think, a very weak excuse, that these gentlemen of the Board of Trade are biassed in favour of free-trade principles. —(Hear.) With regard to this subject, upon which the Hon. Gentleman makes an accusation against us, I think he might as well say that the University of Cambridge was to blame because they had a bias towards the Newtonian theory, as that the officers of the Board of Trade, because they prepared certain tables, had a bias towards the principles of free trade.—(Hear, hear.) I reckon those principles to be the principles of science, established now upon sixty or seventy years' discussion in the opinion of all enlightened men who have re flected upon the subject. The Hon. Gentleman, how ever, has accused us.of acting with recklessness and ig norance, because we have proposed to go into Committee upon the navigation-laws, in order to see if they cannot be amended. Our proposition is (I will not now enter upon a consideration;of the question whether it is the best) . to ackas if the navigation-laws had not existed, as if the ships of all nations should be received in our ports in the same' matmer as British ships, with the exception of , the eoasting trade; and to reserve power to the Sove reign by order in Council to impose conditions and re strictions upon 'those who impose conditions and restric tions upon us. I think the principle is a right one. I am quite sure that so far from being a sign of that igno rance which the Honourable Gentleman laments in us, it is, upon the other hand, a sign of ignorance in him, and in those who act:with him, that they still persist in maintaining a theory which is contrary to all acknow ledged principles, contrary to all the science of the age, contrary to all who have studied the subject in the closet, and contrary to all the dicta laid down by Pitt and Huskisson, and other enlightened statesmen.— (Loud cheers.) I am convinced it is the duty of this House to act according to the knowledge of the times—(Hear, hear)—and I am convinced that if they were to refuse to go into Committee, if they were to keep up these restrictions be cause they existed in former times, this House would properly deserve the phrase of recklessness and ignorance. —(Hear, hear,) But I am, on the other hand, convinced that by removing these restrictions you will draw closer those bonds of amity with foreign nations which are ready to act in friendship and amity with you, and give a proof of the great destinies that await you.—(Cheers.` The House divided, when there appeared— For Mr. Herries's amendment 177 Against it 294 _ _ Majority in favour of th• Govornmeat —ll7 The House then went into Committee, and the ream lotion was ,greed to and repot - V(1, and the Bill was than brought in, tompled ran t!•.e r , solution. ADJOURNMVNT OF THE HOUSE. Lord J. RUSSELL tnojedltlattiiellouse at its rising should adjourn to Thursday, the 15th instunt. Agreed to. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Three o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Conon"" 4 .) FRIDAY, JUNE 2. NAVIGATION AND REGULATION OF SHIPS AND SEAMEN. - Order read for resumi ng ad j ourned Debate on A men d men t proposed to be m a d e to Question (May 29) "That AI r. Speaker do now lea ve th e C hair; " and wh i ch A men d men t was to leave out from th e word " That " to t h e en d o f th e Question, in order t o a dd t h e words " it is essent i a l t o th e national interests of thi s C ountry to ma i nta i n t h e funds mental principles of the existing Navigation-laws; subject to such modifications as may be best calculated to obviate any proved inconvenience to the Commerce of the United Kingdom and its dependencies, without danger to our maritime strength," instead thereof:—Question again pro posed," That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." Debate resumed:—Question put. The House divided MAJORITY—AYES, 294. Alxiy, T. N. Freestun, Colonel O'Brien, Jobs Acland, Sir T. D. Gibson, T. M. O'Connell, M. J. Adair, Hugh E. Gladstone, W. E. OTlalierty, Anthony Adair, R. Shafto Glyn, George Carr Ogle, S. C. Adare, Viscount Grace, 0. D. J. Ord, W. Adderley, C. 11. Graham, Sir J. Grenfell,Gre C C h . Pascoe Palmerston, Oswald, Alexander Aglionby, H. A. G ranger, T. C. Paget, L or d A. Alcock, Thomas G reene. John Paget, Lor d Clarence Anson, Colonel G reene, Thomas Paget, Lord G. Anson, Viscount Anetey, T. C. Armstrong, Sir A. G rey, Sir George Pearson, Ch ar les Armstrong, It. B. G rey, R alph W. Peel,:S i r R o bert Arundel, Earl of Grosvenor. Lord R. Perfect, Robert Barkly, Henry G uest, Sir J. Philips, Sir G. R. Baring, 11. B. Ilaggitt, r. R. Pilkington, James Baring, Sir F. T. H a ll , Sir Benjamin Pugh. David Hall Barron, Sir H. . P r a al t m te e n r , s r. n l W. Viscount . yburton, Lord Pusey, P. Bellew, RAM. Hamilton, Lord C. Raphael, Alexander Berkeley, Captain Hamner, Sir J. Rawdon, Colonel Berkeley, 11. Mastic, Aleiander Reynolds, Jonh Bernal, Ralph nestle, Archibald Ricardo, J. L. Birch, Sir Thomas Hawes, B. Ricardo, Osman Blackall, S. W. Hay, Lord John Rich, Henry Blake, M. J. Hayter, W. G. Robartes, T.:J. Bulling, William Headlam, T. E. Roche, E. B. Bouverie, E. P. Heald, James Homily, Sir John llowring, Dr. Heneage, G. 11. Russell, Lord John Boyd, John Heneage, E. Russell, Edward S. Boyle, Colonel Herbert, Henry A. Russell, F. C. I Brand, Thomas Herbert, Sidney Rutherford, A. Bright, John Hervey, Lord A. Salway, Colonel Brotherton, Joseph Heywood, James Sanders, George Brown, W. Hindley, Charles Sctiolefield,4William Bruce, Lord E. Hobhouse, Sir John Scrope, G. P. Bulkeley, Sir R. B. Hobhouse, T. B. Seymour, Lord Buller, Charles Hodges, T. L. Shell, R. L. Banbury, E. H. Hodges, T. Twisden Shelburne, Earl of Burke, Sir T. J. Hogg, Sir J. W. Sheridan, R. B. Buxton, Sir E. Holland, Robert Simeon, John Callaghan, D. Hope, Sir J. Smith, R. V. Campbell, W. F. Hope, H. T. Smith, John A. Cardwell, Edward Hope, Alexander Smith, M. Tucker Carew, s W. P. llorsman, Edward Smythe, G. Carter, J. B. Howard, C. W. Somerville, Sir W. Caulfield, Colonel Howard, E. G. Spearman, ii. J. Cavendish, C. C. Howard, Sir R. Stansfleld, W. R. Cavendish, G. H. Hume, Joseph Stanton, W.:H. Chaplin, W. J. Jervis, Sir John Staunton, Sir G. Charteris, Francis Keating, Robert Stuart, Lord D. Childers, J. W . Keogh, William Stuart, Lord J. Clay, Jarnesj Keppel, George T. Sullivan, Michael Clerk Sir George K e r, Richard Sutton; H. M, Clifford, Henry M. K er shaw, James Talbot, J. H. Cobden, R. Cochrane, A. Cocks, T. S. Labouchere, Henry Tenison, H. K. King,Kild Kildare, John Tancred, 11. W. aemarquis Talfourd, Sergeant Coke, E. K. Langston, J. H. Tennent, .J. Colebrooke, Sir T. Lascelles, W. S. Thesiger, Sir F. Conyngham, Lord A. I.emon, Sir C. Thicknesse, Ralph Corbally, M. E. Lewis, Sir T. Thompson, Colonel Courtenay, Lord Lewis, George C. Thompson, George Cowan, Charles Lincoln, Earl of Thornely, Thomas Cowper, W. F. Lindsay, Colonel Towneley, John Craig, W. G. Littleton, E. R. Towneley, Charles Crawford, W. S. Loch, James Townley, R. G. Currie, Henry Locke, Joseph Trail, George Currie, Raikes Lockhart, A. E. Tufnell, H. Dalrymple, Captain Lushington, C. Turner, Edmund Davie, Sir Henry M'Cullagh, W. T. Turner, G. J. Denison, J. _ E. M'Gregor, John _ Tynte, Colonel D'Eyncourt, T. Maher, N. 'Vane, Lord H. Divett, E. Mahon, O'Gorman Verney, Sir H. Douglas, Sir C. Maitland, Thomas Villiers, Viscount Drummond, Home Mangles, R. D. Villiers, Charles Duncan, Viscount Marshall, William Vivian, J. H. Duncan, George Martin, J. - Wakley, T. Dundas, Admiral Martin, C. W. Wall, C. B. East, Sir J. B. Martin, S. Walter, John Ebrington, Lord Matheson, A. Ward, H. G. Ellice, Edward Matheson, James Watkins, Colonel Ellice, E., jun. Matheson, Colonel Wellesley, Lord C. . Elliot, J. E. Maule, Fox Westenra, John C. Enfield, Lord Melgund, Viscount Westhead, J. P. Estcourt, J. B. B. Milner, W. M. Whitmore, T. C. Evans, John Milnes, R. Moncktou Willcox, Brodie Evans, William Milton, Viscount Williams, John Erred, William Mitchell, A. T. Wilson, James Fagan, William Moffatt, George Wilson, Matthew Fergus, John Molesworth, Sir W. Wood, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, J W. Monsell, William Wood, W. P. Fitzroy, Henry Morgan, H. K. G. Wortley, J. S. Fitawilliam, G. W Morpeth, Viscount Wrightson, W. B. Foley, John H. Morison, Sir W. Wyld, James Fordyce, A. 1). Morris, David Wyvill, Marmadake Forster, Matthew Mostyn, E. M. L. Young, Sir John Fortescue, Chichester Mowatt, Francis TELLERS. Fortescue, J. W. gorreys, Lord Hill, Lord Marcus Fox, W. J. Nugent, Sir Percy Parker, John MINORITY-NOES, 177. Alford, Viscount Fellowes, E. Neeld, Joseph Archdall, Captain Floyer, John Newport, Viscount Arkwright, G. Forbes, Wm. Noel, G. J. Bagot, Hon. W. Forester, G. C. Ossulton, Lord: Bailey, Joseph Fox, S. L. Packe, C. W. Bailey, J., jun. Fuller, A. E. Palmer, Roundell Bathe, 11. J. Galway, Viscount Pattison, J. Baines, M. T. Goddard, A. L. Pigot, Sir Robert Baldock, E. 11. Gordon, Admiral Plowden, W. H. Bankes, G. Gore, W. 0. Powell, Colonel Baring, Thomas Goring, Charles Powlett, Lord W. Barrington, Viscount Granby, Marquis of Prime, Richard Bateson, T. Grogan, E. Reid, Colonel Benbow, John Gwyn, Bowel Renton, John C. Benett, J. Male, It. B. Repton, G. W. Bennet, Philip Halford, Sir Henry Richards, Richard Bentinck, Lord G. Hall, Colonel Robinson. George Bsntinck, Lord H. Ilalsey, T..r. Rollesion, Colonel Bernard, Viscount Hamilton, J. If. Raiford, Francis Blackstone,lW. S. Harris, Hon. Capt. Rushout, Captain Boldero, Henry Heathcote, G. J. Sadler, John Bourke, Richard S. Henley, jr. W. Scott, F. Bowles, Admiral Berries, J. C. Seaham, Viscount Brackley, Viscount Hildyard, It. C. Seymer, H. K. Bramston, T. W. Hildyard, T..8.T, Shirley, E. J. Bremridge, Richard Hill, Lo r d E. Sibthorp, Colonel Brisco, M. Hood, Sir A. Smyth, J. G. Broadley, Henry Hotham, Lord Smollett, A. Brooke, Lord Hudson, George Somerset, Captain Bruce, C. L. Ilumphery, Ald. Sotheron, T. H. S. Buck, L. W. Ingestre, Visct. Spooner, Richard Buller, Sir J. T. Inglis, Sir R. H. Stafford, Augustus Bunbury, William Johnstone, Sir J. Stanley, E. Burghley, Lord Jolliffe, Sir W G. Stephenson, Robert Burrell, Sir C. Jones, Captain Stuart, Heir,' Burroughes, H. Kerrison, Sir E. Stuart , J. Cabbell, B. B. Knightley, Sir C. Talbot, C. It. Cayley, Edward S. Knox, Colonel Taylor, Thomas E. Chichester, Lord J. Lacy, IL C. Thompson, Alderman Christopher, R. Lascelles, E. Thornhill, G. Clive, Henry B. Law, Hon. E. C. Tollemache, John Cole, H. A. Lennox, Lord G. H. Trollope, Sir J. Coles, Henry B. Leslie, C. P. Tyrrell, Sir J. T. Cubittt, William Lockhart, W. Verner, Sir W. Curteis, H. M. Lygon, General Vesey, Hon. T. Davies, D. A. S. Mackenzie, W. F. Villiers, F. W. Deedes, W. Mandeville, Viscount Vivian, J. E. Dick, Quintin Manners, Lord G. Vyse, R. H. Disraeli, B. Masterman, John Waddington, David Drax, J. S. W. Maunsell, T. P. Waddington, H. S. Duke, Sir J. Maxwell, J. P. Walpole, Spencer Duncombe, A. Meux, Sir Henry Walsh, Sir J. Duncombe, 0. Miles, P. W. s. Williams, T. P. Dundas, G. Miles, W. Williamson, Sir H. Donne, F. P. Moore, Geor ge H. Wodehouse,E. Du Pre, C. G. Morgan, O. Worcester, Marquis Edwards, Henry Mulgrave, Earl Wynn, Sir W. Emlyn, Viscount Mullings, J. R. TELLES/J. Farnham, E. B. Mure, Colonel Beresford, William Farrer, James Neeld, John Newdegate, N. The matter had been submitted to a barrister, and he was n o f e p Is: i p o i 1 7 1 ththatthea b an a d e k s c c h o e u m l d e. not l e b e understood established t h i c t on the - directors were liable to re election. Did not think that the company could have been managed more econo mically than it had been. As to both the undertakings being under the same roof, the witness, in answer to a question of Mr. O'Connor, said ha was aware that the Houses of Lords and Commons were under one roof, and believed there was very little communication be tween them. Had heard that Mr. O'Connor had offered to put all the funds of the company into the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and allow him to nomi nate trustees. By the CHAIRMAN—AIthough Mr. O'Connor said he wished to divest himself of the property. he was not aware that he had taken any steps for the purpose of doing so. Sir BENJAMIN Hann said, in reference to an observa tion made by Mr. O'Connor in the course of the exami nation, that Lord Ashley had told him that he would not consent to he connected with the Lend Company, either directly or indirectly. Mr. Philip M'Grath financial secretary of the Na tional Land Company, was then called and examined — He said the London and Joint Stock Bank were the bankers of the company. The balance-sheets of the company were produced at the meetings of the share holders. He was also a director of the company, and had been so since April. Witness handed in a balance-sheet, sh ming that up to the 25th March last the total receipts were 94,1841. 6s. 11d., and the expendi ture 4,378/. 14s. 9d., leaving a balance of 89,805/. lOs. 2d., which eonsisted of cash in hand, houses, and land. He had himself no part of that balance in hand, as he paid over every week to Mr. M'Gowan, printer and publisher of Great Windmillestreet, all the balance he had in his possession as financial secretary. Mr. M‘Gowan was an agent of Mr. O'Connor, and officially he did not know r y . or o t M b h e e r y G n e :S w . t a a n r T . is hp au publish hands.oni s a o t3et beenri TTo Efthe the print er an d what bec ame o f the money after he paid it into his The auditors were M r. Witness—The rules o f the N a ti ona l L and Company Cuffay and Mr. James Knight. Sir B. HALL—I see an item in one of the books of 75/. 12s. Bd. set forth as being paid to the Convention on the 27th of April. Am I to understand that this Convention is one of the objects of the association? —No. Then was that sum paid to the Convention? Wit ness—lt was paid to the order of Mr. O'Connor, and will be refunded by him; but, as far as my information as financial secretary goes, that sum has not been re paid. Some of the delegates at that Convention were deficient in funds to carry them to their homes, and Mr. O'Connor agreed to supply them with money. There were three lecturers employed for some time at the rate of 2/. a week, for the purpose of making known the objects of the company. There was no rule of the society which gave power to the directors to expend money either in assisting the Convention or in keeping lecturers. The witness was next examined by Mr. O'Connor and other members of the Committee. At four o'clock the Committee adjourned. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. WORSHIP-STREET. THE VICTIMS OF A CHARTIST MOB.—T. and F. Woodward, the young men who were so brutally mal treated by a portion of the Chartist mob on Sunday last, under the false assumption that they were special constables, and the facts of whose case appeared in our Wednesday's impression, applied to Mr. Arnold for some pecuniary assistance from the poor-box. It appeared from their statement that, in consequence of the serious injuries they had sustained on the occa sion referred to, and from the effects of which both of them were still suffering, they were incapacitated from pursuing their ordinary avocations, and having been robbed by the rabble of every farthing they possessed, were reduced in consequence to a state of destitution. One of the brothers, a printer, whose eyes were fright fully swollen and discoloured, and his person covered with bruises, intimated that he had made a painful effort two days previously to resume his employ ment at the office of IlMr. Nicholls, in Hoxton-square, where he had been some time engaged, but was almost immediately seized with such acute pains and throbbings in the head, accompanied by giddiness and dimness of sight, that he was compelled to relinquish the attempt. The other appli- cant, a working silversmith, stated that his position was even more hopeless than that of his brother as he was so terribly disfigured that he could not offer himself for employment, if he were even in a condition to accept it, which was so far from being the case, that on calling that• morning upon a dentist, who had humanely offered to supply him with artificial teeth in the place of those which had been knocked out by the mob, he was in formed by that gentleman, after an examination of his mouth, that he had sustained a fracture of the jaw, which would necessarily preclude the operation for some weeks, and how to subsist in the meantime he was at a loss to conceive, as he was wholly without means or a friend to assist him. Mr. Henley, the chief usher, who had rescued one of the young men, at great personal risk, after ho had been besieged by the mob for nearly two hours in a house where he had fled for refuge, said he had been at some pains to ascertain the correctness of their representa tions, and was enabled thereby fully to substantiate them. Mr. ARNOLD said that it certainly appeared a case de serving commiseration, but regretted that the funds at his disposal would not enable him to afford more than lUs. for their immediate wants, which the applicants re ceived with a grateful acknowledgment. 1 here interposed, and said he felt highly honoured ; that he had a Government spy present. ..'(el " .e.3 . of" Oh!" and " No, no.") Any fellow spoke. ' to the party in question, and inquired hi s name; :,14(1 upon being told, was answered that it way a lie, he knew better, he knew perfectly well who he was, he was the ' scoundrel who had given evidence against soma of their brave patriots at Bow-street.—(Cries of "Then break his neck, turn him down stairs,' kill the --:,) The chairman having obtained silence, the speaker was again addressing the meeting, when another howl was set up, "Turn the Government spies out, throw them down stairs." The party not altogether liking the company he had got into, was in the of departing, when some i fellows cried out at the top of their voices, " He is going." They had no sooner done so, than a number of other persons cried out, "Don't let him, pin him, stab him, or break his neck." In the midst of the confusion the party made off, accompanied by a friend. Mr. Inspector li.!igers, of the L division, on being made acquainted with the violent character of the parties composing the meeting, had the whole of the reserve men belonging to that division pluc,d on duty in case their services should be required. The only meeting announced to take place on Mon day by the Chartists is in Bonner's Fields; but, from private information, the Government is in possession of the fact that monster meetings are to take place at Croydon and other parts. Every provision has been made by the authorities to meet any emergency, either in the metropolis or suburbs; and we can confidently assert that it any procession is attempted in the metro litan district, the most stringent measures will be adopted to break it up. Information has been sent, to the effect that it is the intention of the mob to liberate all the prisoners taken in connexion with the Chartist disturbances. If such was attempted, it must have as great a failure as any of their previous attempts. Last night 800 soldiers were marched into the Penitentiary, and are there to remain until after Monday, in case any attack should be made on that prison. The whole of the turnkeys and wardens were at the same time placed under arms, and similar precautions have been adopted at all the other prisons. Mr. Feargus O'Connor, M.P., last night announced that after the busy day of Monday next, he should leave London by mail train for Birmingham, in order to be in good time for Sheffield on Tuesday, where a grand pro cession is to take place. He also stated that he had given directions for employing the best counsel for Ernest Jones, &c., and he requested that every man would send a post-office order directed to him, which will be placed to the defence fund. The several districts where riotous meeting have been held (except Lambeth) were perfectly quiet last night at half -past ten o'clock. MR. FEARGUS O'CONNOR AND THE CHARTIST LEADERS. Yesterday, Mr. F. O'Connor, M.P., waited on Mr. Jardine, the sitting magistrate at Bow-street Police court, to ascertain if he could not be admitted as one of the sureties for Mr. Ernest Jones, the Chartist leader, who has been committed for trial, without being obliged to remain in town twenty-four hours, the time specified to give the Government authorities the required notices for that purpose. He considered that such a time was named by the Court to ascertain the respectability of the party offering himself, and such being the case, he presumed there could be no objection to accept of his recognizances without further delay, as he was obliged to leave town on important business ; still, if such an order was imperative, he would remain, however incon venient it might be, that he might be accepted as one of th• sureties. Mr. Jardine ssid he was not the magistrate who heard the charges against anv of the persons alluded to, and consequently could not be aware of any order that had been made upon the subject ; but he concluded that the notice should be given to the Solicitor of the Trea sury, by whom the prosecution was conducted, and who would sanction the bail to be accepted. Mr. O'Connor said that he had sent in his name at the solicitor's office on Thursday evening, but the office hap pened to be closed, and he could obtain no information to his inquiries, and he would repeat his visit if' there was a prospect of success. Mr. Jardine thought there was every probability. Mr. O'Brien, the second clerk, said that four names had been sent into the solicitor's office for selection. Mr. O'Connor said he would at once proceed there; and, having left in a cab for that purpose, on his return the magistrate had gone, it being then after five o'clock; but it was understood that he had been accepted as one of the sureties. THE SPECIALS.—On entering the court the Hon. Member was asked if he wished to be sworn in as a special constable—there being a vast quantity sworn in during the day—and he replied, "God forbid!" NATIONAL LAND SCHEME. The Select Committee appointed to inquire into the merits of the National Land Scheme met yesterday in Committee-Room, No. 21, House of Commons. Mr. William Hayter, in the chair. The other. Mem bers of the Committee were Sir Benj a min Hall, Mr. G. Thompson, Mr. Scholefi e ld, Mr. Feargus O'Connor, and Mr. Monsell. Mr. Chinnery was called and'examined. He said the number of shares held by the persons who signed the deed was 25,393. The deed was signed by 7,566 per sons, and the complete registration of the company was effected in February last. Mr. Feargus O'Connor told him first of all to register the society under the Friendly Societies' Act; and if he should not succeed, to register it as a joint-stock com p an y. Mr. O'Connor had Itever paid it was not hi s i ntent i on to register. Wit nefThade Mr. Roberts, •the solicitor, acquainted from tithe to time with the progress which he had made in, effecting the registration. Mr. Roberts's name wts In serted in the deed of settlement as treasurer of the com pany. Did not know that every person who became a shareholder signed the rules of the National Land Company. Knew nothing of Mr. Roberts's conduct as treasurer in carrying out the provisions of the deed. Th e gentlemen named as trustees in the deed were Thom as Slingsby Duncombe, Esq., John Sewell, Esq., and Ernest Jones, Esq.; but none of the property bought with the money of the company had been c onveye d to money was first purchase those gentlemen. It might have been conveyed to them just as well as to Mr. O'Connor if they had been named for that purpose. No land whatever which had been in Worcester purchased with the companY'a was conveyed to of land was made in March, 1846, and consisted of one hundred and three acres, called the Herringsgate Estate. any one except Mr. O'Conant 0: 121 0 . 2,344/. The next The purchase-money amounted to wbank, shire, in October, 1846. It consisted of 470 acres, and purchase made was of land, the cost for the freehold was 8,560/, which was paid by Mr. O'Connor in hard cash, in the presence of wit ness. Snigsend and Mot Farmwas the n ext l and purchased by the ,company. There were 268 acres, and the amount of purchase .money w as 12,2001. Another of land at Minster Lo ve!, in purchase was Oxfordshire, cost of 1 consisting of 297 acres , at the 0 , 8 781; 280 acres 'were also purchase& cla led Dodsford, H o ld_ fordswell, for 10,3501., which included timber, and the estate was unencumbered. They were at present completing the purchase of an estate called Maythorn for 15,0501, exclusive of the timber upon it.. The total amount of money y actually invested in land, in the way mentioned, amounted to 44,3321, Upon the last purchase a deposit 'had been paid of 1,505/. No part whatever of . the land so purchased had been sold to any person. Mr. O'Connor was the only proprietor of the land and labour bank, with was connected with the National Land Company, and the depositors in the bank bad no legal claim upon the land which had been pur chased. Both the establ ishments w ere held und er one roof, and that fact might be calculated to mislead per - sons, and induce them to believe that they were one an d the same concern. There were no direct ors, treasurers, solicitors, or other officers connected with the bank, and it was solely under the management of Mr. O'Connor. The whole expense connected with the preparations and execution of the deed was 2,1761., which included th e first stance. in- That was the amount of Mr. Roberts's bill. Cross-examined by Mr. O'Coieston—lt had been ar ranged that the directors of the Land Company should also be joint directors of the Land and Labour B an k , but i t was found impracticable to carry out that arraugerae ut s . WANDS WORTH. Henry Caswell, a butcher in the Borough-road, South wark, was charged before Mr. Beadon with stealing an ewe sheep, the property of some person unknown, from off Clapham-common. In consequence of several butchers at Clapham having recently lost sheep which they had turned on the Com mon, and complained to the police, Sergeant Emmer eon, 16 V, two constables were ordered to keep watch in plain clothes. On Tuesday night, between ten and eleven o'clock, Police-constable Collins, 108 V, saw a cart drive past a small flock of sheep; it returned again in a few minutes, and the prisoner alighting, instantly caught hold of a sheep, tied its hind legs together, and threw it into his earl. He had mounted, and was going to drive off, when Collins immediately caught hold of the horse's head and told the prisoner to step. The latter threw the sheep out of the fore part of his cart, where the sergeant secured it. The prisoner then struck Collins and the other constable such desperate blows with the butt-end of his whip, that they were compelled, in self-defence, to strike him with their staves (the prisoner's head was bandaged up and he was covered with blood), and it was not until a most determined resistance had been persevered in by the prisoner that he was taken. A cord was found in the prisoner's pocket similar to the one round the sheep's hind legs. _ _ Sergeant Emmerson said it would be necessary to remand the prisoner, to ascertain not only who was the owner of this sheep, but if possible to connect the pri soner with other cases of sheep-stealing. Within a very short space of time Mr. Neale, of Clapham, had lost three sheep off the Common, Mr. Arnold two, and Mr. Terry one. _ _ BEADON said he would remand the case, but would hear anything the prisoner had to say. The prisoner said he went out for a ride and to collect in some money, and as he was returning home, there were a lot of sheep lying in the road, and he ran over this one; he thought it a pity the sheep should die, and believing its back to be broken, he tied its legs that it might be quiet, and he intended to take it to Clapham and find out what butch©r it belonged to, when as he was driving off, the policemen rushed out on him, and hit him on the head with their truncheons. He asked for mercy, but they showed him none. He thought it was very wrong for them to take him up, and lock him up all night. Sergeant Emmerson said there was nothing the matter with the sheep, they had brought it and the horse and cart to the Court. The lather of the prisoner asked for the horse and cart to be given into his keeping. Inspector Busain said it was most important that the horse and cart should not go out of the possession of the pollee #i..BEADoN remanded the prisoner, and refused to accept any amount of bail. THE CHARTIST DISTUftBANCES. DANGEROUS ORGANIZATION FOR MONDAY NEXT.— Notwithstanding the intention of the Government to put down all processions or open air meetings which are cal culated to cause terror and alarm in the metropolis, the Chartists last night gave notice that it was their inten tion to meet in a body on Monday next, at Bishop Bon ner's- fields. Circulars were sent by the Executive to the secretaries of the Chartist body, and they have deter mined, in spite of all resistance on the part of the au thorities, to meet at half-past two o'clock, and conclude by six o'clock, if possible. A few days since an address was sent by the Chartists to Sir George Grey to be laid before her Majesty, the receipt of which was acknowledged by the Home Secre tary, and the Right Hon. Baronet stated that he had laid the document before the Queen. Dr. M'Douall, to whom the answer was sent, has since seat a very impertinent letter to Sir George Grey, in which he stated that he was instructed to inquire whe ther her Majesty was graciously pleased to receive that address—whether any command had been issued con cerning it, and whether it was the intention of the Mi nisters to advise the Queen to consider the same, with a view of complying with the prayer of the address. Let ters have also been sent to Lord John Russell, the Prime Minister, by the Chartist body. In ono they state that his Lordship has thrown down the gauntlet, and they had accepted the challenge. They intended, at all hazards, to hold peaceful demonstrations. They wished to ascertain his Lordship's intentions, they had reason to do so, they stated, after the experience the people had had in this metropolis of the murderous acts of the police. It is needless to state that the answers to the letters have not been altogether relished by the Chartist executive. The organizing of the Chartist members, which has been so long talked about, has most signally failed on the Surrey side of the water. In the extensive parish of Lambeth not more than 130 persons have, up to last night, enrolled themselves. It is therefore very ques tionable whether one tithe of the 200,000 men announced to walk in procession and upset the present Govern. ment will meet on Monday next. A meeting, of a most disgraceful character, took place last night, in the South-London Chartist Hall, Webber street, Blackfriars-road. After an address from the chairman, a number of persons surrounded another party, who enteted the room apparently out of curiosity, when the rabble gave vent to the most violent epithets. One fellow cried out, " Here is a Government spy." Another said, " Then turn him out." The chairman FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE OF FRIDAY. CROWN-OFFICE, JUNE 9, 1848. MEMBER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT. County of Chester (Northern Division)—George Corn wall Legh, of High Legh, in the said county, Esq., in the room of the Right Hon. Edward John Stanley, now Baron Eddisbury. TREASURY-CHAMBERS, WHITEHALL, JUNE 6. The Lords Commissioners of hvr Majesty's Treasury have been pleased to appoint Richard Madox Bromley, Esq., to be Secretary to the Commissioners for Auditing the Public Accounts, vice John Lewis Mallet, Esq., retired. WAR-OFFICE, JUNE 9. 2d Dragoons—Captain Samuel Toosey Williams, from 47th Fout, to be Captain, vice Grant, who exchanges, June 9. 3d Light Dragoons—Lieutenant James Cowell to be Captain, by purchase, vice Martin, who retires ; Cornet George Thomas Gough to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Cowell, June 9; Lieutenant George E. F. Kauntze to be Adjutant, vice Sullivan, who resigns the Adjutancy mil., March 30. _ 2d Fooi—John Charles Weir, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Mathias, promoted, June 9. 12th Foot—Lieut. Samuel Fairtlough, from half-pay 63d Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Storey, promoted, June 9. 17th Foot—Ensign William Pollard, from 57th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Pilmer, who exchanges, June 9. 27th Foot—Lieutenant Francis William Johnstone to be Captain, by purchase, vice C o l e , w h o ret i res; E ns i gn Edward Barnes to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Johnstone; William Douglas Phelips, Gent., to be En sign, by purchase, vice Barnes, June 9. 47th Foot—Captain Walter Colquhoun Grant, from 2d Dragoons, to be Captain, vice Williams, who ex changes, June 9. 57th Foot—Ensign Richard Pilmer, from 17th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Pollard, who exchanges, June 9. 68th Foot—Lieutenant Thomas de Courcy Hamilton, from 90th Foot, to be Lieutenant, ♦ice Stephenson, who exchanges, June 9. 90th Foot—Lieutenant William George Stevenson, from 68th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Hamilton, who exchanges, June 9. 95th Foot—Lieutenant George Cornwall to be Cap tain, without purchase, vice David Dickson, who re tires upon full pay; Ensign Henry Foster to be Lieu tenant, vice Cornwall; Gentleman Cadet John Coltman Davenport, from Royal Military College, to be Ensign, vice Foster, June 9. Rifle Brigade—Lieutenant Julius Richard Glyn to be Captain, by purchase, vice the Hon. J. A. Keane, who retires; Second Lieutenant Arthur William Godfrey to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Glyn; Charles William Doherty, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Godfrey; Second Lieutenant William Bagenall Brewster, to be Adjutant, vice Glyn, pro moted, June 9. Unattached—Lieutenant Charles Robert Storey, from 12th Foot, to be Captain, without purchase, June 9. MEMORANDUM.—.The Christian names of Captain Mitchell, on half-pay Unattached, are Thomas Henry. The Christian names of Ensign Gosling, of the 49th Foot, are Fansbawe ERRATUM in the Gazette of the 6th inst.—Royal Regi ment of Artillery.—The date of the promotion of Cap tain Ellis, Second Captain Wragge, and First Lieutenant Farmer, should be 30th of May, instead of 13th of May. Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Dorsetshire. Henry Gerard Sturt, Esq., M.P., to be Deputy Lieu tenant; Captain Henry Perin Steele to be Deputy Lieu tenant, June 5. Commission by the Lord-Lieutenant of Kincardineshire. 105th Regiment of North British Militia—David Wil liam Balfour Ogilvy, Esq., to be Captain, May 26. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. Stephen Davis and Adolphus Troeger, furriers, York. BANKRUPTS. Robert Wilson, surgeon, Slough, Buckinghamshire. to surrender June 17, at two, and July 29, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Follett, official assignee, Sambrook-court, Basinghall-street; Smith, Bedford-row; Bowles, Windsor. George Payne, wholesale clothier, Minories, June 21, at twelve, and July 21, a t e l even , at t h e C ourt o f Bank ruptcy. Stansfeld, official assignee; Shield and Har wood, Queen -street, Cheapside. William Bignell, tailor, Codicote, Hertfordshire, June 16, at two, and July 18, at twelve, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Groom, official assignee, Abchurch-lane, Lom bard -street ; Taylor, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall street. Samuel Carroll, broker, Mincing-lane,_ City, June 17. at two, and J u ly 24, a t t we l ve , a t th e Court of Bank ruptcy. Green, official assignee, Aldermaabury; Kirk man, Laurence Pountuey-lane. William henry Hyde, printer, Newcastle-under-Lyme, June 20, and July 18, at eleven, at the Birmingham Dis trict Court. Whitmore, official assignee, Birmingham; Harding, Newcastle-under-Lyme. William Sutcliffe, worsted stuff manufacturer, Brad ford, Yorkshire, June 23 and August 4, at ten, at the Leeds District Court. Freeman, official assignee, Leeds; Gregory and Sons, Clement's Inn ; Pickup, Bradford ; Bond and Barwick, Leeds. John Redman, coach proprietor, Liverpool, June 26 and July 14, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ; Vincent, Temple ; Minshull, Liverpool. Edwin Phillips, baker, Shrewsbury, Juno 17, and July 15, at half -past ten, at the Birmingham District Court. Valpy, official assignee, Birmingham; Teece, Shrewsbury ; Reece, Birmingham. Sarah Whitehouse, Edwin Whitehouse, and Alfred Whitehouse, tin plate manufacturers, Newland, Glouces tershire, June 20, at twelve, and July 21, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assignee, Bristol; Philpotts, Blackfriars. (Dividends, &c., in our next.) PRICE OE SUGAR. Tho average price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, computed from the returns made in the week ending June 6, 1848. is 255. 2 1 ,4 d. per cwt. Dispatches were received yesterday at the Colonial dice, from the Governor of the Cape of Good Hope. LECTURES 4 '1" ON THE MORAL, SOCIAL, AND PROFES SIONAL DUTIES OF ATTORNEYS. BY SAMUEL WARREN. Last evening the fourth of a series of Lectures, or( = the Moral, Social, and Professional Duda of - 44 - 5.-7 1 -/_- - - torneys and Solicitors, was delivered in the Hafi'afi sma t ., the Law Society, in Chancery-lane, by—we give the name with a respectful simplicity—Samuel Warren. That fourth lecture brought the series to a conclu sion ; and we, who had the gratification of hearing it articulated by the lips of Mr. Warren, may be per mitted to regret that the series was not one of a more protractel character. It was something, we thought, to listen to the author of " Ten Thousand a-Year," of the " Diary of a Physician," and last, and by no means least memorable for its austere beauty, (A the dramatic narrative of "Now and Then," in the ca• paeity of a lecturer. And a lecturer, too, upon a theme intimately connected with the profession to which the whole of the intellectual energies of Mr. Warren appear to have been directed. We say "the whole of his energies," because whatever reputation Mr. Warren has acquired in literature he has ac quired by the immediate combination of his legal knowledge with his ingenuity as a novelist, excepting, of course, his first work, the "Diary of a Late Phy sician "—a work which, according to the revelations prefixed to a recent edition, was completed in his ex treme youth, before indeed his professional career could have been seriously commenced. In all his subsequent compositions in general literature—in all those, at least, which have come under our conside ration as critics—the fact has seemed to us to be very conspicuous, that the ambition of the writer has been always, essentially and strictly, a forensic ambition. Look, for example, at the elaborate and even pro found acquaintance with the law displayed in the fiction which recounts the vicissitudes of Charles Aubrey and of Tittlebat Titmouse in refe rence to the acquisition of Yatton. Look again at " Now and Then " a tale which is at once a reverent commentary on the Book of Job, and the wade mecum to a portion of the most interest ing lore of "the courts"—touching at one moment upon the laws relating to the preservation of game, at another upon the penalties inflicted for the crime of homicide, and incidentally in short upon several of the most remarkable segments in the great circle of criminal jurisprudence. Or look at some of the brief and less pretentious papers contributed by the same writer to Blackwood's Magazine. In every instance the tendency is legal, the tone is legal, the very inspiration is legal. His terse and masterly analysis of the character of Sir William Follett to wit, or his intricate and bewildering argument, en titled, " Who is the murderer ?" Obvious as these facts are, they nevertheless require some direct enume ration, since the vulgar prejudice is to the effect that a man who writes a story book cannot by possibility be a sound lawyer. And we are induced to insist upon the circumstance of Mr. War ren's devotion to the law, apart from his individual labours as a barrister, or his elementary books as a student in jurisprudence, because were we not con vinced that his whole mind was inflamed with that paramount devotion, we should not dedicate ten mi nutes' attention, or one inch of our columns to the commemoration of the lectures which have just ter minated. Mr. Warren last evening called the law a jealous mistress, and it is precisely because we believe him to have viewed her throughout his career in the light of a jealous mistress that we are induced to no tice his recent enunciations as a lecturer. And, again, it is precisely because many persons cannot comprehend how a lawyer can attain eminence in the belles lettres without deteriorating his o p u ro r fe a s l s l i u o s n io a n l s rteoputtahetiolenctutrheatof w y e este h r a d v a e y by p r e m f a a i c e n d . t oa a n i l inayiwr3gert Chancellorhaa are e th n e ot a iw b n i 7 l io i o t m y pw o a f rt a bt el e novelist paEs q rus ikn a i a d n n e d et the eBw aas nn s d kloit t hllo lovefe verses; neither was Si r Thomas More h who wrote with hi s whole soul about a mere on vi r s i o o n n e .f though no one h as ever since written, or ever will write, a second Utopia. Mr. Warren, therefore, has proved himself, to our thinking, to be eminently qualified to instruct others in the difficult and abstruse science to which his attention has been so sedulously directed ; he has proved this not only by the labours of an honourable career, but also in a particular manner by those very works of imagination which, to the superficial observer, constitute only a negation of his professional pretensions. It was, consequently, on this account that we listened, last evening, to his discourse upon the responsibilities devolving upon attorneys and solicitors, with feelings beyond those of mere curiosity. And it is for this reason that we regard the series of lectures of which that discourse formed the conclusion, as entitled in a very express and particular mauler to a notice of comment and commemoration. Without giving a minute report of the lecture delivered yesterday in the hall of the Law Society, by Mr. Warren, it would be frivolous to attempt to convey any adequate idea of its charac ter. Our intention is, therefore, restricted within a much narrower compass; we are only solicitous to convey to the minds of those who were not among the auditors some fragmentary notion of the discourse through the medium of a very fragmentary rentinis , eence. In one of the introductory paragraphs of his final lecture, Mr. Warren eloquently vindicated the profession of the law from that imputation of barrenness which we hare already alluded to, and which asserts in the most dogmatic manner imaginable that literary celebrity and the celebrity of the jurisconsult cannot be acquired simultaneously. Nobly and passionately did he fling back this preposterous assertion in the teeth of the accusers, apostrophizing them as " plodding dullards," and reminding them that the il lustrious Hallam was a barrister as well as an historian, that Bishop Warburton toiled at the desk of a soli citor's office before his mind was first entranced by the seductive charms of theology, and that Sharon Turner—the erudite and luminous annalist of Eng land —was, up to the hour of his decease, a practising attorney ! In another portion of his dicourse the lec turer insisted upon the necessity of a lawyer striving perpetually for the acquisition of general or, so to speak, miscellaneouk knowledge remembering always the renowned aphorism of Lord Bacon, that "knowledge is power," and instancing the utility of obtaining information beyond the ordinary require ments of the law by supposing that a philosopher, a Michael Faraday for example, offers himself as a client to some solicitor who is unable to understand a word he says from his profound ignorance upon scien tific matters. In illustration of the supreme respon sibilities which may at any moment devolve upon an attorney, the lecturer recounted the following very beautiful incident :—" A short time ago," said Mr. Warren, " a gentleman of large fortune, a man in fact worth his 40,0001., was indignant with his only child, a daughter, for marrying against his wishes. He quarrelled with her—he disinherited her—he left his whole property of 40,000/. to his attorney, and to two other gentlemen, all of whom were residing in Yorkshire. What did the attorney do? He went to his two co-legatees, got them to resign their respec tive claims over to himself, and then made over every , sixpence of the 40,0001. to the daughter and her chil dren ! When I mentioned this circumstance this very morning to a friend of mine, one of the most distinguished men at the bar, he exclaimed, and I doubt not you will coincide in the exclamation, `God bless that man !'" . . . Very different was the effect of another anecdote given by Mr. Warren in the course of his lecture, when speaking of the necessity for vigilance on the part of an attorney. "I myself," said he, "have recognised the brother of the defendant acting as a juryman upon a case, and I have been assured, on credible authority, that on one occasion the plaintiff was actually seen sneaking into the jury-box!" The sly humour with which this was uttered, elicited an explosion of laughter. It reminded one of the satirist of the Tagrags and the Gammons. . . . The principal merit of the lec ture, however, consisted in the communication of wholesome advice to the young practitioners, respect ing their moral, social, and professional duties. Upon these points Mr. Warren was admirably axiomatic. Among other things he maintained, that " the office of the law was—not to cause litigation—but to pre vent litigation." And he particularly impressed upon his hearers the advisability of a law-student keeping pace with the age in which he lived, so that he might to the full appreciate " the difference between reform and revolution, between reparation and disorganiza tion." Altogether, the lectures of Samuel Warren have proved to he the choicest fruits of his exact and laborious researches in the science of jurisprudence. NEW HISTORICAL WORKS.—We are requested to state that Mr. Colburn has this day published, " the Court and Times of Charles I. ; including Memoirs of the Mission in England of the Capuchin Friars in the service of Queen Henrietta Maria, by Father Cyprien de Gamache," edited by the author of " Memoirs of Sophia Dorothea, consort of George I."—" The Court and Times of James 1.," &c., in 2 vols. Bvo., 2S•. bound.— Also, just published, " the Court and Times of James 1., illustrated by authentic and confidential letters from public and private manuscript collections," 2 'roll. Ero., 21s. bound. THE CHARTIST MEETING oN MONDAT.—The Government are determined to use every means in their power to put a stop to these times of excitement, sue have given orders for all the troops to assemble again in London by Sunday night, and we hope that this will be the last time the military will have to attend without being called upon to act in a manner which will be the means of putting a death-blow to this lawless set. At the Middlesex Sessions yesterday Thomas Smith, alias " Tiger" Smith, a captain in the 15th Ben gal Native Infantry, was brought up for judgment, he having been convicted of defrauding Mr. Bishop, the gunsmith, and Mr. Almond, army accoutrement maker, of Bond-street, of a 101. note and five sovereigns in cash, for cheques on the Oriental Bank, in which the pri soner had no account. The Learned Sergeant sentenced. him to hard labour for four calendar months.