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

'use is not in a condition to de&do until we are in pos session of the whole government plan. It occurs to me that the subject started by the Hon. Baronet the Mem ber for Clare goes to the very gist of the whole question. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Noble Lord hod Featly misunderstood him. What he (Lord J. Russell) e tad said was that Government, in their propositions, Would be guided by the public interest alone e and the Noble Lord pretended to understand that something like a bargain had been entered into with Irish Members.— (Hear, hear.) When a government plan had been once Propounded to the House, it was not unusual to confer Oa the details with parties interested, but he repeated that the ultimate decision of Government would be in lhaenced only by considerations of the public interest. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (who bad just entered the House) said, the facts of the case are these :—I yesterday heard that a deputation of Irish Members wished to see me respecting the differential had on rum, and on other matters, respecting which I ad previously had an interview with the Irish distillers, t 'amely, an allowance on wastage when taking British spirits out of store. My Hon. Friend opposite (Sir L. O'Brien) and five other Irish Members waited on nee 1111 d stated:their opinion, founded on representations they bad received from the Irish distillers, that reducing the differential duty on ruin from ninepenco to fourpence would be prejudicial to the Irish spirit trade. I heard the deputation with deference, stated that I would sub rnit their views to Government, and that, as to the aecond portion of their request, that respecting the Wastage, I had for some time bad it under con sideration, and would, if it could be safely done, concede it. It was certainly intimated to lac that the votes of these gentlemen would depend On my answer, and I said that I had prepared what I believed best adapted for the public interests, and that as to the votes, Hon. Members must take the course they thought fit; that I could not make terms, and that had given them the only answer in m power.—(Hear, kear.) I came down to the House ea r l y to answer the 'question of which I had received notice from the Hon. tart., but as a railway debate was going on I returned to Downing -street, where I have been busily engaged ever since. Mr. DISRAELI said that the Irish Members had not yet, received the answer they required.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had announced their plan, and should adhere to it, and not call upon the House to debate a Question, a most important feature in which was con fessedly still under Cabinet consideration. He thought 't but right that the House should be informed as to What really was the government plan. Mr. C. BULLER complained that the Noble Lord the Member fur Lynn was most reckless in his imputations on the Government. The Noble Lord had accused the Government of making a bargain F with the Irish Mem tars. In hi s (M r . B u ll er s) opinion there never d been made a more extraordinary bargain than that Which the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Bucks Seemed inclined to make with Members whose views were diametrically opposed to their own, merely for the PUrrose of catching a few stray votes.—(Hear.) The house had the authority of the Hon. Baronet the M• ember for Clare as to the fact that uo bargain had coen entered into. Mr. BAILLIE said that one of the Irish Members had informed him that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had told them his views were in concurrence With theirs, and that he would use his influence with his colleages to bring them round to a similar opinion. Mr. HERBERT, as one of the deputation which had Waited on the Government, denied that any bargain had ► been entered into. Mr. NEWDEGATE said it appeared to him that atenething very like a bargain had been going on, not- Withstanding the virtuous indignation of the Hon. Mem ber for Liskeard.—(Hear, hoar.) The answers of the different Members of the Government reminded him of the old proverb : " When caps amongst a crowd are thrown, Each man picks up and fits his own." The House could hardly proceed with the debate in ig norance of the government plan. Mr. HORSMAN did not think the explanation which bad been given at all satisfactory.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the House should be informed whether Govern roent meant to proceed with the plan as originally pro- Posed or not.—(Hear.) Mr. FAGAN denied that any bargain had been pro posed or acceded to. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the point respecting which he had expressed his c oncurrence with the deputation was the wastage, and there was an Hon. Member behind him who could con firm his statement. r . Mr. J. O'BBIEN confirmed the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sir L. O'BRIEN said that the Right ROD. Gentleman Still left the House without information on the most im- Portant point. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could give no further answer. Mr. URQUHART was strongly of opinion that a virtual bargain had been going on betwe en the Irish Members and the Right Hon. Baronet. It would appear t▪ hat the Right Hon. Gentleman had been throwing dust in their eyes, and, therefore, he (Mr. Urquhart) should give his vote for the adjournment of the debate. , Sir R. INGLIS did not think the que stion which the y oad been discussing for two hours was so connected with the resolution as to require the expenditure of so long a ti tle--(Hear, bear.) Mr. BERNAL differed entirely from his Hon. Friend, and considered that a nearer assimilation of the duties on rum had a very close connexion with the question. — (koltear.) When they went on with the debate ho would bold. th e Ri g ht Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the proposition he made. He would ab- Solve his Right Hon. Friend from any intention to de ceive, or from entering into anything like a bargain with the rish Members, between whom, it was said, a kind of coquetting was carried on.—(Hear.) Mr. J. STUART said the question they had to con eider was, whether the remedy proposed by the Govern aient for the relief of the West Indies would effect its °l3 .iect. Hew could they go on to debate that question Without knowing whether the Government would adhere to their proposition ? The Government bad a right to live some answer, as upon it the votes of some Members Would depend. Mr. LABOUCHERE was sorry to be obliged to inter fere in a discussion which had been already too long pro tracted. —(Hear, hear.) The Government, in listening to th e representation of those who had objections to urge t he a measure proposed by the Government affecting 'tie trade of the country, had but followed all former Precedent, and his Ri g h t Hon. Friend the Chancellor of ' 0 Exchequer had only adopted the usual course in 81. rittg consideration to the statements of those whose l&terests were a ff ected, and in saying that be would lay the representations made to him before the Cabinet, and rye the parties the opinion of his colleagues as well as own. If this was to be made a pretext for stopping ▪ till, they never could come to a decision on measures fecting the trade of the country. The question of the d uty on rum was an important part of the subject, but it W as; vain t o sa y th a t th e y cou ld not discuss and decide h aving question of the scale of the duties on sugar without f e tt ling an absolute assurance, on the part of the i'.. o vernment, whether the duty on rum was to be 4d. or • In 1846 they received deputations likewise on the t uhiect of the sugar duties, but they did hot depart from a ny . portion of the plan proposed. Nothing was more fair or unjust than to represent a Government as vacillati ng and uncertain because they gave a respectful a ttention to the representation of parties who would be aff ected by the measure.—(Hear.) GOULBURN said the question before the n e °age was in many respects different from a pure Mestion of trade. The question was how they could aff ord relief to the sufferin g West Indies, and before `,: 1 ,-y came to a decision it was important to know nether the differential duty on rum was to be 4d. or 'a• --that is, whether an additional duty of fifty per cent. was to be allowed or not.—(Hear, hear.) With out bein g i n f orme d on th a t p o i n t, h e did not think the -*douse could confidently pronounce an opinion on the Whole plan. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought the Government Should say whether they would adhere to their original Proposition, 11., Lord J. RUSSELL said that his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Labouchere) had given the proper reply to the statements which bad been made. But as the question stood at present, the proposition of the Government, as originally proposed, must be considered as the question , before the House. The motion for the adjournment was then withdrawn. Mr. GOULBURN wished to know from the Noble Lord whether he had considered the suggestion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool with regard to the introduction of a temporary Bill for the continuance of the existing sugar duties for a limited period. He thought it scarcely possible, with every activity on the Part of the House, that the Bill could receive the Royal Assent before the sth of July, when the duties would be further lowered, Lord J. RUSSELL said that when the House came to 4 decision on the motion of the Hon. Baronet (Sir J. l'a ttington), he would then consider the proposition of t he Hon. Member for Liverpool. Mr. CARDWELL said that where a Bil l was a mone y b the House could only take one step every day, and i t ee if the House came to a division on Friday night— or it was not expected that the House would divide that 11 R !ght----the Bill would afterwards have to go throu g h s l eo other s t ages b e f o re it reached the House of L ords. i If th e N o b le Lord waited for t h e i ssue o f the debate be rere the House before he took the first step in introducing s hort Bill of the nature he stated, he would not ha ve J in his power to pass such a measure before the sth of 0 1Y, with ou t an un p rece d en t e d v i o l a tio n of the standing f ..rs of th e H ouse . —(H e ar.) No member of the Government having replied GLADSTONE said be hoped the Goverment 11 ,„'d give an answer, as the subject was important. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Government could increase as well as diminish duties 11 ,"„, a vote of that House. .the adjourned debate was then resumed by , • Mr. MOFFATT, who said that the effect of the race ire proposed by the Government would be to increase 4 cost of sugar to the people of this country without n ging any corresponding relief to the West Indian wenters. For the first year the cost to the country th?uld 750 250,0001.; for tho second, 500,0001.; for the :rd, ,000/. ; for the fourth and two subsequent NZ' , 1,000,0001.; making for the six years that the Bill t° he in operation a total cost to the country of rc , " 0 ,000/ With respect to the reduction of the diffe rnetitiel duty on rum, he thought it was a just and wise and would prove a boon to the West India te ri n est without doing permanent injury to the distilling t e rest in thi s country. He approved of the 500,000/. that lat W as to be given to promote the immigration of to O e urer s , but it would prove of little use unless the f intended by it was promptly afforded. The in t t h A 48 e of pr o t ec ti on g i ven by the proposition was more n il was supposed, because the duty on the sth of July Would be 14s. for colonial sugar, and 18e. 6d. for I foreign. By the praposed duties it would be 13s. for colonial, and 20s. for foreign, making an in crease of protection from 33 to 54 per cent. That was a material increase, and one which was likely to have con siderable effect in diminishing the supply of foreign sugar to this country. He would not object to this if the measure was likely to be effectual in raising the condition of the sugar-producing colonies. But he did not think it would be productive of benefit to them. In his opinion there was no juitification for the measure as one of remedy for the \V‘‘,,t 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. Ile 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 and slave dealers there.—(Hoar, 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.; but, in 1847. it was 225,000/.—(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 with 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 be 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.) Be 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 agitat 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 he 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 this 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. Ile 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 riot 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 13s. 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 propose 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 au 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 meats 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? Ile 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 loss 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 of the Right Hon. Gentleman with no little interest, and much surprise. N othin g could be more euriou, than to reconcile, if it were possible, his objections to r m op e o e s t ed no to gr g e i a v t e e . to He P r should be very g the measure with l a d th i e f h v e ote had lie objec tions of the Right lion. Gentleman. What single ob jections to the plan of the Government than the dment? The Right which was the object of th e amen reason had he assigned for voting for that 108. duty es had the West Indian grievances; but what grevil ce that had c lion. Gentleman thought mu ch of what were called i West Indian complained of a few years sift), not been wh o lly or partially eyed? he prohibi rem tion of purchasing except in British markets was removed--the rum duties had been redu ced—the j uice 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 g rievances, 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 vary severe in the West Indies. Measures of relief were to be applied to it, and the problem they had to solve was. in which way they could apply them most usefully to the colonists and least detrimentally to the mother-country. In the course of the 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, hi Ja maica, was 225. 6d. per cwt. 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 103. 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, an the consequence was, a very considerable reduction in price We imported in the first four mouths of 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 3 ear 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 the same rate as it bad done, what would have become of the 70,000 surplus tons of West India sugar thus thrown 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 laud 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 for 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 0.1 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 borne consumption. The mode of best effecting this important object was, in the opinion of the Government, by means of a gradually decreasing duty, and thereby gradually stimulating consumption. Looking at the in crease, in this respect, that had resulted from the re duction of the duty in 1845 and 1841, the Government was, in his opinion, acting wisely in enabling the core sumer to look distinctly forward to the day when all protection ceased in tuto. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxford University bad stated that he should 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 proposition 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 ae• 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 lad t p o ro c p or o r s e e o d t s th h i o s u m ld is c a o p m pr e eh i o n n to sion op o er n at t i h o o n. p art il o f wase th the g of G t e h n e tl E em x ti o n h , eg a i n e d r m to or i o n i f y orm prop h o im aed th to at ah th o e t breweries as soon as the duty fell to sugarCti i h a g a t h n d t c eeogHl out from r o te o r e n 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 125.; 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 n r e eavneddt taking nthe intoe m a o o ti o n o t a o n f t recent r e a d yh reduction, ee the former reduction of s d. per gallen , the whole amou nt 50,000 t planters by ha t d he a l thus presented to the West Indians was no less a sum than 110,0001. This, added to the whole amounts of former reductions, would swell the gratuities presented to the planters to between 300,0004 and 400,0004, 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. lOid., as stated by the Hon. Baronet, was in reality 15s. 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 which he had un avoidably omitted, but at that late hour he 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 [louse.—(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 [louse 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 tain charges therein ; a Bill to amend the law for the formation of districts for the education of infant poor ; and a Bill to authorise the payment of superannuation allowances to officers engaged ii; the admini. tration of the laws for the relief of the pc or. He pro wised the House that if permitted to bring in the Bills tb .ey should have ample time to consider them I ) efore ho asked for Another stage. After a few words from Mr. lIEN:4BY 1 3511'0 was given. SUPPRESSION OF PIRAC".. 7 :. On the motion o f Mr. M'GREGOR leave Was given to bring in a Bill to ame n d th e A c t of the 11 ill and 12th )ears of King Willi am 111. f or th e more el Tectual sup pression of piracy, and for affording additio. 3EII protec- Lion to merchant seamen. CONSTABVLARY (IRELAND). • On the motion of Sir W. SOMERVILLE leave was .iven to bring in a Bill to amen d t h e Acts 1 'elat i ng to the constabulary force in Ireland. The House adjourned at Half-past One c PARLIAMENTARY MVP. IiONS. 'mow.) (From the Yotes and Proceedings of the House o, ° THURSDAY, JUNE 22. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (BRANCH FROM SLOUGH TO WINDSOR) BILL. (Queen's Consent signifi e d) • M ot i on made, an' 1 question proposed, .6 That the Bill be now re ad the , thi rd; time:" —Amendment proposed, to l eave out t h e word " no , w,", and at die end of the Question to add t h e wor d s " upon tb as day six months ."—Question put, " Th at t h e wor d , nova i stand part of the Question." The House divided :-- MAJORITY—AYES, 224. Foley, J. H. Osborne, • Ralph Forbes, W. Ossulton, . Lord Fordyce, A. D. Pakingto oir J. Forster, M. Patten, J. • Si' • Fortescue, J. W. Pennant, * colonel Fox, W. J. Philips, Si, 7 G. K. Frewen, C. 11. Pilkington, James G,ldard, A. L. Plowden, V, T. H. Grace, 0. D. Price, Sir R • Granger, T. C. Primo, Ricb alit Greenall, Gilbert Pugh, David. Greene, John Fusel', P. Greene Thomas Remileshans, Lord Rale, It. B. Reyno'lds , J ohlr. Hall, Sir B. Ricardo,. J. ',— Hall, Colonel Ricardo,. O sman iianmer, Sir J. Rice, E. . Harcourt, G. Rich, He ury Hawes, B. Robartes, T. J. Hay, Lord J. Raiford, 1 "r•M cis Hayes, Sir E. Rushout, ( 3aptain Ilayter, W. 3, Russell, F. C. Ileathcote, G. J. Rutherfurd , A. Ileathcote, Sir W. Salwey, Colonel Henley, J. W. Scully,Frat teas Hill, Lord E. ' Seaham, V i scount Hindley, C. Shafto, R. D. Ilobhouse, T. B. Shell, R. I:. Holland, Robert : Shelburne, Earl of Hood, Sir Alexander Shirley, E.. J. Hope, H. T. Sidney, Al Berman Hornby, John Slaney, Bois ,rt A. liorsinan, Edward Smith, B. V.. Howard, C. W. Smith, M. Ts icker Howard, E. G. Somerset, Cs iptain Hughes, W. R. Somerville. S lr W. Hume, Joseph, Sotheron, T. WI. S. Ingestre, Visct. Spearman, IL. J. Jervis, Sir John Spooner, Rich and Jollifle, Sir W. H. Stafford, Augustas Kerrison, Sir E. Stanfield, W. R. Knox, Colonel Stanton, W.UL Labouchere, Henry Stuart, Lord J. Langston, J. H. Talbot, J. 11. Lemon, Sir Charles Taliburd,. Sergeant Littleton, E. R. Tancred, H. W. Loch, James Tennent, it. J. Lushington, C. Thickness e, Ralph Lygon, General Thompson, Colonel M'Cullagh, W. T. Thompson, George Maher, N. Thornely, I'. Maitland, Thomas Tollemache , F.l. Marsh.ll, J.IG. Trelawny, .ir. S. Martin, C. W. Tufnell„ Hel try Manley Fox Turner, Ede aund Menx, Sir IL Urquhart, L ortvid Miles, I'. W. S. Vane, Lord H. Miles, William Verner, Sir W. Mitchell, T. A. . Yesey, Hort. T. Moffatt, George Villiers, Viscount Molesworth, sir W. • Villiers, F..W. Monsell, William Vivian, J. E. Moody, O. A. Vivian, J. H. Morgan, 0. Vyvyan, Sir R. Morpeth, Viscount IVawn, J. T. Morris, David Williams, John Mostyn, E. M. Williamson, Sir' 11. Mowatt, Francis Willoughby, Sir H. Mulgrave, Earl Wilson, James; Mullings, J. R. Wilson, Matthew Neeld, John Wood, W. P. "lorreys, Lord Worcester, Marquis Nugent, Lord O'Connell, M. J. Ogle, S. C. Ord, W. Abdy, T. N. Aeland, Sir T. D. Adair, Ilugh E. Adair, R. Shafto Anson, Colonel Austey, Thomas C. A.rchdall, Captain .krinstrong, Sir A. .shley, Lord Baines, M. T. 3aldock, E. H. Baring, Henry _ __ ~.. Barnard, E.O. Barron, Sir 11. Bellew, It. M. Bennet, Philip Beutinek, Lord IL Berkeley, Captain Berkeley, Grantley Blackall, S. IV. Blackstone, W. S. Illandford, Marquis Blowitt, Reginald Bolder°, 11. G. Bouverie, E. P, Bowles, Admiral Bovring, Dr. Boyd, John Boyle, Colonel Brand, Thomas Brotherton, Joseph Bruce, Lord E. Buller, Sir J. Y. Buller, Charles Burke, Sir Thomas Carew, W. H. Pole Cavendish, C. C. Cavendish ' G. H. Charter's, Francis Clay, James , Clive, It. H. Clive, Henry B. — Cobh°ld, John C. Cobden, R. Cochrane, A. Cocks, homas S. Codrington,• Sir W. Conolly, Col. Cotton, W. H. Courtenay, Lord Dalrymple, Captain D'Eyncourt, T. Divett, Edw . ard Dod, J. W. Duckworth, Sir J. Duff, George S. Duncan, George Duncombe, 0. Dundas, Admiral Dundas, Sir D. Dundas, George Ebrington, Viscount Edwards, Henry Elliot, John E. Estcourt, J. B. B. Euston, Earl Evans, Sir De Lacy Evans, John Evans, William Ewart, William Fagan, William Fagan, James Farrer, James Ferguson, Sir R. Filmer, Sir E. TELLERS. Barrington, Viscount Walpole, Spencer MINORITY—NOES, 97. Adderley, C. B. Gladstone, W. E. Milner, W. M. Baillie, H. J. Glyn, George Carr Milnes, R. Moncktou Bankes, G. Gooch, E. S. Muntz, G. F. Benbow, John Gore, W. 0. Newdegate, C. N. Benett, J. Goulburn, Henry O'Connor, Feargus licntinck, Lord G. Grenfell, C. Pascoe PAcke, C. IV. Ileresford, William Halford, Sir H. Penlarves, Edward Broadley, 11. Hamilton, Lord C. Pigotf,. Francis Brown, H. Hamilton, J. H. Rieharkts, Richard Bruce, C. L. C. Harris, Captain Sadleir, .Tolin Burghley, Lord Hastie, Alexander Sandars, t.jeOrge Burrell, Sir.C. Heneage,Edward Scott, F. Campbell, W. F. Herbert, Henry A. Sumer, Hen IT aer Cardwell, Edward Herbert, Sidney Smyth, John ,C• Chandos, Marquis of Hervey, Lord A. Smythe, G. Chaplin,X. J. Hildyard, R. C. Smollett, AI Childers, J. W. Hildyard, T: B. Stephenson, Robert Christy, Samuel Hodgson, W. N. Sullivan, Michael Clay, Sir W. Hope, A. : aylor, Thomas E. Clerk Sir G. 7 Ilouldsworth, T. Towneley, Charles Collins, William Hudson, G. Townley, R.G. Cubittt, William Inglis, Sir. It. Trollope, Sir J. Currie, Henry Johnstone, Sir J Tyrrell, Sir J. Douglas, Sir C. Jones, Captain Vyse, R. 11. Druinmond, Henry Keogh, William Waddington,' David Duncan, Lord King, P. J. Waddington, 11. S. Duncuft, John Lacy, 11. C. Wall, C. B. Da Pre, C. G. Lincoln, Earl o Welby, G. E. East, Sir,J. B. Locke, Joseph Westhead, J. P. Egerton, IV. T. Lockhart, W. Farnham, E. Mahon, Lord TELLERS. Forester, G. C. Mandeville, Viscount Disraeli, B. Fuller, A. E.: Mangles, It. 1). Reid, Colonel Galway,,Viscount Manners,iLord C. HORSHAM WRIT. Motion made, and Qsestion put, " That Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a New 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. B. Drummond. Home O'Brien, Sir Lucius Moon, Colonel Edwards, Henry Pilkington, James Ansley, T. C. Fuller, A. E. "" Rendlesham, Lord Baillia, H. J. Galway, Viscount Reston, John C. Baldock, E. H. Godson,,R. Robinson. George Bankes, George Goulburn, Henry Sumer, H. K. Benbow, John Hawes, Benjamin Sidney, Alderman Bentinck, Lord G. Hildyard, R. C. Spooner, Richard Beresford, William Hobbouse, T. B. Stafford, Augustus Blackstone, W. Hodgson, W. N. Stuart, J. Bremridge. Richard Ifornby, John Talfourd, Sergeant Bruce, C. L. Iludson, George Tancred, 11. IV. [huller, Charles Ingestre, Viscount Urquhart, David 3 Inglis, Sir R. Vyse, H. Maitland, T. Willoughby, Sir H. CO hu d rr r irs i e l lyl: t m C si u ' r el vv. Mandeville, Viscount Waddington, 11. S. Cubitt, William Miles, Philip W. S . TELLERS. Burrell, S i r a , Dod, J. W. Napier, Joseph Goring, Charles Drax, J. S. W. O'Brien, Johs Newdegate, N. MINORITY NOES, 50. Baines, M. T. Herbert, 11. A. Pilki ng ton, James Barnard, E. G. Herbert, Syd ney Ri c h ar d s . Richard.; Bellew, It. M. Hervey, Lord A . Salwey, Colonel Bowring, Dr. Hill, Lord Marcus Stuart, Lord D. Brothcrton, J. Hood, Sir A. Stuart, Lord J. Clay, James Ilorsman, E. Thicknesse, R. A. Cobden, Richard King, Peter John Thompson, Colonel Craig, W. G. Langston, J. H. Thornely, Thomas Currie, Henry Lushington, Charles Tufnell, Henry Dundas, Admiral Mangles, It. 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.Martnaduke Greenall, Gilbert Nugent, Lord Hanmer, Sir J. Pearson, Charles TILLERS. Hastie, Alexander Pechell, Captain Bright, John Hayter, W. G. Perfect, R. Thompson, George 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, Viseount 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 th e i n fl uen tial friends of the society. The children were examined in all the usual branches of education, and distinguished them selves as heretofore in arithmetic, mathematics, his tory, geography, and grammar. They also proved themselves to be thoroughly acquainted with the pro- phecies, facts, duties, and doctrines of the Holy Scrip. tures. A vast number of specimens of drawing in pen and ink, in crayon, and in colours, were exhibited, some of them displaying great talent. 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 'the high gratification they, in common with the rest of the company, had experienced. On Tuesday last, the Chinese Junk " Keying," was honoured by a visit from her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent accompanied by their Royal Hi g h nesses the Duke and Duchess do Neznours and family, and at tended by Lady Augusta Bruce, and Sir George Cowper. The Royal party came in two carriages and four and spent fully an hour in inspecting the interesting vessel. The Mandarin was introduced to the distinguished visi tors in the saloon, and bad been previously under the impression that the Queen Dowager, whose visit took place some time since, bore the relationship to her Ma jesty appertaining to the Duchess of Kent. The Royal party expressed themselves highly pleased with their visit. The vessel has within the last few days been visited by the Prince de Joinville, the Duke and Duch ess of Sutherland, the Duke and Duchess of Bedford, the Duchess of Argyle, the Marquis and Marchioness of Kildare, Lord Combermere, the Marquis and Marchioness of Lansdowne, Lady Paulet, Lady Rivers, Lady Mary Howard, Hon. Mrs. and Lady Caroline Lascell es and family, L a dy C ons t a nce Gower, Baron and M a d ame Van de Weir, M r . an d Lady Elizabeth Grey, Si r F . and Lady Cochrane, &c. MULREADY EXHIBITION.—The Society of Arts, yesterday. placed its rooms at the disposal of the pro prietors of the pictures painted by Mr. Mulready, 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 Argyle, Duke of Cleveland, the Countess Grey, the Marquis o f North ampton, the Lord Colborne , Lord Gwy der, Lord E ve l yn, Lord and Lady Colborne, Lady Houlston, Lady C. De nison, Sir Robert Peel, Bart., Sir J. Swinburne, Bart., and Miss Swinburne, Sir G. and Lady Clerk, Si r J. P. and Lady Boileau, the Right Hon. C. S. Lefevre, Dr. Harding, &c. DEATH OF THE MARCHIONESS DE MESSINGY 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 Prinee Metternich, Lord Brougham, and a distinguished circle, at the Trafalgar Tavern, Greenwich. HER NIAJESTIfIS DRAWING- Roc mi. The Queen held a drawn. tg-room (the third this sea son) yesterday afternoon, in St. James's Palace. Her Majesty and Prince Albert .s rrived from Buckingham Palace, attended by the royal suite, and escorted by a party of the Life Guards. He r 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 Mil& nay, 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 Albers 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-dross was formed of black feathers and lappets. In attendance on the Qiwen and the Prince were the Mistress of the Robes, the V iscountess Jocelyn (in wait ing), the Duchess of Norfolk, the Countess of Gains borough, the Marchioness of Douro, the Countess of Charlemont, the Viscountess Carmine., apd the Countess of Desert, 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 Elphiustone, 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 Reventlow, the Danish Minister The Prince Constantine Soutzo of Bucharest, by the Prince Callimaki, the T ur ki s h Mi n i ster. - Mr. Jay, by Mr. Bancroft. the American Minister Le Baron d'Ugglas, by Baron Rehausen, the Swedi s h Minister The Count Desgeneys, by the Count de Revel, the Sardinian Minister. The following ladies had the honour of being prse sented to her Majesty:— The Hon. Georgina Leigh, by her mother, Lady Leigh lion. Mrs. Byron, by Lady Byron The Marchioness of Ailsa, by the Duchess of Suther land The Honourable Clara Brownlow, by the Countess of Darnley Mrs. Charlton ' by Mrs. John Walter Mrs. Butt, by ssady 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 Couper 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 her marriage, by the Countess of Aber gavenny Miss Scroope (of Denby), by Lady Camoys Mrs. Augustus Morgan, by Lady Morgan Mrs. Simeon, by Lady Clifford Mrs. Hayes, on her marriage, by the Countess of Eglin toun The ilon. Elizs Stoner, 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, th e D owager L a d y C rewe Miss Emily Percy, by Lady Lovaine Miss Willock, by her mother, Lady Willock Miss Aldridge, by Mrs. Vernon Smith Miss Albinia Sulivan, 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 Mare, 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 Louisa Lister Kaye, by her sister-in-law, Lady Lister Kaye Miss Emily Sumner, by the Countess of Egmont. Miss Adele Scrope (of Denby), by Lady Camoys Miss Morgan, by her aunt, Lady Morgan Miss Jane Murray, by her sister, Mrs. Mackenzie Miss Mackenzie of Kilcoy), by Lady Anno 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 Park er , b y h er mother, Mrs. Hyde Parker Miss Georgians Colville, by h er sister, Virountess Newry Miss Bourchier, by her mother, Mrs. Bourchier Miss Thackeray, by Lady Rodd Lady Elizabeth Thackeray, by Lady Road 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 Portarlington, on her marriage, by her mother, the Marchioness of Londonderry Miss Mary Pakenham, by the Hon. Lady Pakenham The Hon. Victoria Susan Talbot, by her mother, Lady Sarah Ingestre The lion. 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 Yo r k, b y M rs. 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. Oswin 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 following are a few of the principal dresses : HEIL MAJESTIC wore a dress of black crape, orbs- mented with bugle fringe, over a black silk slip ; train 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). Ats.nchmsEss 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. AfARCHIONESS 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 torquoise and diamonds. MARCHIONESS OF WATERFORD.—Court dress of rich white Irish Cabinet; skirt ornamented with four rows of superb gold trimming; train to correspond, gold berthe ' and lappets; the whole of British manufacture. Head dress, 11l thers, 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 whito glace, and elegantly finished with tulle and roses; Court tucker and ruffles 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.—Costune de Cour, com 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. mends. Headdress, ostrich feathers, Honiton lace lap• pots, and diadem of splendid diamonds. LADY JOHN RUSSELL.—Dress of Limerick lace, trimmed with flounces looped with bouquet:: of white flowers and silver wheat, over a rich white silk slip; train of rich white satin, trimmed with silver chef; body and sleeves feathers, w ornamented hitetio with wers,lae l e ac l e and app flowers ets,and Headdress, diamonds. LADY FARNHAM.—Dress of black tulle, trimmed with plaitings of tulle and bugle ornaments, over a rich black glace silk slip; train of black glace silk, trimmed with tulle and bugles to correspond. Headdress, feathers, lace lappets and diamonds. MRS. WYLD.—A Court costume: train of very rich pink arid white damask, trimmed with bouillonnes of tulle and coques of ribbon ; corsage drape; petticoat of rich white sat i n, with two tunics of tulle, looped with pink and white azalias. Head dress, plume, Honiton lappets, and wreath of azalias; ornaments, diamonds. MRS.. rARDE BIILLER.—.Train of white glace, trimmed with Llano and ribbon; petticoats of white crape over glace, trimmed with satin ribbon. Headdress, feathers and lace lappets; ornament; diamonds. MRS. SIMEON.—Train of blue glace, trimmed with tulle :and ribbon; petticoat of white tulle over glace, flounced with British point lace. Headdress, feathers and lace lappets; ornaments, diamonds. MRS.. BAGOT.—Train of white moire, trimmed with tulle; Honiton lace berthe; petticoat of white crape over glace, flounced with Honiton lace, and trimmed with roses. Headdress, feathers and 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 ruch es en festoci, and l ooped with two beautiful chateline boaquets, composed of dew grass and holly, being the Mackenzie distinction. Headdress of the same, plume and blonde lappets; ornaments, dia- 1 monds. Misa TALBOT.—Manteau and dress of the richest white glace, elegantly trimmed with ribbon and flowers, tunic of Honiton lace; bertha 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. mom THE 11:MIMING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. TIMES. —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 Englaad 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, Euglatel 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 epelled 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 legislature, the same hierarchy, 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—still the essential elements of our political 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 sake of change; and when our ma chinery, whether in clocks, railways, or government, goes right, we are unw illi ng to sacrifice a real good for a theoretical improvement. Occasionally, indeed, we have diverged from the beat en trac k , but, whenever we have done so, it has for the most part been with a greater reluctance than th a t w i th which we have re sumed. it. This is our history in epitome :—Pro gression animat e d an d 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—h as b een ignored by all who have fought th e battle and plead e d the cause of our constit u ti on . T he traditions of our history have a reality and life about them which makes us revo l t at f i ctitious 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 pl at f orm 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. Tho 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 Ise 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 attenti on . W e w ill not sa y th a t the sentiments which Mr. Hum e ex p resses are o f 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. R aving ourselves pointed out the anomalies of ,our representa tive system, we must disclaim the allies whom Mr. Hume impersonates, and the grounds upon whi c h that confederacy rests. We must disclaim connexion with men who rant about the " yoke of the aristocracy," and cant about t h e " slavery of the people ;'' who in the sam e b reath display the profoundestignorance. of political hi story, and claim new privileges for their assumed enlightenment. The representation requires som e remodelling. It is partially incompatible with the soundest basis on which a repre sentative system rests, viz., contr ib ut i on to the funds o f the State. It is, moreover, occas i ona ll y i ncons i s t en t 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 profe sse d i ntention 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 enj o y s , i s f oo li s h, frivolous, and mischievous. We gr ant thi s ; b u t 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. Temkin: the grocer, or Mr. Hopkins the chandler, or Mr. Dobbins the shoemaker? How and in what way are Dobbins, Toaakins, 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 wo 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 nut every man know that his children may—if they work hard enough and learn enough, and have health, wit, and strength enough—sit i in the august House the c arv i ng an d g il d i ng o f w h ic h n• spires their admiration? Or have they yet to learn that of the leading statesmen for the last 160 years one ball 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 ? Did Wilber force ? Did Brougham ? Does Peel ? Does Glad- stone ?Do Hume and Cobden ? What was Lord El don's grandfather ? What Sir R. Pee l's? What Lord Melbourne's ? Why, the most super •ficia/ knowledge of the most recent history might inlbre a man that, so far from the aristocracy oppressing or let3eping down the people, no class since the brightest pe.riod of Roman policy has been so elastic, so adoptive, and so po pular, as the aristocracy al 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;--shese are the instances which history supplies of aristocratic!, oppresai on and love of war. For the interference of this; same &ass in the pacific policy of past generations, we must look to the despotism which inflicted the omniscient genitui of Burke, the sparkling wit of Sheridan, the gotgeous de clamation and statesmanlike acuteness of Pitt; the com bined wit, eloquence, and logic of Craning, tb e 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 potsder un 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 enlightesn 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 disappoinnxient with reference to the First Report of the Select Ocm mittee on Commercial distress. Having been pleenly told, from the beginning, that the whole affair wtas a sham ; that the results of the " inquiry " were fiddly known before the Committee had once met ; and ahat 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 upoa it that the three arbitrators should consist of-1, their broker, 2, their attorney, and 3, 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, more 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 we.s 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 com 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 cone. 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 i t o c s f a , r a d t ht o 11. Mr. Cobden. 12. Mr. Thornely. the starting,L eag. of sa Thus o votes; Three comm it l m t 3 i e m Al c b o e r n r . s s ß is may be relied on. Then comes Mr. Tennent7 loo w nf whose name never occurs in any one of the divisions, and whose absence, from whatever cause it arose, makes the thirteen a sure majority. Next we hare 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. Harries. 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 iu 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. Bentinck Mr. Spooner Mr. Herries Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn Mr. James Wilson Noss. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir James Graham Sir Robert Peel Lord John Russell Mr. Cobden Mr. Beckett 'Mr. Goulburn Mr. Cardwell Mr. Labouchere Mr. J. L. Ricardo Mr. Thornely Sir W. Clay ,11r. Home Drummond. May 30:— Here is the second division, AYES. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir James Graham Sir Robert reel 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:--- NOES. Lord George Bentinek 'Mr. Spooner Mr. Beckett Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume 'Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn Mr. James Wilson. Mr. Home Drummond NOES. Mr. Thomas Baring Lord George Bentinek Mr. Spooner Mr. Herries Mr. Cayley Mr. Alderman Thompson Mr. Hudson Mr. Hume Mr. Disraeli Mr. Glyn. AYES. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir James Graham Sir Robert Peel Lord John Russell Mr. Cobden Mr. Goulburn Mr. Cardwell Mr. Labouchere Mr. J. L. Ricardo Mr. Thornely Sir W. Clay 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, morel by him on the 6th of 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 undernik ings (except the Deputy-Governor of the Bank), is liclaaimous 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 Governer 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. REDUCTION OF THE DUTIES ON RUM.—A 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 o n 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 subsequ en tl y h eld , that Sir Lucius O'Brien should,in the Hou se , demand EL, declaration of the intentions of the Government. It will be seen, from our Parliamentary report, th a t th e 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, whi c h was lately postpone d , owing t ) the fatiguing duty th e corps were compelle d to undergo during the Chartist disturbances, is definitely fixed to take p'sle to-morrow, in the presence of several royal personages and a brilliant staff of officers. The regiment will be on the ground in Hyde-park, opposite Grosvenor -gate, at noon precisely. The Duke and Duchess of Norfolk, Countess of Lincoln and family, Lord and Lady Beresford, Marchio ness Cornwallis, Lady de Burgh, Marchioness of Clan- Heard., Lord Al o zutcharles, Lady Hogg and piny, Hon. Mrs. Hamilton, Hon. Miss Dillon, &c., visited the Colos seum, Regent's-park, on Tuesday last. SAGO FLoutt.—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 bags of the article. These are unusually large importations of this description of flour from the place mentioned and are of interest.; 23, 1848.