The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-19 00:00:00

IORNING EDITION Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that it was probable that the West Indian colonies of this country would produce more than sufficient to meet the demand, nay,. that it would furnish sufficient for exportation; if such was the case, where he would ask was the necessity for such a measure as the present, because reduced prices would be obtained by the increased supply of the sugar of the colonies of the country? In former years it was well known the sugar from the colonies of this country was more than suffi cient for the supply of the United Kingdom, and prices' in England, before the experiment he had adverted to, were tie same as in the colonies. He believed the differ ence between the prices in this country and the con tinental prices, was to be attributed to the state of the money market in this country. He thought the attempt to introduce this measure, fraught, as it was, with so much, danger, was little less than insanity on the part of her Majesty's Governirrent.—(Hear, hear.) But then it was said that the measure came before them, recommended not only because it would improve the finances of the country, but would lead to different fiscal regulations. For his own part he could not see anything in the principles that had been propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that would lead to free trade. He thought that those who wished for applause out of doors—(Hear, hear)—ought to state clearly what the real principles were on which they intended to act, and that, he would venture to say, her Majesty's Minis ters had not done. The course - Ole Government was now pursuing, was, in effect, obtaining votes under false pre tences.—(Hear, hear.) They said they intended to give protection ; but, for his own part, he could not see how they intended to carry out such a proposition. In the course of this discussion some observations had been thrown out by Honourable Members, upon what they were pleased to call class interests, as if they were separate interests. Such, however, was not the case ; for those interests which had been re ferred to were the interests of the country generally. He condemned the impolicy of legislating for class in terests, as such; but they should consider in the first place how much their own interests, and wealth, and prosperity, were bound up with these particular classes. H the opinions of the Government were oppposed to such principles, the sooner these places were filled by better men, the better it would be for the interests of the country.—(Hear, hear.) If it could be shown that it would be more beneficial for the country, that the in terests of the landowner should not be protected, then he should be ready to adopt the principles of Hon. Members opposite. If it could be shown that their colonies, by their interchange with the mother country, derived no benefit whatever—that they derived neither wealth nor strength nor advantage from the union, let that be pr ove d t o hi s sat i s f act i on, an d he s h ou ld no lon ger advocate the protection of a particular class or in terest.—gear, hear.) But it was because their well being, their safety, and their strength were inseparably connected with that of the general public, that they had judiciously and wisely extended to them that protection which he believed was for the common interest of all. —(Hear, hear.) Whenever it should happen that the agricultural, the colonial, and the shipping interests of that country would be deemed by the House undeserving of protection, then he should say that the honour, the glory, and the tower of that great empire would have passed away. He should give his hearty concurrence to the resolution of the Noble Lord the Member for Liver pool.-e-(Loud cheers.) Mr. VILLIERS said, during the time he had had the honour of a seat in that House, he did not remember having listened to any Hon. Member with more interest than to the Hon. Member for Harwich. The Right Hon. Gentleman had presided over the finances of the country, and according to the general opinion enter tained at the present time, he would do so again. It became, therefore, matter of much interest to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman's opinion upon the financial project before the House, and to hear what he might ad vance against it, or what he proposed to institute in its stead. He did not remembet to have been more sur prised or disappointed on'any occasion thadat the result of his speech. The' Right lion. Gentleman said they were in a great financial ettiergency-that they `tvere in a very critical state of their finances, and that that was entirely owing to the feebleness of the present Govern ment. All he could learn from the Right Hon. Gen tleman was that he' had objected to the proposition of the Government ; but he did not state anything which he did propose himself. 'The Right Honourable Gentleman had asked whether they really considered that these class interests were maintained—that these monopolies and protections were maintained by law, for the purpose of support of parti cular interests, and not for the public good. In answer to that question, he (Mr. Villiers) had notobjec tion to state that he believed that it was for the purpose of supporting these particular interests, an d aga i nst t h e national good that these monopolies were maintained.— (Hear, hear.) That was the answer which the advocates of free trade offered to the Right Hon. Gentleman. It appeared to him that the Right Hon. Gentleman had only added one to the many reasons that had been urged in the course of that discussion, and if they had gone to a division on the first, second, or third night of the de bate, he wished to know whether the public could have learned the grounds upon which Hon. Members pro ceeded to the division ? By the protraction of the debate, they had elicited the sentiments of Hon. Members, and they knew the grounds on which opposition was given to the Ministerial project. Those who complained of the discussion being protracted had to consider under what eircuttestances the resolution had been moved by the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, and what it was he proposed to do. It would be observed that the moment predicted by some and denied by others, and tile existence of which none could doubt, a moment of great financial difficulty in connexion with, if not caused by, great commercial embarrassment—that crisis had been alluded to. with great levity by some Hon. Members op posite as having occurred periodically since the time of George the Second, and as having in every instance remedied itself. It was at that moment that the Noble Lord took advantage of the period when the Government generally expounded the state of the finances of the country—at a moment when the Chancellor of the Ex chequer stated to them that they were in a state of ' financial difficulty, and proposed certain means by which those difficulties might be met. If he understood the scheme of the Right Hon. Gentleman, it was this—that inasmuch as the revenue was derived from taxation of the expenditure and consumption of the community, to maintain that revenue and relieve the community it was important to increase the means of consumption, and improve the capacity of the consumer. It was at such a moment that the Noble Lord ofd his counter-revo lution, opposi ng th e sc h eme of the Government on par ticular grounds. If he (Mr. Villiers) understood the prep?eiteen of the Government, it was that fetters and restrictiens upon their trade tended to injure the industry and commerce of the country. It appeared to him that these restrictions had been imposed to benefit and main tain particular interests and monopolies, and they could ' not therefore be surprised that great resistance should be offered to the propositions of the Governinent.—(Cheers.) But the present intelligence of the conetry would not longer suffer these things to be done, end it behoved Hon. Members opposite not to re eist the measure of the Government on these grounds, l.ut to suggest some others. He did not mean to im pute motives t s the. Noble Lord the Member for Liver pool, lest ic.appeared to him (Mr; Villiers) that he had asei t tned reasons for his resolution which his friends did not eatintain. The Noble Lord had contended that, not withstereling the distress of the country, and the on barraesent nee of its commerce, there were prior claims in the condition of the negro race in a foreign country. It was cleer that the question of the policy of the Go vernment hael been raised during the present discussion, and as that policy involved principles which he had never lost an opportunity of advocating, he could not help expressing his sincere satisfaction that they had been so distinctly recognised by the Government.— (Cheers.) Whatever other consequences might flow from the debate, he believed the discussion would establish the truth of these principles, and it was impossible to exaggerate the importance, or overrate the advantages of adopting the principles of the Government. Those principles had been the sub ject of derision and contempt on former occasions in that House ; and although many Hon. Members on the opposite side appeared anxious to proclaim themselves the advocates of free trade, yet it appeared to him that the speech of the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, which had been much relied upon by his friends, and much referred to by his party, was calcu ' lated rather to suppress these opinions, and to reconcile those conflicting elements of which his party was com posed. It appeared to him, that so far from elucidating the subject the Noble Lord had thrown it into greater foonfusion, and that he had drawn a weapon from the armoury of the Right Honourable Baronet the Mem ber for Tamworth, namely, the dressing up an argument or statement, not to suit the Hou se , b ut for the purpose of imposing upon the House. The Noble Lord said that he did not advocate the pri nciples of free trade, to the exte nt of communities beteg per /flitted to purchase in the cheapest markets,. or of no taxes being maintained for th e protection of part i cu lar classes ; but on the other hand he endeavoured to vindi cate.himself from being the advocate of monopoly. The Noble Lord said that his principle was Now, com petition, he subject to limitation, or limited by protection. 'wanted to know how that was inconsistent with mono poly, , or any p ro t e cti ve policy in existence The lan d iords might as k hi m w h a t he meant by competition • limited by protection, and his answer would be the pre sent Corn-law. The West Indian interests mig h t ask him what he meant by it, and his answer would be the present protective duty on foreign sugar. In the same way his a nswer to the shipping i ntere st might , that it would e n abl e t h em to pay a high price for rotten timber. In short, there was no injury to their interest which might not be defended by the definition of the Noitle Lord's principles of commercial policy. The question of protection must now be discussed. Every person mast state what he meant by that term. It was a question now before the House and the country. It had been defined by many who had experienced—who had paid attention to the subject, as a tax on the com munity for the benefit or advantage of particular classes. If there were persons who held a different opinion on the subject, now was the time to state them. The public were watcing anxiously to hear wh a t eac h person would say, and they would judge them according to their statements. Men of experience and information who had been examined before Committees of that House had defined protection as something indefensible regard ing the public interest, arid as existing only for the be nefit of particular classes. The Noble Lord the Mem ber for North Lancashire said that he was not for free trade, but for competition, subject to protection but the Government themselves proposed nothing else—their object was protection. ay., it was necessary for those who supported Govern anotint tincessatts tinctiv what the Government meant by peek loos FIO il eA Vdr. Villi e rs) did not collect from the siesees*ec.W.of the , reset*Leate - underetoOd Teord the Secretary for the Colonies, %Protection some object which it esl.'esaiaiiisira,lite to ettaid The Noble Lord did not view .protesetion as an endr'but a s a means t o some end. He _ _ . (Mr. Villiers) understood the proposition of the Govern ment to be founded on the principle of free trade. He understood the Government to say with respect to cer tain restrictions which exist under the system of protec tion, we will deal tenderly with them, but our principle . is liberty to commerce, and the ultimate removal of those restrictions. He did not understand from anything which fell from Hon. Gentlemen opposite that they took the same view of prOtection. They took a view consistent with that of the Right Honourable Member for Harwich (Mr. Herries) that ,it was necessary to protect certain classes.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Villier) begged further to state, that he considered that system of protection as most unfair and unjust, when applied to this country; particularly so when not applied generally, and as regarded the persons who were made the exceptions. The landed proprietors, the West Indian planters, and the ship-builders, had no more right to the laws which protected their several interests, than the working men had to laws which should protect them against the application of machinery to the produc tion of manufactures. They knew that claims had been ad vanced by the working classes to be protected against the use of machinery, and that a notion prevailed among those people that they had a right to such protection; and they were not wrong, according to the principles advanced and supported by some Honourable Gentle men with respect to protection. But the claims of these poor men were met as if arising from their ignorance. There was not a particle of the grounds on which they were refused the protection they sought, that was not adopted by Hon. Gentlemen who made that refusal. Railroads might be objected to on the same principle on which the proposition of Government was opposed. They involved the ruin of many individuals residing in towns on•the old lines ; but why were they, nevertheless, established ? On the principle that th e creneral good ought to be preferred to that of particular classes. The principles to which he now gave utterance he had, on former occasions, when he brought forward the question of the Corn-laws, professed and expressed in that House, and he repeated them now only because the public attention was at the present time particularly di rected to the subject—because the public mind was ex cited on the matter, and because those who maintained opposite principles were obliged to enter into a vindication of them. He knew not why it was the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth's speech on the pre sent occasion was so anxiously looked forward to. The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken on this subject on vari ous occasions. Perhaps the anxiety arose from the belief that circumstances had so far changed that some change must have also taken place in the Right Hon. Baronet's opinions. If the Right Hon. Baronet opposed the motion of the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies—if he opposed all change in the Corn-laws, he would be per fectly consistent, because the Right Hon. Baronet had opposed every Committee of Inquiry into the subject. There were no circumstances under which a Committee on that subject had been proposed in which the Right Hon. Baronet had not given his opposition to the pro position " under those circumstances." But the Right Hon. Gentleman had. however, by something which he he had said, excited hopes and expectations in some of his commercial friends, and hence the intense interest that existed as to the opinions which he might now ex press. It was high time that this question should be decided some way or other. The pretexts were so vari ous which had been urged against the consideration of the subject, that the time had arrived when the persons who opposed the motion must say they had some other grounds than those hitherto assigned. One of the grounds stated by one of the Hon. Members for York shire for supporting the Corn-law monopoly was, that they were not so weak as to abandon an advantage which they had the power to maintain. That was the real state of the question—it was a question between the rights of the people and the power : of the landlords. There were not ten people out of that . House—nor any within it—who believed that s the resolution of the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Lord San,don), contained the real ground of objection to the motion before the House. The question was not dis cussed on that , ground. It was on the round that great changes were expected, and that the measure was pro posed by her Majesty's Government, that the approach ing division was about to take place. The people of the United States had the same right to exclude our manu factures from their ports as we to exclude slave-grown sugar from this country. And it was not improbable that they would exclude our manufactures in conse quence of their aversion to our Corn-laws. He had a few days ago received a paper from America, in which it was stated that they took the same view of our Corn laws that we did of their system of slavery—that the merchants and farmers regarded the Corn-laws ofEngland and the slave trade as belonging to the same class of establishments. The Hon. Gentleman read a long ex tract from an American pamphlet which he had lately received, in which the writer spoke of the Corn-laws of England as prejudicial to the people of this country, and such a nuisance to the people of other countries, that it became incumbent on the United States to consider whe ther they should not take some public measure to obtain a repeal of those, and show their sense of their injustice. What had been the policy of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side with respect to other countries in which sla very existed with many aggravations ? What had been their favourite policy with respect to Turkey, but to preserve the integrity of the Turkish empire, on which was supposed to depend the balance of power ? We knew that slavery existed in Turkey, under ciroum stances of greater aggravation than in the West Indies. We had become more familiar with, during our recent in tercourse with that country, yet we had made no stipu lations for preventing the slave-trade, and not an argu ment had been advanced on the other side on this ground against our policy.—(Hear, hear.) And so it was with the East Indies. The present resolution had been seconded by an East Indian Director, yet the organ of the Company, at the present time, was filled with details of East India slavery—(Hear, hear)—which was winked at, or openly countenanced by, the Company's servants. What then were the people of England to think if they were not to be allowed to consume a necessary article of life, because they were not to be allowed to consume slave produce ? What were they to think of it when the present motion was supported by those who were recently indemnified for the sacrifice of their property in slaves , when it was supported by those who were actually owners of slaves, and sharers in the profit arising from their labour. Why in the world was the British House of Commons to stop an intercourse with other countries on such grounds as those which were put forward ? Would it not be seen that such a proposition could only have originated in party views. —(Hear, hear.) He had been told of some great experiment being made, and that they ought not to disturb it, for th a t th e i n t erests o f humanity I was involved in its success. This was a great mistake, So far as he understood the experiment, it was whether a portion of the African race was capable of being free, and whether they had any taste for the arts of civilised life. The experiment was made, and it was shown all the statements to the contrary were fallacious, made for the purpose of keeping fellow-creatures in bondage. The experiment was mae at once in Antigua, one year before the emancipation of the slaves ; and this circum stance constituted the difference between one island and another. In Antigua the population found it easier to obtain work, and were willing to work for wages ; and and they would find this to be the case wherever the quantity of labour rather exceeded the supply than the demand. When we emancipated the slaves, we never undertook to g uaran t ee t h e p l anter against all the con tingencies that might arise from the difficulties of ob taining labour.: The difference between the islands did not arise from the emancipation of the slaves, but from the difference in the fertility of soil and other circumstances.—(Hear, hear.) There was another topic in the proposition of the Noble Lord (Sandon) which he could not sit down without referring to, namely, that this was not only a question of slavery but also a question of the adequate supply of sugar. The Noble Lord implied by his resolution, that if the supply of sugar was not adequate, w e might then allow slave produce to come in, and the Noble Lord thereby implied that the present supply was adequate, that is, that this necessary article of consumption was cheap enough. That was quite sufficient to raise the question Of what was the condition of the people of this country. He thought the Noble Lord must have overlooked, or must be totally ignorant of what was the state of the country where he considered that any article of neces sary cons um pti on was cheap enough.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Villiers) believed that there never was a period in the history of this country in which the I people were worse off than at present, and had been for the last two years. He had with him abundant details of the greatest physical sufferings that were now being endured by the poor of the country. The Hon. Member for Finsbury had supplied the House with details of this kind, and he (Mr. Villiers) should occupy the House to had time been ofthe end of th e week were he to read to them those with which l much supplied. Pl h ied Hou H se e with wouldthose os ed not, e however,tdetails, b ut occupy he could nut help adverting to eth suff er ings in some of the districts with which he was acq uainted. He was in formed by a communication dated the 10th of May instant, that at Preston the number of was 1,220 ; that th e i ncrease of the n punier e empty houses vvho:receive out-door re li e f f rom the parish t oof paupers 37 to 1840, was 83 pe r cent., and from 1837 18471 per cent., being an i ncrease of 40 per cent while 1 8 27 e the in-door relief was conti nue d i n the usual" w During this time large subscriptions had b een proportion. During and 1,320 women received various articles of beddin g It was the opinion of some wh o were connected with this charity, that 2,000 families, consisting o f 1 0,000 indi viduals, had not a single blanket to cover them. The Chaplain of the House of Correction stated that crime had increased 30 per cent., while it was impossible to say how many were subsisting by beggary. The wages on some of the trades were decreased 10 per cent. with in the last three months, and 25 per cent, since 1832. Many of the trades kept up their wages by unions and combinations, but this class were tramping about the country. At Bolton it , was stated that the mills, among which were those of the Hon. Member for that place, an d employing no less than 14,000 persons, were worked but for a very short time ; that at Blackburn there were four mills that were not working; and that a fire-proof mill with its machinery, which a short time ago cost 50 9 000/ had been recently sold for 15,0001. It was stat e d _ _ also, that at Little Bolton 300 houses were visited, con taining 500 beds; and that in 'one of these houses they found twenty-three persons without a bed; eight, who slept in one bed • , forty-two who slept in seven beds ; seventy-eight who slept in six beds ; 185 who slept in five beds ; 432 who slept in four beds ; and 582 who slept in three beds ; that there was 1,025 per sons whose average income was below ls. 6d. per week ; 359 whose average income was below 2s. a week ; and 165 whose average income was below . ls 6d. per week. The Hon. Member also read statements from Oldham, Nottingham Leicester, and other places, of the emistence of similar distress at those places, one of which stated that a cow having died and been buried, the owner a day and a half afterwards was besought by a number of Women to allow them to have the carcass for their families ; and that upon his yielding to their importunity, they disinterred the carcass, and deviled it among them, and afterwards declared that it was the only meat they had tasted for many years. The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract, the report of Mr. Hickson a Govern ment Commissioner, as to the state of the poor in Ireland, in which the Commissioner said that he had heard the question asked among them, which was the most contrary to the will of God, to extinguish the life of their children, before they had arrived at the knowledge of good and evil, or to give a nominal consent to their existence, and to see that for them the earth had not brought forth its increase. He (Mr. Villiers) wished to inquire, when we were boasting of the value of our possessions, of what value were they to theie unfortunate people ? (Hear, hear.) We called upon them for taxes for the protection of our possessions in the East and West Indies ; but he wished to know of what advantage were they to a people who were starving ? Of what advantage were they to the poor, when if it was proposed to ex tend to them some of the comforts they produced, they were told that they could not enjoy them because it was essential to protect and maintain monopolies ?—(Hear.) In contrasting the condition of the slaves with those who suffered so much, he would refer the House to the works of a writer who possessed great experience of the state of the working classes, and whose writings con tained much truth, most powerfully stated—he meant Cobbett, who said, " Poverty, after all, is the great badge of slavery ; weary bones and rags are the true marks of real slavery. What is the object of Govern ment but to cause men to live happily, which cannot be without a sufficiency of food and raiment ? There can be no morality, no virtue, no sincerity, among . people who are continually pining for want, and it is cruel in an extreme degree to punish them for crimes that are not theirs, but are brought about by their all-controlling necessities." It might be said that these were the opinions of a democrat, and that they were not worthy of attention, but he should read the opinion of a high Tory, Mr. Southey—(Cheers)—who said that we had arrived at a state in which the inequality of con ditions was intolerable, and that, if a remedy were not applied, a war between the poor and the rich was in evitable.—(Cheers.) What an increase of misery had taken place since Mr. Southey wrote this !—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Villiers) had made no exaggerated statement of the condition of the people. He should be happy to hear it proved they were not so miserable=(Hear ! hear) — that it was not owing to the state of trade that they were so, and that the state of trade was not owing to the re strictions on our commerce. As he stated last year, the manufacturers asserted that all the misery was owing to their not being allowed to exchange their produce with other countries—that their warehouses were bursting with food sent from America and other countries, and that they were ready to take that corn for goods already sent to America and those other countries.--(Cheers.) They said that if they were allowed to do this they were ready to execute further orders for the same kind of food. —(Cheers.) He hoped they were going to a division.— (Cheers.) He hoped to a dissolution.—(Great cheering from both sides.) He hoped the names of the majority would appear to-morrow.—(Renewed cheering.) He did not say that he wished Hon. Gentlemen opposite to be marked, but he wished that the people at large should have an opportunity of seeing what were the constituen cies those Gentlemen represented.—(Loud cheers.) The people complained that they now represented sinister and sectional interests. On the contrary it was insisted that the people were virtually represented, and that they had influence over the electors, who were only their .trustees.—(Hear, hear.) He said, then, if ever there was an occasion when the people ought to judge of the conduct of existing consti tuencies, this was the occasio n . —(H ear , hear.) Nobody was less desirous than he of disturbing the Con stitution of this country, but those who had the, elective franchise should see that justice was done to all classes alike.J-&;-(Cheers.) - And it was coming to this; that if the House .did not do justice to the people, the people would do justice to themselves.—(Much cheering from both sides of the House.) The - question befcfre the House had been treated as if it were whether one I set of men should ;take, office :instead of another ; but nbthing had been said from the other side as to the good which they would do for the people.---(Cheers and laughter.) The present Ministers proposed those excellent measures ; and, before he consented to give his vote for another set of men, he must at least have some intimation that they meant to do some thing better. In the course of the debate he had heard nothing of the kind from gentlemen opposite.—(Cheers, and laughter.) He had heard one say that no distress existed—(Hear, hear)—another that those measures would increase it, and another that it would be best cured by leaving it to itself.—(Cheers.) It struck him that there were now three parties in the State—one of which thought that no justice should be done to th e people—(Cheers)—another which admitted that justice was not done to them, but that it ought to be done, and that it could be done under the present Constitution.— (Cheers.) The third party consisted of those who were hourly increasing in numbers and strength, and who thought that justice was not done and would not be done without a change in the Constitution.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) The Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies belonged to the second class, and said , that although justice was not done to the people it ought to be done, and it could be done with the present Con stitution—the Noble Lord had undertaken to attempt it. —(Great cheering.) He had undertaken the lead— (Cheers)—and in that he had chosen the post which was best fitted to his name and his position—(Cheers)—and he (Mr. Villiers) saw every reason to expect success under his lead.—(Cheers and laughter.) The people would be most unwise to repudiate the leadership which the Noble Lord undertook.—(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh," from the Tory benches.) He hoped the Noble Lord would not be deterred by the taunts which had been thrown upon him.--(Cheers,.and cries of " Oh, oh.") He hoped the Noble Lord would not_be daunted by the threats that his measure would set one class against another—(Hear)--for it was the nature of those laws to set one class against another. The question was the same in 1640 —when it was claimed by the King to tax the people for his own benefit—as it was now, in 1841, when the a r i s t ocrac y c l a i m to tax t h e people for their benefit.—(Cheers, and counter cheers.) He hoped the middle classes in the approaching contest —(Cheers)—would not show themselves degenerate sons of those men who had sown the seeds of liberty in this country, and had disseminated them over another hemis phere--(Cheers)--and he hoped that the poorer classes would not show themselves indifferent to those great rights of theirs which were involved in this question. The Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst much cheering. Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL would not be sorry that the debate should continue for seven nights upon so important a question—that it should be understood in all its bearings, but for the injury which had been done to the most important interests of the country by the suspense in which they had been kept.—(Loud cheers from the Tories.) The Ministers were to blame far not having used their influence in preventing the time of the House from being so much occupied.—(Hear, hear, hear.) With respect to the calculations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the produce of the sugar duties, he had no doubt they would be realised, if the quantity of sugar from the colonies alone would yield the anticipated re venue. But the effect of the measure would be to en courage in foreign countries the horrid and inhuman practice of slavery, which at so much expense we had suppressed in our own possessions.—(Hear, hear.) But, even if th e measure were i n i tse lf advisable, it ap peared to him to have been brought forward at a most improper moment. Indeed, he could only look upon it as a party expedient, tending needlessly to agitate the country ; for Ministers could no t h o p e t o carr y out t h e i r policy. On the timber question the feeling of the people of Canada was opposed to them, and the people of that country could not be denied their just claims upon that subject. With respect to the Corn-laws, he begged leave to say, that the duty ought naturally to vary with the price of corn in any sound system of protective policy ; and that was th e op i n i on o f M r. Canning. What did the Hon. Member for Marylebone (Sir B. Hall) say last night ? He said that he supported the Ministerial measure, becouse it would lead, in his opinion; to a total abolition of all protecting duties. That was the motive which actuated many of the Ministerial supporters. The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers), who was not then present, had made some severe comments on the landed interests in regard to that subject, arid he (Sir E. Knatchbull) thought it was unfair 'of the Hon. Member, after the course he had taken in his speech, to retire from the House before an answer could be given to it. That Hon. Member had entered into details showing the sufferings of a large portion of the labouring classes ; but Hon. Gentlemen on that (the Opposition) side of the House were not less anxious to alleviate those suffer inga than the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton or any of his party. A repeal of the Corn-laws could not materially benefit the labouring classes, for if it diminished the price of corn it would equally diminish the rate of wages, and would place the labourer in no better condition than at present. The army, the navy, and all the public establish ments would certainly reduce their expenses in propor tion as the price of corn might fall ; and he had no doubt but private individuals would imitate the ex ample. He was sure that if those laws were repealed this country would one day have reason to regret a course of proceeding which left her at the mercy of fo. oCdh anlctelhleardebfetehnecEorn plained x- - foreign n of at h w y n t s h f e or ß l i i g er ht su H p e p h ly . t o h f e chequer that the Hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition Benches had not explained the course which they would recommend under the present circumstances of the country ' • but he had never heard that a Ministry should look for advice to those from whom they habitually dif fered. It was the business of a Ministry alone to advise the Crown, and Parliament as to the policy which it would be wise to adopt, and to propound the measures which it felt to be expedient.—(Hear, from the Ministerial benches.) He did not, however, despair of the fortunes of his country. He placed the most implicit reliance on the spirit, the Judgment, and the patriotism of the people of England. — (Cheers on both sides of the House.) Ire knew that there were in this country men of sound sense ; and he would repeat that he did therefore confidently hope in the maintenance of our prosperity. He believed that with a strong and efficient Government they would be enabled to uphold the dignity, promote the welfare, and secure the happiness of all classes of her Majesty's srib jects.--(Cheers.) Mr. CHARLES BULLER had never in the course of his life felt so keen a disappointment in listening to any speech in that House as he had in listening to the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, in which, at the close th i o n f fe h r ath of y d e d al r w e sas, which,s he li s tlistening h nii firmly n g the and coursecruelly ef it, h denied e h them a information given them some hope.—(Hear, hear and cheers.) He inst t confess, with the greatest de lights(ocha some mi j ot r o l he.e u es B r tnnummu twelvel should,i moe moments, adjournment sidegentlemen me l waive the oei tfvdhl to the speeches of the Right Hon. Baronet, he was astonished when, yesterday, having- moved the ee ll autmdh: s u s snpn r i e nowtkgoo t: ethu n ona dts House; d t ho; h res e edahssnoesh p ddost r ohto u e t levhdioas ris n e ke esee House rot „o, e i nntio afteriuhn ni g it dss , ad dresse t it.--(Cheers and laughter.) He supposed the NDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1841. Right Hon. Baronet, not having met with any single an tagonist worthy of his powers, had determined to reply to twelve gentlemen at once, and to spit all of them on his lance.--(Cheers and laughter.) He was more willing to suppose that than to give credence to a rumour that the Right Honourable Gentleman had remained silent under coercion --(Cheers and laughter ; " Oh, no," from Sir E. Knatchbull ; and renewed laughter) —that he had been induced to r e f ra i n , least he should make some inopp o rtune disclosures.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet, in the course of his s'eech, had said the time was now come when it would be right for them to speak out.—(Cheers.) The countenances of Gentlemen on his (Mr. Buller's) side of the House had, at the commencement, been gilded with the expression of hope ; the hungry sheep had looked up, but they had not been fed.—(Cheers and laughter.) The countenances of the Right Hon. Baronet's paulo post futurum colleagues--(A laugh}—had fallen in terror at the thought of the imprudent revelation which they dreaded.—(Cheers and laughter.) —But neither the hope nor the terror was destined to have long endurance. The Right Hon. Gentlemen had said that the time was now arrived when gentlemen opposite should speak out as to what they thought of •certain doctrines which had been laid down by the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton. He had called upon them to say what they thought, not what they would do. On that point he supposed the Right Hon. Baronet was satis fied with the revelations of the Budget.—( Cheers and laughter. ) The Right Hon. Baronet had said that he should confine his observations within a narrow compass and certainly if by a narrow compass he meant a compass quite outside the question in debate, he had done so, for not once in the course of his speech had he alluded to the sugar duties. He (Mr. Buller) should not follow the Right Hon. Gentleman through all the topics which he had introduced into his speech. He hoped they would have another opportunity afforded them when they might discuss with more propriety, according to the rules of House, the question of the Corn-laws—( Loud Ministerial cheering)—and when the Right Hon. Baronet would have an opportunity of describing the terrible state to which the country would be reduced, by becoming a series of smiling pastures studded with towns, a n d th e h orrors which might be expected to overwhelm us when war should become unknown. —( Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet had taunted Members on his side of the House with their inconsis tency. He wondered how the Right Hon. Gentleman could talk ofeiriconsistency. He wondered that when his lips at tempted to utter that word they did not refuse to form the syllables, and come out with the words " malt tax" instead. The Right Hon. Gentleman had complained of the spirit of de ception in which these measures had been brought forward. In fact, his opinions might be summed up in his old motto " Nusquam tute fides."—(Loud cheers and laughter.) It was not his intention to depart from the principle whieh had been observed by the House by going minutely Into the subject be. fore it.—(Cheersa) The arguments in support of the propo sition of her Majesty's Government were so exceedingly special as hardly to afford matter for a very lengthened debate, and, above all, the resolution of the Noble Lord not to take any slave produce, seemed to him to be so completely the essence of the most refined fanaticism, that he could ndt seriously discuss it. '1 he principle was worth nothing unless it was consistently acted up to, and to realise it we must confine ourselves rigidly to the use of articles the produce of free labour. Now, he could not seriously discuss this question, because, he believed that the supporters of the Noble Lord's resolution did not value their consistency on that point as much as they did a pinch of snuff.—(Cheers and laughter.) The arguments of those who supported the sugar monopolies, were the extra vagant and absolute arguments, by which a protective trade had always been defended, and on this occasion they had even been carried higher, for it had been contended that we were bound to maintain those high duties, not only for the purpose of maintaining but of creating a protective trade, for what else were the arguments brought forward on the subject of East India sugar ?—(Cheers.) At any rate that was not an esta blished or ancient trade—that was not a vested interest. Until very recently our laws had discouraged the production of sugar in that country, but now the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite came forward with a poetical description of the valley of the Ganges, and said that it ought to be devntedlo, the cultiyation of sugar, and, that for that purpose the sugar trade should protected! For whose benefit he would ask ?—for that of some.. great capi talist, perhaps, who might be induced to divert his capital from the West, to the .East Indies; but would any one tell him that it would be for the advantage of the poor native of Hin dostan that he should be induced to devert his industry'solely to' the' purpoSe: of raising sugar for the English market ? It would be the greatest curse that could be inflicted upon the natives of India to tempt them to raise sugar, not for the market of the world, where they might improve by meeting with competition, but for the protected and confined market of the mother country, thus making their dependant upon every fluctuation in our commercial policy.—( Cheers. ) We had reflected many injuries upon them ; we had needlessly in terfered with their prejudices ; we had ground them down with taxation, we had de s t ro y e d th e i r manu f ac t ures o f cotton an d muslin, but there were one curse greater than all whieh we might inflict upon them, and that was in fostering an artificial and protected industry.—( Cheers. ) These who argued in support of the West Indian monopoly, said that after all monopoly was the best way to support lowness of price ; that after an indefinite time, if they were sufficiently protected in the West Indies would furnish an ample supply of sugar. But that was not the high argument which was put forward that they should foster the growth of sugar in the West Indies, in o.der to prevent the production of sugar by slave labour. Now, no man, he thought, could be chimerical enough to suppose that by refusing the sugar of the Brazils, they should put an end to slavery in that country. The only reasonable ground advanced in support of the monopoly, was that it was desirable to continue it to give the experiment of emancipation fair play. That was a most dangerous policy, because it was leaving the success of that experiment upon a result which must disappoint them. When they freed the slaves, the result ought to have been foreseen,that the industry of the blacks would be transferred from exportable products to articles of consumption. It was not to be expected but that in Jamaica, when the old sugar lands, were worn out, and when there were plenty of other lands, the blacks should take to the cultivation of other products, and the exports of sugar should, consequently, decrease. In Antigua and Barbadoes, where there were no waste lands and plenty of labour, the ex ports had not diminished ; while in Demerara, Berbice, Guiana, and Trinidad, where the lands were not worn out, the proprietors expressed themselves as not fearing the competi tion cf the Brazils if they could get a supply of labour. Mr. Burnley, in Trinidad, had said at a public meeting in that island, that if they would remove all restrictions, he would be ready to enter into a competition with the whole world ; but that gentleman had not slumbered under the tree of protec tion, but immediately upon the emancipation had taken mea sures to procure a supply of free labour. But it was not, after all, on these special grounds that the question was to be argued ; it was not even on the ground of revenue, but it was on the necessity of adopting such principles of free trade as should not only maintain the existing markets but open up new ones to the great export trade of this country. When gentlemen, talked so lightly of our foreign markets did they re member what it was that enabled us to maintain a more vast population and a greater extent of comparative comfort than any country in Europe? It was our export trade.--(Hear, hear.) Between 1811 and 1821 the population of this country had increased by 875,000 families, of these 65,000 only had been added to the agricultural class. Be tween 1821 and 1831, while the agricultural class had actually decreased in mumbers, the population of the country had increased by 475,000 families, so that altogether there were upwards of 500,000 families, containing about two mil lions and a half of human beings, depending upon other em ployment .than agriculture. Now, how could they be main tained except by manufacturing for the export trade —(Loud cheering)—and if they distroyed existing markets, and failed to raise up new ones, our population must become the most beggarly in the world. Our trade with the Brazils, and the United States were now in jeopardy. Both countries, in the revision of-this tariff, threaten retaliatory measures. Under these circumstances, it was the duty of the Governmen to tell the House they eould not keep up the present system, but must have free trade, that the people might live. A great deal had been said about the present being an inconvenient time. He had ever found that the time proposed was ever the most in convenient to those who had to give up their privilege.— ( Cheers and laughter.) But he would ask them if last year, when sugar was dear, the measure had been proposed they would not have called it precipitate; and with regard to the Corn-laws if the abolition had been proposed during a moment of fa mine, then they would have been swept away ; but 'without any regard to existing interests, without even the protection at which Hon. Genvlemen opposite affect to sneer. Gen tlemen opposite affect to sneer at what they called the agita tion of the Corn-law question. For himself he could only say that the effects produced by the Government preposition had been greater than he had anticipated. But they should recollect that it was the nature of such excitement to go on in • creasing.—( Cheers.) He trembled for the consequences if they were allowed to go on. But the sin of maintaining the ex citement rested not upon those who had brought for ward the question to relieve the distresses, and to in crease the resources of the country, but upon those who refused to co-operate with them, who put an extinguisher upon the measures proposed to alleviate the troubles of the country, and who defended a monopoly which pressed with such horrible effect upon the great mass of their countrymen. —(Cheers.) They had not succeeded in eliciting from Gen tlemen opposite the course they would pursue; they had not stated whether they would maintain all existing monopolies, or whether, which, judging from the cautious plan they had pur sued, might be the case, as it had been heretofore, and they had opposed as an Opposition those concessions which they would grant when in power.—( Cheers.) He hoped that so unworthy a course would not again be adopted—(Loud cheers)—and he hoped that Hon. Gentleman having attempted to displace the Government, would let the country see on what grounds they were proceeding, and on what principles they intended to con duct the Government, if, unfortunately, they should obtain it. There was one thing in the power of the Government, and he trusted that they would attain that end. They might force the Gentlemen opposite to say what they in ended to do, if not by words, by their votes. They could only prove their sincerity in the proposition s they had laid be ore the House by the perseverance and determination which they showed ih carrying . them out. Wh atever i mpu t a ti on m i g ht be thrown upon their e ' motives, and abundant imputations were always thrown out by those who were in the expectation of succeed ing to office, but the country would not heed them. The peo ple would see that the Government was engaged in a great popular cause, which would justify a great and even unusual struggle. Let them force the Hon. Gentlemen opposite to state whether, if they would not grant cheap sugar would they grant cheap timber—(hear, hear )—and grant cheap coffee; but, above all, f orce them to sa y if neither of th ose , would t h e y whether they would grant them cheap b rea d . —( L ou d c heers.) Perhaps in the course of that discussion they 'alights extract from them, or it might be let fall inadvertently, how it was that they intended to provide for the national expenditure, and if they refused to make up the d e fi c i ency by diminishing the burdens of the ( . ) He could people, let them at l eas t exp l a i n w h a t new burdens they in tended to place up on th e coun t r y.—Cheers not have any d ou bt o f w h at the i ssue o f th e strnggle would be. He was old enoug h to remember when t h e a d voca t es o f a mea sure were in a small minus ity in one year, which measure was carried by acclamation in the following, but he had never seen a permanent failure of any popular cause, when taken up by any great p ar t y i n t h at House. The advocates for the repeal of these duties never battlsat under better auspices than now. —(Loud cheers ) Th ey had on the i r s id e th e unanimou s opinion of every writer and thin k er on th e su bj ec t. —(Cheers, and counter cheers.) H e repeated, of every writer and thi n k er o f any eminence on t h e su bj ec t ; b u t a b ove all, they h a d on t h e i r side the wants an d urgen t necess iti es o f the people—their sense of justice, their revolting sense of the injustice which had been committed upon them in being so heavily taxed for maintaining the luxuries of the aristocr acy. Those fighting u n d er a standard like that, we re sure to con quer.—(Loud cheer s .) Sir ROBERT PE EL —Mr. Speakers this, Sir, is not the first time that I h ave h ad oceasion to fee l th e extreme .embar rassment of bein g ca ll ed upon to a dd ress the House when every argument h as b een exhausted, an d when the inge nuity of those w h o h ave preceded me h a d availed them selves of every t op i c that could be pressed into lithe ,dis_ ssion ; and I woul d h i ve been per f ec tly content to re linquish any cl a i m that I ,may have on the attention of ee t the House but th at I feel that the House must see that mi I haveno alter na ti ve than to prefer that c l a im—that I should not permit thi s d e b ate to close without g i v i ng an expression of Loud cheers .) And as I feel that I have n o my sentiment s ._( alternative left but t o address the H ouse , I trust that, without allowing party feelings to interfere the House will gra n t me a patient hearing._( Ch eers. ) Sir, I shall first address myself 1 to that whick is the proper subject of debate on this occasion, viz., the question which is involved in the resolution of my Noble Friend. Sir, that resolution embodies an opinion on the part of this House that, considering the sacrifices which you have made for the abolition of the slave trade and slavery, we ought not to sanction the proposal for introducing into the markets of the United Kingdom sugar the produce of slave labour. And, Sir, after all the reflection which I have given to the subject, and which it so eminently demands, my opinion remains the same, that it would not be for the interest or the honour of this country—( Loud cheers)—to open our ports to sugar, thgi produce of slaves. Sir, I shall, give my vote on this abstract question apart from any other consi deration. If upon this occasion I heard nothing of the Con laws—had nothing been said respecting the timber duties should have been prepared—without reference to any other con sideration—l should have been prepared, Sir, earnestly to sup port the resolution of my Noble Friend. Ido not support it upon the assumption that there is an overbearing moral oblige tion which compels us to abstain from the consumption of all the production of slaves. lam not one of those who con sider that the Right lion. Gentleman opnosite can be charged with any dereliction of principle in bringing forward this mea sure. I, Sir, have myself voted for a reduction of the duties upon articles the produce of slaves. I have contended for a re duction on the duty on cotton, for the purpose of encouraging the industry of this country.—(Loud cheers.) Only last year I supported the Right Hon. Gentleman in the attempt to get rid of an absurd system, by which coffee, the produce of certain slave States, was admitted into this country at a lower duty, in consequence of its having been trans-shipped at the Cape ; and it was from no opposition that I offered to that measure, that it was not proceegled with. Id o b e li eve, Si r, that we must c om bi ne w i t h the proceed of a moral na ture, prudential considerations of a powerful nature. For in s'aice, Sir, I am not at liberty to peril the manufacturing in dustry, and threw hundreds of thousands out of employ, from a conscientious scruple that the produce of slave labour should not, under any circumstances, be admitted. Such large pru dential considerations, combined with the moral considerations belonging to the question, are fairly within the cognizance of legislation. lam perfectly willing to admit that those pru dential considerations must enter into this discussion; that we must look and inquire whether its advantages or its disadvantages most pi eponderate. Those considerations I have maturely weighed, and my mind has been made up in favour of the resolution of my Noble Friend —my mind has been made up upon a consideration of the State of the West Indies, and the progress which that great and important ex periment, upon which we have lately entered, has made. Ido not ask you to continue the exclusion of other sugars for the purpose of supporting any individual interests. —(Hear, hear.) I admit that your liberality towards the West Indians has been so great, that if their mere personal interests were concerned you would have a right to ask them to make some sacrifice for the public advantage. Sir, I look at the moral and social condition - of that part of the empire in which we have made the greatest and most arduous, and I am happy to say, so far as it has gone, the most successful experi ment ever made in civilised society—(Cheers) —and I cannot bring myself to take a step which might decide for ever that sugar cannot be produced by free labour in our West India co lonies. The Hon. Member for Liskeard said, "If sugar can not be grown in the old islands let it be cultivated in Berbiee and Demerara." Now I will ask the House is that the way in which to look at the interests of a great colony like Jamaica?_ (Loud cheers.) With what fairness can we say to the white inhabitants of that country that it is necessary for the moral improvement of the slaves whom we have emancipated that you should be put to large expenses ? You must have a large new police establishment —you must provide a large Church Establishment, and you must provide the means of education. How can we hold that language to them, and at the same time time say that it is to us a matter of indiffer ence whether sugar can be produced in Jamaica or not ? Is this, Sir, to be the result of this great, this glorious experi ment ? Is this, Sir, to be the example by which we are to persuade other countries to remit their claims on slavery ? —that in the greatest colony which England possesses, the re sult of that experiment has been the total expulsion of the white inhabitants —the destruction of their ,capital, the posses sion of their country by the negroes, who are contented with the-mere agricultural plisdnee of the knit; and that trade with England has totally ceased, and that is the happy condition in which emancipation his resulted:-(Loud' cheere,) . And yet, says the Hon. Member for Liskeard, there is riot a writer of authority, or a thinker upon the subject; whohas not supported this view, and one of the witnesses Whona ,he cited, and whom he justly' stated to be a man of high character, was Mr. Burnley. Nor it is very odd that I am prepared with a refutation of all the arguments of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, from the mouth of Mr. Burnley himself. I have here a pamphlet, in which Mr. Burnley says, " Withont the power of combining labour and increasing it, before 1840 all the capital hitherto combined by slavery must perish ;" and he further insists upon the necessity of extensive emigration, without which he feared that the great experiment might be disastrous ; and if so it would create an impression throughout the world against emancipation, which no subse quent efforts would be able to coumteract. That is Mr. Burn ley. But, Sir, I have here another authority. A few days ago I had an interview with three gentlemen of high standing in the commercial world, and of great ability ; they waited upon me as a deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, in order to discuss this question. Of course I told them that I must reserve any expression of my feeling until I was in my place in this House, but I listened to them with great attention. At the conclusion of the interview they asked me to read a pamphlet, and they informed me that if I would only do so with attention they had no doubt that even I would become a convert. Of course hearing that from such high authority, I commenced my task with some anxiety ; but as it was written by a gentleman stated to me to be of high autho rity upon the question of slavery, and as it was pressed upon me by a gentleman of the very highest charactey, and, as I found in our interview, a gentleman of the greatest intelligence and ability, I mean Mr. Ashworth, I did so. The pamphlet, I found, was the production of Mr. William Greg. At first I was inclined to believe that it was the production of the Hon. Member for Manchester; but I am informed that it is the work of his brother. At the end of the pamphlet he says, 6. the planters h a d no r i g h t to demand that the nation shoutd endure the payment of the present enormous prices for the pro duce of our colonies." He also is well acquainted with our Brazilian trade, and is a strong advocate for its being main tained. Yet. this chosen champion of the Chamber of Com merce at Manchester, a man of enlarged and enlightened views, comes to this conclusion, that without a large emigration of labourers into our colonies the capital there employed in the sugar cultivation would be destroyed, for the white inhabitants would carry what of their capital remained to other parts, and his words are, that "in such a case emancipation will then have signally failed." "If ever the black population shall be come squatters on waste lands, or cultivators merely for subsistence, then slavery and the slave trade will have re ceived the last encouragement which can be given to it." The Hon. Gentleman the Deputy of the Chamber of Com merce foresaw that I should he convinced that their panegyric upon their selected champion was not just, he foresaw the argu ment which has been made use of in this debate, he foresaw the argument that would be used—" you consume tobacco and you consume coffee"—arid he says "it may be urged against you, how can you conscientiossly permit the admission of slave grown sugar on the ground that it would encourage slavery and the slave trade, when you receive into your ports, without im pediment, slave-grown cotton." He foresaw that his answer to the objection is rather smart than sound—(Loud cheers) — and its inapplicability will be obvious in a few mo ments. I will not give you the whole of his rea soning. He sums it up in a short sentence---" In a word, the country is not called upon to exclude slave-grown cotton, because it never has been excluded, and because of its continued admission." (Here some observation was made in an under tone from the Liberal benches.) You may not be a member of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester; but re collect the Chamber of Commerce are all advocates for free trade, the men who are agitating against the Corn-laws,—they asked me to read this pamphlet, and told me that they would abide by the decision to which I came upon reading it._ (Cheers from the Tory benches ) He says, " This country is not called upon to exclude cotton,—this country is called upon to exclude slave-grown sugar, because it has always been excluded, and because its admission now would he the greatest possible additional stimulus to slavery and the slave trade which England for thirty years has been lavishing all her efforts to abolish."—(Cheers.) And the conclusion of his pamphlet is this. He says," I think we have now clearly made out all the propositions. The only method of abolishing the slave trade is by destroying the demand for slaves. This object can only be attained and may certainly be attained by establishing, through the prosperity of our West Indian colonies, the supe rior cheapness of free labour, and that the prosperity will be ensured and can only be ensured by extensive and systematic immigration, and by a temporary continuance of the present dis criminatingduties on sugar.''—( Cheers from the Tory benches. ) Lest the Hon. Gentleman did not hear me, I will repeat that " And by the temporary continuance of the present dis c.iminating duties on sugar."—(Loud cheers.) Now this is not the first time that I have been indebted for an argument to the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester.—(Hear, hear.) I have read the pamphlet which the advocates of free trade placed in my hands. The result of the reading of that pam phlet is, great respect for the abilities of the author, and a confirmation of my previous impressions i favour of the con tinuance of the present discriminative duti&.—(Cheers. ) At the same time I cannot conceal from myself the fact that there has been, in consequence of the abolition of slavery, a great di minution of the productions of sugar from the West Indies, and if I could look to no other source of supply, I believe the pressure would be so severe, that you could not maintain the monopoly of the West Indies.—( Hear, hear.) If you could only look to an annual produce of 115,000 tons of sugar, I think you could not maintain the protection. But I look to that country which gives us hope of future pros. perity ; I look to India, as affording a check upon extravagant prices, and I have a competent hope that if you permit the ex periment to be fully made, the West Indies the Mau r iti us , an d the East Indies will a ff or d you a supply which shall secure the impertati mof sugar at a moderate price. The Chancellor of the Exchequer referred with some satisfaction, only a satisfac tion, lam sure, as confirming an argument of his, to a sud den increase which had taken place in the price of sugar. New, I think the Hon. Gentleman will find that, subsequent to the day on which he spoke there has been, fm some weeks past, a progressive reduction in the price of sugar, and, notwithstand ing the expectation that the House will not confirm the scheme of the Hon. Gentleman for admitting slave sugar into the British market, that expectation has not tended, I believe, to in crease the price of sugar. What may take place hereafter I of course cannot foresee, but I am told that since, the com mencement of this debate, there has been again a material fall in the price of sugar. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last says we are going to inflict an enormous injury upon India by giving to the West Indies a monopoly of sugar. Ido not exactly understand the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. Why, if we give this encouragement to the home market, we are preventing East Indian sugar from competing with Bra zilian sugar in the market of Europe. The Hon. Gentleman says, " For God's sake don't divert the capital of India, don't divert the labour of India by this production of sugar, which is certain to end in subsequent disappointment." Divert the capital of India! Why, have you considered the relation in which we stand with India ? The question simply is between the introduction of slave-grown sugar and the introduction of free-labour sugar. With respect to India, the amount of remit tances on account of Government is 3,200,0001., besides private receipts to the amount of half a million. If I can encourage the produce, and find employment for labour, shall I be told that 1 am inflicting an irremediable injury upon India?—( Hear, hear.) If I enable them to make these re mittances by it, by encouraging the production of sugar and protecting agricultural labour, shall I be told, with reference to a country from which I demand an annual remittance of 3,2:10,000/., which it has no other means of making up except by agricultural produce, shall I be told that some clear, in fallible doctrines of free trade prevent me from giving encouragement to that ?—(Loud cheers). 1 recollect some recent debates in this House upon the condition of India. I recollect the amount of the injury you had in flected upon that country by the unavoidable, unintentional cheapness of our produce. The town of Jappa was reduced from 1,500,000 to 15,009 or 20,000, and the Malaya was gradually advancing upon it. I recollect in the debate re specting the Hill Cool es, the speech of the Hon. Member for Roxburgh, who had personal experience of the condition of the labouring classes, and I refresh the Honourable Gen tleman's memory for the purpose of calming his alarm as to the extreme danger of diverting the resources of India. The Hon. Gentleman said he w as appointed to inquire into the condition of the . agricultural labour of Bengali He found that they were paid about Is. 6d. per week, or 2d. per day, that they " subsist • on rice, and when rice fails they starve." He says " I have seen the people by hundreds and thousands hurry towards the point at which relief was distributed by the Governor of Bengal. I have seen whole villages swept away by a dread ful inundation, and vast tracts of land utterly ruined." And then he gives a picture of horror which exceeds anything that the most romantic imagination ever pictured. I know of nothing more striking than that statement.—( Hear. ) He says I know this, that an official charged with a mission from Calcutta, was obliged to return back in consequence of the smell from the carcases of persons who had died from famine. Looking at our relations with that country if we are responsible for the moral condition, for the happiness, and comfort of its inhabitants, shall I b e t o ld t h at there is some superior obligati on which makes me encourage the slave pro duce of Cuba, in preference to the produce of a country from which I exact a large amount of produce, and where the labourers are in the condition I have stated? 'lfiese are the grounds I thought before, and which I still think ought to induce me to give my vote for the resolution of my Noble Friend the Member for Liverpool.—( Hear, hear.) I never sought to inflame the minds of the people of this country on the subject of slavery. I -never took an aative part on the subject. I gave my snpport to my worthy Friend, although I confessed at the time that I viewed the matter with apprehension, but I gave my support to it. I never lent myself to the cry of slavery, and I will not now lend myself to the cry of cheap sugar when the slavery cry begins to fail.—( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Devonport has charged my Right Hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge and myself with inconsistency, with respect to East and West Indian sugar. He stated that it was discussed in the Cabinet of which Lord Glenelg was a member, whether or not East Indian sugar should not be placed on the same footing as West Indian sugar. He said it was clear that that proposition was submitted to the Cabinet, and that the great principle involved in ta. e question was giving protection to slave sugar in pre ference to West Indian sugar, arid the Right Hon. Gentleman after stating this asked with great warmth if we were prepared to ride into office upon such manifest inconsistency. I, Sir, do not recollect anything of that, sort having taken plate, nor does nay Noble Friend Lord Glenelg. If he had recollected such a circumstence I should instantly have bowed to his deci;ion, but I think that my Lord Glenelg's impression is the same as mine, that the proposals were never submitted to the conside ration of the Cabinet. I believe they were communicated by my Noble Friend to some Members of the Government, but they never underwent any formal consideration. In 1828 and 1829 we declined to adopt these resolutions. It is trite that my Noble Friend said he did not assent to the principle of them, but the principle to which my friend referred was the reduction of the ditty on sugar, for the purpose of increasing consumption, but the introduction of East India sugar and slave sugar never was th e su bj ect o f d i scussion. It must be remembred, too, that since that time slavery has been abolished in the colonies of this country ; and it must be recollected also that there was at this time a bounty upon West India sugar. The protection then was a complete one, and therefore sugar the production of slaves, could not enter into competiton. Sir, I was surprised, in the course of this debate, to observe the altered tone taken by gentlemen on the other side of the Housa with respect to slavery.—(Loud cheers.) I must say that after all our magnificent professions, I was sur prised at the course which on the other side of the House they are prepared to take. We are to tell foreign countries that we have at length discovered the only effectual way of putting an end to slavery and the slave trade. We are to tell them that the only way to do that is to encourage competition between sugar the produce of free labour, and that which is produced by slaves—( Great cheering) —and then we are to be told that this proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is really and truly brought forward, not so much to encourage the consumption of sugar, bat for the purpose of putting an end to the slave trade.—(Great cheering.) How was it proposed to extinguish slavery ? Why, by open ing the markets of England to sugar, the produce of slave labour. Such a proposition, I will venture to say, will be scouted in every part of the country.—( Hear, hear.) Again, I have heard in this debate, on the authority of a Cabinet Mi nister, that the delinquencies of other countries are no con cern of ours ; that it was quite indifferent to this country what course other countries might pursue. I think that such a state ment is unworthy the source from which it comes, and I hope that the time is far distant, before we shall hear it broached again. The Hon. Gentleman, the Member for'Wolverhanipten said that the United States had as much right to refuse to trade withva on the ground that we would not take their cotton', as that we' had a right to say that we would not receive into this country sugar the produce of slave labour. The Hon. Gentleman has also stated that the municipal fegulaticms of ' other'Staes were no concern of ours, and that we had no right whatever to hold any language which might be considered as dictating the course they should pursue. That may be all very well, but I don't think it is the language that her Majesty's Government would hold. Let the House look at the course which the Noble Lord has pursued in making treaties with other countries. If I understand rightly the Noble Lord in making the treaty with Texas, he made it one of the provisions of that treaty that they should abandon the slave trade. I cannot therefore think that it is matter of indifference that we should see what course other countries • will take with respect to slavery. I think, whatever Hon. Members may say of the influence these propositions have had in the country, that the country would view with disgust and al arm th e aban donment of the position this count r y has hitherto contained in its opposition to the introduction of foreign slave-grown sugar. Sir, the real question is not whether a certain amount of ca pital is employed in sugar refining—in this trade or in that— the 'seat question is, whether we do not incur the hazard of giving a fresh impetus to sugar the produce of slave-labour.— ( Hear, hear.) It appears to me that in abandoning that posi tion you are cescending from the high position you have here tofore occupied. Sir, you have made great sacrifices to carry out this experiment. You have paid twenty millions of money to emancipate your slaves in the ti est India Colonies. I trust that that disinterested conduct will still be maintained by you, and that you will not disqualify yourselves from holding up the ex ample of England as an example for other nations.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord the other night, in comparing the po sition of England with that of Rome, observed that the circum stances of England were entirely different, and in a beautiful paraphrase of Dryden observed— " Rome, it is thine alone with awful sway, To rule the world and make mankind obey, Dispensing peace and war thine own majest i c way. " —( Hear, hear. Sir, we are in different circumstances, for we have formidable competitors in the arts of war. We can no longer rule mankind by physical force, we can no longer compel obedience to our decrees by physical force, but I had hoped, till this debate, that there was an awful sway by which we might still rule mankind, and make the world obey by the influence of our example, and the disin terested efforts we had made for the abolition of slavery and slave trade.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, lam sorry the Noble Friend did not continue his quotation a little further— " So tame the proud the fettered slave to free, These are imperial acts, and worthy thee." —(Much cheering.) Sir, that is the majestic way in which I hope we cannot dispense peace or war but dispose other na tions to follow in our path, and by our all-glorious example to promote the interests of humanity.—((;heers.) Sir, these are the grounds on which I shall vote for the resolution of my Noble Friend ; and in voting for that resolution I am taunted by the Noble Lord with pursuing a factions course. The Noble Lord commenced his speech by repelling with indignation the accusation preferred against the Government, and said he was confident that no man who had watched the progress of events could be possibility suspect them of bringing forward any public measure with a view to party motives. Now, Sir, I should have thought that the Noble Lord's experience might have freed us from the charge of having offered to him much of factious opposition. I think the Noble Lord might have called to his mind some occasion on which, if a factious op position had been offered to him his position as a Minister would have been infinitely less safe. —(Loud cheering.) But the Noble Lord before he preferred that charge of faction against those who support this resolution might just have borne in mind the question of Privilege—(Cheers)—the question of the Union of the Canadas—(loud cheers)—or the question of the Poor-laws.—(Loud cheering). And the Noble Lord might have had the justice to have given his opponents credit for not having been desirous against their conscientious convictions, of embarrassing his course on public questions, when embarrassment would have been the result. --( Hear.) But a factious course ? I who have t.ken precisely the same course which I took last year.—(Cheers.) I, who when the Hon. Member for Wigan, proposed to me to intro duce sugar, the produce of slave labour recorded by my vote, my opposition to that motion. I now stand here advocating the same principles, putting on record precisely the same opinions, when I say that 1 am not willing to admit slave grown sugar after the sacrifices the country has made. And yet I am charged by the Noble Lord with faction. Why, Sir, the only prima facie suspicion of faction attaching to my course is, that it was the course taken by the Noble Lord last year.—(Much cheering.) Really I don't see any assign able ground for it. I guilty of faction for adhering to my opinions of last year ! Really 1 have had some experience of Parliamentary assurance—(A laugh)—and I can conceive that if I had embodied the Corn-laws, and the sugar duties, and the timber duties in one measure, and that I had said " Don't discuss these question separately, but try to get as many as you can to Tote against sugar, by mixing up with it timber and corn," then I might have been charged with faction.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) But for the Noble Lord, under the present circumstances, to accuse me of faction is one of the most extraordinary charges that was ever made. When I referred to the Right Hon. Gentleman's proposition, did I use a word of taunt—did I not perfectly ac knowledge that if the interests of the country required it, the Right lion. Gentleman was quite justified in taking a dif ferent course. That accusation I beg most distinctly to repel. —( Hear, hear.) One of the charges of factious motives was founded on the allegation that we had embodiod no great and in evocable principles in our opposition. Sir, we have had ex perience enough in these principles —( Loud cheering.) The Nob!e Lord might, perhaps, say " Why don't you imitate our more illustrious example. Why do you not move a resolution that no arrangement on this subject ever can be satisfactory." ( Vehement and long continued cheering.) Why, with the mt.morable example before us of the policy of the Noble Lord in reconsidering his resolutions—that the tear of the possibility of our being obliged, not to recant, for that they would not do, but to leave on the journals of the House that standing opprobrium to all Government—(Loud cheering, in which the remainder of the sentence was lost). That may perhaps be a sufficient ex cuse to all the successors of the Noble Lord to view with ap prehension that example ; but see what an absurdity you commit. The Noble Lord may say that we leave to ourselves a loophole to escape, and who could predict that we might not be guilty of the unparalelled iniquity, that next year we may be compelled to introduce propositions of a similar character? If we are, shall we be worse than the Noble Lord ?—(Cheers.) Leaving a loophole ! Why what loophole have you !—( Cheers.) The charge you bring against me is faction. You, who op posed these resolutions last year, are you so uncharitable as to think men can be actuated only by factious motives, who leave to themselves the opportunity at last of taking another course ?—( Cheers from the Ministe rial benches.) Now, do not mistake—do not believe that I move this resolution with for forethought of being able, next year, under similar circumstances, of deviating from the course I now take. I will be frank.—(Loud cheers and counter cheers.) Ido say that my opinion is that this experiment should be fairly made, and that you ought to encourage the introduction of free sugar and the attempt to supply the market of the United Kingdom. And if, perhaps, if I take the course I state, it is not that I contemplate if I succeed to office, following your example, and having opposed your propo position this sear, coming down next year and proposing it— ( Cheers.) The principle for which I contend is this, that East India sugar, rum, and the produce of all our colonies, ought to be placed on the same footing. It is my confident hope and expectation that the produce of our own colonies will afford a sufficient supply of sugar ; and it' this should prove true, since the necessary supply can be procured, 1 for one am prepared to contend for the existing protection, so long as the West India colonies remain in a state analagous to the present.—( Hear, hear.) As I said before, I would not have said a word to Hon. Gentlemen with respect to their having taken an opposite course ; but when I am charged with faction I have a right to refer to it. And what was-the lan guage held on the motion of the Hon. Member for Wigan, which was resisted by her Majesty's Government ? We were told that the price of sugar was high to an unparalleled degree, that the stock was short and scanty to a degree never equalled, and that we ought to introduce a supply from the Bra zils. But you, the President of the Board of Trade, met the argument respecting the introduc tion of cotton, tobacco, and sugar, the produce of slave labour, and said that there was a broad distinction between sugar, and tobacco, and cotton. Then, when Hon. Gentlemen on this side attempt to show that distinction, is it not too much a t o r , s u a m y e t t a t an we d ae d r a r guilty sa o m f efadci stin b t i n c e o c n a u ? s_e ( w c e h use enrs t . he ) . 15 said the peopl e o f E ng l an d required that the great exP er 4 l s o should be fai r ly t r i e d. "If, t h en , at t hi s moment," you said, 4 the colonists are struggling with such difficulties as have D 791 described, y ou are a b out to d o w h at ? to epen the flood of foreig n supp l y , an d i nun d ate the British market , u vf! tl i sugar, the prod uce o f s l ave labour, the people will be a t l nant." The p r i ce o f su g ar i n July last was 565. 10d-, its now 375. 10d.—(Ch eers. ) Y ou have since then g i v en creased facility t o t h e i ntro d uct i on of East India. sugar, at s you have equa li ze d t h e duty on rum. You now find it ear e - , r dent to try a diff erent course. Be it so. Take that court' I should have g i ven you f u l l credit for your motives ; but n you take that course d o not think it necessary to Charge yor opponents with faction because they take the course s va ; you have abandoned.—(Cheers.) Sir, that is all the ob:e rs " tion I wish to ma te w ith respect to the question of sugar; an I could have been contented to have here terminated mY," servations, if I had not been constantly reminded that thi s 11 _, great commerci a l an d fi nanc i a l crisis—that the question ofst , ' is intitnately conn ec t e d w i t h other measures—that the t vernrnent solicit investigation of their general plan, and that ef tee have no right to confine ourselves to the simple discust of the question. Sir, I say that the principles of free trade in no way concerned with this question of sugar.-0_ e , hear.) It stands in so peculiar, special, and unparalleled t: d aition that it is apart from all the principles of free trade, .7 0 all other qu es ti ons , an d on i ts own sacred ground I gi ve vote again s t th e i n t ro d uct i on o f s l ave-grown sugar.—( Cbeue .s I do not d en y th a t th ere i s i n t hi s country great manufact r• in; distress, and I am su re t h a t t o w h atever party we may bell we all hear with th e u t most pa i n and grief those deta il s o f dividual suff er i ng w hi c h are b rought under our notice ; but protest against them as legitimate arguments by which t°, beni tluence the judgment of the House. No man can hear them with greater pain and affliction than I do. I heartily ado _ no some measure could be devised for their relief ; but, at the sa uir, time, I am bound to say that at all times, and under a cumstances, we have had s i m il ar d eta il s of th i s eharactitte e and that never can hope, i n th e comp li ca ted s e , of society in which we live— with the extensive manufactur o l su e concerns in which we are engaged, to see the time when nc appeals may not b e ma d e, and when it may not be attentitte ree i„ inikence our reas on an i ju d gment by harrowing up our 9s, the ' s ings with these melancholy details. Although I admit vere pressure of this manufacturing distress, I must at these time say that I do not view with the same alarm and despp,7, ency as other Hon. Gentlemen the commercial position of t f o . country. Ido not see the grounds for the alarm they L' at , expressed. I have referred with some anxiety to the a ccost laid before the House, of commerce and manufacture!, anedthis belief is, that it is bat a temporary pressure. forme- opinion on th e d ocuments printed by the House, and solja. tr y ing the a mount of the expert and import trade of the coo , during th e l ast t h ree years-183g, 1839, and 1840: The :3'9, cial value o f our exports i n 1838 was 92,000,000/. ; in e l d i 97,000,000/. ; an d i n 1840, 102,000,000/. If you j u d ge 0 y; , official va l ue I am aware that with respect to quantity noso4 factory refere nce can be drawn, so I t urn to t h e a__„,ni° u ". of declared v a l ue , w hi c h , i n 1838, was 49,630,01 i, In 1839 52,700,000/ . , an d i n 1 84 0 51,000,000/., being ade e cation for the last y ear i n th e d ec l are d value of British p rodOc , of 1,700,0001. I n th e cotton manufacture there was no crease. In the linen manufacture there was no increas e d The decreas e was i n eart h enware, in hardware, 7,00 in wooll en an d s ilk manu f actures. On the declared 'said, of 1839 and 1840 the defalcation in earthenware, iZ o i, ware, and in woollen and silk manufactures was 1,60 0 0';,, I find that th e U n it e d St ates ta k e t h e chief part of our nlof factures. They take two-fifth s o f our handware, one- half our silk-manufact ures , an d one - t hi r d o f our woollen rnann't e b tures. When I cons id er th e em b arrassed situation d United States, on account of the state of credit and currency in that country—when I see the increased demand for a; articles of British prod uce , I entertain a hope that when el temporary difficulties of the United States shall have po ss e , away, there will be a corresp on di ng i ncrease in our maneiato tures. We must n o t b e i n a d espond i ng mood with respec t the demand f or our art i c l es of manufacture in the 02ite d _ OO States.—(Hear, h ear , h ear. ) The value of experts f' s, Great B r it a i n an d I reland to the United Slate et 36 amounted in dollar s i n th e year ' 1835 to 612,000,000, inS'es to 783,000,000, it then suddenly, fell to 44,000,000, it _s' de wards rose to 65,000,000, and the next there was a great was crease, as might naturally be expected. Although there ihel such a defalc a ti on , yet exper i ence in bur trade wiai`the 01 4 States warrants a h o p e t h at t h e d ema n d ' irk that dii bird again revive. Now just look - to thestate of our trade and vigation ; I cannot reconcile that state .witlethe assertions n specting fail ure i n our manu f actures and prosperity. the year 1838 the tonnasse on new b u ilt vesse l s registered into) United Kingdom we:157,090, in th e y ear 1839 2 9 6 , 000; in ' 333,000; in 1838 the total number : of ships entered' ittr he was 4 000,000 ;i n 1839, 4 , 432 ,000 ;in 1840, 4,657,00 0 •. die abipping outwards am oun t e d, i n 18 38, to 4,099,000 ; in f year 1839, 4,492,00 0; i n 1840, 4,781,000. Now, certainly , there were that severe and universal distress which is °la re tinned, he c ou ld h ar dl y reconc i le that incase it, trade a navigation, as det erm i ne d, not b y the number of vessels, b u t by to the tonnage, with any statement to that effect. Looking..., the condition e f t h e U n i te d States—looking to the natural mi terruption in trad e f rom our relations with China—kioking the interruption of our commercial intercourse with Syria' looking; at the position of France and other countries of Europe . convulsed with th e f ears o f war, whereby commercial trails, % tions must b e necessar il y i nterrupted —if a deficiency in declared value of B r iti s h exports during the last year has ete place, I do not infer from that circumstance that ,;',e ought to give up a ll h ope i n t h e manufacturing prositer of this country. I am not prepared to admit that it t , country be prosperou s , th ere s h ou ld not be a relaxation in not due restrictions on commerce. lam not prepared to say et us remain stationary, if we improve the commercial c" e s tion of our country ; but let us apply ourselves to the C0°.7,,, deration of the means by which we may increase the prosee t l r ' , _ of the country. The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton (°"__, Villiers) insisted that I ought to make a declaration of.„,lailL sentiments' with respect to the principles of free trade. • -t_ . P o i Hon. Gentleman said that his principles and the principles such of his friends as concur with him, are those that, withou t reference reference to any other consideration, your true policy be to buy in the cheapest market. If these are the of 'the Hon. Gentleman, and if they are to be invariably applied without deference to circumstance s or times, I can onlY that in the application of these principle s I do not concur• don't press them with reference to a country where there a r : no reformod institutips, but, as my Noble Friend said, in, country of such compricated relations, of such extensive emr as this, with such various moral and social obligations, inde pendent of mere commercial advantages, to say that yon'shou. ri pr o rn g mple; rigidly and uniformly apply those principles, would_ b d e_ my opinion, only involving this country in inextricable i t tli_• cnities. I apprehend her Majesty's Government, however the Hon. Gentlemen may laud the course they are taking, will wes as laid do be obliged to d ssent from the principles of free trade, by the Hon. Gentleman. If the Hon. Gentleman's principl es , really be to buy i n th e c h eapest market, what does h e say ,0 „ t _,., the proposition of th e Government to impose a duty of " uponree a m wheat dun ? r — est ( r Hear, importation r i , hear.)N Vhy nf ri m n . t he p a, e t rm an it ga a r, Pe ti c t f e tb et e _ l f and everythin g e l se , if th e pr i nc i ples of the Hon. GenGentlemanbe fully carri e d ou t ? Th e :G overnment claims for themselves tit: same privilege s w hi c h I c l a i m f or myself, namely, I liaise n thing to do with these abstract principles without knowing the circumstances under which, and the time when they are applied. Notwithstanding the Noble Lord had said that corddie'] support than he did from me, I will not hesitate to say, tha t d the time I did support the proposition of Mr. Huskisson, a t , ' 0 the result has confirmed my opinion. I think I could appeal the Noble Lord for a confirmation of this, that one of the reaso° assigned by M r . H usk i sson for joining in the Government P', the Duke of Wellington, was his having received cordial, rut'' port from me. The only obstruction thrown in his WV v ias , by the Hon. M em b er f or C oventry, and that was on that very cou ld ] question t o w hi c h you referred. Every argument that coo be collect e d was, w i t h t h e assistance of the silk ma n u factUrorg z of Covent ry , put f orward b y that Hon. Gentleman, in order'. to have. Coventry exempted from the application of the 1% 4 ° 5 ' ples of free trade. The only opposition in the motion met by Mr. Huskisson was by a motion proposed by a Right ie - 1 0 °' Gentleman who is now the columen decusque reruns "Pf he t Majesty's pi . esent Government, and he was sup P o r ti a. in th a t oppos i tion by a faithful adherent of t,"- same party, w h o was t h en t h e Member for Lincoln, and who has since been promoted to the office of Judg e ' The colleague of the Noble Lord was not content with decryingr the principles of free trade, b u t h e accused us, who advocat a , them, of b e i ng co ld and b loody metaphysicians.—(Cheers 30d, laughter.) We, according to th e l anguage of Burke, as quo te by the Right Hon. Gentleman, were actuated by all the mal i f nity of the^ devil, and with a sovereign contempt for the we fare of mankind. —(Cheers and laughter.) Such was the law guage of t h e N o bl e Lord ' s colleague, and he said this 17,,, , merely ag a i ns t t h e mot i on respecting silk, but: to discredit ow' whole commercial principles, and our perseverance is t h i e , course which w e h a d f rame d . That was the occasion to vsLiej. the Noble Lord referred with so much exultation, and h : which, h e sa id, we gave a cold and lukewarm support to measures ef Mr. Huskisson, who, the Noble Lord would hap` us believe, was borne on in his course by the tide of 147 , 1 % i support.—( Ch eers and laughter from the Opposition.) i' 3 ;:r the Noble L or d c l a i med exclusive credit for the suplwr`,. „ those principles, and said that if he went out of office he pack up his principles of free trade, and carry them with lu' r e —(Great lau g h ter f rom the Tory benches)--ehat would carry them away, foreseeing that we, who teed 31 .' 113- been opposed to them, would try to rob him of his proe,ettii but that such was hi s magnanimous generosity beforehar d, h' he would stand b y hi s pr i nc i ples, and not withhold fro•ln us t'e, ; necessary supply of Lib era l pr i nc i ples.—(Shouts o', teteatttc: from the To r i es .) H ow d oes the Noble Lord claim this'o'n'iu sive dominion over the principles of Mr. Huskiss an ?—(r e r r cheers.) Where did we ever hear of that claim till,,the pres sent moment ?—( V e h ement c h eer i ng from the oppo4t,i? i r.e Was there ever a p u bli c man that pronounced a into , .? ,‘ v condemnation of th e p r i nc i p l es of free trade,. than t he Prime Minister ?—( Renewed Tory ch eers . ) 'When Lord Alelbourne said that it was absolute insanity to deprive agriculture of . pro' beentection( Cheers)—and who use d l anguage that.anight hav e mine—(Qheers)—that in the present coneplicated tions of the country it was impossible to apply the principles 0 ' free trade—( Hear, hear)—yet no man rose in this House wtt as ethe n e d s pg t eert a g cn a efn i n t s .l t a sut t p h o i y s ne at d hr e e c o l c a n r u a s t tt i oh o em n .3 —_(Loud t trade' r e : 0 ; that trade? e —(Tory ocr cent, t c . h eers t ‘ h Veillpdutye a s ad e nddit accordingo_laughter.)aj u, po principles of say tobacco last year which was , already taxed 1,200 per' cent. ,e ll 5 according to the principl es o f free trade (Renewed -OFfel.- ing. ) I n t rut h G overnment do not mean to apply. theprig" ciples of fr ee t ra d e , an d you should not talk of them as if yo u were the exclusive professors of them for a long series of years' I assented to th ese general principles of free trade when they were presented in a very different manner, when they were su i berly and cau ti ous l y presented, with the power and means° effecting what we proposed—( Vehement cheering from the Tories)-when the public mi n d : was prepared for them, Whe n opposition wnas weak and its success was prevented by the ea" „ : tious and deliberat e manner in hich our meaSnr% were brou g h t f orwar d .—( Vehement cheers from the Tories.) We acted in this manner when we were in union with M r. Huskisson. —( Hear, hear.) I have no doubt you will ric" ;i • quire fro m me w h at I propose relative to the Corn-laws',,,-; ( Hear, h ear ) I w i ll not shrink from expressing my on the subj ec t. l am aware that I can consis tentlygwith my u n ' tv give my opi n i on, an d 1 will give it —( Che ers. ) If I had se'° reason to chang e my course, I would d o so, as lion. Gent'ee men opposit e h ave `tone; I maintaSii th e op i n i ons an d / a dhere to the course which I have already avowed, perfeetly.unde terred by th e menaces whichappea r t o th reaten declarations of opinion on this subject.—(Cheers.) Notwithstanding the i formidable combination which stands against the supporters ° the present Corn-laws— notwithstandi ng the declaration til t they must either be repealed, or a fixed duty must be soh',b tuted for the sliding s cale—notwithstanding this 'probe' tion and declaration, I do not hesitate to avow my adherence to the opinions which ex • d 1 d referen ce piesse ast year, an my p of a graduated scale to any fixed duty.—(Great cheerin* I said last yea r , tiotl and I repeat now what I said on the:rl l , 6 . of the Hon. Member for W 1 h t Isaid that I o ver amp on— _awes with anxiety the state of manufactures—l said then and 4 5 think that a prosperous state of manufacturing industry country was most intimately connected with a prosperous 'kSa e of agriculture. I could 'then andh t the r°s - now t a _ Nej e petity of Ruse t" - manufactures is a greater support to agricu ) system of Corn-la ws cou ld b e . —(Mi n i ster i al But I said last that I decidedly prefer the principle of Ind dusted and sliding scale to a fixed duty.—( Cheers. not bind myself to a rigid adherence to the exact scale,as it f ile rated, but I reserve to myself the fu.l power of considering:t, details. All that I declared was, that I preferred the friiielpi_es as compared with that of a fixed duty. I hold the" same opinou y// F THE SUN, L MORN ENG_ EDITION._ -:~