The Sun. — London, England, 1849-02-14 00:00:00

Vbirtif Mtlttion SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Birkenhead Lancashire and Cheshire Junction Railway (abandonment of part of the line, extension to London and North-Western Railway, &c.) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. PETITIONS. ' Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from the Mon treal Board of Trade, complaining of the colonial policy of the country, and praying that a differential duty of ss. might be imposed upon Idleign corn imported into the colonies or the mother country. Mr. BROWNE: presented a petition praying that in ternational disputes might be settled by arbitration. Mr. HILDYARD presented a petition from White. haven against the repeal of the navigation-laws. Mr. EVANS presented a petition from a place in Derbyshire against any further endowment of Roman Catholics. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Oswestry, praying the House to extend the jurisdiction of county courts to debts of 501. Also a petition from Wakefield in favour of international arbitration ; and a petition praying for the abolition of punishment of death. Mr. ANSTEY presented two petitions from Limerick, praying the House to pass alaw for the better preserva tion of the fisheries of the Shannon.' Mr. J. A. SMITH presented a petition from the Gloucester Chamber of Commerce, relating to the Sea man's Fund Bill. Mr. MILES presented a petition from the parish of Bedminster, praying that urban and rural parishes might not be united without the consent of the parish authorities; also two petitions from the schoolmasters of two parishes in Gloucestershire complaining that they had been unlawfully removed from their offices by order of the Poor-law Commissioners. RETURNS. On the motion of Mr. G. THOMPSON, the following returns were ordered :—Returns of the quantity of East Indian cotton imported into the United Kingdom by the East India Company, from the year 1780 to the year 1814 inclusive; of the taxed price at which the said cotton was put up for sale and sold in London at the quarterly sales, during each year of the above period; similar return to the above, from the year 1814 to the year 1834 inclusive; - showing the rate of duty charged in the several presidencies of India upon the export of cotton, whether coastwise or to the United Kingdom, or to foreign countries, from the year 1780 to the period at which such duty was discontinued ; show ing the rate of duty, in the several presidencies of India, upon the transit of cotton from place to place within the said presidencies, from the date at which such duty was imposed until the period of its discontinuance. Of the total quantity of cotton cloth and cotton piece goods ex p6rted from the several presidencies of India, whether coastwise, to the United Kingdom, or to foreign countries, from the time such exports were first recorded until the present period. Copies of a circular, dated Bombay, 28th January, 1847, addressed to the Governor in Council of Bombay to the several mer cantile houses of that place, giving a detail of the Go vernment measures connected with introducing an im proved system of cultivating and cleaning cotton in the Southern Mabratta country. Of thereport of the settle n.ent of Zillah numeerpoor, in the province of Bundle cund, made by Messrs. Allen and Muir, of the Bengal Civil Service. Of a revenue letter from the Governor in Council of Bombay, dated November 5, 1823, addressed to the Court of Directors of the East India Company, and of a prcclamation, issued by the Governor in Council of I3ombay,and published in the Bombay Government Gazette of the 20th June, 1838; together with copies of the noti. fications of the 24th February and Ist of August, 1835, and of the Ist and 17th November, 1836, issued under the authority of Government by Thomas Williamson, Esq. Revenue Commissioner in the Deccan, granting certain exemptions from assessment to land cultivated with cotton and the Mauritius sugar cane. Also of all cor respondence which passed on the above subjects between the Revenue Commissioner and the Governor in Council of Bombay, and between the Governor in. Council of Bombay and the Governor- General of India in Council, and the Court of Directors of,the East India Company. INSOLVENT MEMBERS' BILL. Mr. MOFFATT, in moving the second reading of this Bill, remarked that it involved simply a question of common sense and common honour. It proposed to apply to all Members of the - House the provisions of an Act which now only extended to part of them. It pro posed to withdraw from all Members, no matter whether traders or :not: the privilege* of at all times being pro tected from arrest; but in introducing the Bill he had beep :especially careful to preserve, the privileges of the House as far as they relate to carrying on public busi ness. The Aot of 1812 preserved the privilege which exempted Members from • arrest during the sitting of Parliament, and in that respect the present Bill followed the Act of 1812. No doubt Hon. Members were aware that that Act provided that it. was highly necessary for the preservationi of the dignity of Parliament, that all bankrupt members being traders should not retain their seats. That principle bad been found to work well in respect of trading members, find he could see no reason why it should not be extended alike to all memlers, no matter whether traders or otherwise, wiles° affairs were in an insolvent state.—(Hear.) It had been objected, however, to this Bill that it did not go far enough. There were some Hon. Members who went the length of saying that the privileges of arrest ought to be abolished altogether, but he confessed, having carefully looked into the matter, he could nut coincide with the propriety of that suggestion.—(hear, hear.) And he thought he could convince the House in a few minutes of the inexpediency of their adopting it. In the first place, if they were to abolish the pri vileges which Members usefully enjoyed of exemption front arrest during the sitting of the House, it would give rise to endless confusion, particularly when party feeling ran high, for then,-if they abolished the privilege, two or three Members might be arrested just before a division, and such a proceeding might not only be pro ductive of inconvenience, but might at times endanger the constitution of the Ilinise.--(Hear, hear.) On that ground alone, therefore, he did not think it expedient to adopt the suggestion which one er two. Hon. Members had thrown out. Having briefly explained the principle of the Bill, he trusted there would be no division upon it, and should there be any objection to the details, an opportunity would be afforded to make any suggestions with respect to them. Ills only object in introducing. the Bill had been to maintain the dignity and indepen dence of the House, and he begge 1, therefore, to move that it be now read a second time. The motion having been seconded, Sir G. GREY hoped the House would agree to the second reading of the Bill. When the. Hon. Member introduced a similar Bill lest session, he then thought it necesary to caution the House not to sanction it, because the manner In which the principle was sought to be car ried out was so objectionable. The Hon. Gentleman had now reconsidered the subject, and while he sought to attain the same object, he did it without incurring any of those objections which were attached to the former Bill. Al though there were some alteratiOns which he had to pro pose in the details of the Bill, which, however, it was not necessary for him to elate at present, he was quite prepared to give his sanction . to the measure. The Hon. Gentleman did not propose to interfere with the House of Peers, and to the omission of that branch of the Legislature irom the provisions of the Bill he had no objection. Me. BERNAL said, he felt it his duty to object to n e e Bill w hi ch had been introduced. by his Hon. Friend. was in net disposed to give his opposition to it the present stage of its progress, but he warned the House, and h e b egge d to call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir George Grey) to this subject, not to sanction such a principle as that laid down by one of the most important clauses, and which would have the effect of depriving the House and the country of the be nefit of Lion. Member's r o v f ices - for a period of six months. Under the cover" justice and morality it gave an advantage to hidadu persons, and on that reound he was bound to state his objections to it. Mr. GOULBURN was not prepared to offer any oppo sition to the second reading of the, Bill but there w ere , many points: involved in it whichhe considered required the serious consideration of the House. The Hon. Member who had introduced the Bill had rather addressed himself to the objections which were made to the Bill, than to giving any reasons for the mode in which he had proceeded with it. As the Bill was totally different to the one first introduced, he thought they ought to have had some reason why th e alterations ks ad-bera made. The Honourable Gentleman did not ir.tend tgaply the principles of it to the House of Peers else- well ei v io the House of Commons, but he e f c'no 9 e when a , principle of this kind was adopted , the lorslas of the 11.4 Use uniformly applied it to all persons in P arliament:; `!The privileges of Parliament were much more extended' than at present; and at one time the Members - of : both Houses of Parliament had the privilege. --ol'etes being sued in any Court of law, but it was thought advisable to introduce a Bill to alter the 'law in that respect, and the provisions of it applied'. equally to both branches of the Legislature. The mestie , process gave a right to- arrest Members of Parliament until they should give security to answer an action of debt, and that power might have been used as a polit leaf engine to prevent the carrying of certain me asuree. Th e reeske process had, hoWever, been materially di minished, and arrest was now hinited to cases where a iii4gen'ent: had been obtained against a debtor. The pi - agent-, Bill proposed to deal with a very limited Isle s& of cases, but he thought it gave an bpportunity to creditors of Members of Perlis e"lereatlne might have a strong political object in their etnd to resort to i m p r i sonmen t w i t h a v i ew to o b tain character Such a course m i g h t tend to discredit the " o f a Member, and . ght prevent him, at a moment of imp ortar - • try.—(llear, hea•ree. rendering a service to ' his T . h ere had been cases, when party spirit ; ) a renderred useless asa ? hi gh , of a party b ink Thoseepr,et entative, and unable to perform his_duty. were considerations which 00:.ght not to be omitted when the House Th details of the Bill were taken in to consideration power, and without Lill involved a question of Parliamentary eges,over which they themselves had absolute the interference of the other branch of the Legislature. They would find a number of instances in the j ournals . of the House, in which Members had been arrested upon judgments pronounced against them, sometimes been discharged, and someeim es permitted to remain in con 1141,Sient. tie tlioughtit would be much better to deal with thitqueat`i9g.eatlietehy a resolution of the House than by all AitoC . %' O, - e esseiheneene%because if they passed an Act and Igii" tleqrfkt)rat it interfered with the proper dis ° l24 *O-:4 0 -44144.-rihich Idogaberg owed to their 7 7-ts, p.i...,617 THE constituents, they would have no power to alter it with out the sanction of the House of Lords; whereas, if they dealt with it by a resolution, and found any evil arise from it, they might make alterations from time to time, and so abate the evil. He would not say a word about the details of the Bill, and had merely made those observations with the view to prevent the House coming-into direct collision with parties with re spect to the arrest of Members. Ur. JOHN WILLIAMS thought that the House was much indebted to the Hon. Member for Devonport for introducing the Bill. Nothing would tend more to ele vate the character of the House than the passing of that Bill, and he hoped her Majesty's Government . would extend the principle which it involved to both branches of the Legislature. Mr. HENLEY was anxious that the second reading should be postponed, to enable Members to have more time to consider whether they should give their assent to the principle of the Bill, which there could be no doubt was a very large one. It was quite clear that the object of the parties who introduced it was to carry its principle step by step to the other branch of the Legislature. The main ground for the introduction of the Bill was to assimilate the case of an insolvent person to that of an insolvent trader, but he thought that they were not at all analagous. A trader who, from unforeseen circumstances, was un able to pay his debts, received his discharge in full upon surrendering up all his property to his creditors—but it was not so with insolvent per sons. The bankrupt received his certificate and was a clear man for the future, and could be _elected to serve in that House, and to hold other offices. But the insolvent man who was involved in debt coald not get clear, 'Although his property ccald be taken as freely as that of the bankrupt. Therefore there was this essential difference between the two cases, the trader being a bankrupt received his certifi cate, and immediately afterwards could be elected a Member of that House, but the insolvent could not be similarly elected unless he satisfied all his debts in full. A Bill of that sort depended very much upon the de tails, and he would not take the responsibility upon himself of opposing the second reading, but would merely suggest its postponement until the House had given it a more mature consideration. It. ought never to be lost sight of, that it did not involve the privilege of Members, but the. privilege of constituents—(Hear, hear)—and he thought it extremely likely that the House might occasionally get into some kind of squabble, from parties being elected who were not properly qualified. The Bill was then read a second time. On the motion that the Bill be committed, _ _ . Mr. GREENE suggested that the whole subject in serted in the Bill should be referred to a Select Com mittee, who should report to the House, and that the House should then proceed to legislate upon the matter. He put it to the Government whether this would not be the most advisable course to adopt. Mr. E WART hoped his Hon. Friend would postpone the Bill for a fortnight, and that he would afterwards proceed with it until it was passed into a law. After a few words from Mr. MILES and Mr. GREENE, Sir G. GREY expressed himself favourable to the postponement of the Bill for a short time. Mr. MOFFAT 1' assented to the postponement of the Bill for a fortnight, but expressed his intention to oppose the reference of the subject to a - Committee up stairs, since every Member must have had sufficient practical experience of the necessity or riot of the measure. The Committee on the Bill was then deferred for a fortnight. SUN, THE NAVIGATION-LAWS. On the motion of Mr. LABOUCHERE that the House go into Committee on this Bill, Sir T. ACLAND presented a petition against the re peal of the navigation-laws. Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition in favour of their repeal from Montreal, signed by the Mayor, the President of the Board of. Trade, and a num ber of merchants. Mr. WAINN and Mr. HamEs presented petitions to the same effect. Mr. GLADSTONE wished , before the Speaker left the chair, to offer a few observations upon a matter of much public interest. Were it not a matter of this nature, he assured the House he should not have re ferred to it at that period of their proceedings. The SPEAKER inquired if it had reference to the navigation laws ? Mr. GLADSTONE said it had. It arose out of a speech recently delivered by the Hon. and Learned Member for Hull (Mr. Baines) to his constituents. The speech was a very manly and straightforward one, but being made by a Minister of the Crown he considered that he would be excused if he asked a question with respect to it.—(Hear, hear.) The accuracy of the speech he had not the means of judging.—[Mr. Baines intimated that it was correct.] The speech being re ported in the Morning Post of the 9th of February, con tained the following passage:—" Then there is the subject of the navigation-laws. It is perfectly well known that the Ministers introduced a measure with respect to those laws, against which I voted. I divided against the Ministers at every stage of the Bill. I felt it to be my duty to do so. And though I differ with many of my constituents—gentlemen of great intelligence who still think that they ought to be repealed, yet I am not of that opinion—on the contrary, I think that the principle of the navigation-laws. ought to be retained." And on reference to the division lists he found that the Hon. and Learned Member had in the last session voted against the Government on the question.—(Hear, hear.) The question he bad risen to ask was, whether the measure recommended from the Throne by her Majesty, and to day to be introduced by the lion. Member (Mr. Labouchere), would have the support of the Hon. and Learned Member? Lord J. RUSSELL would answer the question of the Right Hon. Gentleman by a statement of the facts as they had occurred. The lion. and Learned Gentle man, now the President of the Poor-law Commission, was offered by him, in the name of her Majesty, the office he now held. He replied that he had no objec tion to accept the office, hut that he feared his opposition to the Government with re spect to the navigation-laws would present an insuperable objection, since he had voted against the Ministers.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord J. Russell) re plied that he considered the department so important, and the services which he believed him capable of rendering equally so, that he intimated to him that he should not in any way interfere with his opinion - on the navigation-laws.— (Hear, hear) Understanding from him that upon every other subject he agreed with the views of her Majesty's Government, he considered him in every way qua lified to become one of the Ministers.—(Hear, hear.) Many precedents were on record of different Govern ments having adopted a simiEr course with respect to some of their members. For instance, there was the Hon. Member for Montgomeryshire, who, though a member of the Government, voted against the Alien Bill, and who, in addition, spoke against the policy which guided the Ministers in introducing thatßill. Again,the pre sent Lord Lonsdale voted against the Catholic Disabi• lities Bill, yet the Duke of Wellington, then at the head of the Administration, allowed him to continue a member of the Cabinet. With the exception of the Honourable and Learned Member, the other members of the Government concurred in the Bill tor the repeal of the navigation- laws.—(Hear.) The SPEAKER having left the chair, and it having been taken by Mr. BERNAL, Mr. LABOUCHERE proceeded to say that the duty had again devolved upon him of calling the attention of the House to the laws which regulated the navigation of this country, and he rejoiced that he was enabled to do so at so early a period of the session, when the House would have an ample opportunity of discussing those important questions, which discussion, he trusted, would lead to the solution of subjects which, he was sure, could not be delayed without the most injurious consequences to the mercantile and commercial interests of the British empire. They had last session long discussions upon this subject, and though they did not lead to any practical conclusion, yet he trusted that the time which was then devoted to the question was not altogether thrown away or lost. Ile trusted they should be enabled to approach the sub ject in the present session, having cleared away many of the preliminary difficulties which had been encountered upon the thresh Old of this question, without passing over the ground they had traversed, and that they should be prepared, without protracted preliminary discussion, to advance at onto to consider the measure which the Government had felt it its duty to submit to that House. He was glad that this country and the colonies had bad, during the interval that had elapsed since the last session, an opportunity of considering the whole question, the magnitude of which he was not disposed to underate. It would indeed be most satisfactory to discuss and decide upon the expressing p artsof the e eir o question after the inhabitants o f t h e most di s t ant em p p i i n re ion h e a nd had fhoramdinag a jnoupdpgormteunntityupoonf it. Under these circumstances, he what he had t o say i nto the briefest li • mits compatible with the vast importance of the subject. The • main provi sions of the measure of last session were these :—With re • gard to one great branch of the navigation-laws, that part which regulated the coasting trade and fisheries of the the country, he did not, in the measure of last year propose any alteration, with the exception of a modification in the regulation relating to fisheries, and with respect to this portion he did not propose to make any alteration, but in the proper part of his address he should more particularly allude to this. Last year he stated that the necessity of the naviga tion-laws was contended for for many things —i n the words of the Hon. Member for Stamford (Mr. Herries), three fundamental principles: the first was that portion the object of which was to secure to this country the I trade • next to secure to this monopoly of our colonial _e " and the third was d country the " long voyage trade; " and that principle which endeavoured 0 secure to this country the possession of that indirect European _ , he might trade. With respect to the colonial, not inappropriately repeat now what he stated that last year, that it did appear to him h that policy which the House had adopted with r, to depriving the colonies of protection—(Hear , heer)—of protection in the markets of this country—be that policy wright or wrong, it was not then necessary for him to discuss; but, believing that a great portion of the House were not prepared to retrace the step which it had taken (Hear, hear) considering, that the protection enjoyed by the colonies in the markets of the mother country, and that the time was not far distant when protee tion would be withdrawn from them altogether, it appeared to him the height of injustice to refuse the colonies the abolition of those restrictions upon naviga tion of which, in all-periods of colonial history, they had so mu eh reason to complain ; but at the present time it would. be an intolerable injustice to maintain these reztretigns upon thOir c9lonial trucle—rectrietione which LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 14, 1849. he bad no hesitation in saying were incompatible with the connexion that subsisted between the most impor tant of our colonies and the mother country. These were the arguments which he last ses sion advanced in favour of the proposition then before the House, but more in detail than he intended to sub mit them on the present occasion. He had produced numerous communications from Canada and the West Indies, all complaining of the injustice of the present laws. Lord Harris had detailed the ad vantages which would be derived by the im portant colony of Trinidad, if it were allowed to carry on an interrupted trade with Spain and France. He begged to remind the House of the arguments heretofore advanced by him. As Australia, Canada, and their other colonies developed themselves, com posed of Englishmen, was it to be supposed that they would rest satisfied with restrictions of this de scription?—(Hear.) Was it not the part of true wisdom to take the step proposed by this Bill, rather than com ply with it when irritation and agitation compelled ahem to accede to it. The interval that had elepsed had only brought additional proof of the senti ments of the colonists, and he would fain hope that the attention of the House had during it been called to the papers which were last ses sion laid before the House. The Honourable Member then referred to a dispatch of Lord Elgin, setting forth the views of the inhabitants of Montreal, New York, and Quebec, and the evils which the manufacturers and producers of the far west expe rienced in consequence of the existence of those laws— since they prevented them from obtaining the true advantage of all those internal means of com munication which had been constructed at such an' enermous outlay.—(Hear, hear.) The patience which Canada had evinced pending the repeal of these laws deserved their utmost gratitude, and they would show but an ill sense of it if they did not early accede to their wishes. One docu ment had been furnished to Lord Elgin by two p?rsons of high respntsbility and influence, to which he had called the particular attention Of the Home Government, stating that they were unable to execute an order for 250 tons of Scotch pig iron, in consequence of the oppressive nature of these laws. The third of those main and fundamental principles, on which the system of the navigation-laws rest, consisted in those restrictions which attempted to secure to this country its own carrying trade. With regard to the operation of those restrictions he thought it right to re mind: the House that this was a policy that could be only successful so long as it was confined to ourselves, and so long as foreign nations acquiesced in it. If every nation attempted to insist on that indirect navigation, we should gain nothing, but should infallibly be 'timers. In a gain in-which all would lose something, we should assuredly lose the most.—(Hear, hear.) Foreign nations were altogether agreed, that if we meant to keep this carrying trade to ourselves they would re taliate upon us. During the last session of Parliament tie stated the situation in which• we stand in regard to Prussia in this respect. He knew Hon. Gentlemen treated with great levity any menaces from Prussia; but, in his opinion, it was not wise so to treat them. But was Prussia the only country which was expected to speak similar language to us if we insisted on this Policy ?, He ventured to call the attention of the House to the trade with Russia; there were few trades of more importance to this country than that which we conduct with Russia. Abounding in raw pro ducts as Russia did, and England being eminently a manufacturing country, two such countries were formed by nature to have commerce with each other. How did we stand with Russia in respect to this indirect trade? We made a treaty with Russia in 1843, which was to last for ten' years, and which would, therefore, expire in 1853. By that treaty Russia engaged to admit British ships into Russian ports upon equal terms with her own ships. Was it likely, when that treaty expired, that Russia would not retaliate upon us, by putting the same restrictions on our carrying trade as we did upon hers? (Hear, hear.) At this moment au English ship might take a cargo of sugar from Cuba to Russia, but a Russian ship could not take a cargo from Cuba to London. Now could we believe that Russia, when this treaty expired, would allow this state of things to con tinue?—(Hear, hear) But what had Russia done? In 1845, two years after the signing of this treaty the Emperor of Russia published an ukase against all nations that did not treat Russian . ships in the same way they did ships of their own nation. Was it not much better, when we had to discuss this question without the exasperation which at a future moment would render its discussion incon venient—was it not much wiser, and had it not more of true dignity—by a timely concession, not to the de mands of Russia, but to the demands of equity—(Hear)— and a true and enlarged policy, to put those laws on a consistent and sound footing, and so to prevent the evils that, by a postponement of the question, must inevitably be ours? These were, as he bad stated, the three main principles on which our system of navigation laws was founded ; and he proposed in the course of the last session, and he should now propose to the House, to deal with these restrictions in • such a way as that the Privy Council should have the power of re enacting them wholly or in part, with regard to any Government with respect to whom it may be for English interests that they should be so re-enacted. Ile would remind the House that the main alteration with respect to the manning and building of ships was to admit foreign ships to British ports, if British owned and British manned ; he therefore proposed to break down the monopoly which at present existed. With out anticipating the discussion on this point, he must say that subsequent experience had only confirmed the conviction he then expressed, that that most important trade, he meant the trade of ship- building in Eng land had nothing to fear from this competition. Since the House had discussed this question additional information had been afforded by the evidence taken before the House of Lords. He had looked narrowly into that evidence, and he thought Honour able Gentlemen could not look into the statements made before the House of Lords without coming to the conclusion that, of all the trades in the world, there was nothing in which we could more successfully compete with foreign nations than that of ship-building. —(Hear.) To compare this country with the United States of America, what did be find? He found that all the main articles of iron, copper, sail-cleth, and many others, were immeasurably cheaper in En gland than in America. Ho found with regard to cordage we had the same advantage over America in that respet; with regard to timber we were .ar an (quality; with regard to labour we were also upon an equality, so far as wages were concerned. But he must allow that there was one point on which we were not upon an equality with the United States, and he feared the statements put forth on that point, before the House of Lords, were perfectly correct. Mr. Murray Wigram stated before the House of Lords that the wages of shipwrights, in New York were about the same as the labour in London ; but there was this difference, the shipwright in the United States gave his whole day's work for his wages, and the shipwright in London worked as a combination man.— (Hear, hear.) Did the House mean to state that the trade of this country was to be burdened by mer cantile difficulties, or to grow up, in order to protect a combination of shipwrights?—(Hear.) Was that a point to be pressed upon him in legislating on a question of such importance? The remedy for this was to expose those who resorted to such unfair means to render their labour dear to their employers, to the competition of others, and so prevent that combing tion, by giving to the employer the fair labour of the employed.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the duties imposed on timber used in ship-building in this country, he would again appeal to the evi dence of a gentleman who altogether disagreed with him (Mr. Labouchere) on the subject of the navigation laws ; he appealed to the gentleman to whom he had already adverted, viz., Mr. Murray Wigram, who was one of the largest shipowners in the world. It would be impossible for any man to give his evidence before the House of Lords in a more frank, candid, and truthful manner. He said, with respect to those duties on timber in raising the price of ship-building in England, " the amount of timber duty payable upon foreign timber is trifling—it was but 3s. 6d. a ton in the case of a merchant ship of 690 tons." On the other hand, mahogany_ was admitted duty free; it was the same with other valuable foreign woods, and, therefore, it was quite a mistake that those duties on foreign timber impose any material charge on the Bri tish ship builder. He would quote now the name of another gentleman who wasmost strenuously opposed to any change in the navigation-laws. He referred to Mr. George Frederick Young. That gentleman stated in 1847, before a Committee of the House of Commons, that " the quantity of foreign timber used in the con struction of ships in this country bore but a small pro portion to the whole quantity employed." The next alteration to which he (Mr. Labouchere) would advert, and which he proposed last year, was with respect to the number of apprentices which shipowners were obliged to take. They had constantly complained of this obliga tion, and be thought it was highly proper that they should be relieved from it at a time when the House was making the proposed change in the navigation-laws. Those therefore were the principles of the measure which he proposed in the last session. He proposed absolutely to repeal those three principles of the navigation-laws, viz., the restrictions on the carrying trade, the restrictions on the colonial trade and the restrictions on the " long-voyage trade ;" and also to modify the laws which regulated the registration of ships and sea men so as to allow the British shipowner to purchase his ships from foreign ship-builders, and also to abolish the obligation to have a certain number of apprentices. He had during the interval of the recess, in eonnexion with her Majesty's Government, carefully ' considered the objections made to this Bill, with the earnest desire to adept any suggestion which ap peared the e d o gm Member ar r ob i d g eo i r n tVf schemeog it h h xt o r fr e i d s o p so w e t a c h t t e c d h o t bt t y h e he e mw c aa o oy a to th em to b e an improvement i n the o oa forfl ly thisth eporooupoo Universityt u r n y d t e h d e . of objection, that by diminish• ing, or continuing uni m p a i re d, t h e restrictions on that trade we were placing ours e l ves at great die advantage. in trading with foreign countries.—(Hear.) He adverted especially to the case of the United States of America, and he asked what could be more unequal and unfair than that, while we allowed the Americans to engage in our foreign and colonial trade, by retaining those restrictions, and by preventing them from sharing OUT coasting trade, we debarred ourselves from sharing that important trade along the coasts of America, which partook more of the nature of a foreign trade than of a mere coasting trade. He ( Mr. Labouchere ) felt it very difficult to meet that argume n t . He certainl y thou ght if we bad made! no change in our: coasting trade we could have no claim in equity or justice to ask the United States trade. to admit our ships to their coasting Nevertheless he had thought it better to consider this part of the sub ject with a view to sec whether he could not meet the difficulties he felt ttt the time to opening the coasting trade, all ty the alarm that bad been ft lt among the sea-faring population of this country, and also the danger that was anticipated to the revenue by allowing foreigners to participate in the coasting trade of this country. Afterimaturely considering the question he bad come to a conclusion which he trusted would meet with the approbation of the House, and would have its effect, if adopted, of not exposing the revenue to any danger, or excite any alarm. There were two branches of the coasting trade to which he had turned his attention particularly; the one was steam navigation, with which he did not think it possible foreigners could compete with this country. He proposed to maintain that de scription of coasting trade which existed in going to and fro from port to port entirely in this country; and any restrictions that he proposed to abolish with respect to foreigners: lie also proposed to put an end to with respect to English vessels—he intended to allow either English or foreign vessels to touch at Bri tish ports if they were bouud for abroad. He thought it desirable that such facility should be given to the coasting-trade of the coantry. The altera tions he had adverted to were the only alte rations of any consequence he proposed to make in the measure he had laid before the House in the course of last session. There were some minor alterations in the Bill, but it was un necessary for him to advert to them then, as they would be fully considered by the Committee. There were many points raised on the discussion last year to which he would not then advert, because there seemed to be a general desire that the resolution he intended to propose should be agreed to, in order that it might be considered in Committee. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to endeavour to enter into any understanding with America on this subject. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that in a conversation he had had with the American Minister, Mr. Ban croft, that gentleman had stated that he considered it most desirable that a convention relative to the coasting trade should be concluded with America and England, and that if such a conven tion was drawn up he would sign it to-morrow. —(Hear, hear.) Mr. Bancroft had further stated to him that he was willing to throw open the coasting trade in the modified manner he (Mr. Labouchere) bad stated to the House.—(Hear, hear.) He could only conclude by assuring the House that if he believed that the safety, honour, and welfare of this country would be put in jeopardy by the measure he would be the last man to bring it forward, or give it his support, but feeling-econvinced that it would abolish xis: less restrictions, recruit the maritime strength of the country, and tend to its security, he had no hesitation in bringing the measure forward, end he felt as little doubt that it would meet with the approbation of the House.—(Hear, hear.) In particular,:he entreated the House to consider the situation in which they stood with respect to the colonies, and asked them no; to delay the question which was now brought forward for their conaideration.—(Hear, hear.) He had been much gratified by the assurance given by the Right Honourable Member for Stamford that he did not intend to resist the resolution he proposed, in the first instance. In conclusion, he trusted that the measure he proposed would give stability to the commerce of this country and contentment to the colonies. There were two subjects to which be had promised to allude but which he bad inadvertently forgotten. One was with respect to the light dues; on that subject he into nded to re-introduce the Bill he had brought forward last ses sion, with some slight alterations, and he was in hopes that he should be able to pass it during the present session. The other subject was with respect to the Merchant Seamen's Fund. To-ere was no question, in his of inion, connected with the mercantile marine of the country. tmore important than :that. — (Hear, hear.) He was sorry to say that the Merchant Seamen's Fund was at present insolvent. He had introduced a Bill on this subject during the last session founded upon the report of tee Commissioners that had been appointed to investigate the question. The recep tion that measure hack) mat with in that House was not such as to induce him to persevere in that Bill, but he had- since considered it to be his duty to reconsider the subject, and ho was in hopes that he should be able in the course of the present session to introduce a measure very different from that of last year upon the subject, and that at an early period of the session.—(Hear, hear.) An Hon. Friend of his, one of the Lords of the Admiralty, had considered the subject of the measurement of ships, and he was in hopes that in the present session he would be enabled to intro duce a measure which would put an end to the objections that had been taken on that subject.—(Bear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by stating that the resolution he intended to move was slightly modified from last year, the only alteration he proposed in it being—" And to amend the laws relating to the coasting trade of the United Kingdom." Mr. HERRIES thought the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had placed him in a situation of some embarrassment as to the course he ought to pursue. It was generally understood iii the last session that this question should be so placed, that during the present session, they should begin the discussion where they left off last. He thought that the House would pursue a wise course if they postponed, till the second reading ,of the Bill, the main question to be considered in the present case.—(Hear.) He thought Members had some ground of complaint against the Go vernment for they course the had pursued in refusing information to Members while it was given to other parties.---(llear, hear.) He was in hopes, from all he had heard, that the Right Honourable Gentleman would have been ready to take a step much more in the right direction than that which he had done, and that the alteration he had intended to pro pose in the resolution brought forward last year would have been much more effectual. Now, he thought that that was essentially right. An English ship could not load on the coast of America for a voyage, say to California, a distance of 10,000 miles, under the denomination of a coasting trade. He did not see why the exclusive advantages that we now enjoy should all be abandoned for a merely suppositious ad vantage—for it should be remembered that this measure had not respect to America alone, but to every . c3untry with which we have commercial relations. The only benefit which was re tained, or rather proposed to be retained, was the right, in the event of oiler countries not giving - equal advan tages in return, of imposing retaliatory measures. But was this benefit at all likely to be retained ? Judging from what had already transpired he should say cer tainly not, for the system which they pursued was de cidedly progressive. Let them see if any other countries had shown the slightest disposition to return the favour which we were gratuitously conferring. What had been the conduct of France? Why, at this very moment France was deeply engaged in carrying out their restrictive measures, and when ap plied to to grant reciprocal advantages to this country, the French Minister coolly and very properly replied by the question—On what ground do you ask us to do this? You have candidly acknowledged that the reduction of your duties was made solely for your own benefit, and , wherefore, then, shotiferwe on any ground of gratitude, g i v e you these reciprocal advantages? _ We may be un fortunate in not taking yourview of the matter; but in the meantime we mean to take care of ourselves.- -(Hear, hear, from both sides of the House.) Well, and this was virtually the reply of every other Minister to which application had been made for international treaties.—(Hear, hear.) Then, with regard to the West India islands, on what basis had they any right to ground a hope that the West India colonists• would be induced to employ British shipping in preference to that of America or any, other country ? None at all. By the very principle which they had adopted they had made the slave-grown sugar equal, in respect of privilege, to that of our own islands— they bad destroyed the trade of those islands, and had actually consigned them to absolute ruin. —(Hear, hear.) Then as to Canada, what had been done there?—[Mr. Labouchere interposed the remark, that what had been done was under the advice of Lord Elgin.] Lord Elgin! and was Lord Elgiu's opinion to be weighed against the opinion of the whole of the Canadian population, and against the force of the principl e o f t h e navigation laws?—(Hear,) The Canadians were decidedly opposed to the principles which were being adopted by the present Government. They had been treating the matter as if it were only a mere item, of commercial concern. This was a great mistake.—(Hear, beat.) It was a matter of large national, nay, be might say, of vitally_ national interest.—(Hear, hear.) This qustion was to be decided upon the fundamental principle of the navigation-laws; that principle was the protection of the national mercan tile marine—(Hear, hear) —and he should contend that by the full exercise of that principle could they ever an ticipate retaining that superiority which is necessary to us as a commercial nation. That great man whose high merit every man of the commonest candour would Allow —that great man, General Washit gton, had taken this matter into his deepest and most mature consideration, and the deliberate result of that consideration was con tained in the recommendation which be had given to Congress. (The Right lion. Gentleman:then read an extract from one of the General's messages to Congress, in which he stated that in his opinion it was a mistake to suppose that the duties laid on for the protection of a mercantile navy was any burden upon the people to whom the shipping belonged. He also read an extract from the report made by the last Committee which sat upon the subject of the navigation-laws, in which Mr. Gladstone appears to say, that, in his opinion, protec tion to British shipping - ought to be retained, and that the navy had derived its best and most hardy seamen from the mercantile marine.) He would not consent to any alteration of the law which gave foreigners the same advantages that we possessed ourselves. With respect to maritime intercourse with the colonies, no other nation could give us an equivalent for any advantages the present measure proposed to give to them, and there fore he considered no other nation ought to think of interfering with us and our colonies. Instead of the consumer obtaining any advantage by the passing of the measure, he was of opinion that they would not gain a single farthing. The poor consumer would get nothing, but he was always put forward by the capitalist and the great dealer when it suited their own pur poses to do so. He was not prepared to concede the exclusive privilege which we now possessed of naviga ion to our colonies to foreigners. Hecame to the next head—the long-voyage trade—and he had to express his decided objection to the surrender of those privileges which this country now possessed. The principle laid down by the present law was to secure to this country the carriage of com modities from three parts of the world, viz., Asia, Africa, and America, and with that foreigners could have nothing to do. They might themselves forbid us to partake in the long-voyage trade with their ports. No country was so fitted for a place of deposit tor commodities from a ll coun t r ies as England. With respect to the commerce o f Zurope, the cue Wee CU. thinly more easy, and notavithstandieg what had been said t which it was stated that a good deal of English capital on the subject he still -thought that the principle of had been embarked in foreign shipping. The lion. reciprocity was not only more applicable, but was cepa- Gentleman the Member fur Montrose attributed that ble of enlargement. lle had hit upon a passage which to the existence of these absurd navigatiou-laws. Now, was applicable to the present question from Huskisson, t what was the extract which his Right Honorable and in alluding to it he could not retrain from saying that Friend read to the House ? It did not elate it would have been well if those who sometimes pro- that British capital was embarked generally fessed to have so much respect for that authority had l in foreign shipping, but it was embarked advocated and abided by his policy.—(Hear.) Mr. largely in foreign shipping of a country where recipro- Huskisson slid he could not, in alluding to the United city treaties Existed, that was to say, that in those noun- States is a British House of Commons, think it was tries where they had relaxed the navigation-laws, improper to say that in matters of navigation and maxi- the consequence which the Protectionists said time power there existed a spirit of rivalry—a spirit of was likely to result had already resulted to which he did not complain, but he doubted • a great extent, and still the Honourable Member the wisdom of any measure that was calculated ; for Montrose gets up and says, it is all the consequence to give any advantage to the commercial resources uf ' of the navigation I,ws. The Hon. Gentleman who had America. He (Mr. Herries) would ask the House if a just sat down asked them to explain how it was that capitalist would employ an English ship when a foreign I th e y supporte d these laws. He could t eot tell him. It vessel would answer all his purposes at a cheaper rate ? ; was a remarkable fact, that in all countries where It was for the defence of this; country and: the mainte- reciprocity existed British shippo , g had de nance of that, withoutiwhich it would cease to be what clined ; and how was it so ? Why, simply it was, that protection had been afforded to our navy. be cause there the British shipowner could not compete He could not but regret that, in collecting evidence upon ; with the fureiguers, and he sought a more profitable the subject of the navigation-laws, there had been an occupation for his vessels elsewhere. Now that was evident desire to disparage the character of British precisely the reason why he opposed these resolutions. seamen.—(Hear, hear.) It was said they were Pass them and they would at once shut out the British the worst seamen and the most difficult to trader from ports and seas where the foreigner had a manage, but three parts of the assertions greater advantage.—(Hear, hear.) which were made were wholly without foundation.— Mr. RICARDO believed it was understood at the (Hear, hear.) One of her Majesty's consul s h a d stated commencement of the debate that these resolutions were that the effect of a repeal of these laws would be to in- to pass without a division, and the discussion was to crease the investment of British capital in foreign be reserved for the second reading. Under these cir vessels, and thus lead to diminish the employ- cumstances he would abstain from entering into ment of shipwrights, rope makers, chain and I the details of the question then, but he could not help anchor makers, and every body of mechanics whose 1 rising to say, that from all he had heard from Honour occupation depended upon the construction and ; able Gentlemen opposite he could not collect what prin building of vessels.EThere could be no doubt that if this ciple they were going upon in opposing this measure.— Bill passed the capital of British shipowners would be (Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman the Member transferred to other countries.—(Hear, hear.) He had ' for Stamford had already declared if they ob confined himself to the principles of the Bill, tamed reciprocal concessions from foreign coun not being desirous at present to enter into the tries he would have no objection whatever details, but could not allow the opportunity to pass to the measure. The Right Hon. Gentleman declared without declaring that the weal or woe of our mercan- that if the coasting trade of this country could be re tile navy depended upon the decision which the House laxed, he, at least, would not object to it, it the United might come to upon it. The Hon. Genleman concluded , States did the same. The Hon. Gentleman the Member by stating that he was compelled upon the groundsstated for Westmoreland, upon the last occasion when this to give to the proposition his determined and most question was debated, declared himself in fa strenuous opposition.—(Cheers.) your of some relaxation in favour of what was Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND said there was a great called the long voyage, and the lion. Gentleman the deal of misapprehension out of doors as to the real na- Member for Sunderland had declared that he was quite titre and object of the measure, and possibly that mis- I willing that the crews of ,British ships should be com apprehension might be shared in by Honour- posed of the sailors of any country. Now, with all these able Members. To translate, however, official jargon y relaxations, what became of the fundamental principle into plain honest English, he would s imply say that this of the Right Honouralbe Gentleman opposite? It was the last of a series of measures of the Manchester it meant anything it meant this, "so long as school, the end and intention of which was to discharge you make conditions, by which foreign ships and foreign all British labour and employ for the future foreign sailors are enabled to sail upon equal, and no better, labour.—(Loud cheers.) They were to have foreign terms than the British ship, I don't care what becomes timber for English timber, foreign shipwrights l of the navigation-laws." It meant that certainly, and instead of English ones, and he might go through the hence the fundamental principle fell to the ground.— whole catalogue of labour, and say the same of each (Hear, hear.) Well, then, it was admitting that the kind; and for what was all this done but for the advan- the navigation-laws were the bane of commerce ; tage of mercantile men, and for the advantage of Man- but then it was said, if you relax them chester cotton spinners.—(Cheers.) It should not be his you destroy the royal navy, and the service would be fault if the country did not understand the true meaning I less able to defend the country against the foreigner. of the question from one end of it to the other. He That argument came with an ill grace from the ship considered it was merely a question of trade and con- owners, who were constantly complaining of the system merce connected with our marine, and it essentially and of apprenticeship and of the light dues. But if the much more clearly effected the condition of labourers Protectionists rested their opposition upon that than any other question could do. ground, he must be allowed to say that the Mr. HUME said he had heard many statements navigation-laws afforded too much or too little restric in that House with respect to the navigation-laws, but tion. The navy, it was admitted, was in a less what had fallen from the Hon. Member who had just efficient state now than it had ever been before, sat down had surprised him beyond measure. He and, therefore, the navigation-laws did not pre undertook to say that it was the last of a series of mea- serve the navy, or they did not sufficiently restrict sures brought in by the Manchester school, and that the shipping trade to secure such preservation. they all tended to the injury of labouring men. But he would not detain the House by going into de- But how could that be reconciled with the assertion of tails. He must say, however, that it would be much those who said that the food or labouring men had been better for th, m if, instead of resting contented with an reduced by the navigation-laws.—(Hear, hear.) What inferior navy, and endeavouring to bring down other was more important than that the labouring classes countries to their level, to make an effort to should be able to get food of all kinds, and at a mode- raise the position of their own country by rate price. —(Hear, hear.) removing the restrictions which pressed so heavily upon An Hoer. MEMBER—But the question of wages.— she shipping interest. It was much better to depend (Laughter and cheers.) upon the energies of Englishmen in a time of trial, than Mr. HUME—WeII, he would come to the question of to wait till the foreigner went with them berore they wages. He had certainly heard within these last few made an effort to extt nd the trade and commerce of their days, and it was with great regret, that in the south of own country.—(Hear, hear.) England the wages of labourers had been redaced from Alderman THOMPSON s a id, agreea bl y to t h e un e Bs. and 7s.—(Hear, hear.) But what was it derstandiug to which the Hon. Gentleman who had just that increased wages but increased employment?— sat down• had referred, he should confine himself now (Hear, hear.) And the way to effect that °eject ito only one or two passing observations. The Hon. was to bring the greatest amount possible of trade and I Gentleman had asked the opponents of this measure what commerce to this country.—(Hear, hear.) Tne Hon. it was they wanted. He would tell the lion. Gentleman Gentleman opposite (Mr. Herries) had stated that no what it was in a few words. To use a commercial place was so well calculated ter a depot for the phrase—they wanted a valuable consideration for the trade of the world as England, but what had kept advantage they were going to surrender to the fo it from being so but those laws?—(Hear, hear.) I reigner. In fact, they wanted a reciprocal concession If they wanted any proof, let them take the assertion of made to them by all those nations in whose that Hon. Gentleman, when he said that the capital of favour they relaxed these laws. (Hear, hear.) the country was so restrained by the navigation-laws As his Right Hon. Friend the Member for Stamford that we were obliged to employ English capital (Mr. Herries) had clearly proved this measure could almost in every part of the world.—(Hear, hear.) only be productive of advantage to other countries What was wanted was, that the English shipowner should and be of none at all to this. Then if they be permitted to carry his goods in English as well as looked at the conduct of Spain and Sicily foreign ships. The tarts stated by the Hon. Member for with respect to their cwn colonies, they would see that Stamford (Mr.lllerries) had been repeated over and over the measure of protection was precisely that afforded in again, if they had not been repeated by himself, which he th e mot h er coun t r y. T wo s hi ps were wa i t i ng f or a l a di ng (Mr. Hume) believed they hid. This country had too long in a Spanish colony, and the Spanish ship readily ob been a sufferer by these laws, as well as all other mono- Weed a full cargo at the rate of 51. per ton, while polies. But if they had been repeated the American a fine English ship then lying alongside could obtain no navy would not have been one half its present extent. freightage whatever, although the master only asked 255. Ho considered that their repeal would relieve and pro- a ton, and this was owing to the fact that the dues pay fitably employ capital, and demand, as a natural conse- able by the latter ship were so heavy that it was better to quence, the increased employment :of the people.— export in the Spanish than in the British ship. Then, (Hear, hear.) France was no argument in fa- with regard to coal, of which a great quantity is sent to your of the continuation of these laws since ' France, and upon which a very heavy duty was imposed if she did not alter her policy she would, lose in French ports, we made such a difference in favour the little navy that she h a d. F r ance was a beacon held of French vessels abroad, that coal absolutely taken out to us as a guide. There was nothing in our met- to a British possession, Malta, was obliged to chants or shipwrights that would prevent them from be imported in French bottoms to gain a cheap ad freely competing with the whole world if mittance for the use of our own steamers. Much in these laws were removed from the statute books. quiry had been mede by the Committee into He denied the calumny cast upon his countrymen, that the respective duties levied upon ships trading they were not competent to compete in the way he had to Montreal and New York, and the amount of mentioned. They had been informed, through expense for internal conveyance between the two places; Mr. Bancroft, that America would reciprocate any and such was the extent of that difference, that it was course that this country might adopt with respect to found better to import at New York, and carry the these laws. An Honourable Member bad said goods internally through the States than go direct America had not repeal, d her navigation-laws. She to Montreal. And the same thing held had not, because this country had not done so. Then with regard to that great depot Bermuda. the course of misgovernment that had been pursued to- The Hon. Gentleman then read a private communication wards the;colonies had ruined thousands; it was due, there- from Mr. Wigram, whose eminence as a ship builder was fore, to them to repeal those laws; and he thanked the well known. to show that the duty paid upon oak Governments for comings forward with this Bill at an timber in British ports, when prepared for ship early instead of a later period of the session, and trusted building, was such that although that kind they would day by day push it on in order that it might of timber was actually dearer in itself at New York than become law with the least possible delay. The abolition in England, the duties were such that the whole of the of the lighthouse system he hoped would follow in their benefit for ship building purposes was thrown into wake.—(Hear, hear.) the hands of the American builder. After all, Mr. BANKES asked the Hon. Member for Montrose he then continued, this was no more the shipbuilders' this question—how were the labourers of this country or shipowners' question. It was a great national question. to obtain food, even at its low price, if they had no and he would cite the evidence of the most eminent wages wherewith to buy it ?—(Protectionist cheers.) authorities in the navy to show the evil effect which The labourers of America were intelligent, but those of would certainly ensue if protection were to be done this country were just the reverse ; and yet these were t away with. He then proceeded to read extracts the men whom he wished to supersede by superior tin support of his position from the evidence of competition, the incompetent labourers of this country. I the Admiral of the Fleet, Sir Byam Martin, Sir James He agreed with the Hon. Meeiber for .Surrey (Mr. Stirling, and other officers, and concluded by saying Drummond) that this measure was the " last of a that, on these several grounds, he should oppose to the series" which had been directed against the la- utmost the doing away with the protection to the ship bouring classes ; for he knew of no other injury ping interest. they could inflict upon them. He advised the co- Mr. MITCHELL said there had been two lonies to wait, since public opinion had set in such gross fallacies broached on the Opposition side against the free-trade policy; the time was not far distant ,of the House, that he could not help noticing them, espe when he confidently believed the Houses would retrace cially as they had been endorsed by the Hon. Alderman its steps. He challenged any Members connected with opposite. The first of these relate es was the over the.manufacturing districts to rise and say that the trader sight altogether of the advantages which accrued to the was satisfied with the free-trade measures. Nay, he consumer from the reduction of the duties. It had would go further, and ask the Irish Members if the op . i. I been alleged that by the reduction of these duties nion that formerly prevailed with respect to free trade in a difference of 25 per cent. had been made ita the co-t Ireland was the same now? mercantile goods. Now this difference, he contended, Colonel THOMPSON said, when two sides declared was a profit of itself which went altogether two opposite opinions, and each with the strong belief into the pockets of the consumers. But there that they were enunciating the truth, it often happened was a further advantage which never seemed to that there was something which had not up have struck those Hon. Gentlemen but yet it was evi to that time found its way into the arena of dent from what had recently taken place that the reduc discussion. In simple words, those on his side of the tion acted very advantageously also in an indirect House maintained that protection, from whatever side , manner. On a late occasion it was shown, that in conse of the House it came, meant paying away one shilling) quence of this reduction there had been in one particular and getting a sixpence worth in return. The free- article a glut of' the goods in the market, and the price traders had some credit in the country because they had fallen immediately fully twenty per cent., that was had well indoctrinated the people with the truth of their another gain to the consumer. If Belgium had been policy, and it would take some force of argument to so protected as it was represented, and that protection convince them that giving ls. for 6d. was either sound was beneficial, how did it happen that nearly the whole policy or commercial wisdom. Protection was, strictly of the coasting tradeof that country was actually carried speaking, robbing other people to pay for its maintenance on in British bottoms. There might be a difference in they might be defined in the reply of a Member of favour of Spanish and French vessels, but still he would that ',House, who advised his son to take a wife, contend that it was so trifling on the whole trade as to " Whose wife shall I take?"—(Loud laughter.) be utterly useless in making the calculation of pro- The free-traders were charged with encouraging foreign portionate benefit.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Op labour at the expense of the British labourer. H e d e - pos i t i on. ) If H on.lGentlemen questioned the statement, nied it. He for one would never support the measure he was fully prepared to go into the whole matter, but if he thought it would diminish the work of the English he would not du su then, because it was evident from the labourer.—(Opposition cheers.) He hoped Honour- declarations opposite that, as a shipowners' question, the able Gentlemen on the other side would not go whole principle had been altogether given up since last away with the conviction that free trade was year. (Cries of "No," from Mr. Alderman Thompson and calculated to diminish the work of the English labourer. others.) Yes, he contended i: was so, for tho..e Honour- It was a delusion and mistake; but if they thought so able Gentlemen had altogether shifted their ground, and they forget the feet that if they increased English labour now, instead of looking upon this as a merely mercantile in one direction they diminished it in another.—(Hear.) matter, they desired to make it a national question. But if the Protectionists grounded their opposition upon On that ground also he was prepared to meet them, but that principle the much maligned free-traders were quite he would not do so now ; and he would only further ready to meet them upon it. But it was urged as a notice the remark of the Hon. Alderman upon the necessity for keeping up the navigation-laws that they difference of price between American and English oak, served to defend the country against the foreigner. by saying that although there was a considerable dif- But that was a principle not worth maintaining. It ferenee in the prices of the two woods, the former it should was hardly worth while to give a shilling for only be recollected was white oak in the rough,which would only sixpence in return,, and that was what they last, when made up, fur seven years, where as the English really did in keeping up navigation laws for the purpose oak spoken of; was properly prepared for shipbuilding, of securing an efficient service for the navy. If Hon. and vessels constructed of it were calculated to endure Gentlemen opposite would close with the free-traders fur twelve years—(Cheers)—in active service. on that point, the ground of debate would be con- Mr. ROBINSON could only say that if the Ministry siderably diminished. He admitted the importance were determined to carry this measure through the of maintaining an efficient naval service, but House, and had the strength to do so, that fully im the nary was not manned entirely from the pressed as ho was with the disastrous consequences of the mercantile service. That was not everything to be con- measure he should give them little further trouble. considered in manning the navy. The manning of the Yet, while making this statement, he could not but re, navy depended more upon the wealth of the country ; cal to their recollection the testimony which had now and if they persisted in giving a shilling for sixpence the been so abundantly given, and warn them of the country would soon be so impoverished us to be unable to certainty that it must greatly tend to drstroy our meet the expenditure which was always necessary for car- naval superiority, and pauperise the country.— (Hear.) rying out any great naval or military operations. He would He denied that the Canadians had expressed a stronger conclude by craving of the protectionists not to be so wish than they did last year for the repeal of the ready with their; attacks upon the free-traders for at- navigation-laws. There could be nu doubt, say tending public meetings. Honourable Gentlemen, what they would, that the Canadians m us t h ave who advocoted Prote c ti on i s t p r i nc ipl es , cou ld a tt en d ' a protective duty of five shillings on corn. meetings, too, if they ilked ; but this he was j The geographical position of Montreal was such that no confident they could not do, they could not alteration in the navigation-laws would do any get ; the support of the majority of the people good for them. If the Government altered the like the Efree-trader, which no doubt was the real ; navigation-laws with respect to Canada they cause of their being so mum annoyed at the holding of , would not afford them any benefit whatever, these free-trade meetings.— (Hear.) but would rather prevent their enterprise and perse- Mr. HILDYARD did not rise to advocate the policy verance in trade. lie objected to giving the Queen in of paying is. to gain 6d., nor did he intend to Council any right to interfere in the question of recipro go into the details of this question, but he rose city. He was willing to consider the question of the al simply to correct a misapprehension into which the teration of the navigation laws, but it was a question with Hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose had fallen. I him how far any alterations could be made in them The Hon. Gentleman commented with great triumph with a due consideration f w or ou t l h d e reinacrrietii:seee scuypuirmeme:ccey . upon an extract which his Right Hon. F r i en d, th e M e m- of the country. It was s a id that the alterations beg fur Stamford, read from a consul'o celunanuication, in the ig ..Y-.:®. r_ What commerce, he would ask, would it improve? Not English, but foreign, he would venture to say. T! a whole of the evidence that bad be«•n taken before the Committee in the House of Lords was entirely against the pro position made by her Majesty's Government. He would advise the House not to wake any alteration in the navigation-laws, and if foreigners chose to reta liate, they should let them do so. Mr. J. WILLIAMS said that the state of trade gene rally. notwithstanding all that had b.en said, was most deplorable; but, considering that the measure proposed by the Govert.mer:t was calculated to improve commerce, he should give it his support. Sir JOHN TYRRELI thought if the ports of this country were to be tree to every one, the House ought to be informed from what source the revenue of the country would spring. The advocates of the Manchester school must have et t , red into a con spiracy. They seemed to be plunging on thisiheadlong course. notwithstanding the destitu , ion and the increase of v,grattoy in Ireland, and the po vei ty in this country.—(Hear.) If they looked at the case of Canada and tLe West Indies, it was but justice that there should be a relaxation of the restriction on trade; but generally he objected to the whole course of their legislation on this subject. Mr. LABOUCHERE hoped the House would allow this resolution to pass at once, and so allow the other orders on the paper tor the day to be gone into. He might state that during the recess her Majesty's Ministers had entered into a correspondence with the Governments of foreign nations, informing them what course the Government of this coun try meant to pursue on the subject of the navigation laws, and asking those Governments how they intended to act on that subject ; and that the correspondence should be laid on the table of the House in a few days. The Marquis of GRANBY said he agreed with the observations that had fallen from his Hon. Colleague the Member for Stamford, but as he would have an other opportunity of stating his views with respect to the principle of the measure; he would reserve what he had to say until that occasion. After a few words from Mr. J. O'CONNELL, Mr. HENLEY said he understood the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade to say that an American vessel coming from America to London might discharge art of her cargo and take in another part and golto Lon don. He wished ask if that was ao? Mr. LABOUCHERE said, under the plan ho pro p lsed, an American vessel would be enabled to come trom one port in England, and then to another English port, and take in a a cargo from the first to the second; taut sne could not carry on a regular to-and-fro coasting trade. The resolution was then agreed to without a division. The House resumed. The CHAIRMAN of the Committee brought up the report, and leave was given to bring in a Bill founded upon the resolution. WAYS AND MEANS. The House resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means. Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. the Chan cellor of the Exchequer when the Budget would be brought forward ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would mention the day on a future occasion. Early notice, however, would be given of the Budget. Mr. GOULBURN said last session a sum of money was voted as a loan to the West India islands, but the terms of the loan would not admit ,of the islands accepting it. He wished, therefore, to know whether Government was prepared with any preposition for modifying the terms or this loan? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had re ceived no notice of the question, or he would have been prepared to toiswer it. A vote of 8,000,0001. out of the Consolidated Fund was then taken on the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. The House then resumed, and the CHAIRIIAN re ported accordingly. HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion for considering the report of this Bill, Mr. J. O'CONNELL wished to move that the report be considered this day six munths, but The SPEAKER, said such a motion could not be made under the new rule/. Mr. O'CONNELL hoped then that another opportunity would be afforded him for speaking on this question. Sir G. GREY said it only wanted five minutes to six, and if the Hon. Gentleman spoke till six he could re sume his speech to-morrow. Mr. O'CONNELL said he would accept the sugges tion of the Right Hon. Baronet with pleasure.—(Cheers, and laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to address the House amidst a rush of Members to the door and continued laughter. At Six o'clock the SPEAKER adjourned the House till to-morrow. PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES. (THIS DAY.) PRIVATE BUSINESS. In the Exarninera' Court to-day the promoters of the following Bill were declared to have complied with the standing orders:— Llncashire and Yorkshire and London and North- Western Railway Companies (Transfer of interest in the Preston and Wyre Railway, Harbour, and Dock, and regulating management of the undertaking). The case of the following Bill was considered, but the decision adjourned till this day week:— Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction Rail• way (Power to sell or lease to the London and North- Western, the Chester and Holyhead, or the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway Companies, or to amalgamate therewith). TENB SAUNDERSFOOT, AND SOUTH WALES RAILWAY.—(THIS DAY.) The usual halt-yearly general meeting of the pro prietors of the above railway was held this afternoon, at the Gresham Room; Mr. William Chadwick, chair man of the Board of Directors, in the chair. The report represented. the affairs of the company to be in a satisfactory condition; the line had nut been commenced yet, nor would it be for some time to come; but there was every prospect of its being eventually carried out, and proving a profitable undertaking. In future the expenditure, including in terest on paid up calls, would not exceed 201 per annum; and the balance in hand, although small, would be amply sufficient to meet the liabilities of the concern. The balance-sheet showed that the receipts amounted to 717/. 163. Gd., and the expenditure to 589/. 2s. 3d., leaf ing a balance of 1281. 14s. 3d. in hand. The CHAIRMAN, in moving the adoption of the report, stated that the commencement of the works would entirely depend upon the progress made by the South Wales Company in their line. It was probable that that line would be opined to Swansea in about twelve months, and then, no doubt, would be the time to enter upon their works. The report was unanimously adopted, and the retiring auditors and directors having been re-elected, thanks were voted to the Chairman and the meeting terminated. UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE. WEDNESDAY MORNING.—At a numerous meeting of the Members of the Senate of Cambridge, held on Monday, it was proposed by Professor Corrie, and unanimously resolved, to present a memorial to the Vice-Chancellor, to the following effect:—" That the undersigned members of the Senate, being not fully sa tisfied with the constittrion of the proposed Syndicate fur the revision of the statutes of the University, re spectfully request the Vice-Chancellor to withdraw the gr..ce for the present." The memorial was to be pre sented this morning. Just as we are going to press we have received the. following announcement by electric telegraph:— "Cambridge, Wednesday, Feb. 14, Twenty-two Minutes past One. " The grace for the appointment of the Syndicate has been withdrawn." We have also been informed that the order of the Chapter of Bristol, concerning reading the service in the cathedral, was rescinded at a meeting yesterday; but the Dean, as Ordinary of the Cathedral, has made a fresh order requiring certain portions of the service to be read in future.—London Guardian of this day. REPRESENTATION OF BRISTOL.— It iS rumoured that Earl Fitzhardinge has wholly withdrawn his sup port from the Liberals of this city.—Bristol Mercury. The notice for the renewal of the Exchequer-bills dated March is expected by the end of the week, and the impression is that should the present buoyancy of the Stock-market continue, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be able to reduce the rate to lid. per day. 'ibis will be 2/. ss. 7d. per annum. The existing March bills bear 2id. per day, and those of June2d. per day interest.. WOOLWICH, FEB. 23.—ROYAL AuTILLEny.—In consequt nee of the dense fog which prevailed this morn ing, Captain Cheetham's company, 11th battalion, was prevented from embarking at Ruff's wharf, and they marched to Nine-elms at an early hour to proceed by railway to Portsmouth. BIRTLIS. On the Bth inst., at Carlton-terrace, the Countess of Ca!e don, of a son. On the 7th inst., at the Rectory, vYrezham, Bucks, the wife of the Rev. A. A. Kemp, of a daughter. On the 9th inst., at Struan-house, Haveratock-hill, Mrs, Richard Madigan, of a son. On the 9th inst., at Edinburgh, the lady of Patrick Boyle, Esq., of a daughter. On the 9th inst., at Dartmouth-grove, Blackheath, Mrs. P. Richardson, of a son. O the 9th inst., at Brecknock-villa, Earl's-court, the wire of John J. Stone, Et.q., of a daughter. MARRIE. On the 7th inst , a t Glenarges co D ttage, Blackness, Dundee , James Gibson, Esq., Rotterdam, to Jane Beveridge, only daughter of 51r. George R. Baxter, Dundee. Oa the 10th inst., at St. Pancras New Church, Lucius Octavius, youngest son of the late M. Tate, Esq. a Chill' ford, (,loucerershire, to Susan, se con d daughter Of the late Mr. W. LI. Gilbert, of Lawrence-lane, Cheapside. LIED. On the 13th inst., at Clapham-common, Edmund Bellamy , Esq., of the House of Common , aged 43. On the 26th ult , iu Wilton -crescent, Belgrave-square , Mrs. Hannah Cortoy, aged 66. On the 2d inst., at Montrose, aged 43, D..vid Burnes, Esq• A.f.D., formerly of London. On file sth inEt., at Torquay, aged 64, Lieutenant-Colone l James Smith, of ILE.I.C. ce, Madras. On the 6th inst., at Ashburton, Devon, John Soper, Esq•r M D., aged 52. O❑ the 9th inst., Francis B. S. Wilder, Esq., of Bu s " briJge-hall, Surrey. London : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, 0„ f No. 112, Strand, Printe r , at Th e Sun Offi ce , No. 111 Strand, in Ihe Precinct o f t h e Savoy, i n t h e cou ntY huocueval Wedgexclay, Febrp.ary 141 1849! Rich Will taw Thor Jitar, tet t , / Atill i th e b. P G to go Yearl add, 11 Varkt : th e Is gee due ec PR *IN o n , or s e debt I With° Cla Mont. Ilenr; 11 1116 lllllia Itober John fu The ( Comp; Are m i t o u credit Is Bra , Aubliy P O , 84rers Adv 44(1 al `;711 s _ he Dr, briie DR,_ I STI 113 t p Zni _6tai