The Sun. — London, England, 1842-05-14 00:00:00

1. - ‘,. privileges, and t "- . .seis increased vigilance in look ing aftsr these things. He believed. therefore, that the Committee was uncalled for, that they were setting out oe a a rung principle, that they were not proceeding on a eere principle, but that they were trying to make the Isse s , le believe what they did not believe themselves. For those reasons he should raise every impediment iu his power to the formation of this Committee. Mr. HUME said that the lion. Member who had 11 : ) - stating that they all very well knew that such practices had existed, would do well to speak only for himself. Mr. M. MILNES said that what he had stated was that the House knew that arrangements took place. Mr. HUME was surprised to find that the Hon. Member objected to the inquiry. He believed, however, for his part, that the most effectual means of putting an end to those corrupt practices which disgraced the country would be to extend the franchise, and to give a vote to every person who paid taxes. Still he thought it wa s desirable that the proposed inquiry should take place, and he should therefore support the motion. Sir J. WALSII complained of the alteration made by the. Hon. and Learned Member fur Bath in his motion at the close of the discussion on Monday , night. He did nut mean to impute any improper motives to the Hon. and Learned Member, for whose character he entertained the highest respect ; but he could not help expressing his regret that the original motion had been clandestinely altered, in the absence of many Members who took an interest in tie subject. The SPEAKER was understood to say that the Hon. Member was out of order.—(Hear, hear) On the ques tion before the House lie could only object to names. Sir JOHN WALSH (who was repeatedly inter rupted with loud cries of " Order, order," and " Ques tion") said, that the Speaker had decided that ho could only object to names.—(Hear, hear.) If so, then, he hoped he would not be required to give his reasons. —(clear, and '• Oh, oh.") To do so would render a task always invidious doubly painful. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had extended the duties of the Com mittee so much that it was necessary it should be com posed of men of the highest character in the House and of the highest personal character; and he conceived that he was portesstly justified asking that persons of that character should be placed upon that Committee. There was a voice that once commanded universal at tention in that House ; there was a voice which, whenever its tones were beard, all those who could appreciate the talent of the greatest living orator would endeavour to eateh; and he had heard a certain Noble and Learned Lord say not long ago, in commenting upon the composition of Election Committees, that he regretted that persons of high professional character were absent from the list of those who composed such Committees. .Was he then out of order in moving that such persons should be added ,to the Committee? The motion of the Hon. Gentleman Was arig,inally for a Select Committee to inquire whether certain parties connected with election petitions pre sented to that House against the return of certain Mem • bers, were not guilty of a gross breach of its privileges. -The motion founded upon ghat was, that a Select Commit tee.,he appointed to inquire into certain corrupt practices which . had occurred at the recent elections. That was the motion that was submitted from the chair. He con tended that this Select Committee to inquire into the nature of these compromises was a judicial inquiry of the greatest possible importance. It was an inquiry which not only concerned the honour and character of several Members of that House, but it was a judicial inquiry in which the interest, the rights, and privVeges, of fire con stituencies of this country were concerned—the rights and privileges of those who returned nine seats to that House. This taw* be a small portion of the House, but he re ax,llected the time when upon nine seats, and upon votes of Members of that House, the fate of a Ministry depended, and it was not impossible that, in JO years, nine seats would determine the fate of a Monarchy.—(lronical cheers, and cries of " Question.") It was impossible for the Eton. and Learned Member to ground an objec tion to the issue of the writ for Nottingham on his original motion. But he founded his objection upon a subsequent addition to his motion. It was a very serious thing for the House to agree to the suspension of a writ. Nothing could justify this but the strongest grounds. Ife drew this conclusion from the Hon. and Learned Member's motion, that upon the Repartof the Committee ulterior proceedings should be taken against the bo rough of Nottingham, and then ulterior proceedings would be taken against the other towns named. The House, therefore, voted a Committee which might be said to combine the subject matter of five Election Com ra:ttees in one. He said it was a case which required the telsistance of Hon. Gentlemen of professional expe perience of the highest legal character in that licinse. Thou.l, he had many friends of his own on the Commit tee, he should still say, frankly and openly, that he did not think the Committee were possessed of that profes aional knowledge which would justify the House in re posinga trust of such importance in them. He thought the assent of the House was given by surprise to the ap pointment of this Committee, and the only remedy that .now remained was to appoint professional persons to as mist on a subject which concerned the rights and privi leges of the people of the country. Mr. COCHRANE wished to put a question to the iron. Member for Derby, in reference to the petition that was presented to the House this evening from Mr. Warburton. The question he had to propose was—and lie thought he had a right to put it, as the Hon. Mem ber was a Member of the C o mmittee—whether the Hcri. Member had given any counsel to Mr. Warburton to stistnand an inquiry respecting the borough of Bridport iteforo the Select Committee ? „Ur, ,STRUTT begged the Hon. Member to repeat his question, as lie did not understand it. Mr. COCHRANE having repeated the question, STRUTT said that he gave his fribnd (Mr. War hurt,. it) no e upon the subject.—(Hear, hear.) He w:ts ne • sure that he had not heard Mr. Warburton speak of ,'is intention to present such a petition ; but he 01. e. Strutt did not g ive any opinion on the subject. — (Ilear, hear.) Be had no knowledge of the petition till be. saw itin the Votes, and he never knew anything of contents ail he had heard f them from the Hon. Mem ber or Liskeard.—(Hear, hear,) Captain BERNAL wished to ask the Chair, as a voang Member of the House,—(Great laughter.) He begged pardon, he wished to ask the Chair whether this system of putting questions to Hon.tMembers, not Mem bers of the Government, was strictly in order. The SPEAKER said, that the original practice was, that questions should be confined to the orders of the slay. The rule sleets then had been relaxed and ques tions had been put to Members of the Government, and chio to Members of the House, on subjects with which they were connected; any further relaxation of the rule lie did not remember, until the lion. Member for Bath laud put certain questions.—(Hear, hear.) 2,1 r. M. MILN ES observed, that what he had stated, refereed to compromises, and not to bribery and cor rupt, ou. The letmes of Mr. Wm. Miles, Sir Wm. Heatlicoat awl the lion. W. Lanibton were added to the Committee. On jut being proposed that Sir Wm. Somerville's name be added to the Committee, S:r 1V k.".. SOMERVILLE observed that the post assigned Mira by the Hon. and Learned Member for Rah was not a very enviable ow, but if lie could facili tate the object It s ' had in view,he should be happy to be a Member of the Committee. The name of the _Hon. Baronet was then added to the Committee, as was al, o that of Mr. Hawes. Os the question that Mr. Strutt's name be added to the G atrni I tee, M.-. STRCTT stated that if any Hon. Gentleman objeetetto his name being :m the Committee, he should be happy if he would make that objection, a 4 he was must desirous of being excused from being on the Committee. Th.; lion. Gentleman's natne was then added to the Committee, as were also those of "Lord Wersley and Mr. lio '.,ark. pa the question that five be a quorum, Mr. T. I)UNCOMBE objected to the motion, because 1w had given notice of a certain test to be proposed to • Memberi forming the Committee. and if several gen tiorticit objected to take that test the number of Members Ill' r' ht. be considerably reduced. f o rd I.'t )I.l.lN(i'l ON ohjeeted .to the Him. Menden . for Bath being a Meleher upon the Committee. After a few words' from Mr. DUNCOMBE and Lord 1 J. Busfet.t.. which were inaudible, • l'ir ROBERT PEEL said, the Committee ought to be uaalogoiti to ono appointed under the Election Juris dicdoe Act, and it was of great importance that the , Geatleman appointed should undertake the duty with the understanding that they should f. , ,-!Te th rir regular attendance. Should any indi vidual Member unfortunately be unable to attend, ti e H o we would be empowered to supply his place, and this would be a very imperfect remedy, because the new lleWkber would not have heard the whole of the evidence. With respect to the quorum, he trusted every gentle man composing the Committee would feel it his duty to wire his regular attendance. 4, Mr. DUNCOMBE then moved that nine Members forin a quorum. Lord F. EGERTON said, as far as precedents went, every :Member of the Committee understood that he was to give his attendance precisely the same as if on an It/salon Committee. This would make the proposal of the Hon. Gentleman opposite unnecessary. Mr. BRAMSTON said, though he should notrh peaps undertake the duty cheerfully, still he would endeavour to do his duty. lie trusted that there would be an order of the House that the Committee should always attend ' in full number. After a desultory conversation between Mr. Christ mess, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord J. Russell, and Lord Worsloy, the motion was withdrawn. On the question that the Committee have power to send for papers, persons, and records being put, Air. T. DUNCOMtE said that he believed this was the proper period for hint to submit to the consideration of the House the motion of which he had given notice the other day with respect to th:s Committee. He begged to move " that each Member appointe4,to serve on the Select Committee on compromises of election petitions, shall subscribe the following declaration in the presence of Mr. Speaker : " I -,-- do solemnly declare that I never directly, or indirectly, have been guilty, by myself or apnts, of any 1 PA! t of bribery or corruption in procuring a sect in Par iliatnent ; that I never p a id, or promised to pay, intend : Jo pay, or sanctioned the payment of. any sum or sums 0: money beyond the legal expenses for my lust or any pt -,,yious election ; nor have I at any time connived at, been privy to, or assisted in, any corrupt practice for the pu rpose of returning any Member or Members to serve in Parliament. (Signed) f 4 / I : 1 54 . ? ',.'4 • 1 LL0 4 2 k Some short time since he had taken the lib erty o f ask .,''',*d.,, 77t N . ing the Right lion. Baronet if it was his i ntent i on to in treduce any measure for the prevention of treating, bri bery, and intimidation, and he (Mr. T. Duncomb e ) h a d .:-. +,,,,,-,, ~ ~eh , „. s tated that his reason for asking that. quest i on ..• , ~. , then -..i.' -7, / 4.:''tiviwas that it was perfectly notorious that at the last . ic,..,,,'• , t ' '-.t .1 :-..-,' , - )it 1..'" ' general election there had been more bribery, j % • ' '?'/ 7corruption, more treating, more intimidation, - • , ,•-, . -. ~,;,.... more 1 a s than had ever been known in the most cor- rupt age or. the most corrupt period.—(Cheers.) Tile Right lion. Baronet had said that the press of public busin?ss would prevent him from bringing for ward any measure for that purpose, but that he trusted that the Noble Nord, the Iliember for Lyndon, would again introduce the measure which he had introduced in the former Session, and would again take up the sub ject. At the same time the Right Hun. Baronet ad !flitted that it was his (Sir . . R. Peel's) belief that at the last general election gross bribery, gross corruption, and gross intimidation had been practised.—(Cheering and counter-cheering.) He :(Mr. T. Duncombe) could only say that if any one expressed the slightest doubt on the subject, he could undertake to prove at the bar of the House that a majority of the Mbmbers of that House had been returned by gross bribery, corruption, and n timida don. —(C heering and counter-cheering.) He was now prepared to prove that assertion, but he was not prepared to carry that great question to a private room up-stairs, to gratify party feelings and private animo sities.—(Cheers.) He wished that an inquiry into the coustitution of that House should take place at the bar, in the face of open day, and of the whole country. — !Loud cheers.) The whole country regarded their transactions during the last week with the most unmiti gated disgust at their injustice and hypocrisy. — (Loud cheers an laughter.) The public knew perfectly well that when they were about to persecute six or eight individuals there were at least 600 of them in the House who were just as bad. There was a sense of justice in the British public, that did not like to see eight or ten men hunted down by 600 others, who were equally implicated.—(Cheers.) Three millions and a half of the people had already told them so, in the petition which hp had presented, and which they had refused to hear, although the petitioners had offered to prove their allegations at the bar. What did they say in that peti tion, which had been so unjustly maligned?—(Hear, hear.) The petitioners stated that seats in that House were improperly obtained, that they were sought for at a most extravagant cost, which proved an enormous de gree of fraud and corruption. They stated, and stated most truly, that bribery, intimidation, corruption, and treating prevailed in Parliamentary elections. Now, if they were to inquire into these practices, let it be seen that the gentlemen, who were to act to a certain extent as volunteer inquisitors, at all events, mounted the judg ment seat with clean hands. That was the object of his motion. He also agreed in thinking, that the Committee should be presided over by some gentleman of great legal ability, of calmness of temper, and moderation of habits. He hoped they would be enabled to find nine men, at least, who would be free from the corrupt practices complained of. He could obly say that, if he had been named upon that Committee, he could not make the required decla ration.— (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He could take it as the representative of Finsbury ; but, unfortunately for him, he was once a candidge for the very pure and immaculate borough of Pontefract.—(Laughter.) He had spent 4,000/. to get into Parliament for Pontefract, and he h'ad no hesitation in saying that that money was spent in gross bribery, treating, an corruption. On that occasion, he was unsuccessful • he was defeated by Lord Pollington, and the father of the Hon. Gentleman oppo site (Mr. M. Milnes). At that election, corrupt prac tices had been resorted to ; and he would say more, he did not believe that any one was returned for Pontefract without bribery.—(Hear, and laughter.) Mr. MILNi 4 .S—i deny it. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE continued.—He had unfortu nately stood a candidate also five times for Hertford.— (Hear and laughter.) Three times he succeeded, and twice he was defeated ; but at all events he contrived to leave 30,0001. behind him at Hertford.—(Great laughter.) He had to contend with a very great aristocracy. He had to contend with "seven days leases"—(Hear, hear) — which the voters held under the Marquis of Salisbury, so that they would be immediately turned out if they voted against the pleasure of their landlord.---(Hear, hear.) Well, he (Mr. Duncombe) had to build houses for them.—(Laughter.) He had to build or buy sixty three houses.—(Roars of laughter.) A great portion of his money was spent in treating, but the greater part in direct bribery.—(Laughter.) Having only shown that he himself could not take the declaration, he should like to see the nine men who could.—(Hear and a laugh.) They would be the admiration of the country. The whole city would come down to see them, especially after they had passed sentence upon the gentlemen accused of offences of which almost the whole House had been guilty.— (Hear, hear.) If the resolutions were not agreed to, he hould, immediately after the holidays, move that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she would be graciously pleased to dissolve this Parliament, after the extensive and disgraceful practices of corruption which prevailed at the last general election ; without the total di s continuance of which the House could not be restored to that degree of respect and confi dence which was necessary to the due exercise of its legislative functions. The SPEAKER having put the question, Lord POLLINGTON said the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, had applied such language to the borough which he (Lord Pollington) had the honour to represent, that he felt it his duty—(Laughter)—that he felt it his duty to inform the House of the circumstances of the election to which the Hon. Gentleman had alluded, when he confessed that he spent this large sum of money, which was unsucessful ; and he would tell the House why it was unsuccessful. It was because it could not succeed in corrupting the people.—(Hear, hear.) In the borough of Pontefract there had only been one election before the time, when the Hon. Member came down in reference to which charges of bribery and corruption had been =dn. On that occasion there was a very severe contest in deed, and the memory of that contest remained to this day in the town. In the year 1834 %Ir. Raphael, the then Sheriff of London, came down in the Sheriff's coach to stand as a candidate for the borough. There was a report in the borough that he was a Jew, but when he was asked the queston, he replied, " I am not a Jew, but I am as rich as one." Mr. Raphael paid as much as 4,0001. into a bank in the town, but he was unsuccessful in his attempt to gain the election. If bribery ever prevailed in that borough it had originated with Hon. Members on the other side of the House. He believed that if there had been any corrupt voters, a better class were now taking their place, and he made no doubt that if the imputations were true, which he denied them to be, the borough would very shortly be relieved from them. Mr. M. MILES- would simply say, as it seemed these assertions were to be made, that since he had repre sented the borough of Pontefract, he had never heard the subject of bribery so much as alluded to, and he had never heard any accusation of that sor t made. All he had to say was, that if the Hon. Member for Fins bury divided the House. he should support him (as we understood). Mr. HARDY, who rose amidst much laughter, said, that as he had been alluded to in this accusation, be ought to be allowed a few words in explanation in re spect to his connexion with Pontefract. He had con. tested the borough of Pontefract in 1826, and he had the good fortune to prevail on the returning officer to take the election in one day instead of two, as had always been the case, and by this means he avoided the prac tice which prevailed in the intervening night of an elec tion. He certainly did prevail on the returning-officer to take the election in one day, and he as told, when that day had considerably advanced, that if he would spend 5001., and leave a sum of money in the hands of some person, he should win the election ; but he re fused to do so. He was not cognizant—as he was an swering to that House—of bribery in respect to that Election, and to show to the . House in what way he considered his own conduct on that occasion, when the Committee sat on the petition, on which his Right Hon. Friend below bin, efts his nominee on that Committee, and lie put himself in the witness-box, and was examined by the counsel on the opposite side with respect to his conduct on that oc casion, they refused to put any question imputing anything unfair to him. He was perfectly aware, an ti Hon. Gentlemen who had spoken were aware, that when the late excellent Member, Mr. Daniel Sykes, the Mem ber for Hull, was first chosen for Bull, his legitimate expenses were less than 3001. There was a little me moir in the library of the House in which this fact was stated. Owing to the spirit which prevailed in Pontefract, he was obliged to leave behind him what lion. Oil - men knew by the name of head-money ; but he took care that it should not introduce hiin again to this con gtitueecy. He had stated plainly to the House the facto, and he should ever strive to follow in the step.; of Mr. Daniel Sykes in all his elections. Mr. WARD said he would vote against the motion of his Hon. Friend. He thought that motion was of a na ture to cast ridicule on what he conceived to be a grave and important proceeding. The motion of his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Roebuck) was brought for • ward with temper, tact, and firmness, and lie considered that a test so impritetiCable — ( o h, oh)—and so ill-ad vised—(Oh, oh)—he said ill-advised, because no person was agreed as to what legal expenses were, and no per son could take the tEst with a safe conseience.—(oh, oh.) The Hon. Member overshot the mark in pro posing it.—(Hear, hear.) lie looked on it as all at tempt to int ?rfere with the motion of his Hon. and Learned Friend. His Hon. Friend did not intend it, he was sure ; but that would be the effect of it, and he should therefore vote against it. Sir It. PEEL said that the House saw the Com mittee, and it would judge whether they were fit to dis charge the duty imposed on them. And in his opinion the Committee, constituted as it was, were fit, as honour able men, to discharge the duty confided to them. No such test was required of the Committees selected to try election petitions ; and if the members of such tJom mittees were not considered disqualified from deciding cases involving the rights of Members and constituents, why should such a test as that proposed by the Hon. Member be imposed in the present instance ?—(Hear, hear.) It was a dangerous precedent to otablish, that a test of this nature should be imposed on certain of its Members by the Home, He thought the Hon. Gentle man said that supposing nine Members could be found vino took such a test, the whole town would flock down to see them. That was a very facetious, sentiment, but if, as l ie expected, a considerable number of wendering spectators came to see the entry and departure of the (Sir R. Peel) did not see how they Comtnittee--if 600 . 0ut of the e 53 Members could not tory result from the inquiry he ettaikuel tehxepc!cetst,abseati.i fa c proposed to institute.--(G His objection was of a general nature. He believed that to appoint a Com mittee in the manner proposed by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, would be forming a most daaprous precedent. He should therefore dissent from the proposal of the lion. Kember. Mr. lIUME could not vote for the motion, because he believed, if he did so, he should frustrate altogether the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath. Mr. ROEBUCK thought that it would be desirable, when Hon. Members wished to oppose a. measure, that they should do so in a straightforward manner, and not to pretend to patronise when they were doing all in their power to render it inefficient. When he proposed to thp House the inquiry now under consideration, he was anxious to state, and did state explicitly, and it received the assent of a majority of the House, that it was the system at which he aimed, and not the individuals. Throughou THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAC 14, 1842. the whole proceedings he had been anxious to put his linger upon the system, and abstain from all asperity W' I:inguage upon individuals. But the Hon. Member for Finsbury had, in slanting language, for his language was as oblique as his motion, endeavoured to fix on him the stigma of being - actuated by other motives than those he had distinctly avowed. He said he was desirous to promote the purity of the House, and yet he stated a case the most corrupt, according to his own phra seology, and in the most shameless and barafaced manner. Those who promoted purity ought to do so by example i well as precept, which of the two modes of proceeding, was the most straightforward opposition. The motion of the Hon. Baronet was plain and distinct, it questioned the propriety of inquiry at all; but the Hon. Member for Finsbury was favourable to in quiry, and yet endeavoured to prevent investigation. When it was before the world that there were nine or ten cases that might be distinctly proved, were they to say that tlse whole representation was so corrupt and so evil, that they could make no inquiry ? Were they to indulge in an esoteric morality in that House, and in dulge in sneers which they would not dare to mention out of doors ? , What he desired was, to make the matter so plain as to render it necessary to legislate upon it. He trusted to the good feeling of Hon. Gentlemen around him to treat with scorn the present motion. considering that itwas not an honest and straightforward, but a round about, oblique, and factious mode of opposing his (Mr. Roebuck's) object. Mr. PAKINGTON was surprised at the intention ex pressed by the Hon. Member (Mr. T. Duncombe) of pressing his motion to a division. The sole object of the Hon. Member was to throw ridicule upon the motion of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. He be lieved the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had done great public service by bringing forward this subject. The extent of bribery which had taken place at the last election was discreditable to that House, and discredit able to the law. He would not be a party to an attempt to defeat the object for which the Committee had been appointed. Lord J. RUSSELL said he perfectly concurred in the objections which had been stated to the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He thought, that having ordered the inquiry, it would be extremely inconsistent for the House, by an extraordinary and unusual pro ceeding, to defeat the object of that inquiry. His Hon. Friend seemed to imply that the House must either agree to his motion, or make the confession that its Members had been guilty of bribery ; but he (Lord J. Russell) would not admit that such was the case. There were cases in which moderate refreshment was given to the voters, which were very different from the offering of a bribe of five guineas. For himself, he would feel it very unsafe to say that he had never paid any sums beyond legal expenses. He would suggest to the Honourable Member the propriety of using words which would meet the difficulty. Mr. S. O'BRIEN said—ln rising to support the mo tion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, he would assure the House that he did not do so with any intention to defeat the inquiry. BUt for his part, if he were included in the inquiry, he would not consent to be tried by a per son who had himself been guilty of the same practices of which ho was accused.—(Loud cries of " Divide.") He did not think with the lion. Member for Finsbury, that corruption had so far infected the House, that this small number of persons could not sign the test. If it were so, the sooner the people knew how they were represented in that House--(Divide, divide.) Mr. WAKLEY was utterly at a loss to know why so much soreness of criticism was bestowed upon the motion of his Hon. Colleague. It had been said that this was proposed to get rid of the Committee. He denied that, and he believed that its effects would be to carry out the object of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. In- stead of so much reproach being cast upon his Hon. Col league's courageous and honest acknowled&ment, his ex ample ought to be followed. His Hon. Friend was right in bringing forward his motion, and could not have an object in defeating the motion brought forward by the Honourable and Learned Member for Bath, and prosecuted by him with so much zeal and ability. Did the Right Honourable Baronet opposite think there was anything in the test which every Member ought not to be able to take ? Would it not be very well for any candidate to be able to point to this test, and show that if he were returned he would have to take it? —(hear.)' He thought that the inquiry ought not to end with those six boroughs, for if it did it would give no satisfaction. He did not agree with his Hon. Friend that there were 600 members who could not take the test, for he believed that many Members were not guilty of bribery, or any dishonest practice. For his part, he would not have the slightest hesitation in taking this test, for he never spent one farthing in bribery or treat ing, and he believed that many men could take the test as safely as him. The inquiry, he asserted, could not stop with these six boroughs, but it should go as far as the petitions would reach, for in most of them the alle gations of corruption and bribery were as strong as in those which were compromised. He supported the motion. Mr. BROTHERTON thought that the Hon. Member for Finsbury should have brought forward his motion before the Committee was appointed. He was confident that the, gentlemen of that Committee would do their duty, and would neglect no means of bringing to light the corrupt practices which had prevailed at so many of our elections. For his part he should have had no hesi tation in taking the test ; but he could not support the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. V. SMITH said that he should feel it his duty to vote with the Hon. Member for Finsbury. It would be advisable, in his opinion, to satisfy the public that the Members appointed to try the charges that had been made were themselves free from the practices complained of. They were not about to call on the Members of the Committee to subscribe the declaration from any in vidious motives ; but he believed it would he more satis factory to the public that they should be placed beyond the reach of suspicion. Mr. T. DIJNCOMBE said that he wished to say a few words in answer to some of those very unfounded attacks which had been made on him by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. He had - always thought that the usual Parliamentary course was, not to attribute motives to any Member of that House when he had brought for ward any motion lie had though fit. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Member for Bath, had thought proper to attribute to him motives which were totally unjust and unfounded.—(Cries of " Order.") The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said that he had wished, by oblique and indiscreet, and as it were underhand means, to defeat the inquiry. Now he could till the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that there had been nothing in his (Mr. Duncombe's) conduct in that House which could authorise any individual to say that he letd not always taken a direct course when any motion was brought forward.—(Hear, hear.) He was not one of those who had made attacks upon individuals in their absence, and who when called upon to justify those attacks would shrink from doing so.—(Order.) Mr. ROEBUCK said that if the Hon. Gentleinan meant to make any charge against him, he begged he would state when he had been guilty of any conduct to justify it. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member for Bath, could not speak in reply ; if he spoke at all, it would only be by the special indulgence of the House. Mr. DUNCOMBE contended that he was in order ; he repeated that he was net one of those men who made attacks on individuals who were not there to defend themselves. Sir E. EINATCHBULL rose to order ; he deprecated this mode of one Member making attacks on .another. Mr.DUNCOMBE—I am making no attacks.— (Order.) Sir E. KNATCHBULL was quite sure that discus sions of this personal nature were not advisable. Mr. FRENCH thought if the Hon. Member for Fins bury was personally attacked he had a right to defend himself. He moved that the debate be adjourned. Mr. BERNAL said that as the Speaker had not given his opinion it would be indecent to adjourn the debate.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. DUNCONIBE said his object was that the Com mittee should have the confidence of the public, and he believed it would not obtain that unless this test were applied. They might think his confess'ons shameless and barefaced, that might be human frailty ; but he considered that frailty preferable to those professions into which the self-conceit of other people led them ; namely, the profession of superior virtue and purity, which only themselves were able to discover. Mr. FRENCH withdrew his motion of adjournment, and the House divided ; when there appeared :-- For Mr. Duncombe's motion l7 Against it ltco Majority against the motion -143 LIVERPOOL PETITION ON EDUCATION. On our admission to the gallery, we found Sir 11. DOUGLAS on his legs, stating that seeing the Right lion. Gentleman the Member for Tipperary in his place, he wished to inform him that he had received a letter from Liverpool, with respect to the petition he had presented the other night on the subject of ethics,- Lion, mid for presenting which he had been charged by the Hon. Member with a breach of the privileges of the House for presenting a petition with fictitious signa tures. The letter he had just received stated that the signatures were genuine. bin SHILL would only observe, in reply to the Hon. and Gallant Officer, that it was most extraordinary that in a petition casting the gravest imputations on many Members of the Catholic Hierarchy in Ireland, the first page should contain a whole series of names written manifestly by the same hand. Sir R. PEEL despaired of getting through with the tariff, if these irregular discussions were indulged in. He really must take advantage of the rules of the House. He did not mean for one moment to say that the delay occasioned by these discussions was intentional, but he must ask the Speaker if such discussions were strictly in order. SHILL--This is a matter of privilege. The SPEAK,LIi said that, according to the strict rules of the House, no debate could take place that did not in some manner relate to the Orders of the Day ; but, that of late, a practice had sprung up, of asking questions and raising discussions on them, on the motion that the Orders of the Day be read. According to the strict rules of the House, however, the debate ought to relate to some of the Orders of the Day. Mr. SHILL would just remark, that the diseussion whichhad just taken place, related to a question ofpri Mop' and was, therefore, perfectly in order. He had charged the Hon. Member for Liverpool with having been guilty of a breach of privilege in presenting a petition to the House, many of the signatures to which had been fabri cated, He had been requested by the Noble Lord, the other Member for Liverpool, to postpone calling the at tention of the House to the subject until the Hon. and Gallant Officer should have . hart an opportunity of com municating with Liverpool on the subject, and this was the earliest opportunity he had had of calling the atten tion of the House to the subject. IPSWICH ELECTION. Mr. PAKINGTON rose, not fur the purpose of de laying the tariff, but to make a communication to the House on the subject of the Ipswich Election, which he was anxious to do before the holidays ; but if the House was desirous that he should not do so—(Cries of " Go on ! go on !") It would be in •the remembrance of the Howe that he, as Chairman of that Election Committee, had moved that the issuing of the writ be suspended for three weeks, in order to give time for the evidence to be printed. That time would expire on Monday next, and he thought it right to inform the House that it was not his intention to move the further suspension of the issuing of the writ. He thought it right to make this state ment in order that onourable MeMbers might have an opportunity or considering what course they might think it advimble to pursue. In allusion to what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Montgomery the other evening, relating to the con duct of the Committee in neglecting to report whether the bribery had been committed with the cognizance of the sitting Members, without at all entering . into the reasons which had induced the Committee to avoid all allusion to the subject in the Report, and without al luding what he considered the very vague manner in • hich that part of the Election Act was worded, he would, as some imputation seemed to have been cast upon the sitting Members, at once state that it was not his intention in any manner to imply more than had been stated in the Report, and that the general feeling 4)f the Committee—a feeling in which he concurred—had been that it had not been proved that the bribery which had taken place had taken place with the cognizance or knowledge of the sitting Members. THE TARIFF. • On the motion that the Order of Day for the House resolving itself into Committee on the Customs Bill be read, Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a petition from the ropemakers of London, preying that the House would not impose a less duty than Bs. upon the importa tion of foreign cordage, or than 20s. upon the importa tion of foreign twist. Viscount HOWICK could assure the Right Hon. Ba ronet, that in bringing forward the motion of which he had given notice, delay was not his object.—(Hear, hoar.) In the proposed alterations in the scale of du ties, there were many articles on the importation of which from foreign countries it was proposed to levy a higher rate of duty than on their importation from the British colonies. The Right Hon. Baronet must agree that the subject was one well worthy of the consideration of the House, and that as it involved a question of principle, it could be much more conveniently discussed by bring ing it forward in the shape of a resolution before going into Committee, inasmuch as if a discussion were to be raised in Committee on every article of the tariff in which the principle was involved, such discussion, in addi tion to many other inconveniences, would inevitably oc casion great waste of time, and much unneccessary delay. On the other hand, to select one article for exemption, and to take a division on that, showing the determina tion of the House with regard to the principle gene rally, would not be doing justice to the importance of the principle he then felt it his duty to submit to the consideration of the House; and it would also prevent that division being fairly taken, since it would be mixed up with the consideration of the proper rate of duty to be charged on the particular articles. Therefore, in moving the resolution of which he had given notice, which was in these words—" That in making a new ar rangement of the Customs duties, it is not expedient to impose different rates of duty upon the same article, when imported from foreign countries or from British possessions, in any case where no such difference now exists; and that in those cases in which such a difference already , exists, it is not expedient that it should be in creased." It was now proposed, for the first time, to reduce the duty on articles from our colonial possessions, or compared with the duty on the same kind of articles from other countries. To this he had the greatest ob jection. He objected to differential duties, because it would leave the consumer subject to the burdens of taxa tion, and yet deprive the Treasury of the income which it ought to derive from those burdens, and would en tirely fail in affording that advantage to the colonies for the purpose of which those differential duties were created. With respect to this country, it wits perfectly obvious that differential duties were contrary to the in terest of the country. Under the head of provisions he found the articles of cheese and butter. At the present time, these articles were at the same rate of duty, whe ther imported from a foreign country or a British posses sion. Butter paid a duty of 11. per cwt., and cheese 10s. the cwt., from whatever country they were imported. The consequence of this had been, that none of these articles had been imported from a British possession, but from foreign countries a very considerable revenue had been obtained upon them, realising about 370,0001. The proposal of her Majesty's Government was that the duty upon these articles from the colonies should be re duced. Butter from foreign countries was still to re main at 11. per cwt., but from British possessions it was to be ss. Cheese from foreign countries would still re main at 10s. per cwt., and from British possessions it would be 2s. 6d. Now what would be the necessary ope ration of this change ? The Right Hon. Baronet told them that every article in the tariff had been carefully considered with reference to the prices of the articles. He supposed, therefore, that it was intended by this ree duction in the duty on articles from the colonies, to allow the products of the colonies to enter into competition with articles from foreign countries. But the difference in the duty would counterbalance this advantage.' He would assume, for the sake of argument, that this was the case. He might assume that in future one-half of the supply of these articles would be derived from the British colo nies, and the other halt' from foreign countries. It was obvious, then, that the condition of the consumer would be unaltered, because the price would be the same, there fore when the duty was changed, there would be no dif ference so far as the consumer was concerned; but there would be this very important difference to the Treasury. that where they now received 375,0001., the duty on half the supply would continue the same as at present, viz., 187,5001., and the other half being for the colonies, the duty would be only one quarter of what it now is, and instead of 187,5001., it would be somewhat less than 47,000/., so that it would be a loss to the revenue of 140,0001., without a diminution of the price to the consumer. Assuming then, that one half of the supply would come from the colonies, for every cwt. of cheese the revenue imposed a duty of 2s. 6d., instead of 10s., thus losing 7s. 6d. per cwt. ; and the new duty on butter would be 55., instead Of 1/., thus losing 15s. per cwt., at the same time no advantage would accrue .to the consumer. Precisely in this manner all differential duties operate. The consumer ought not to be subjected to any burden, which was not productive to the Treasury. The answer to this no doubt would be, that the colonies must be protected. He trusted that the time would come, especially after the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the other evening, when they would see none but revenue duties.—(Hear, hear.) It was certainly difficult to dis tinguish between protecting duties, and duties for re venue, because even those which were called pro tective duties, did of necessity prsduce revenue. Even the corn duties themselves produced, in reality, a very large revenue. With respect to the argument, that the colonies should be protected against foreigners, his answer to that would be a quotation from the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet. He (Lord Howick) heard with great pleasure the opinion expressed by the Right Hon. Baronet, " That if other countries did not choose to buy cheap from usthat was no reason why we should punish ourselves by refusin! , to buy cheap from them." He cordially agreed %vith him in that opinion. It might be said that it was necessary to secure our authority in the eolonies, by placing a low rate ofduty on their produce. But there would arise the question, were differential duties really an advantage to the colonies or not ? The argument, he maintained, was, that the establishment of these differential duties were entirely delusive, and, instead of their being - ad vantageous, they were extremely injurious. He enter tained this opinion on the simple grounds that he be lieved the establishment of these differential duties had the necessary effect of diverting the capital and ilidustry of the colonies from their natural channel. Those dif ferential duties placed the colonies in a situation of con siderable danger. lie was told that by these duties a great trade would be carried on between the mother country and the colonies, highly beneficial to both. Ile believed. that that had been the received doctrine of a long period by many persons. Although this was fortified by prescription, few gentlemen would be found to maintain it in principle, whatever they (lid in practice, for he believed that principle was now very generally abandoned. He for one contended that trade of this description between the colonies was disadvantageous to both parties. He believed that instead of maintaining the connection between the mother country and the colonies, the maintenance of this principle • was of all others calculated to dissolve it. Because it was obvious, that it' the productions of the colonies were received on more favourable terms in this country than similar priAuctions of other countries, the colonies, in their teen, must be sub;eet to a smaller trade in our markets and elsewhere. This was the ground why he said these dut 7 .es would weaken the connexion between the colonists and the mother country. Look to the United States of America ; it was perfectly well known that it was this system of taxation which led to the unhappy separation of the United States from the mother country, and that the feeling of soreness was created in the col on i es b y t h e restrictions which existed with respect to trade, and produced that feeling in the United States which ultimately led to the separation of the two countries. He thought it was best to assimi late duties, and t o l eave th e i n t e rnal government as much as possible t o th e co l on i es themselves. He be lieved that the adoption of such a liberal policy as this, so far from weakening the connection between the mo ther country and the colonies, would contribute more than anything else to render the con nection permanently and mutually beneficial.—(hear.) After hearing the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the other evening, he knew not how he (Sir R. Peel) could conscientiously object to his (Lord llowick's) motion. lie heard with great satisfaction the Right Hon. Baronet lay down the great principles of commercial freedom. He heard him express his concurrence in the views of Mr. Huskisson ; and he (Lord Howick) now asked the House and the Right Hon. Baronet whether they believed that if Mr. Huskisson was now alive, and had the absolute power of disposing of this question, that the Right Hon. Ba ronet had, he would cre a te new differential duties in favour of the colonies? On a ca re fulexamination of the s cale of dutie s proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet, he ( Lord Howick) was nut able to discover the principle on which it was framed. The Right Hon. Baronet would no doubt be able to offer all explains! ion on that matter, but at present he ( Lord Howiok) was unable to comprehend the principle on which the changes in the tariff were founded. In the case of some articles, the produce of the colonies, proteltion was granted, while in that of others it was altogether withheld. 'l'o colonial cotton they granted a protective d u ty o f 80 per cent. against cotton the w produce of foreign count ries; w hile with respect to linen there no difference whate ver i n the rates of duty imposed, whether it were colonial nr foreign. In like manner manufactures from goats' wool was not protected, while those from sheep's wool was. What, he wanted to know, was the reason of all that ? There was, no doubt, some reason for such an ar rangement,but the uninitiated must feel it difficult to under stand it. To commercial restrictions generally he was op-, posed. It was not to restrictions on commerce that we owel our prosperity. If we were desirous of carrying on an advan tageous commerce with France, Belgium, Spain, and the Unis tee States, we must set them a good example. But was this now the case? On the contrary. protection was given now to articles to which it had not been given before. He al luded to the case of salted irovi.ions Hereafi e r, a trade he twee this country and the 'United states miizht, in all proba bility, grow up in salted provisions, and he asked was it Oleo right, was it po itie, to ssie to their colonies the power of introducing in' o this country salt pro di sions at a duty one-fourth less than that imposed on the same article when imported from foreign countries? It was with these views, and on those grounds, that he begged leave to movo as an amendment, the resointion of which he had given notice. At the same time he begged leave to thank the Right Hon. Baronet for doing as much as he had done in miti gation of those restrictions which pressed on many branches of our trade. He only regretted that the Rigbt Hon. Baror et had not proceeded further in the same course. However, the very announcement of such principles by the Right Hon. Gen tleman gave ho e--rather, gave certain indications—that many years could not elapse before those principles would be carried fully and completely into effect. The SPEAKE R havin g put the question. Mr. GLADSTONE said that the character of the Noble Lord and the tone of his speech demonstrated that he had no motive in the proposition he made except that of ihe public advantage.—( Hear, hear.) And he concurred with him that the mode in which he brought ferward his proposition was the most convenient he could adopt. On the other hand, he should claim from him an acknowlec:gment that the Govern ment would not be slow to adopt those measures he now re commended, if they thought it would promote the public ad vantage. In the first place, with a view to lay before the House the spirit in which the Government proceeded in this matter, he would make some remarks on those differential autie, in favour of colonial produce, which were already to be found in the statute book, from which they would be better able to understand the reasons for the imposit.on of the new duties to be imposed. There were 131 different articles of colonial produce in the existing tariff, which were protected. Of these 131 articles, the existing differential duty had been re duced in no less than 98 cases ; but in no instance, however, had it been reduced by raising the duty on the article when it proceeded from the colonies, but, in every instance, by lower ing the duty, when it proceeded from foreign countries. In 21 of the remaining articles, the differential duties remained unchanged. He now came to the remaining eight cases, four of these consisted of Brazil wood, ebony, coffee, and pitch ; the other four were isinglass, cotton, silk goods, and tallow, and the principle on which they proceeded with. regard to these latter articles, was founded on the relations which subsisted between them and foreign countries, In consequence of these relations it was deemed advisable not to interfere with the duty on foreign articles, while at the same time it was considered reasonable to reduce them to their just standard. With regard to the article of coffee, there was a reduction of the duty in this country, and also a reduction of the differential duty on this article ; but he did not dwell on that, because the high duty on foreign coffee fell on the class of what he might term naturalised coffee, that was, foreign coffee coming within the limits of the East India Company's Charter. But the British produce of this article had to compete in the market not only with the coffee which paid 3d. more of duty, but also with the coffee which made a second voyage. It was now proposed to take away the second voyage altogether, and to transfer the duty to the revenue.— ( Hear, hear.) With regard to tobacco, he admitted the force of the Noble Lord's argument, and with regard to himselt he took blame for the indiscriminate application of a different rule to col nial productions in this article. But he must say in all good humour that the perceptions of Hon. Gentle men opposite with regard to the subject of these differential duties were quickened in opposition. They all knew that the principal act which marked the colonial administration of the late Government was to raise up a protective interest in favour of East India sugar.—( Hear.) But he admitted that their pre sent policy had raised up against them a new body of opponents. That Government established a differential rate of duty in favour of rice and bees-wax coming from the western coast of Afriea, in 1836. In 1838 a new differential rate of duty was imposed in favour of hides coming from the Colonies, and in the same year an extensive protective duty was established in favour of wood from Honduras. In 1840 a petition was presented to the House, praying that the produce of the East Indies may be placed on the same footing with the produce of the West In dies. The article of tobacco was a part of the produce, and he was not sure that the Hon. Member for Montrose was not most vehement in urging the Government to establish a different rate of duty. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, admitted there was an objection to adopting the course prayed for by the petition, in consequence of the effect it would have upon the revenue. The same remark was ap plicable to the article of East 'lndia tea, about which a ques tion was raised at the same time. The new rates proposed were upwards of two hundred, and were subject to two limita tions. In the first place,the articles should be produced within the United Kingdom—that was the first limitation. The other was, that the article should be produced in the colonies, or im ported into some of the colonies. The Right Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to discuss the justice of imposing differential duties, and said that true principles of trade would make their way in the world in the course of time, and that England, without regarding what otl:er countries might do, would adopt such principles as she believed to be true and wise in her system of commercial policy. But, at the same time, he thought that if the House were indifferent to the importance of the colonial trade, great uneasiness would be evinced throughout the country. He con sidered the effect of giving protection to infant colonies, had been to place the supply of those colonies in the hands of this country, and ti cheapen the price of their produce throughout the whole world. Indigo, he considered, was an example of that fact. He did not think, therefore, that a system of differential duties was in every case commercially disadvantageous. It created an intermediate class of prices between foreign and home produce. It did not-increase the price of the article to the consumer, but it augmented the supply, and brought a new party into the field of competition-- ( Hear, hear.) He thought that the Noble Lord was unfor tunate in his selection of salted provisions, which, he said, would have a bad effect in America. Now he thought that as the principal market for salted provisions was the navy, which frequented foreign ports, it was better to take salted provisions out of bond without payment of any duty.—( Hear, hear. ) Tne differential duty would or would not increase the con sumption. If it increased the consumption, the additional duty which was paid was added to the revenue ; if it did' not increase consumption, but displaced a portion of what was formerly consumed of articles produced at home, it still in creased the revenue; but if it injured the revenue by displacing a foreign commodity, it did so by making that commodity cheaper. It was an abuse of words to call the new colonial rates of duty the creation of differential duties. It was, in point of fact, admitting the colonies to commercial equality with the commercial producers. The Noble Lord had said that the creation of duties on this side had a tendency to produce re strictions in the trasie of the colonies. Now, what was the particular answer to that? Why, that great reductions were taking place its the whole Western World. The Noble Lord had said that it was most important that the House should be careful, especially at the present moment, what example it afforded to foreign countries with respect to colonial legislation. He was sure that the proposition of the Government was one which foreigners never could construe unfavourably. It was approximating to the ease of commercial freedom • They were doing now in the colonies what they did half a century ago in Ireland. That country was separated from this by a commercial tariff, but when it was desirable to unite her with England, the country admitted her produce free. The case of Ireland, therefore, was analogous to the colonies. He contended that the effect of these new rates of duties would be to cheapen the articles to which they related, and not to enhance their price, and that they would be the means of fostering the commercial marine, and increase the facility to commerce to the colonies. Under the existing system the colonies had certain claims in respect of justice upon the country. There were certain disadvantages under which the coonies were placed: differen • tial duties were imposed on the colonial markets. It had always been the principle of the law—it was the principle introduced by the late Government and the present one, to impose differen tial duties on all articles imported into the colonies, where they came in competition with other articles. It was true that the range of the differential duties was about to be reduced, but the prineiple of them was retained. It was also the rule of this country to prohibit the colonies from laying taxes on British manufactures ; they laid duties on the colonies, but this countr y would not allow them to lay duties upon it. Canasta, he believed, was almost the only colony that was allowed to raise its income to the extent of 5 per cent. on the manufactures of this coun try. On the whole, lie believed that the course adopted by the Government would have the most beneficial effects on the trade and commerce of the country. Mr. C. WOOD considered that it would be unjust to the Right Hon. Gentleman if he did not at once admit that great improvement had been made in the tariff since it had been first laid on the table of the House ; but he was in hopes of seeing greater improvement in it still. It was a matter of question whether those differential duties were of any benefit to to the coloinal trade. It was the general opinion of enliehtened persons who were acquainted with the trade of the colonies, that they were of no benefit whatever. The case of India had been referrial to ; but as the colon:es did not contribute, as Ireland did, to the debt and the other burdens of the country, they had not the same claim to have their trade, like that of Ireland. on the footing of a coasting trade. When the restrictions under which the colonial trade had before laboured were about to be relaxed. he knew of no new claim whico the colonies had to the additional advantage of differen tial duties. The proposed measure would raise up a new system of vested interests, which would greatly impede the efforts of this country to extend the principle of free trade amongst our colonies and dependencies. It might be very true that it would be desirable to place the colonies on the same footing as Ireland. But if that were clone at ence what would become of the revenue? Would it not he necessary to make up for the deficiency by increased imposts upon the peo ple of this country ? He thought it would be ior the best to leave these duties ai they were. . . . . Sir C. LEMON so lima approved of the tariff, that it was with reluctance he offered opposition to any part of it. But he considered that the differential duties on tin would open the door to frauds which no sagacity could guard against, and they would have a m , ,st injarious effect upon tt.e mining interests in this country.—( Divide, divide. ) Lord STAN LEY would occupy the House a very short time. His Noble Friend opposite objected to the differential duties, on the ground that they would raise the price to the home consumer, and at the same time lower the revenue. The Hon._ Baronet opposite (Sir C. Lemon) objected to them on the con trary ground, that they would make tin cheap, and thereby in jure his constituents in Cornwall.—( Hear.) Now he differed from his Noble Friend, and was convinced that whilst the effect would be to lower the price to thehotne consumer, the revenue would he benefited. He should say, with reference to the speech of the Noble Lord, that it went altogether to the an nihilation of that system upon which we had hitherto car ried on our commercial intercourse with the widely-spread colonies of the British empire. Ile entered his protest against the doctrine of the Noble Lord, by which he would put our trade with the colonies of Great Britain in no more advantageous position than with colonies which were bound to us by no t i cs of nationality.—( Hear, hear.) Against the justice, against the policy of such a system, he altogether protested. Iltstrie. tions were imposed by this country upon the col on i es; t h ey were prevented purchasing in the cheapest market ; and while those rescrietions were imposed upon their trade, we could not in justice place them in the . same positi on with regard to us as foreign countries. He did not say that the colonies should be treated in all respects as an integral p art o f t h e empire, although he did not see any objections whi c h f ore i gn f armers ' could make to our taking such a course ; b ut they might at least claim a preference over nations with whom our trade might at any time be interrupted by the cessation of peaceful relations, or by other causes. On the grounds of policy it was important to encou rage th at colon i al trade which was subject to no caprice, subject to no hostility, subject to none of the embarra ssments ar i s i ng out of the inevitable instability of our relations with countries over which we had nu control, and with whose condition we could never be per fectly acquainted. Let them look to the mere amount of our exports to the British North American colonies, and they could not fail to become sensible of the importance of that branch of our trade. The total amount of our exports to the British North American colonies was, in 1837, 3,844,000/. ; in 1838, it was 3,616,0001., making an average amount for these two years of 3,700,000/. The average amount of the imports into these colonies from foreign countries was, during three years, not more than 700,000/. That was the total amount of the imports which did not come directly from the mother country.—( Hear, hear.) The total amount of the imports of British North Ame rica, of the West Indies, and of Australia, taken together, was in the year 1837, no less than 10,261,0001. ; in 1838 it was 10,581,0001. ; and of this amount, in neither year, were there 2,000,000/. of these imports which did nut come directly from Great Britain, or from British colonies, and which were not • the produce of British industry and British manufactures.— ( Hear, hear.) Our returns f , om the same colonies amounted, in 1837, to 11,032,000/.. an , l ,n 1 , 38 t i 1 - ?054 OWL. ,hile i hi, trade was carried on, not ei:( u.tously, hte, directly, an! with mutual advantage to bot't parties. Let them pgriare their trad.. w ith their North Vneri an coloni .s, with their trade with their best foreign customers, the United States. He found, that in one year, tho amount of our exports to Canada, which contained a population of only 1,340,000 souls, was 2,629,0001., which gave an amount of 395. 2d. per head; while our exports to the United States, which contained a population of 17,000,000 souls, amounted to 7,235,0001., which gave an amount of only Ss. sd. per head. Under these circumstances, he called upon them not to deprive either Great Britain or the colonies of the advantage of the re lations now subsisting between them. He believed that by pursuing the policy of the Noble Lord they w , uld diminish the national strength, and sink this country into a second-rate power. - Mr. BARING said, notwithstanding the able declamation of the Noble Lord, the House could not have the slightest notion of the question before them.—( Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend pro t iosed to take the sense of the House, as to whether it was advisable to create new differential duties; his resolution did not touch any hf those at present existing; he asked no opinion upon them, all he asked was, whether they would abandon the old course they had hitherto pursued, and introduce new differential duties that did not now exist. The answer of the Noble Lord was a panegyric on the existing system, and yet he invoked them, in the name of all that was valuable, not to adhere to that old system, but to adopt a system of differential duties, now introduced for the first time. The speech of the Noble Lord was an admirable one against the whole tariff of the sh e Right Hen. Gentleman.—(Cneers. ) If ihe Noble Lord were not now a free trader, but remained what he was last Sear, his speech would de ve been one of the most powerful against any change in the existing system. Every argument he had used would tell with effect against the proposals of the Right. Hon. Gentleman. What were the differential duties that bound them to the colonies? They were 131 in number, and the Noble Lord invoked them, on eve..y commercial and political ground, not to touch them ; yet, of those 131 duties, under the new tariff, 98 were reduced, 4 were abolished, and 8 were increased, 4 from trifling, ands from temporary causes; twenty one only were left untouched. The cases of rum, sugar, and coffee, had been taken and stated against the late Government; but it was an extraordinary assertion to say that because they equalised the duties on them they were of a different opinion then than they held now. With respect to the two articles of rough rice and bees-wax, imported from the Coast of Africa, the differential duty was allowed by the late Government, on the belief that if they could raise a trade with that continent they would do more to abolish slavery than by any other means. With regard to timber, he would ask any one who knew anything at all of the trade in that article, what it was which regulated the price? The admission made by all must be, that the price of colonial timber was regulated by the quantity that came over for consumption. The colonists themselves recog nised that principle. So also in the case of spices ; the price was regulated by the price which the surplus bore in foreign markets. He found upon apples, pears, and medlars a diffe rential duty. It was necessary to bind the colonies in an indis soluble bond, by giving protection to those fruits ; and what was remarkable, if they dries the apple, if they dried the pear, if they dried the medlar, the principle ceased to be applied. There was a protecting duty upon meat—there was stone upon liquids. He was at a loss to understand upon what principle these differential duties were imposed ; dried apples were not protected, cider was net protected, but apples were. He really was at a loss to know upon what practical principle the imposition of these differential duties were base I.—(Cheers. ) Sir R. PEEL had hoped, until he had heard the speech of the Right Hen. Gentleman, that the object of the Noble Lord had been to save discussion in detail on the various articles of the tariff, and to take the discussion on the general principles of the tariff, so far as the case of differential duties was con cerned ; but he was afraid, from the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that they would have to go into details when the various articles came under the consideration of the Committee, and under those circumstances he could not but wonder that the Right Hon. Gentleman had not restrained his indignation at the article of medlars on the present occaasion.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Noble Lord must have given notice of his motion out of regard to the Right Hon. Gentleman, be cause if the Noble Lord had not brought forward this motion, the discussion must have been taken in Committee on the first article of the tariff; the discussion must have been taken on the colonial asses which had so excited the indignation of the Right Hon. Gentleman the other ev e nin g =( Cheers and laughter)—and had it not been for the motion of the Noble Lord, that would have been the pons asinorum of the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon. Gestleraan had given to the House an exposition of the port). sition of the Noble Lord. He (Sir R. Feel) besought the House to hear his (Sir R. Peel's) version of the principle con tained in the Noble Lord's motion, That principle was nei ther more nor less than this, that you should not in any case impose a different rate of duty upon the same articles when imported from foreign countries or from British possessions. The Noble Lord had laid down the abstract proposition that you should not in any case raise the duty on articles imported from foreign countries higher than the duty imposed on similar articles imported from British Colonies; the Noble Lord con tended that in every case, and under all circumstances, the colonies should be treated as foreign countries in all our com mercial relations. It had,•, however, been said by his Right Hon. Friend that Hon. Gentlemen opposite had not acted upon that principle when in office, and the Right Hon. Gentleman had admitted that there had been the slightest pos sible exception to the adoption of that course of policy with regard to bees-wax and rough rice, the produce of Africa, and the reason why differential duties had been established upon those articles was, according to the Right Honourable Gentleman, because it was thought it would confer a benefit upon the natives of Africa, by encouraging the trade, and inducing them to devote their attention to the pursuits of peaceful industry. But what became of the argument of the Noble Lord, that by establishing differential duties they were doing an injury to the colonies themselves ? (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord said, that by establishing dif ferential duties they were only disturbing the application of capital, and encouraging that which must prove a source of great future injury. If that argument were correct, where was the humanity of encouraging the growth of rough rice in Africa?—(Cheers.) That was the great principle which the Noble Lord had laid down, and upon that principle they were called on to. night to decide. If the principle of the Noble Lord were correct, there was an end at once of colonial con nections.—( Hear, hear.) The principle struck at the root of that connection. Was it right—was it just—to say to the co lonies, you shall import articles of British manufac ture on a more favoured footing than you did to the foreigner ? They were at this moment passing an Act to force the colonies to give the British manu facturers a preference, and would it, he would ask, be just to say to the colonies, we will force you to give more favourable terms to the manufacturers of Great Britain than the manti fact urers of foreign countries, but dr-at Britain will give your produce no preference whatever?—( Hear, hear.) That was the principle for which the Noble Lord contended.—( Signs of dissent from Lord Howick.) Would the Noble Lord then do away with the preference given to British manufactures in the colonies.--( Hear, hear, from Lord Howick.) If he would, he ( Sir R. P.) would ask why maintain the colonies at all ? ( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) The colonies were, ac cording to the Noble Lord, to have an unlimited right of buying in the cheapest market. They were to have a right of taking goods from the foreigner on more fevoured terms if they thought fit than goods from this country, and this country was to show no favour to colonial produce. If, for the purposes of revenue, they imposed a duty of 30 per cent. on articles the produce of Russia or France, according to the Noble Lord's principle they were to impose the same rate of duty upon articles the pro. duce cf our own colonies.—( Hear, bear, from Lord Howick.) Be it so ; but then he would ask why go to the expense of keeping the colonies ?—( Hear.) The Noble Lord had said, look at our trade with the United States. See how it had in creased since they had become independent; but then -he (Sir Robert Peel) would ask why retain the colonies ? ( Hear, hear.) If we were to derive no advantage in respect to commercial intercourse, if we were to derive no advantage for our shipping and navigation, if we were to have no exclusive privileges in the colonies, what possible rea son could there be for maintaining and supporting them, and why should we be at the at the expense of garrisons in Canada of 15,000 men? According to the Noble Lord's principle, co lonies should govern themselves, and ought at once to declare their independence. The Noble Lord said that air. Huskisson had advocated a similar principle ; but Me. Huskisson had pro posed in the case of Canada to admit Canadian corn into this country at a fixed duty of 55. If the Noble Lord's resolution had passtd, it would have been impossible for Mr. Huskisson to have made that proposition. Again, with regard to Mauri tius sugar; who had lowered the duty on Mauritius sugar 10 per cent. ? —Mr. Huskisson. He had done so in 1826 or 1827. If the Noble Lord's principle had been affirmed by the House, it would have been impossible for Mr. Huskisson to have equalised the duty on Mauritius and West India sugar.. But what said Mr. Huskisson with respect to the East Indies, when a complaint had been made that the United States had refused to our manufactures the same privileges which they had granted to the manufactures of other countries? Why, Mr. Huskisson had raid, when speaking of the measures to which this country might resort, if the United States persisted in the adoption of that course of policy, that we could soon be abundantly sup. plied with tob icco from the East Indies, if'we afforded encou ragement for the cu'tivation of it. How was that to be done, except by lowering the duty ? With regard to the rice of India, Mr. Huskisson had said that that would soon usurp the place which the rice imported from Carolina then held. With re ference to cotton, it was only necessary to give the cultivation the same encouragement and protection as the indigo trade obtained, to ensure the cultivation with equal success, nil u good and rateable an ar idle. The result would soon be that the cotton would rival that of the western world, as the indigo of India had excelled that of all other places, owing to the judicious encouragement of trade—the proection of the East India indigo trade by means of reduced duty. This was to have the effect of encouraging the culti vation of that article, and diminish its price to the consumer by transferring the trarle,to the colonies. This was what was Awed by Mr. fluskismm, and yet the Noble, Lord contended that Mr. Huskisson was the patron of this principle, that colo nial articles should in all cases be subject to the same duty as foreign article . He ( Sir H. Peel) thought this was entirely inconsistent with the fact. Let them take the case of India. They sent their cotton manufactures to India. They insisted on India receiving their goads. It India were to a tempt to get revenue by subjecting our articles of manufacture to a duty, they should take care effectually to prevent it. The Noble Lord ought to be prepared to subvert altogether the colonial interest. It was quite clear that if they insisted an the colonists being subject to a special duty for the purpose of increasing the maritime strength of this country—for the purpose of increasing the consumption of ourananufaetures in the colonies, they insisted upon their manufactures being introduced at lower rates than the manufactures of other countries, he (Sir R. Peel) put it to any rational man in that House, actuated by equitable princi ples, whether it would be just, concurrently with the main tenance of the dignity of the country, to contend that the (lobo- Hies should have no advantage. It appeared to him to be alto gether inconsistent and unjust. They told the colonies that they would maintain their connection with them. They had pledged themselves to the Canadas to maintain that connection. He should deeply regret if the House of Commons was pre pared for one or other of these things. Either to tell the Canadas that there would be no distinction for British manu factures, that they were at liberty to introduce foreign goods, the manufactures of other countries, upon terms equally advantageous with British goods ; or take that, other still more impolitic course, to say to them we insist upon introducing British goods, we insist cm de priving you of the discretion of carrying on an inter-course with foreign countries which exported manufactures, They would turn round and tell them, if your goods are to be introduced in this country, they must be introduce;( on the same footing as the fo reigner. It appeared to him (Sir R. Peel) that such a course would not enable them to maintain the connection between this country and the colonies. He could not answer 'to the ju.tice of 600 or 700 articles. It was impossible to make every discri. ininating duty just. If they took one article upon which a duty of 6d. was imposed, and took anoth upon wh ei 9d. was im posed, and required an explanation of the difference, he said at once that it was impossible to give that explanation. They must judge of it as a whole. They must consider the complicated re lations of the country, the immense extent of capital employed in trade, the immense extent of colonial empire, and the Clanger of rashly shaking the foundation of the connexion of that empire; and they must decide, as he thought they had un dertaken to decide, upon the whole, whether, its proposine these financial and commercial measures, looking to the pecu liar results which were admitted, they had d die all that a wise and prudent Government could do for the purpose of relieving the country. If that were the conclusion to which they Would come, if they believed that some vigorous effort was necessary for the pu-rse of relievinti the fillanees of th eirintry, and , for , e pori,c, of relit clog the s of in .ustry. he appea' a to thei j.t tiise to docide upoi-t rne,n, 171.3 a whole, ra'he. r , than sei nt nu e part, in respect of hick' would be difficult to give a satisfactory and conclusive proof of its propriety. He hoped that H u n. Uentleinen opposite, had stated that this measure, as a whole, was excellent, were still of that opinion, and that the House would decide upon the general principle included in the resolutiou of the Noble Lord. (Lord Howick made some observation across the table, which was inaudible in the gallery. ) This principle would be most injurious to the colonies, not speaking Per: sonally, but of the permanent interest of the whole people. Ihl princip,le of the Noble Lord was not to introduce colon ial articles on a more favourable footing than foreign. The Nobl e Lord wished to protect the interests' which had sprung all under the present system, but he wished to place the colonies on the same tooting as foreign nations. Whoa they sanction ed that principle, they ought to sanction the principle that eaeh . colony should declare its own independence and provide for itse!l Mr. VILLIERS would support the motion of the Nob° Lord, though he thought it was too limited. It did not go far enough towards the goal of free trade. Lord J. RUSSELL, amidst cries of " Divide," said tha t he only wished to make a few observations on what had fallen l from the Noble Lied, the Secretary for the Colonies, and th e Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, who, finding, he auPP' s thai, the motion of nis Noble Friend was in itself reasonabl e, had applied all their arguments to other propositions—to soln e proposition which was not before the House—some theory which they thought they could combat, but which had nothing t do with the proposition which the House was called ors consider. The Right Hon. Baronet proposed new different' al duties on 200 articles, with regard to which his Noble Fria"' said that in themselves they were obviously a loss to the venue, while they conferred no gain on the consumer. —Olga'' hear.) Why then, asked his Noble Friend, should those be imposed ? And what was the answer ? The answer was, it via l not right to treat the colonies as foreign countries. But that an y swer had no relatiiin whatever to the question before the 11 01.14 ' d —( Hear.) That was a question of abstract theory, and ha nothing to do with the matter now under consideration''' . ( Hear.) One would have thought that the Right Hon. Ge n ' tleman, having devoted the greater part of the recess to the e ° , 11 ,." sideration of this subject, would hav e b een p re p are d to state'w ° reasons for introducing each ot those articles ; but having ecre fused to state his reasons for each arti he at least expec t to hear some reasons for their introduction generally ; but had not heard a single reason from the Noble Lord, or any) , i o f the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite, for th e introduction those new articles.—( Hear.) He had heard much of C 0: lonial dependency, and much of the utility of keeping u ! the intercourse between this co un t ry an d t h e c olonte tt ; hut that was totally beside the question.—( Hear, hear,) could agree to a statement ot that kind, and yet vote for the i proposition of his Noble Friend, as he s h ou ld d o ; t h e wh01e,.°, 4 the principles laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman night were totally opposed to those h e p ropoun d e d th e oth:i evening, when he said that great advant age wou ld b e dell 4 by the people of this country if the duties w er e l ow ered, a.. 11 if they were to have articles of consumption at a c h ea per To"; —( Hear, hear.) He hoped when they name to the tariff tb e ' would not be satisfied with dealing' on liberal principles WI the smaller articles, but would act in the same ma ri ner wi t i a regard to those great articles of consumption, which Wt . confer real and substantial benefit on the people of this count''' . The House then divided, when there appeared— For Lord How ick's motion ... 108 Against it Majority against the motion ...... --173 On our re-admission to th e ga ll er y we found the Houle : '- Committee, and Mr. S. O'BRIEN on his legs, objecting e to the House P r : ceeding further that night. H e s h ou ld move t h at t h e GM"' man repo. t progress, and ask leave to sit again. Sir R. PEEL had no objection to the course proposed, Pr': vided the House would allow hi m t o procee d w i t h t h e tar iff e'" the Monday after the recess, and on the Wednesday, Tho rr day, and Friday in that week.—( Hear, hear.) This suggestion being agreed to, the Right Hon. Bar° l l stated it was his intention to proceed w ith the Army and Or nance estimates on Friday next. The House then resumed, the Chairman reported peogrelf' and asked leave to sit again on Monday week. 'f he other Orders of the day were then disposed of, and tile House adjourned at a Quarter to One o'Clock. LOAN BILL. The following is a copy of the Loan Bill, as pas ° by the Congress of the United States : " A Bill for the extension of the Loan of 1841, and an addition of 5,000,000 dollars thereto. 4 "Be it enacted, &c., That the time limit e d by t h e first section of the Act of Congress, entitled P -e f authorising a loan not exceeding the sum , 12,000,000 dollars,' approved July 21, 1841, "' obtaining said loan, shall be, and the sa me i s , hereby extended for one year, from the passage of this Ae t ' " See. 2. And be it further enacted, that so mus h of the said loan as may be obtained after the pasself of this Act shall be m a d e re i m b ursa bl e, as shall,"- agreed upon and d e t erm i ne d a t th e ti me o f i,€stil said stock, either, at th e w ill o f th e S ecre t ary of t. $ Treasury, after six months' notice, or at any time 11 P exceeding 20 years f rom th e Ist day of January Det " Sec. 3. And be it f ur th er enacte d , t h at the eerfa ficates hereafter to be issu e d f or sa id l oan may, required, be in such form as shall be prescribed by t tio ' r Secretary of the Treasury, so that the stock nusf transferable by delivery of the certificate, insteatt e being assignable on the books of the Treasury. " Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, that the PO . viso to the second section of the said Act is hereby repealed; and the Secretary of the Treasury is i. heruoeba+ 1 authorised to cause the stock h e re a ft er to be iss e ,enti to be disposed o f a t th e hi g h es t price Ahiel: obtain for the sa me , on i ts b e i ng advertised hall able time for prop osa l s ; b ut no stock whatever s of, be sold below par, except upon, and iii.pursne nce a specific advertiseMent, and by virtue thereof. " Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, th;it the Inone3l: arising from duties on goods, wares, and inerchandOt which may be imported into the United States, or of much thereof as shall be equal to the payment, fro! , time to time, of the interest, a nd t o the ultimate demption of the principal of the stock hereafter to tw a . issued under and by virtue of this Act and the sa l Act of July 21, 1841, hereby amended, and so nu l _.„, thereof as may be necessary to pay the interest .01 said stock, and redeem the same when due, appropriated to that object, to be first applied by "L . Secretary of the Treasury to such payments and I*-- demption. h e " Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, that it shall to the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to report Congress, at the commencement of the session, 11 0 amount of ' money borrowed under this Act and t o Act hereby amended, and of whom and upon W h o , terms it shall have been obtained, with an abstract is heren,i, brief statement of all the proposals submitted for th same, distinguishing between those accepted and th 7( rejected; and a detailed statement of the expens e • making such loans. , 4. 10 " Sec. 7. And be it further enact e d, that ahi.or. provisions of the said A c t, no t h ere b y modifiei" changed, shall be and remain in force, and apailf this Act. " Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, that the Pls h ie: dent of the United States is hereby authorised] borrow an additional sum, not exceeding the sum b t 5,000,000 dollars, if, in his opinion, the exigenciesco;, the Government may require the same ; which sc l .. j;, tional loan shall be made within the time and aceT, ing to the provisions of said Act, as modified by ti w c ; ,. , " Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, that all T re- ot sury notes heretofore issued under the Act entiti..o An Act to authorise the issuing of Treasury nor fi 7i approved the 12th day of October, 1837, and the subsequent thereto, and now outstanding and ne i t ; 4 l' deemed, or which may hereafter be issued under 0 ,, by virtue of the same, shall, if due and unpaid bef o to ' the sth day of March , 1842, bear interest at the of 6 per cent. per annum, from that day ; and they may become due hereafter, or may - have bee°;i, due since the said sth day of March, 1842, 511 6 1; bear interest from the day of their becoming- duep': the rate of 6 per cent. per annum, until they be respectively redeemed. Provided, that such terest cease at the expiration of 60 days' notl e ';', to be givEn at any time by the Secretary of the Tr eii ,.; . i sury, in one or more of the principal papers po : , lished at the seat of Government, of a readiness to ,deem the same. And the said interest shall be plt able semi-annually at the Treasury of the Uni l f i States, on the first days of January and July in er e ' ,r. year." MONEY MARKET and CITY NE SUN.—A degree of flatness has pervaded the English Al 0. and the prices of Cons o l s f or 111nnev are not quit e s ) goo d sel. lett off yesterday, being 923 g 92%, and 921- 9 4 % for the 41' count. Bank Stock, 1674 164 ; India Stock, 219 , Exchequer Bills, 39 41 prem. Cl r The prices of F ore i gn S ecur i t i es were—Belgian 1011 O I r Dutch Two-arid-a-Half pe r Cents., 52 1 / 2 53 3 • t he }lye . r Cents., 1004 1014 ; D an i s h , 804 814; and Bra zilian, 67 6 . 13. 0 e, A considerable busine-s was transacted in Mexica%o quotation f or w hi c h h as b een raised to 37,4,374 ; but as all , t "e i r - have been for time, th ey must b e l oo k e d upon as merely 5 11 0 .0„.: . lative. Th ere i s j ust as muc h reason for the rise now am' : 4 00 , ) was for the late d ec li ne , th a t i s to say, none w h ich c a n b e te trd legitimate, but only attributable to gambling operat:on s, result of which should be a suffici en t warning to avoid 1 1, e / 13 0: - . London and Birmingham Railway Shares were 0 6 / 0/4 Birmingham and Gloucester, 53 55; Great Westerns . ath 934 ; the Half Shares, 64 64/ ; South Western, 6:34Z; f el Gosport, 634 644 ; North Midland. 65 67 ; the Neff 324 South Eastern and Dover, 294 30 ; the Scrip , 7 z - 1 0f. Eastern Counties, 9A 9a ; Blackwall, 113 llg ; 'the Shares, 9,t 94 ; Brighton, 363 36d per Share. The Bonds of the insolvent States w ere thus, q uot 5/ 4; . Colombian, 26 26* ; Portuguese Five per Cen'a, 33 0 the Three per Cents., 224 23; Spanish Five pur Cents , 22f, and the Three per Cents. 224 23. ;Ate r ' The Foreign'Exchanges are all firm, and a s h a de b•...ber The bills negotiated on H am b urg h were l arge b ot h i n n om and amount. The qu o tati ons were—Haraburgh, 1 0 '44), 12 134 ; Antwerp, 12 44 12.44 ; Rotterdam, 12 44 iti o sr Amsterdam, 12 44 12 ; Frankfort, 1513 1514 ; V ie 9 524 9 53, and Paris, 25f. 80c. to 25f. 824 c. ; bOi There were no foreign arrivals or particular feature .P.,ure nen beyond being the dullest day which has be en e x pa l " for some time. _ • ter*'' The Earl of Auckland, accompanied by 'nis 91° iKi”; the Hon. Slit es Eden, and his nephew and Aid- Hon. Capt. W. Godolphin Osborne, is expecte , to arr.,' town the first week in the ensuing month, from.the late 7 7 „tlirpf . ', his Government at Calcutta. His Lordship went . oo 4 " - ' spring of 1835. " !Fo.,R o .. n ,Es th q, e .;o lo osf ih f,ij i n n a st. c , r a a t w C fo h r a d rlt ono ,: ge: Leicester, y 3 ( l )u A n ß ge n st i s ß o Peter fjslr";" Caflin, daughter of +~ Esq., of Woolwich-con.my in. 10 i On the 12th inst., at St. John's, Oxfc.rd.squarc' Flom age Esq., of Bryanston.street, Porttnati- s4 u— p,Y Elizabeth Anne, young est daughter oißobert Warreu,: formerly Captain in the 4th Dragoon Guards. '.ortb n : Printed .ant Published RD I Y (. 15 1 e a • 12, Stran.:. ':'he So, Office, No 112, ‘ , 5- " fa the County of Middlesex, Saturday, May 14, 54 ~ - r