The Sun. — London, England, 1849-02-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 14. INSOLVENT MEMBERS' BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. GOULBURN was not prepared to offer any oppo sition to the second reading of the Bill, but there were many points involved in it which he considered required the serious consideration of the House. The Hon. Member who had introduced the 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 i n troduced, he thought they ought to have had some reason why the alterations had been made. The Honourable Gentleman did not intend to apply the principles of it to the House of Peers as well as to the House of Commons, but he found when a principle of this kind was adopted, the forms of the House uniformly applied it to all persons in Parliament. The privileges of Parliament were much more extended than at present; and at one time the M em b er s of both Houses o f Parliament had the privilege of not being sued in any Court of law, b u t it was thought advisable to introduce a Bill to alter the law in that respect, and the provisions of it a pplied equally to both branches of the Legislature. 'The mesne 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 politic al engine to prevent the carrying of certain measures. The mesne process had, however, been materially di minished, and arrest was now limited to cases where a judgment had been obtained against a debtor. The present Bill proposed to deal with a very limited class of cases, but he thought it gave an opportunity to creditors of Members of Parlia ment, who might have a strong political object in view, to resort to imprisonment with a view to obtain their end. Such a course might tend to discredit the eharacter of a Member, and might prevent him, at a moment of importance, rendering a service to his country.—(Hear, hear.) There had been cases, when party spirit ran high, of a party bring rendered useless as a representative, and unable to perform his duty. Those were considerations which ought not to be omitted when the details of the Bill were taken into consideration by the House. The Bill involved a question of Parliamentary privileges, over which they themselves had absolute power, and without the interference of the other branch of the Legislature. They would find a number of instances in the journals of the House, in which Members had been arrested upon judgments pronounced against them, sometimes been discharged, and sometimes permitted to remain in con finement. He thought it would be much better to deal with the question rather by a resolution of the House than by an Act of Parliament, because, if they passed an Act, and found afterwards that it interfered with the proper discharge of the duties which Members owed to their 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. Mr. 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 tho 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 thahey were not at all analagous. A. trader who, from nforeseen 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. Bet the insolvent man who was involved in debt could not get clear, although his property could 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 bo lost sight of, that it did notinvolve 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 e!octed who wero nut properly qualified. The Bill was then toad a second time. On the motion that the Bill be comMitted, Mr. GREENE suggested that the whole subject con• tained in the Bill should be referred to a Select Cone mittee, who eliould 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 W ART hoped his Hon. Friend would postpone the Bid for a fortnight, and that he would afterwards proceed with it until it was passed into a 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. SIOFFAT I' 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, eince every Member must have had sufficient practical e.xperience of the necessity or not of the measure. The Committee on the Bill was then deferred for a fortnight. THE NAVIGATION-LAWS. On the motion of Mr. LABOUCIIERE 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 number of merchants. Mr. WAWN and Mr. HAWEC 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 aro3e 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.—(llear, 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.—(blear, hear.) The question he had risen to ask was, whether the measure recommended from the Throne by her Majesty, and to-day to be introduced by the Hon. Member (Mr. Laboueleere),uld have th e support of the Hon. and Learned Member? Lord J. RUSSELL would answer the question of rho Right Hon. Gentleman by a statement of the facts as they had occurred. The Hon. and Learned Gentle man, now the President of the Poor-law Commission, was offered by him, in the na me of her Majesty, the office he now held. lie replied that he had rt , o objec tion to accept the o ffice, hut tnat he • feared his opposition to the G ov ernment with re speet to the navigation-laws would present an insuperable objection, since he had voted against the Ministers.—(H ear , 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 similar course with respect to some of their members. For instance,! there wasl 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 Lonadale 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 for the repeal of the navigation laws.—(Hear.) . The SPEAKER having l e ft t h e chair, and it having been taken by Mr. BERNAL, M r . LABOUCIIERE pr e o v c o e l e ve d d ed u t p o on say him that of t h e duty had again devolved calling t h e attention of the nett se o r the l aws which regulated the na v i gat i on this country, a nd he rejoiced that he was e na bl ed to do so at B O early a period of the s e ssi on , when the House would have an am ple opportunity of discussin g those important que stions, 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 apt lead to any procUcal couolusiwa, yet he trusted that the time which was then devoted to the question was not altogether thrown away or lost. He 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 threshold of this question, without passing over the ground they had traversed, and that they should be prepared, without protracted preliminary discussion, to advance at once: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 had, 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 underrate. It would indeed be most satisfactory to discuss and decide upon the question after the inhabitants of the most distant parts of the empire had had an opportunity of expressing their opinion and forming a judgment upon it. Under these circumstances, he should compress what he had to say into the briefest limits 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, ho 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—in 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 monopoly of our colonial trade; next to secure to this country the " long -voyage trade;" and the third was that principle which endeavoured to secure to this country the possession of that indirect European trade. With respect to the colonial, he might not inappropriately repeat now what he stated last year, that it did appear to him that that policy which the House had adopted with regard to depriving the colonies of protection—(Hear, hear)—of protection in the markets of this country—be that policy right 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 protec 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 I so much reason to complain ; but at the present time it would be an intolerable injustice to maintain these restrictions upon their colonial trade—restrictions which be had 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 them to accede to it. The interval that had elapsed 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 enormous 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. Ono docu ment had been furnished to Lord Elgin by two persons of high respectability 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 s 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 losers. In a gain in which all would lose sum , ,thing, we should assuredly lose the most.—(Llear, hear.) Foreign nations were altogether agreed, that if we mount to keep this carrying trade to ourselves they would re taliate upon us. During the last session of Parliament he 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 ?; Ho 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 cur carrying trade as we did upon hers? (Hear, hear.) At this moment an 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 thin.gs to con tinue?—(Hear, hear.) But what had Russia done? In 1845,tw0 years after the signing of this treaty,the Emperor of Russia publs,hed 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—(Rear)— 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 had stated, the three main principles on which our system of navigation laws was founded ; and he proposed in the COW:I3C 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 maybe for English interests that they should be so re-enacted. He 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, ho 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 con c l us i on t h at, o f a ll t h e tra d es i n t h e wor ld, there was nothing in w hi c h we cou ld more suc cessfully compete with foreign nations than that of ship-building. — (Hear.) To compare this country with the United States of Amer - ea, what did he find? He found that all the main articles of iron, copper, sail-cloth, and many others, were immea H su e rab f ly cheaper in En gland than in A mer i ca. to cordage we h a d America in that respct ; w i t h regard on to advantaged with regard the timber we were over on an equality; with regard t o l a b our we werealso same n 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 combina• tion, by giving to the employer tho 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 gi ve hi s ev id ence b e f ore t h e H ouse o f L or d s in a respectmor ef r a n t k e , candid,thoseduties and h h o truthful tm ma e n r n i e o r . r a i l- s l i ng h He t said, o with price of ship-building in England, " the amount of timber duty pa yable trifling—it was bu, upon foreign timber is 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 was must 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 he 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 lie 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 connexion with her Majesty's Government, carefully considered the objections made to this Bill, with the earnest desire to adopt any suggestion which ap peared to them to be an improvement in the scheme which he had originally propounded. With respect to the coasting trade of this country the Right lion. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford stated, by way of objection, that by diminish ing, or continuing unimpaired, the restrictions on that trade; we were placing ourselves at great dis 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 our 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 argument. He certainly thought if we bad made no change in our coasting trade we could have no claim in equity or justice to ask the United States to admit our ships to their coasting trade. Nevertheless he had thought it better to consider this part of the sub ject with a view to see whether he could not meet the difficulties he felt at the time to opening the coasting trade, allay the alarm that had been felt among the seafaring population of this country, and also the danger that was anticipated to the revenue by allowing foreigners toparticipate in the coasting trade of this country. After maturely considering the question he had 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. Ho 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 he 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 bound for abroad. He thought it desirable that such facility should be given to the coasting trade of the country. 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 tho 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) had 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 convinced that it would abolish us-less restrictions, recruit the maritime strength of the country, and tend to its security, he had no hesitation in bringing the measure forward, and ho 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 not to delay the question shich was now brought forward for their consideration.—(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 ho 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 he had promised to allude but which he had inadvertently forgotten. One was with respect to the light dues; on that subject he intended 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. Ti ere was no question, in his opinion, connected with the mercantile marine of the country more 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 had met with in that House was not such as to induce him to persevere in that Bill, but ho 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 tho 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 me 4sure which would put an end to the objections that had been taken on that subject.—(Hear, 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 in the last session that this question should be so placed, that during the present session, they should begin the discussion whore 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 they had pursued in refusing information to Members while it was given to other parties.—(lfear, hear.) He was in hopes, from all he had heard, that the Right Honourable Gentleman would have been ready to tako 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 supposititious ad vantage—for it should be remembered that this measure had not respect to America alone, but to every country 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 other 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, should we, on any ground of gratitude, give you these reciprocal advantages? We may be un fortunate in not taking your view 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 coloni s t s wou ld b e induced to employ Britgh shipping in preference to that of America or any other country ? None at all. of our ur isla own ndg, islands— theyandh had destroyed d a By the very principle which they had adopted they had made t he slave- g rown su g ar equal, in respect of privilege,the tratotde that t of actually consigned them to absolute ruin. —(Hear, h ear .) Then as to Canada, what had been done there?—[M r . Labouchere interposed the remark, that . what had been done wa Lord sun Elgin'sder the advice adovpicienioofnLtoordbeE Elgin.] Lord weighed against Elgin! the and was opinion of the whole of the Canadian population, and nattat the force of the principle of the heYigAtion• THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING- 9 FEBRUARY 15 1 1849.7 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 co mmerc i a l concern. This was a great mistake.—(Hear, hear.) It was a matter f la he might say, of vitally national in This question was to be decided uponter Large the ( national,afundamentaler, h nay, ear.) principle of the navigation-laws; o t —H that principle was the protection of the national mercan tile marine—(llear, hear)—and he s hould contend that by the full exercise of that principl e 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 Washington, 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 he had given to Congress. (The Right Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from one of the General's Messages to Congress, in which ho 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 thick 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. H . o was not prepared to concede the exclusive privilege which we now possessed of naviga'ion to our colonies to foreigners. He:came 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 tor a place of deposit for commodities from all countries as England. With respect to the commerce of Europe, the case was cer tainly more easy, and notwithstanding what bad been said on the subject he still thought that the principle of reciprocity was not only more applicable, but was capa ble of enlargement. He had hit upon a passage which was applicable to the present question from Huskisson, and in alluding to it he could not refrain from saying that it would have been well if those who sometimes pro fessed to have so much respect for that authority had advocated and abided by his policy.—(Hear.) Mr. Huskisson said he could not, in alluding to the United States its a British House of Commons, think it was improper to say that in matters of navigation and mari time power there existed a spirit of rivalry—a spirit of which he did not complain, but he doubted the wisdom of any measure that was calculated to give any advantage to the commercial resources of America. lie (Mr. Herries) would ask the House if a capitalist would employ an English ship when a foreign vessel would answer all his purposes at a cheaper rate ? It was for the defence of this country and the mainte nance of that without which it would cease to be what it was, that protection had been afforded to our navy. He could not but regret that, in collecting evidence upon the subject of the navigation-laws, there had been an evident desire to disparage the character of British seamen.—(Hear, hear.) It was said they were the worst seamen and the most difficult to manage, but three parts of the assertions which were made were wholly without foundation.— (Hear, hear.) One of her Majesty's consuls had stated that the effect of a repeal of these laws would be to in crease the investment of British capital in foreign vessels, and thus lead to diminish the employ ment of shipwrights, rope makers, chain and anchor makers, and every body of mechanics whose occupation depended upon the construction and building of vessels. There could be no doubt that if this Bill passed the capital of British shipowners would be transferred to other countries.—(Bear, hear.) He had confined himself to the principles of the Bill, not being desirous at present to enter into the details, but could not allow the opportunity to pass without declaring that the weal or woe of our mercan tile navy depended upon the decision which the House might come to upon it. The Hon. Genleman concluded by stating that be was compelled upon the grounds stated to give to the proposition his determined and most strenuous opposition.—(Cheers.) Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND said there was a great deal of misapprehension out of doors as to the real na ture and object of the measure, and possibly that mis apprehension might be shared in by Honour able Members. To translate, however, official jargon into plain honest English, he would simply say that this was the last of a series of measures of the Manchester school, the end and intention of which was to discharge all British labour and employ for the future foreign labour.—(Loud cheers.) They were to have foreign timber for English timber, foreign shipwrights instead of English ones, and he might go through the whole catalogue of labour, and say the same of each kind; and for what was all this done but fur the advan tage of mercantile men, and for the alvantage of Man chester cotton spinners.—(Cheers.) It should not b. his fault if the country did not understand the true meaning of the question from one end of it to the other. He considered it was merely a question of trade and com merce connected with our marine, and it essentially and much more clearly effected the condition of labourers than any other question could do. Mr. HUME said be had heard many statements in that House with respect to the navigation-laws, but what had fallen from the Hon. Member who had just sat down had surprised him beyond measure. He undertook to say that it was the last of a series of mea sures brought in by the Manchester school, and that they all tended to the injury of labouring men. But how could that be reconciled with the assertion of those who said that the food of labouring men had been reduced by the navigation-laws?—(Hear, hear.) What was more important than that the labouring classes should be able to get food of all kinds, and at a mode rate price?—(Hear, hear.) An Hoes. MEIVBER—But the question of wages.— (Laughter and cheers.) Mr. HUME—WeII, he would come to the question of wages. He had certain'y heard within these lust few days, and it was with great regret, that in the south of England the wages of labourers had been reduced from 93. to Bs. and 7s.—(Hear, hear.) But what was it that increased wages but increased employment?— (Hear, hear.) And the way to effect that object was to bring the greatest amount possible of trade and commerce to this country.—(gear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Herries) had stated that no place was so well calculated for a depot for the trade of the world as England, but what had kept it from being so but those laws?—(Hear, hear.) If they wanted any preof, let them take the assertion of that Hon. Gentleman, when he said that the capital of the country was so restrained by the navigation-laws that we were obliged to employ English capital almost in every part of the world.—(Hear, hear.) What was wanted was, that the Engli s h s hipo wne r sho u ld be permitted to carry. his goods in E ng li s h as well as foreign ships. The t acts stated by th e H on . Member for Stamford (Mr.lHerries) had been repeated over and over again, if they bad not been repeated by himself, which he (Mr. Hume) believed they had. This country had too long been a sufferer by these laws, as well as all other mono polies. But if they had been repealed the Amerie in navy would not have been one-half its present extent. Ho considered that their repeal would relieve and pro fitably employ ca pital, andelemand, as a natura l conse quence, the increased employment of the people.— (Hear, hear.) France was no argument in fa vour of the continuation of these laws, since if she did not alter her policy she would lose the little navy that she had. France was a beacon held out to us as a guide. There was nothing in our mer chants or shipwrights that would prevent them from freely competing with the whole world if these laws were removed from the statute-book. Ho denied the calumny cast upon his countrymen, that they were not competent to compete in the way he had mentioned. They had been informed, through Mr. It =rat, that America would reciprocate any course that this country might adopt with respect to these laws. An Honourable Member had said America had not repealed _ her navigation-laws. She had not, because this country had not done so. Then the course of misgovernment that had been pursued to wards the colonies had ruined thousands; it was due, there fore, to them to repeal those laws; and he thanked the Government for coming forwa rd with this Bill at an early instead of a later period of the session, and trusted they would day by day push it on in order that it might become law with the least possible delay. The abolition of the lighthouse system he hoped would follow in their wake.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BANKES asked the Hon. Member for Montrose this question—how were the labourers of this country to obtain food, even at its low price, if they had no wages wherewith to buy it ?-7(Protectionist cheers.) The labourers of America were intelligent, but those of this country were just the reverse ; and yet these were the men whom he wished to supersede by superior co:npetition, the incompetent labourers of this country. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Surrey (Mr. Drummond) that this measure was the " last of a series" which had been direct ed against the la bouring classes ; for ho know of no other injury they could inflict upon them- lle advised the co lonies to wait, since public opinion bad set in against the free-trade policy; the time was not far distant when he confidently believed the House] would retrace its steps. He challenged any. Members connected with the manufacturing districts to rise and say that the trader was satisfied vvith;;the free-trade measures. Nay, he would go further, and ask the Irish nion that formerly prevailed with respect to free trade in Ireland was the same now? Colonel THOMPSON said, when two sides declared two opposite opinions, and each with the strong beli e f that they were enunciating the truth, it often happen e d that there was something which had not up to that time found its way into the arena of discussion. In simple words, those on his side of the House maintained that protection, prom whatever side of the House it came, meant paying away one shil ling and ge t t i ng sixpennyworth in return. The free traders had some credit in the country because they had well indoctrinated the people with the truth of their policy, Rua it would take some force of argument to policystthatconvincehp eeyspeaking, ki Hnogro mightut crhsooeemb,mb::: robbing commercial oacoti definedta hag. advised vrvwi peoplensi wisdom. dnd o l m s t . hh. te f so o p seao6pyndl Protection fy . r w t ooi a ft s s tamaewki maintenance, ei h sne, e tm r ae nb soundstrictlyaew nr icf e oef: " Whose wife shall I take?"—(Loud laughter.) The free-traders were charged with encouraging foreign labour at the expense of the B r iti s h l a b ourer . He de nied it. He for one would never support the measure if he thought it would diminish the work of the English labourer.—(Opposition cheers.) He hoped Honour able Gentlemen on the other side would not go away with the conviction that free trade was calculated to diminish the work of the English labourer. It was a delusion and mistake; but if they thought so they forget the fact that if they increased English labour in one direction they diminished it in another.—(Rear.) But if the Protectionists grounded their opposition upon that principle the much maligned free-traders were quite ready to meet them upon it. But it was urged as a necessity for keeping up the navigation-laws that they served to defend the country against the foreigner. But that was a principle not worth maintaining. It was hardly worth while to give a shilling for only sixpence in return, and that was what they really did in keeping up navigation-laws for the purpose of securing an efficient service for the navy. If Hon. Gentlemen opposite would close with the free-traders on that point, the ground of debate would be con siderably diminished. He admitted the importance of maintaining an efficient naval service, but the navy was not manned entirely from the mercantile service. That was not everything to be con considered in manning the navy. The manning of the navy depended more upon the wealth of the country ; and if they persisted in giving a shilling for sixpence the country would soon be su impoverished as to be unable to meet the expenditure which was always necessary for car rying out any great naval or military operations. He would conclude by craving of the protectionists not to be so ready, with their attacks upon the free-traders for at tending public meetings. Honourable Gentlemen, who advocoted Protectionist principles, could attend meetings, too, if they liked ; but this he was confident they could not do, they could not get (the support of the majority of the people like the free-trader, which no doubt was the real cause of their being so much annoyed at the holding of these free-trade meetings.— (Hear.) Mr. HILDYARD did not rise to advocate the policy of paying is. to gain 6d., nor did ho intend to go into the details of this question, but he rose simply to correct a misapprehension into which the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose had fallen. The Hon. Gentleman commented with great triumph upon an extract which his Right Hon. Friend, the Mena ber for Stamford, read from a consul's communication, in which it was stated that a good deal of English capital had been embarked in foreign shipping. The Hon. Gentleman the) Member for Montrose attributed that to the existence of these absurd navigation-laws. Now, what was the extract which his Right Honorable Friend read to the Hope ? It did not state that British capital was embarked generally in foreign shipping, but it was embarked largely in foreign shipping of a country where recipro city treaties existed, that was to say, that in those coun tries where they had relaxed the navigation-laws, the consequence which the Protectionists said was likely to result had already resulted to a great extent, and still the Honourable Member for Montrose gets up and says, it is all the consequence of the navigation-laws. The Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down asked them to explain how it was that they supported these laws. He could/not tell him. It was a remarkable fact, that in all countries where reciprocity existed British shipping had de clined ; and how was it so ? Why, simply because there the British shipowner could not compete with the foreigners, and he sought a more profitable occupation for bis vessels elsewhere. Now that was precisely the reason why he opposed these resolutions. Pass them and they would at once shut out the British trader from ports and seas where the foreigner had a greater advantage.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. RICARDO believed it was understood at the commencement of the debate that these resolutions were to pass without a division, and the discussion was to be reserved for the second reading. Under these cir cumstances he would abstain from entering into the details of the question then, but he could not help rising to say, that from all he had heard from Honour able Gentlemen opposite he could not collect what prin ciple they were going upon in opposing this measure.— (Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman the Member for Stamford had already declared if they ob tained reciprocal concessions from foreign coun tries he would have no objection whatever to the measure. The Right Hon. Gentleman declared that if the coasting trade of this country could be re laxed, he, at least, would not object to it, if the United States did the same. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Westmoreland, upon the last occasion when this question was debated, declared himself in fa vour of some relaxation in favour of what was called the long voyage, and the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Sunderland bad declared that he was quite willing that the crews of ,British ships should be com posed of the sailors of any country. Now, with all these relaxations, what became of the fundamental principle of the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite? If it meant anything it meant this, "so long as you make conditions, by which foreign ships and foreign sailors are enabled to sail upon equal, and no better, terms than the British ship, I don't care what becomes of the navigation-laws." It meant that certainly, and I hence the fundamental principle fell to the ground.— : (Hear, hear.) Well, then, it was admitting that the the navigation-laws were the bane of commerce ; but then it was staid, if you relax them you destroy the royal navy, and the service would be less able to defend the country against the foreigner. That argument came with au ill grace from the ship owners, who were constantly complaining of the system of apprenticeship and of the light dues. But if the protectionists rested their opposition upon that ground, he must be allowed to say that the navigation laws afforded too mush or too little restric tion. The nary, it was admitted, was in a less efficient state now than it had ever been before, and, therefore, the navigation-laws did not pre serve the navy, or they did not sufficiently restrict the shipping trade to secure such preservation. But he would not detain the House by going into de tails. He must say, however, that it would be much better for them if, instead of resting contented with an inferior navy, and endeavouring to bring down other countries to their level, to make an effort to raise the position of their own country by removing the restrictions which pressed so heavily upon she shipping icterest. It was much better to depend upon the energies of Englishmen in a time of trial, than to wait till the foreigner went with them before they ' made an effort to extend the trade and commerce of their own country.—(Hear, hear.) Alderman THOMPSON said, agreeably to the un derstanding to which the Hon. Gentlemen who had just sat down had referred, he should confine himself now to only one or two passing observations. The Hon. Gentleman had asked the opponents of this measure what it was they wanted. He would tell the Hon. Gentleman what it was in a few words. To 1130 a commercial phrase, they wanted a valuable consideration for the advantage they were going to surrender to the fo reigner. In fact, they wanted a reciprocal concession made to them by all those nations in whose ' favour they relaxed those laws. (Hear, hear.) As his Right Hon. Friend the Member for Stamford (Mr. Herries) ha I clearly proved, this measure could only be productive of advantage to other countries and be of none at all to this. Then if they looked at tho conduct of Spain and Sicily with respect to their own colonies, they would see that the measure of protection was precisely that afforded in the mother country. Two ships were waiting for a lading in a Spanish colony, and the Spanish ship readily ob tained a full cargo et the rate of 51. per ton, while a fine English ship then lying alongside could obtain no freightage whatever, although the master only asked 255. , a ton, and this was owing to the fact that the dues pay able by the latter ship were so heavy that it was better to export in the Spanish than in the British ship. Then, • with regard to coal, of which a great quantity is seat to • France, and upon which a very heavy duty was imposed in French ports, we made such a difference in favour of French vessels abroad, that coal absolutely taken l to a British possession, Malta, was obliged te • be imported in French bottoms to gain a cheap ad mittance for the use of our own steamers. Much in- quirt' had been made by the Committee into the respective duties levied upon ships trading to Montreal and New York, and the amount of expense for internal conveyance between the two places; and such was the extent of that difference, that it was found better to import at New York, and carry the goods internally through the States than go direct to Montreal. And the same thing held with regard to that great depot Bermuda. The Hon. Gentleman then read a private communication from Mr. Wigram, whose eminence as a ship builder was well known, to show that the duty paid upon oak timber in British ports, when prepared for ship building, was such that although that kind of timber was actually dearer in itself at New York than in England, the duties were such that the whole of the benefit for ship-building purposes was thrown into the hands of the American builder. After all, he then continued, this was no more the shipbuilders' or shipowners' question. It was a great national question. and he would cite the evidence of the most eminent authorities in the navy to show the evil effect which would certainly ensue if protection were to be done away with. He then proceeded to read extracts in support of his position from the evidence of the Admiral of the Fleet, Sir Byam Martin, Sir James Stirling, and other officers, and concluded by saying that, on these several grounds, he should oppose to the utmost the doing away with the protection to the ship ping interest. Mr. MITCHELL said there had been two such gross fallacies broached on the Opposition side of the House, that he could not help noticing them, espe cially as they had been endorsed by the Hon. Alderman opposite. The first of these fallacies was the over sight altogether of the advantages which accrued to the consumer from the reduction of the duties. It had been alleged that by the reduction of these duties a difference of 25 per cent. had been made in the cost of mercantile goods. Now this difference, he contended, was a profit of itself which went altogether into the pockets of the consumers. But there was a further advan.age which never seemed to have struck those Hon. Gentlemen but yet it was evi dent from what had recently taken place that the reduc tion acted very advantageously also in an indirect manner. On a late'occasion it was shown, that in conse quence of this reduction there had been in one particular article a glut of the goods in the market, and the price had fallen immediately fully twenty per cent., that was another gain to the consumer. If Belgium had been so protected as it was represented, and that protection was beneficial, how did it happen that nearly the whole - of the coasting trade of that country was actually carried on in British bottoms. There might be a difference in favour of Spanish and French vessels, but still he would contend that it was so trifling on the whole trade as to be utterly useless in making the calculation of pro• portionate benefit.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Op position.) If Hon. Gentlemen questioned the statt went, he was fully prepared to go into the whole matter, but he would not do so then, because it was evident from the declarations opposite that, as a shipowners' question, the whole principle had been altogether given up since last year. (Cries of "No," from Mr. Alderman Thompson and others.) Yes, he contended it was so, for those Honour able Gentlemen had altogether shifted their ground, and now, instead of looking upon this as a merely mercantile matter, they desired to make it a national question. On that ground also he was prepared to meet them, but be would not do so now ; and he would only further notice the remark of the Hon. Alderman upon the difference of price between American and English oak, by saying that although there was a considerable dif ference in the prices of the two woods, the former it should be recollected was white oak in the rough,which would only last, when made up, for seven years, whereas the English oak spoken of, was properly prepared for shipbuilding, and vessels constructed of it were calculated to endure for twelve years—(Cheers)—in active service. Mr. ROBINSON could only say that if the Ministry were determined to carry this measure through the House, and l:act the strength to do so, that fully im pressed as he was with the disastrous consequences of the measure he should give them little further trouble. - Yet, while making this statement, he could not but re cal to their recollection the testimony which had now been so abundantly given, and warn them of the certainty that it must greatly tend to destroy our naval superiority, and pauperise the country.—(Hear.) He denied that the Canadians had expressed a stronger wish than they did last year for the repeal of the navigation-laws. There could be no doubt, say what they would, that the Canadians must have a protective duty of five shillings on corn. The geographical position of Montreal was such that no alteration in the navigation-laws would do any good for them. If the Government altered the navigation-laws with respect to Canada they would not afford them any benefit whatever, but would rather prevent their enterprise and perse verance in trade. He objected to giving the Queen in Council any right to interfere in the question of recipro city. He was willing to consider the question of the al teration of the navigation laws, but it was a question with him how far any alterations could be made in them with a due consideration for the maritime supremacy of the country. It was said that the alterations in the navigation-laws would increase commerce. What commerce, he would ask, would it improve? Not English, but foreign, he would venture to say. The whole of the evidence that had been 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 make any alteration in the navigation-laws, and if foreigners chose to reta- Iliate, they should let them do so. Mr. J. WILLIAMS said that the state of trade gene rally, notwithstanding all that had been said, was most deplorable; but, considering that the measure proposed by the Government was calculated to improve commerce, he should give it his support. Sir JOHN TYRRELL thought if the ports of this country were to be free 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 entered into a con spiracy. They seemed to be plunging on this headlong course, notwithstanding the destitution and the increase of vagrancy in Ireland, and the po verty in this country.—(Hear.) If they looked at the case of Canada and the 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 for 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 fe w 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 part of her cargo and take in another part and go to Lon don. He wished to ask if that was so? Mr. LABOLICRERE said, under the plan he pro posed, an American vessel would be enabled to coma from one port in England, and then to another English port, and: take in a cargo from the first to the second ; but she could not carry on a regular to-and-fro coasting trade. The resolution was then agreed to. The House resumed. On the question that the report on the resolution he received, Mr. lIERRIES hoped that some time would be allowed to elapse before the House was called on to agree to the second readitu, the Bill. 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 Fast session a sum of 500,000!. was voted as a loan to the West India islands, but the terms of the loan would not admit 0:4 the islands accepting it. He wished, therefore, to know whether Government was prepared with any proposition for modifying the terms of this loan? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had re ceived no notice of the question, or he would have been prepared to answer it. On the vote of 8,000,0001. out of the Consolidated Fund being proposed, Mr. HUME thought before agreeing to any such vote the House should have some statement of what the means were. He trusted that an early day would be fixed for such a statement, The Houie then resumed, and the CHAIRMAN re. ported accordingly. HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION (IRELAND) BILL On the motion for considering the report of this Bill, Mr. J. O'CONNELL hoped the Government would postpone it to another day, as it was now near six o'clock, rind be did not wish to allow the 1111 to pass a single stage without offering it his opposition. Sir G. GREY hoped the lion. Gentleman would con sent to take a stage now, on the understanding that the third reading should be fixed for the first business on Friday. Mr. J. O'CONNELL wished to move that the report be considered that day six months, but The SPEAKER said such a motion could not be made under the new rules. _ _ . Mr. J. O'CONNELL said he should conclude by moving a clause. At the same time he should not object to the Government fixing this and the other orders for to morrow, provided they did not deprive him of the opportunity of speaking on this stage of the Bill. 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. PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES, PRIVATE BUSINESS. In the Examiner.' Court yesterday the promotors of the following Bill were declared to have complied with the standing orders:— _ _ Lancashfie 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 lense to the London and North- Western, the Chester and Holyhead, or the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway Companies, or to amalgamate therewith). TENBY, SAUNDERSFOOT, AND I SOUTH WALES RAILWAY. The usual half-yearly general meeting of the pro prietors of the above railway was held yesterday at the Gresham Rooms; Mr. William Chadwick, chair man of tho 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 20/. 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 7171. 16s. 6d., and the expenditure to 5891. 2s. 3d., leav 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 opened 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. BIRMINGIIAM. — The Birmingham Town and Dis trict Bank has declared a dividend at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum for the half•year ending the 31st of December last, payable on and after the Ist of March next. UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE. CAMBRIDGE. WEDNESDAY MORNING.—At a numerous meeting of th Members of the Senate held on Monday, it was proposed by Professor Currie, land unanina9usly 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 constitution of the proposed Syndicate for the revision of the statutes of the University,. re spectfully request the Vice-Chancellor to withdraw the grsce for the present." The memorial was to be p it re4 sented this morning. Just as we are going to press we have received ,;hit following announcement by electric telegraph:— "Cambridge, Wednesday, Feb. 14 , Twenty-two Minutes past One. " The grace for the Appointment of the Syndicate ions 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; 13 , 3 the 1k an, as Ordinary of the Cathedral, has i Dade a fresh order requiting certain portions of the servicsb Lobe read in future.—London Guardian of yesterday. THE CoU.NTRY MARKETS. BASINGSTOKE, FEB. 14.—But a moderate supply of vrb eat ; if not for some foreign samples offered there would not have been a sufficient quantity to supply the demand, yet r n fillers refused to give the quoted prices of last Wednesday for ars y but the best qualities. White wheat, old, weight 621 b to 641 b per bushel, realised 131 lOs to 14/ per load of 5 qrs ; ditto. new, 131 to 131 10s ; ditto red wheats, of the same quality and weight, made from 12/ lOs to 1315 s ; ditto second rate, from 101 to llt ; ditto poor, 9/ to 91 lOs ; ditto bread and fl our, as last week. Barley—A few samples of bath English and fo reign, bright and fit for malting, sold at 32s to 34s per Quarter; good heavy grinding, 27s to 30s ; ditto poor ditto, 24 s to 285 per quarter. Malt of dull sale, at from 7s 6d to 75.; 9d per bushel. Oats—Poland and Scotch at 22s per quarter:; good black feed, 193 to 20s ; ditto, common ditto, 16s to 18s per quarter. Beans—Heavy old ticks, weighing 661 b per bushel, made 40s per quarter; good second rate ditto, 375; ditto com mon beans, 34s to 36s per bushel ; trade good. Rye 1..4s per sack ; tares, winter, 7s to 8s 6d per bushel ; old, 6s to. es 6d per bushel ; spring ditto, 9s to lOs per bushel. Peas —Best white, for seed, 40s to 42s per quarter; greys and maple, ditto, 36s to 38s per quarter. Seeds—White turnip, lls to 1.2 s per bushel ; red and green ditto, lOs to 12s per bushel ; rye grass, 24s to 25s per quarter • cinque foin, 28s to 3;2 8 per quarter. Clover, red, 34s to quarter; per cwt; white ditto, 34s to 36s per quarter; foreign ditto, 8s to lOs per cwt, more money ; trefoil, 14s to 17s per cwt. DORCHESTER SHEEP FAIR, FEB. 14.—The first Dorset sheep fair was held this day. Those held here are yearly growing in importance, and increasing much; many buyers attending since the opening of the railway who used to wait for different fairs held in Hants and Wilts this day. The show was good for the early season of the year ; some fine ewes and large healthy lambs being offered for sale, as well as wethers and tegs. Prices were lower than in October and November last by from 3s to 5s each ; trade was rather brisk at those reductions, and all were soon disposed of—best Dorset couples snaking from 45s to bal; second-rate, 42s to 44s ditto ; ewes, near lambing, from 38s to 40s ditto; Downs, ditto, from 355 to 36s ditto • second-rate ditto, 30s to 32, ditt o ; b arren di t t o , '26s to 283 ditto; some good horned tegs made from 34s to 36s each ; smaller ditto, 30s to 32s ditto ; Downs, from 30s to 33s ditto ; wethers at from 36s to 383 for best four and six tooth ; smaller ditto, 32s to 34s ditto; fat sheep were sold at from 6d to 6id per lb ; for best full mouthed sheep, from bd to bid ditto, second-rate ditto ; and from 4d to 4i l d ditto for fat ewes. GLOUCESTER.—On Saturday the supply of English wheat vas small, but no reduction from the rates of this day week vas submitted to. There were many inquiries for foreign ,wheat, and some sales were made to buyers of limited quanti ties. In barley, bans, and oats, we note no alteration. Im ports into Gloucester from the 2d to the 7th inst.:—Coastwise: Oats, 309 qrs; foreign wheat, 4,740 qrs; beans, 2,055 qrs. DUBLIN, FEB. 13.—There was a very moderate supply of farmers' grain, which met an exceedingly dull sale. Wheat was tid, and oats and barley 31 lower. Foreign wheat and Indian corn held at full prices, but no offers could be had. Flour is again heavy, and holders anxious to sell. — BELFAST, FEB. 12.—Since Friday the supplies have bees small, and prices unchanged. The weather is particularly favourable for the country, and the farmers are sowing a large breadth of spring wheat. Wheat, 93 6d to 103 8d; barley, ;is •d to 6s 6d ; oats, 5s 6d to 6s 3d ; oatmeal, 9s 9d to 103 fid per cwt. Indian Corn, yellow, 7/ 12s 6d to 8/; white 5s less. Pork is also a small supply, and prices vary from 40s to 47s 6i l per 1201 b. _ CORK, FEB. 12.—Flour—Firsts 14s 6d to 153 6d; extral63; aceonds 13s6d to 14s 6d ; households 11s to 13s ; thirds fis to 105 per cwt. Meal—Oatmeal lls to lls 6d; Indian meal 8s ; wiest ;meal 11a per cwt. Indian corn 7/ lOs to 8. pc.' ton. Bran lii per ton. Hay - Farmers 30s Od to 36s Od; average 00s; dealers 43s to 00s; average Otis Od per ton. Straw—Farmers 16s Od to 26s Od ; average 22s ; dealers 005 Od to 00s Od; average 00s Od per ton. Bread—Wheaten loaf 7d to 7%d; household loaf 6d to 6id per 41b. Coals—Newport 175; Lydney 18s ; Landore 175; best Neath Culm 16s per ton. Tallow 46s 6d per cwt. Whiskey, 25 o. p., 6s Od per impe rial gallon. Meat—Beef 4d to 7d; Mutton 5d to 6id ; veal bid to 7d; pork 4d to 51-d ; bacon 7d to 8d ; sausages 6d per lb. Hops 61 108 per cwt. Bangor slates 3/ 2s 6d to 3l 5s per ton. Bark—Barbary 61 to 71; Valonia 11/ to 131; French 6/; English 6/ per ton. Fleece Wool 105 to 12s per stone. Hemp 35/ per ton. Fish— Scotch herrings 185 to 00s ; red ditto 25s to 27s per barrel ; Newfoundland 11/ to 12/ 101 per ton. Timber—New Memel 4l lOs ; old scarce ; red pine 3 1 153; yellow pine 31 per ton ; deals, first quality, 20'; second quality 17/ per 120. Hides—Market Ils to 163; salted Its to 183 per cwt ; calf skins 2d to 20; market 2d to 24d per lb. Guano—Peruvian 10/ lOs ; Ichaboci 9: per ton. Potatoes—. White 10d to 12d ; Minions 18d to 00d. Tar—Archangel 18s per brl. COAL MARK ET.—YEsTERDAY. Buddle's W. Hartley 14s 9dlEden Main • 148 61 Carr's Hartley Chester Main l3s Gd l ßelniont lss Od East Adairs Main..... 12s 6dlyons l4s 6d Hasting's Hartley l4s 9cl'lletton .. lss 6d New Tanfield l2s 6d Haswell l6s 0.1 Ravensworth's Pelaw. Pis 3d Lambton South Pontop .. ...... 11 s Od Russell's Hetton South Peareth Stewart's Hartley.— 14s o.;' Whitwell ... Tanlield Moor • Townley Wylam ... Wall's End, &c. Thornley Bewicke and Co. Brown's Gas . l2s 6, Seymour Tees Framwell Gate . . 14s Od Cowpen Hartley Hedworth Hotspur Riddell's l3s 9c. Ships at market, 216. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, FEn. 14. SToca ExcriANGß.-The market for shares has been very firm to. day, and a large business has been done, and rather better priceS have been obtained. The sales are-Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire, 311. Shares, 10% dis.-Ditto (late C. and B.), 271. 10s• Shares, 6 per cent., 1549, 14% ex int.-Great Northern, 9 e. Ditto (A. Shares) Deferred, 4/. 18s. 9d.-Ditto (B Shares), 6 Pef t cent., .5,g, dis.-Lancashire and Yorkshir e (l a t e M anchester and Birmingham) 11 dis.- Ditto, Quarters, 3 dis.-Ditto, Fifths, 1/. 10. 3d. (IN.-Ditto, 10/. Preference, 6 per cent., I/. 18s. 9d. c. Ditto, Halves (late Huddersfield and Sheffield), 8% dis.-Ditto , Halves (late Lancaster and Bury), 8% die.- London and North - Western, 139%-Ditto, Fifths, 7% c. p.-Ditto, New Quarters, hf; 18s. 9d.:p.-Ditto, Quarters (C), 4 p.-Manchester, Sheffield, a n : Lincolnshire, 43-Ditto, le/. Preference, 11y-Ditto, Quarters. 6 c. dis.-Ditto (Docks), 13 1 A c. dis.-Ditto (late Sheffield and Lin coln), 13 die. -Midland Stock, 93-Ditto, New Half Shares, 4% -North British, e.--Ditto, New Thirds, 4% c. -North Stafford' shire, 2% dis . -Nor t h Union (B) , 151-Shrewsbury, Os westrY, and Chester, 3 1 4 dis.-Ditto, New 10/. Preference, guarantee d 8 P!'" cent., 14-South-Eastern and Dover, 25 3 4 c.-Ditto, No. 1, 7 3 4 d lB ' Ditto, No. 4, Thirds, 7% -Whitehaven and Furness, 12 dim. York, Newcastle, and Berwick (Extension, No. 1), 13 s p.-Ditto (N. and B. Extension), No. 2, I% p.-Ditto (G. N. E. Purchase) , U per cent. guaranteed, 1 1 4 c. p. MANCHESTER, FEB. 14. STOCK EXCIIANGE.-The sales are-South-Eastern and Dover, No. 3, 2234 - Ditto, No. 4, 7 13-16-West Riding Union, 3 5-16 dis. - Leeds, Preference, 1% p.- Manchester and Birmingham, Q.iarter, (C), 31, p.-Leeds, 32/. Shares, 5% dis.-Grimsby, 201. Shares, leg dis.-North Staffordshire, 2 11-16 dis.--Clitheroe, Preference, 17 4" -. Old Dover, 25 3 4-Grimsby, Quarters, 6% die.-Sheffield and Lli coin, 13 3-16. BIRMINGHAM, FEB. 14. STOCK EXCHANGE.—There were a considerable number of transac • tions to -day, and prices remained firm at yesterday's quotations . The sales are—North Staffordshire, 465. 3d. dis.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), St I Is. 31 dis. ex int.—Ditto (B), 58 s . Pd. dis. ex int.—Shropshire Union, dis.—South StaffOrdshire, 3i dis. YORK, FEB. 13. SrocK EXCHANGE.—The busizie s transacted to-day was as fol; lows:—Great Northern, 9';',", --York, Nmeastle, and Berwick, No: (late New Berwicks), 21 3 1—Ditto (G. N. B. Purchase), W. 35. 9 d• GLASGOW, FEB. 13. STOCK EXCHANGE. —Tli% following are to-day's transactions Aberdeen, Preference, 50s.—Edinburgh and Bathgate, 7 gow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr, 52 —Ditto, Halves, No. I, _Ditto, Halves, No. 2, 7—Gla sgow an d G reenock, Halves, 7%—Ditto, , ference, 71. I Is.—Great Northern, 14178 —Menkland, a per ceu • guaranteed, s—Wishaw and Coltness, 45. [ADvERTismmENT.]—An Abscess in the Breast Cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills.— About three years since Mrs. O'Flaherty of Mill-street, Cork, accidental bruised her breast, for months afterwards the pain increase d and the part became fearfully swollen ; various application s were tried without giving the le as t relief. Ultimately an ab scess formed, discharging a great quantity of humour, wbic il debilitated her constitution to an alarming extent ; a t this stage a lady strongly recomm en d e d h er to t ry H o lloways Ointment and Pills, having witnessed their good effects on former occasions, which advice she followed, and these fin e medicines answered most satisfactorily, for the wound was soon healed, and her health is now completely renovated.— Sold all Druggists and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 2 4. " Strand, London. At the Indigo sale yesterday 1,469 chests have passed, of which 110 weie bought in, 369 withdravio, and 990 sold ; prices have been firmer, and the advance of 3d. to 4d. per lb. fully maintained. BIRTHS. On the 10th inst., at Dane-end, Herts, the lady of I 1 Sartees, Esq., of a daughter. On the 11th inst., at Cambridge-terrace, Hyde-park, th e wife of Richard H. Leach, Esq., of a son. of On the 12th inst., the wife of Robert Hesketh, Esq., Wimpole-street, of a daughter. On the 12th inst., at Stoke-hill, near Exeter, the wife of J. G. King, Esq., of a son. On the 12th inst., the Hon. Mrs. H. Powys, o f a clanght er. On the 12th inst., at Margate, Kent, the wife of Herma n C. Mertens, Esq., of a daughter. On the 12th i, at., at Royston, Herts, the wife of Edwar d Beldam, Esq., of a daughter. es On the 13th inst., at Ch am pi on -hill, th e w if e o f Thoma s H. Bothamley, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIED. de On the 20th ult., a t Edi n b urg h , t h e C oun t Woronzovf Litta, to Miss Clara Hamilton, of Trevor-square, Broln eldest daughter of the late J. Hamilton, M.D. kW On the 10th i ns t., a t Edi n b urg h , the Rev. Franklin Ton •, , diocesan missi onary , youngest son o f t h e R ev. N. TotAl Jlr of Lelant vicarage, Cornwall, to Beatrix, youngest daught e of the late Captain Debbie, R.N., of Saling-hall, DIED. &(1 On the 10th inst., at South-stre e t, .Finsbury.squa_r_e 87i,t E 6, Michael Josephs, Esq. His eminence is an iiebra , placed him foremost in the rat ks of Jewish literature. o f On the 9th inst., at Islington, Emma D'Oyley, the wife Hugh Tweedy, Esq., of the Excise. On the 9th init., aged 28, Susan, the wife of C. Callt °° ' Esq., of St.'Marlin's-lane. ()n the 10th inst., at Old Brompton, Mrs. Sarah Etbsio widow of the late Mr. T. E,ll:ins, of Coventry-street, age d . 0,1 the 10th inst., at Cheltenham, Sarah, the wife of Bagnall, M.D. f• 0 On the 11th inst , , at Turnharn-green, Mary, the VII - Mr. J. T. Jackson, aged 72. ---- a of London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUN-112, No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No* pE Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the COU Dilddlepos, Thursday, February_l6 ; 1549. PO! Prf