The Sun. — London, England, 1831-03-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. SOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH IS. Petitions were presented by Lcrd Ralnor from Christ Church, Middlesex, and from the Fide of Thane, in favour Re'orat ; by the Duke of Wellington from Newcastle ,under-Lyme against the proposed measure for Reform ; by Lord Gower from Cheater against slavery, arid from /he Staffordshire Potteries in favour of Reform ; by Lord Durham from Marylebone in favour of Reform, and from Horsham to the same effect ; by the Duke of Norfolk from Kirlicaley, from a parish in Fife, from St. Ann's, Limehouse, Shepton Mallett, Cupar, and several other places, in favour of Reform ; by the Duke of Argyle, from Inverness, against the repeal of the duty nn barilla, and from the proprietors of kelp estates, (ruin the Hebrides, to the same effect ; by the Duke of Devonshire, from Derby, Chester, And other places, in favour of Reform. The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition. signed by :396 Members of the English bar, in favour or Reform. The Not.le Lord also presented a petition from Barnsley, Yorkshire, signed by upwards of 3,000 person, to the same effect ; and twenty-nine petitions from other daces, to the same effect, among which was one front HA signed by upwards of 7,000 persons, The Noble al-o presented a petition from Huddersfield, signed by 7,000 persons, and thirtrninn other places, to the same effect. His Lordship apologised to the petitioners for presenting their petition* in the manner he did, but the motive of his pursuing such a course was the unwilling_ nest he felt to oeeupy the valuable time of the House with entering into detA* on each petition ) and he was sure the petitioners would acquithim of any neglect of their interests when they knew that at the present moment he had up w 'yds of 147 petitions to present, in additie.t to those he had already presented, some of which were from important Corporations, otkers signed by 10,000, '2,000, and .5,000 persons. He had in the House at the present mo ment 74 petitions ; bit having already trespassed largely on the time of the House, he should pottpcne presenting those petitions till Monday. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented petitions to the same effect, from Bradford, Trowbridge, and another place in Wilts ; from the parish of St. Mary, Whitechapel, and trona the Magistrates and Tewn Council of Stranraer. Lord KING ptesented petitions in favour of thz Mini sterial plan of Reform, from Beverley, in Yorkshire; from Ernsworth, in the county of Southampton; and from some place in the county of Lancaster. All these petitions were laid on the t,ble. SUB-LETTING ACT. Lord MELBOURNE rose. pursuant to notice, to lay on their Lordships' table an Act to repeal the Act of the 7th George IV., commonly called the Sub-letting Act, arid to substitute other provisions in lieu thereof. As this was a subject of great importance, especi illy to the landholders and agricultural population of Ireland, he hoped their Lordship would indulge him while be made a few observations in explanation of the altera• tine which it was intended to make in the provisions of the existing Act. He repeated at the outset what be had said the other night, in answer to a question put to him by one of the Noble Lords opposite (Carberry), that it was the intention of Ministers to maintain and sup port and ievigorate the principles of the existing Act, and that the only object was to remove some in2onve niences and difficulties that had occurred in the execution and operation of the statute, and clear up some doubts that had arisen as to its proper construct on. In order to effect this object it had been thought preferable to repeal the Act, rather than attempt to amend the existing Act, in order to avoid those ambiguities, complexity, and confusion which so often resuitad from passing several Acts for amending a particular statute, instead of entirely remodelling it. The plan of sub istituting a new statute was adopted for the sake of perspi cuity and simplicity. Their Lordship were probably all acquainted with the history of the Sub-letting-Act. In con sequence of the distresses which existed in Ireland in 1822-3, the subject was taken under the consideration of Par liament, and a Committee of the 1-louse of Commons was appointed in 1824 to investigate the subject, which was again taken tap in 1825 and investigate by the Committee of the other House, and also by a Committee of their Lordships, and it was from the reports of these Committees that the Acts originated. A labor:ous and extensive investigation took place, and various remedies were suggested for the evils which pressed so heavily on the country. That investigation was conducted by men of the greatest ability, industry, and under standing, and various witnesses of various classes, who had the beet opportuniry of being acquainted with the state of Ireland, were examined. Eminent lawyers were consulted who were connected by their professional duties, and otherwise, with the different parts of the country ; several Roman Catholic Priests : many resident Magistrates, and land agents, and surveyors were employed by Government ; men, all of them having the best opportunities of being thoroughly acquainted with the situation and condition of the various parts of Ireland, were minutely examined ; and ale result was, then all, with one voice ascribed, the dis turbed state of that country chiefly to the relation which there existed between landlord arid tenant, to the great and manifest injury of both parties. The landlords, when their lands came into their hands, after the expiration of leases, found them crowded et ith a multitude of paupers, whom they had no means of removing or pro -vidiag for is other places ; and the case was still more hard on the occupying tens, t, for, perhaps, between hint and the head landlord there were six or seven intr.-mediate persona, and each of these, in case of dis putes, or in ease of failure in paymints between them selves, had the power to distrein on the occupying tenant, who was thus liable to b.: made to pay his rent repeatedly, instead of paying it only once. The concurrent testimony of all wiee that the grand evil was this relation between landlord and tenant, and in this the reports of the two Committees] concurred ; and the first remedy recommended in the report of the Commors was an amendment of the law between landlord and tenant. In consequence of this recommendation the Bill was brought into the House of Commons by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was then Secretary for Ireland, assisted by the then At torney• General for Ireland. The Bill was brought in in 1825, and stood over for a Session, and in 1826 it passed. But it was soon found that those by whom it had been prepared had fixed their eyes steadily on the existing evils, and on the application of the remedy, without suffi ciently considering the 'effect which the remedy would have when viewed with reference to the existing state of the country ; and, therefore, when the Act came into operation, some blots and errors in it were discovered. These blots and errors had, however, been most grossly exaggerated, and a great clamour had been raised by those whose object it was to excite discontent and animosity among the people. A great outcry was consequently set up against the Act ; but it was not to satisfy that cla mour, or to give way to the outrages promoted by agi tators, that Ministers proposed to bring in another Bill on the subject. The only object was, to remedy the de fects and remove the inconveniences and difficulties of the existing Act, and to clear up the doubts which had existed as to its construction. Haying male these preliminary observations, he would state to the house the most mate rial alterations now to he made. The enactments of the statute were two-fold ; first respecting the leases that were in existence on and before the passing of the Act in 1826 ; secondly, respecting the leases that might be made subsequent to the passing of the Act. It was not in tended that the Act should be retrospective, nor that it should hive any operation on the leases in existence at the time of its passing as to their covenants or waivers of those covenants, all which covenants and acts it left as before. But it had been generally under stood in Ireland that it had a retrospective effect on pre-existing leases, and this gave rise to various dis putes and to much irritation. At the bar is Ireland, how ever, the general opinion was, that it had not a retrospective operation, but that covenants and waivers were left in the same condition as before the passing of the Act of 1826. But as there was some doubt on that head, that doubt was a sufficient reason for passing an enactment fur its removal. It was intended that the new Bill should be entirely prospective, and relate only to leases made subse quent to its passing, and should not affect, one way or other, any covenants, or constructive or other waivers of preceding lease, with reference to any question of sale or sub-letting. The Bill would leave all the leases to the ordinary rules of law, whether as to assignment or sub-let ting. But where there should be introduced in subsequent leases covenants a g ai n s t assigning or sub-letting, it W 55 in tended that such leases should not be saleable under execu ti,nis, nor on bankruptcy, or insolvency of the tenants; but that the l e a ses should become void, and the land revert to the landlord. This, perhaps, would be in some measure retrospective, as far as regarded creditors ; but it was con form-able to the spirit of the Act, and he hoped to lie able to prove in the cours e of t h e progress of the Bill, that there was no injustice in this, and that a mode would be left open for fraud unlest some such clause was introduced. Another difficulty was the devolution of leases on in testacy. In case of the decease of the lessees without having made any will their personal representatives, if they were chattel interests, took the lease, d this gave occasion t o much of that division of lands which it was se desirable to avoid. It was proposed to enact that those divisions should not take place on death and intestacy which the lessees could not make by will. It wen enacted by the 9th Geo. IV., that the lease when left by will could be left only to one person, but it left the case of intestacy unprovided for. By the new Act it was intended to adopt the provision, that if left to two or more, it shou'd only be as joint tenants without division or power of alienation, except among each other. In the same manner, in cases of intestacy unprovided for by the firmer Act, it was intended that when leases came as real property to the heir, or as chattel interest to the next of kin, that when it happened in either cases that the suc cessors were co-heiresses, or there were more than one next of kin in the same degree, these respectively should take as joint tenants, and that there should be no division or alienation except between each other. These were the most material alterations intended to be made, and he thought it unnecessary to say more on the subject until the Bill came under the consideration of their Lordship.. Lord CARBERRY thought the propositions upon the whole satisfactory ; although there might be shades of dif ference in opinion as to some of them. He would render every assistance in his power in forwarding the Bill. The Ear! of WICKLOW differed in tuts from his Noble Friend, as far as he approved of the new 13111; for he thought the original Act far preferable, and now very seri ous alterations ware to be made in it. Lord FARNHAM agreed, as to the mode of proceed ing, that the best was to bring in a nets• Bill, and so to avoid complexity and confusion. . . After a few words from Li.rd MELBOURNE in expla nation, the Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be printed. The Duke of ARGYLE presented petitions from the Isle of Skye, and from the Islands of North and South Wist and Harris, .nd from tbe landlords of kelp estates in the Hebrides generally, against the repeal of the duty on barilla. Lord KING pregented petitions from Clerkenwell, and from a place in Yorkshire, praying for a ' , peal of the as sessed tares. Lord KING presented petitions from Beverley and several other places, in favour of Reform ; also from New castle and Glamorganshire, against the tithe system. Im doing sn, the Noi:le Lord observed that he had of late been silent as to the conduct of the Clergy, in the hope that they would do something to satisfy the country, but it appeared to him that those delusive 'hope, were gone for ever. A Noble and Learned Lord, one of their friends (Lord Tenrerden) had brought in a Biil which contained a moderate and fair proposition respect ing moduses. That Bill all the Right Reverend Prelates had opposed. One Rev. Prelate, instead of wish ing the Bill to be passed shortly, had complained that there had not been sufficient notice given, and that sixty years at least ought to expire before the provisions of the Bill came into effect. For himself be did not consider that church property would last sixty years.—(Laughing,. ) ' But at all events he could see that the church would do nothing that was fair and reasonable.—(Laughter.) The Bishop of LINCOLN rose to order, and stated cleat the Rev. Prelate to whom the Noble Lord had al luded was not then in the House, and it would be better to defer the discussion till he was present. ' The Bishop of BRISTOL observed that the Noble Lord Was quite mistaken in what he had represented a Rev. Prelate to hare said. The time he had stated was three years, and not sixty. He (the Bishop of Bristol) felt confident the Noble Lord who had brought forward the Bill would think fit to make several material alterations before it passed into a law. Lord KING, in consequence of what bad fallen front the Right Rev. Prelate, would move that there be laid before thi, House an account of the number of suits on account of tithes commenced in the Courts of Chancery and Ex chequer, and in the Courts of Common Law, during the last forty years. This would show whether incumbents had been backward or not in asserting their claims to tithes, or in their efforts to set aside moduses or cotepositialis. The motion was put and agreed to. Lord KING then presented petitions from Winstow, in Somersetshire, and from a district in the county of Carlow, in lr-land. preying for a commutation of tithes. Earl GOWER presented a petition from a place in the county of Chester, praying for the Abolition of Negro Slavery.—Adj , urned till Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS, llfitzcir IS. In consequence of there being a ballot for a Committee to try the merits of a petition presented from Liverpool against the return of Mr. Ewart, the Gallery was not opened till Twenty Minutes to Five o'clock. Several private Bills were forwarded a stage. DECCAN PRIZE MONEY. Colonel SIBTIIORPE wished to ask the Noble Lord (th• Chancellor of the Exchequer) whethi r any probable information could he given relative to the distribution of the Deccan prize money. He did not wish to attach blame to any particular elites of persons, but as no inconsiderable delay had already taken place, it was very desirable that some period should be fixed for its distribution. Lord ALTHORP said, that the patties most inte rested in the decision of the question had objected to its bring referred by the late Government to Sir James Scar lett and Sir Charles Wetherell (then Attorney and So licitor-General), because those gentlemen had been em ployed in the argument before the Privy Council ; there fore the present 11Iinisters had referred the case to the present Attorney-General, as he had not taken hitherto any part in the discussion. DISTRESS IN IRELAND. Mr. D. BROWNE presented petitions from parishes in Mayo, paying Parliamentary aid for the improvement of the nevigation of the river Moyle. He said that the ad vances made by the House for public works in Ireland had done much, not only to abate distress, but to imptove the condition and habits of the people. He described the distress at present prevailing in Mayo and other parts of the West of Ireland to be excessive and increasing. Mr. J. SMITH confirmed the statements of Mr. Browne respecting the distress of the poor in Ireland. Sir ROBERT BATESON said, that the distress was net confined to Mayo sod the west of Ireland, but was equally prevalent in several of the northern counties. Mr. JAMES GRATTAN agreed with the Hon. Baronet in the opinion that the increase of the distress was alarm ing, and that it would he necessary f or th e G overnment to do something for its alleviation. Sir ROBERT BATESON did not wish it to be un derstood that he had alluded to the necessity of grants from the Government to relieve the distress. There were other measures which he believed it would he necessary to resort to in order to prevent a dreadful scarcity of frod—such, for instance, as a temporary prohibition of the use of grain in the distilleries.—(Hear.) Mr. LEADER read extracts from several reports, showing the beneficial effects which had resulted from Parliamentary grants for the employment of the poor, and fur local improvements in Ireland. So great was the sti mulus given to industry by the expenditure of those sums, that the revenue was, in each instance, during the pro gress of the works to which the grants were applied, in creased to nearly double the amount of the sum advanced by the Government. As an Irish gentleman he felt bowed down with sorrow and disgrace when he beard the distres-es of Ireland brought forward as subjects of discus sion in that House. Irish gentlemen ought to consider the great effects which had been produced by Parliamen tary grants of comparatively aural sums of money, which plainly showed that if they employed at home one-half of the produce which is at present exported, to the amount of ten millions annually, in the shape of rent to absentee landlords, and for which no return whatever is made, scarcely one man would be unemployed in Ireland. Mr. GEORGE R. DAWSON could confirm the statements made by the gentleman who preceded him respecting the distress in several parte of Ireland. But he could not admit that the means of relieving it ought to come from the Government. He could not consent to gentlemen's bringing Ireland annually before that House es a mendicant. He agreed with the Hon. Gentleman (31r. Leader) that Ireland had abundant resources in her self for her own relief, if they were properly made use of. It seemed to him that the most effectual means by which the Legislature could promote the improvement of that country would be the passing of a Bill to allow Grand Juries to raise money for public works and local improve ments, upon the security of the county rates ; or, per haps, the institution of Poor Laws, and a Bid empower ing parishes to mortgage the rates fur money to be em ployed in public works. Mr. O'CONNELL considered it his duty, as an Ir i sh Member, to inform the House and the country that the most frightful distress was spreading over Ireland, and that a famine was approaching. He did not know what was to be the remedy : he would not undertake to suggest any ; he dared say that the Government were anxious to devise one ; but he begged them not to invest the Grand Juries of Ireland with any new power—he begged them not to countenance any scheme for enabling those Juries to tax the people under pretence of relieving them.—(Hear, hear.)—The distresses of that peopl e were the mere grievous, as it was undeniable that the produce of their soil and of their industry was not only ample but super abundant. It was lamentable that a cou n t ry w h ose pro duction was greater in proportion to its pop u l at i on t h an perhaps any country in the world should be subject to pe riodical famine. Lord ALTHORP was sure the Hou‘e would feel that the Government must have much difficulty in treating a subject of the kind then under the consideration of the House. No doubt there was, as his Hon. Friend had stated, much distress in the county of Mayo ; but nnhap pity the distress was not confined to tile: part of the country, and the Government had much difficulty in at tempting to deal with matters so limited and local, lest they title ht do more hartn than good ; if upon inquiry, how ever, they were enabled to learn any thing that could jus tify or give room for beneficial interference on their part, they would he most happy to do all in their power con sistently with their sense of duty. Mr. HODGES said that a tax upon absentees, in the form of a well-regulated poor-rate, would be the only re medy for this periodical famine which visited Ireland. Mr. A. LEFROY defended the resident landlords. After a few words from Sir AL W. RIDLEY, Mr. BENETT, and Mr. RUTHVEN, Lord KILLEEN said that the distress was not confined to Mayo, but extended all over Ireland. Mr. SADLER had no difficulty in asserting that the wealth of the country ought, by compulsory means, to be made to sustain the poverty of the peojijes New cases of that kind would be continually recuri,apet-until provision was made for the poor. Mr. HUME said that the time from five to seven o'clock had been set apart for receiving petitions upon Reform, and they bad now spent a considerable portion of that time in discussing poor Jaws. After a few words from Mr. D. BROWNE, the peti tion was ordered to be printed. Sir R. BATESON, in the absence of an Hon. Friend, presented a petition from the ship-owners of the port of Whitby against the proposed alteration in the duty on tinsb. r. Mr. HODGES presented a petition from Deptford, Greenwich, Woodchurch, and another place in Kent, in favour of Reform. Mr. H. HOPE presented a petition from East Lose, against the Ministerial plan of Reform. Mr. RUTHVEN presented a petition from a parish in Yorkshire, in favour of Reform. The same Hon. Mem ber presented a petition from Coventry, praying for the removal of all taxes affecting the circulation of knowledge. On a former day he gave notice that on that night he should move that the duty on Newspapers be reduced to one halfpenny; but us he understood the proposition to which he intended to move that as an amendment was not to be that night moved, he should, he feared, he precluded from then submitting that amendment to the House : but he was resolved to take an early opportunity of doing so, for he considered it to be of extreme importance to the instruction of the people, and their happiness and tran quillity. Mr. HUNT most cordially supported the prayer of the petition. Whether a halfpenny or a penay was proposed, he should support such a reduction. PENRYN. Mr. FRESTIFIELD 'presented a petit;on from Penryn, complaining that a petition which had been rent against the fbrmer Men-ber of that borough, and complaining of the corrnption there, had been lately presented to that House. He could n! , t allow such a circumstance to pass without pressing o❑ the House that the old petition did not relate to the present Member for that borough, he hawing been returned without any bribery or corruption, nor to the last election, Lord ALTHORP was understood to say that he was the person who had presented that petition. He had re ceived a great numb,r on Reform, and that might pro bably have found its way among the others. r He was glad to learn from the Hon. Member that the electors of Pen ryn had had so much improved.—Petiti,m laid on the table. NUMBER OF PETITIONS. Mr. HUME sugeestvd that the House should meet To morrow, at twelve o'clock, to receive petitions, the number to be presented was now become so great. The SPEAKER suggested, that if the House met to morrow, it should not be with a view of receiving only one class of petitions, but to receive petitions of all kinds, which would secure a greater number of Members. Mr. G. DAWSON complained of the number of peti tions vet to be presented. He was down at the House by ten o'clock, and the forty Members had already put down their names. The SPEAKER was willing always to receive peti tions after the other business was over, and sat for that purpose ; and be recommended the Members, if they wished to keep down the arrear of business, to present their petitions at t late hour. After some further conversational remarks, it was, as we understood, settled that the House should meet to-mor row at twelve o'clock. SUGAR DUTIES BILL. On the motion of Lord Al.r►+oMr, the House went into a Committee on the Sugar Duties Bill, and the Bill was ordered to be reported, without amendments, to the Howe. Report to be received to morrow. COLONIAL INTERCOURSE BILL. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Houle resolved itself into a Committee on the Colonial Intercourse Act. On the motion that the first clause be read a second time, Mr. G. ROBINSON had an objection to make to the Bill, but he did not wish to oppose it at that stage, pro vided the discussion of his objection might be taken at a future period. Mr. POULETT THOMSON said the Bill had already been discussed, and he wished that the Bill should then be proceeded with, and that the Hon. Member might then state his objections. Mr. G. ROBINSON did not then mean to discuss the propriety of the duties, but he objected to the word tem porary, and to the duties being imposed only for a certain period. He wished that word struck out, not meaning to say that the duties should be permanent, but leaving it quite at the discretion of the House to decide unfettered concerning them. He did not wish those duties to be per. manent, but he did wish that the House should be implaged. Sir JOHN NEWPORT thought the conduct of the Member exceedingly strange. The Hnn. Member wished the duties not to be permanent, and yet he proposed to strike out the word making them temporary--(A l a u gh.) If the word temporary was left ont they %s ould be made permanent. Mr. lIUME hardly understood the Hon. Member for Worcester, but as far as he did understand him he could not agree with him. For his own part he wished that the duties on flour and timber should cease at an earlier period than providel by the Bill. The lion. Member was pro ceeding to put an amendment to that effect, but was told by the Chairman that he was out of order. Mr. K. DOUGLAS objected to the Bill as a most in csnsistent piece of legislation, and as striving, contrary to the principles professed by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, to build up a new interest in the Canadas. Mr. POULETT THOMSON stated that the object of the Bill was not to build up any new interest, but to give protection for a certain period to interests which had grown up in Canada in consequence of the Non-Inter course Act, which interests, unless they were protected, now that the intercourse with the West Indies and the United States was to be renewed, would be endangered. Those interests, however, were only to be protected for a certain time; and the Bill went on a principle which he had often heard praised in that House, and, if he were not mistaken, praised by his lion. Friend the Member fur Dumfries. And that principle was, of at once saying to any class of persons to whom protection had been granted which was found impolitic, that it should cease at a certain period. The Bill fixed a definite time at which the pro tection would be withdrawn, and that would enable the parties concerned to withdraw their capital. It was not building up, it was letting down an interest, and in a manner which had been frequently adopted, and generally recommended. He was surprised at the quarter whence the opposition to the Bill came. Mr. MAURICE FITZGERALD ;wished to preserve our colonies, and was a n a d vocate f or the whole an d en tire protection their interests had hitherto received.—(Hear , hear, and a laugh.) The Noble Lord might sneer, but he could not defend the treatment the colonies now received. He repeated that he was the advocate for entire protection, and he was prepared to defend the doctrine.—(Heir.) He was not to be put down by sneers—he would treat them with contempt, as well as the egacombry and con ceit which prevailed in the measures he opposed. Mr. SPRING RICE meant to give the Bill, as it stood, his warmest support. Mr. GOULl3URN;upported the proposition of the lion. Member fur Worcester. Lord ALTHORP said, if the Parliament did not show that it intended to do away with these duties at a certain period, capital would still continue to be embarked in the lumber trade, and the object of the delay on reducing the duties wholly defeated. Mr. HU'ilE thought the whole measure en unjust and impolitic, that he should certainly move as an ame n dment, that the. duty should be 15s. now, and that it should wholly cea,e and determine on the sth January, 1884. Mr. BERRIES thought it would be better to leave it to Parliament from time to time to deal with the question as it thought fit ; and that the House should not be pledged to give any particular time for the removal of the protecting duty. Mr. WARBURTON was of opinion that the West In dians were in this instance taxed solely for the support of the Canadas. After some further conversation between Mr. Humus, Mr. HUME, Mr. P. TnoMsow, and others, Sir E. H. EAST begged to ask the Vice -President Af the Board of Trade, why it was that the duty on Ameri can produce had been raised in the present instance to 24s ? Mr. P. THOMSON said that calculations had made, and that 24e: would give a protecti,— __ oeen ..* of about 9s. a loft, which was found to be the lowest duty that would give a protection to British shipping. On the question being put, Sir A. GRANT informA the Hon. Mover of the amendment (Mr. Robinson), that his object would be de feated by the omission of tkc word " temporary," because the effect of omitting it would he, as there was a second and lower duty, to make the first and higher duty a per manent duty. Mr. ROBINSON, ander ft uch an explanation, could not press his motion to a divi , ion; but as he bad allowed the original resolution to pass pro . forrna, under the expec tation of taking the sense of the Howe in Committee on this question, he should certainly. avail himself of some other mode to effect his object. The first amendment to leave out the word " tempo rary" was then negatived. Mr. HUI\IE thought that although there was a formal objection to the amendment of his Hon. Friend, there could not he any objection to his, end he therefore moved that the word " additional" should be omitted. 'This amendment, as well as a succeeding one, that the existing duties should cease in 18:31, were then negatived, and the House having resumed, the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday next. CUSTOMS ACTS.—SILK DUTIES. Lord ALTHORP having moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Customs Act., Mr. 11. DOTTEN(tc believe) begged to ask the Vice- President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Thomson), whether it was intended in any new regulation of the silk trade to allow the port of Dover the exclusive privilege of being the place through which silks are to be imported ? lle thought that Southampton, from its position and mari time impnrtance, was entitled to share that privilege. Mr. P. THOSISON believed there was no intention to alter the existing regulations. No representations on the subject had been made to the Board of Trade. Mr. DOTTEN replied that a representation on the subject had been sent in to the President of the Board un der the former Goa;erntnent. Mr. THOMSON said he was satisfied that the Noble Lord at the bead of the Board would pay attention to the representation. THE CUSTOMS' BILL-TIMBER DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. then rose to state to the House the course he intended to pursue with respect to the duties on timber. When he first proposed the measure respecting an alteration of the timber duties to the House, his object was to get a large increase to the revenue, without, at the same time, pressing on the com merce of this country. It was also his opinion that the proposition Government made would have the effect of leading to the adoption of a better commercial system with respect to the trade of timber. In endeavouring to effect this object, he was aware that he was likely to meet with most powerful opposition. He knew the power of gentle men connected with the shipping interest ; and their power was increased by the union with which they acted. Still, feeling confident that the proposition of Government would prove beneficial to the country, he was prepared to meet the opposition of those gentlemen.—(Hear.) lie knew that it was made a charge against the proposed measure that it would take the money out of the people's pockets:. Now he was ready to admit that whatever capital was de stroyed iry the change, so far an injury would be done; hut if capital was not destroyed but merely diverted into ano ther chain 1, the whole operation might be perferreed, and no person a loser. Supposing that, by the operation of a law coals from Newcastle were obliged to he sent round Scotland before coming into the port of London, • and thus the price of the article greatly increased to the consumer. But if the Parliament repealed that law, and permitted coals to come straight to London, placing at the same time a duty on the article of the same amount as the expense saved in the carriage, the Exchequer would be ben , fitted, and not a human being hurt. It was, indeed, plain that when any at tale was brought from a greater distance than was necessary, an alteration might be made which would have the effect of increasing the revenue of the public, without injuring any individual, provided the capital employed in - the trade could be as profitably em ployed in another direction. Ile was desirous that the Committee should fully understand the defect of the pre sent law with respect to the importation of timber. The present law either compelled the consumer in this country to use a worse article than he liked, or, if he used a better article, the law raised the price of it artificially against him. That was the case avowed by the advocates of the existing law. It was avowed that for the &ake of one class of the community we should raise against the consumer the price of the best article, or compel him to use an inferior one. That North AMerican timber was inferior to the Baltic it needed no argument to convince the House. It was unfit for many purposes ; and it was stated, in evidence before the Committee in 1821, that ships built of North American timber lasted only four years, while ships built of Baltic timber lasted eight years. —( Hear.) In consequence of that evidence, North Ame ricrn timber was excluded from the dock-yards of this country, and he believed that in all building contracts there was a specification that Baltic timber should be usell.—(Hear.) This was a sufficient proof, he thought, of the inferiority of North American timber. He knew it was said, and truly, that the red pine of North America approached nearly to, if not equalled, the qua lity of the Baltic timber. But then, what was the effect of the existing regulations upon the consumer of wood in this country? Supposing the red pine of North America to be equal to the Baltic timber, yet the price of the red pine before importation was 355. per load, while the price Of equally good Baltic timber was only 235. The existing regulations, therefore, in forcing a man to purchate the red pin e of North America, compelled him to pay fifty per cent. more for it on the first price than he need have paid for the Baltic timber. The red pine, of which he had been speaking, was the produce of Upper Canada, and a great deal of it, besides, came from the United States.— (Hear.) When gentlemen, therefore, talked of the exist ing regulations being a protection to the colonies, he begged leave to say, that though they were partly so, yet at the same time they afforded great protection to the produce of the United States.—(Hear.) Then, on the other hand, the commercial advantages of the proposed change seemed to be left entirely out of sight. What was the state of the question with respect to that point? There was Norway, in the north of Europe, with a bad climate and steril soil, which could produce nothing to give this country in return for its manufactures excepting timber. Canada, on the contrary, was a fertile country, its climate pro• pitious, and it produced every vegetable. Why, then, should we take a bad timber from a country which could give us in exchange for our commodities other articles of a better description, instead of drawing our supply of timber from a country which could give us no thing else in exchange? But it might be said, that Nor way, while it supplied this country with timber, would not take our manufactures in return. It certainly appeared that whatever of our manufactures was consumed in Nor way did not come directly from England ; but the reason of that was, the laws which precluded the English con sumer from making use of Norwegian timber. If we took the Norwegians' timber, they would be glad to have our manufactures.—( Hear, hear.) It was then plain, that we excluded from this country the only article which Nor way could supply us with, in order to take a worse article from a country which was able to eupply us with much better commodities. When, therefore, he found himself sealed upon to provide for a large amount of revenue, he did think that the proposition which Government had made to alter the duties on timber would, for the reason he had stated, prove most beneficial to the country. That proposition had met with great opposition, and he ad mitted that the opposition it had experienced made him feel a difficulty in carrying it. He had also no hesitation i n saying, that with respect to the shipping interest, every possible anxiety would be s h own on the part of Govern ment to avoid injuring it if possible; but he was not pre pared to say that he would sacrifice every other class of the community in order to support that one.—(Hear.) He did not think that the House ought to sacrifice com mercial advantages merely for the sake of supporting the s hi p ping interest; yet he should be clad if any alteration of d u ty could be made in a mariner to be as little injurious as possible to the shipping interest. The question than arose in his mind, could any alteration in the duty on timber be made, in such a manner as to effect the object he had ill v i e w—namely, the restoration of the trade to a healthy and natural state, without injury to any one? In order to put the House in a condition to judge of the propriety of the change in the duties on timber which Government now intended to propose, it would be necessary for him to enter into a statement of the state and prospects of the revenue of the country. The House would then be able to judge of the policy of the proposition which he should submit at the conclusion of his speech. The House would recollect, that in the financial statement which he made a few weeks ago, he had calculated what would he the produce of the revenue for this year, from its amount in last year, and had stated his expectation, that the new taxes which he intended to lay on would bring more to the revenue than would be lost by the repeal of some others. But since that period he had the experience of he effect which the ' reductions made by the /I last year had had on Locking at the amount :girt Hon. Gentleman opposite in 'one revenue. f ., the pre ent year, he found that it exceeded th e -. '.cerived fr o m t he Customs for the first t wo months o of the revenue ount received durine the corresponding months of last year cr easing at that rate, he calculated that at the end of th e z increasing by the sum of 176,0001. If the revenue proceeded year there would he an excess, upon the Customs alone, of 1,000,000/. beyond the amount of last year. He did not mean, however, to calculate upon the whole of that sum ; but be would take two-thirds of it as the excess which would exist at the end of the present year over the receipts of last. Adding that sum to the amount of Customs of last year, he found it would give a total of 18 : 025,000/. From that sum he deducted the amount of the duty on for ten months, and the total amount would then be about 17,520,000/. From the taxes he proposed to place on steam-boats and other things, he expected 75,000/. ; from cotton wool, 250,0001. ; from the exportation of coals, 100,0001. ; and from the duties on wine, 150,0001. These taxes made up a sum of 575,000/, which, added to 17,520,000/., made a total exceeding 18,000,000/. He had founded his calculation upon the receipts of the customs for the two first months of the year, a test which had been often taken, which he believed was taken by Lord Goderich, and had always ken found to answer. Looking at the revenue derived from the Excise during the same term, he found it had fallen off, hut mot in pro portion to the amount of duty reduced.—[The Noble Lord here went into details respecting the anticipated income of the Excise, but in so low and indistinct a tone, that we found it utterly impossible to understand his statements. Indeed, we cannot pledge ourselves to the perfect accuracy of the calculations we have just given, but we believe that the result of the whole was, that the Noble Lord expected a surplus of 1 : 135,000/. for the year 1832.] — If that view of the finances which he had taken was cor rect, there remained no imperative reason to force Go vernment to lay any great taxation on the importation of timber for the purpos e of benefiting the revenue. But commercial policy did call on the Government to take steps not violently but gradually to relieve the consumer of timber in this country.—(Hear.)—While he leoked on this question as one of revenue, he was bound to take that course which he thought would produce the greatest benefit, and therefore he considered it necessary to in crease the duty on Canada timber. But now, when the prospect of the revenue was more flattering, he • did not propose to increase the duty on Canada tim ber—(Hear, hear, hear)—but he intended to reduce the duty on Baltic timber, and he would state the grounds which made Lien believe that the plan he hod adopted would prove advantageous to the country. He was aware of the importance of the shipping interest, yet he did not consider that it should be alone regarded. The prosperity of that interest depended on the state of the commerce of the country, and unless that commerce were flourishing, the shipping interest could not be flourishing. Some Hon. Gentlemen were accustomed to argue the question as if the shipping interest were opposed to the other interests of the country; but he considered that any rtssulation which interfered with the commerce am! its dustry of the nation would be injurious to the shipping in terest. The duty on timber in log, coming frost the Baltic, almost amounted to prohibition; and while from Canada one-third only of the quantity sent out came in the shape of deal, two-thiids come from the Baltic. The alteration which he proposed to make in the duty on timber, in log and in deal, would, he thought, be advan tageous to the commerce of the country, and open the trade with the Baltic more than at present.—(hear, hear.) The only points of objection that could, he con ceived, be raised against his proposition was, the effect it would have on the colonies.—(Hear.) He was ready to admit, that whatever capital was laid out on saw-mills in Canada no uld stiffer. But the amount of capitol so laid out was very small in roportion to the capital which was otherwise engaged in the timber trade ; and even that capitai might be applied to a certain extent to other purposes. The lagsoot amount of capita! was employed in the lumber-trade in Canada. That was an entirely floating capital and capable of being diverted to other channels, with as great ease as any oiler floating capital. Then, it was said that the emi grants would suffer. But tine emigrants were not em ployed in one part of the operation of the timber trade, beeouse they did not understand the use of the oxe. They were certainly employed to a certain extent in moving the timber down to the coast ; but the only reason why emi grants accustotned to agricultural pursuits were so em pieyed, was the effect of the legislation of this country, to drive capital into the lumber trade. By taking gra dually away the inducement to capitalists to place their caoital in the lumber trade of Cansda, he hoped to make them turn their speculations to the cultivation of the soil, and give employment to the emigrants in agricultural oc cupations. He did not belies e that the effect of such a change could he any thing but advantageous to Canada; and it was clear from evidence produced at different times before that House, that persons engaged in the lumber trade were not desirous of continuing in it. He admitted that the case was somewhat different with respect to the southern provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. The soil there was not so propitious, and the timber trade was consequently of greater importance ; but he could never admit that the trade would be destroyed by the proposed measures of Government. The timber of that port of Canada was used for the manufacture of certain articles, and it would always continue to be used for those purposes. Though an improper material to be used in build ings of a paramount nature, yet it had the advantage of being more easily worked than other timber, and therefore it would continue to be used for certain purposes. The Noble Lord here stated certain particulars respecting the duties an timber, but with a rapidity and indistinctness of utterance which made his observations perfectly unintelli gible in the gallery. The only proposition which we could understand was, that the duty on Baltic timber was, on the Ist of January, 1832, to be reduced 6s. per load ; on the Ist of January, 1833, another Os. per load ; and on the lit of January, 1834, a further reduction was to take place of 3s. per load ; and then the reduction to cease : making in the whole a lessening of the duty to the amount of 15s. per load. The Noble Lord concluded by submit ting a proposition to the above effect, namely, that the thity on timber eight inches square, imported into the United Kingdom from any foreign country, should b,, after the Ist of January, 1832, 2/. Os. per load ; after the Ist of January, 1833, 2/. 3s. per load ; and after January 1, 1834, 2/. per load. Mr. WARBURTON made some inquiry of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, but neither the question nor reply were heard in the gallery. Mr. ATTW'OOD did not think that the present pro position differed in principle from the former proposition. The measure first proposed went to impose an additional duty on timber from the North Anierian coloaies, and re duce the duty on European timber. Thus protection and encouragement was held out to foreign countries to the prejudice of our own colonies; and it was upon the same principle that the present proposition had been framed.__ (Hear, hear.)—lle differed from the Noble Lord in that part of his speech where he had laid down the principles which should govern our trade, which proceeded from the common error of his school of political economy; but he congratulated the House upon that part of his speech where lie explained to the House that there were other in terest concerned in this question besides those of the re venue. The Noble Lord had referred to the capital em barked in the Canadian forests ; and sure be (Mr. Att wood) was, that the Committee would throw out of their consideration every thing regarding revenue, in consider ing the policy which was now proposed, of abolishing pro tection. The Hun. Member for Bridport bad said, that we had no right to exact protection for the colonies; but if we had adopted the principle of protection, there was no act of the legislature regarding the colonies which should be held more sacred than that which gave them protection.—(Hear, bear.)—lle would refer the House to the report of the Committee in 1821, which went into the history of the timber trade. It stated, that previous to 1810, our supply of foreign timber w as p r i nc i pa ll y Wasa e from the Baltic ports ; but in 1809 and 1810 we h a d re course to our Canadian coloni s t s . What was the object o e i r t eav i ne n d n uordere quality of Ca nadian t Neh o o i b t ia in ct ei f icet t ai he png a a t ia l I t nn e e t rp in o i ,oroohrf to t t h odr e d eyr: tiy v e t a ?h T g e r e ptrire er. The duty was protectiv e , and it wa s intended to be pro timber were as well known then as now. It was not to enable this country to purchase cheap timber, but in order to guard against the danger which then threatened us from Europe, and which, the Committee said, as it might occur at a future period, it would not be proper to place us entirely at the mercy of the northern Powers fur the supply of timber, which might be interrupted by the same political danger. It was no less flow this—that at a time of great peril, when all Europe was leagued against us, we adopted the measure, and on the faith of an Act of Parliament our merchants embarked their capital, on a pledge as sacred as Parliament could give, that it should be safe. But the danger had passed away. There was now no longer any probability of danger from the great northern states. He would be content to put that out of view, to consider that there was no probability that the great northern states would not continue to cultivate the arts of peace ; he would suppose that we might get cheap timber from thence without any necessity of alarming the country. But was the House prepared to sacrifice the men who had saved us from danger ?—(Hear, hear.) The timber trade was in a precarious state, and on the faith of th e protection offered to them, our merchants ex erted all that enterprise which always belonged to them ; they invested their fortunes in the recesses of the Ca n adian forests, erected mills and machinery, cut canals, and built wharfs and warehouses, all of which would be useless if this protection were withdrawn. But we were deceived if we thought such a measure would not bring evil upon ourselves. It was bad economy that had notjustice for ' had proposed, were exciting the violence of the viol :I and urging men t o f urt h er demands—(Hear , hear) eel he would t e ll hi s M a j esty ' s Mi n i s t ers that the discon.t.e, its lameis. Illajesty's Minis'ese, by the measure! .telmrs,! in the country h ar t b een ow i ng to a long serie s of legole, tire proceedin gs , w hi c h, b y trea di ng the productive classes, and sacrificing it to an abstrac h t p wa , iosophy, were leading to results the extent of %chi c h i t not yet to be seen.—(Hear, hear.)--The g round wat (Mr. Attwood's) . opposition to the measure, therefor litical its injustice. It was a great mistake o f the trade economists, that capital invested in a branch °f eic h it could be readily removed, and that the labour sv" rrcr employed could be removed also. This was an all the committed by Adam Smith, and it ran through a, is works of the political economists. A capital ins'c'tc" army branch of commerce could not be so readily to f ie ferred, and the labour which it employed could n d ° but made useful in another branch. It might he cru a i , e . b . his it could not he transferred. The principle on sT . ," l , c r , t he Majesty's Ministers defended the measure apPlie", e - k by whole of our colonies, it would loosen every ," The which the. empire was bound together.—( ll e a " d ut ies same principle which applied to-day to the timb er . „to would be applicable to the abolition of all protectalte„ our domestic.. industry, land labour applied ; then the Whether the system d be de tion bail or good was not the question non . ' t ° o f it, ticiwo thc propel tyhi! I cider]; a capital hart been invested upon the faith , it was advise-Ode to destroy this capital and labour;o be admitting this, if ever tee charge took place, it W°a ate la accompanied by a temporary derangement Of capital on to surblus of labour, which philosophy was ult„biels make some provision for. Was this a period in ` e ?se . tile country could safely undergo so great a eb acs ,„ r to (Hear.)—lf it was agreed that it would be b e T abandon the system of protection, the resolution s'fose be carried into practice in a period of universal rose perity at home and of tranquillity abroad. li ° what this such a time ?--(Hear, bear, hear.) 6 ,,51 market could we rely upon for three months? s eaa se ek by the gentlemen opposite, that the capital Inigh,teim employment elsewhere ; but when it deserted its old e ig ht nel and opened a new one, some political event : lll o hr question was, whetne.o3 eecur to close up the ne v market, and, after all this bed we might be driven back to the old system which we et abandoned.—(Hear.)—H e (M r . Ai twoo d) shou ld 4 ')- 0 1 have been surprised if abstract th eor i s t s we re des ir t e e u t i m e putting such a scheme in practi ce , w i t h ou t regard hed state of the country and of the world ; b u t h e was astonrthe that men, holding the responsible post of Ministers a te lit country, should have brought forward such a ra ea ' a re ere such a period, when, both at home anal abroad, reef threatened with dangers on every side,—when ha l f a rt' rope was in arms,—a measure which might be ac been ponied by calamity and ruin. Th e measure h ad ' un do brought forward by his Majesty's Ministers on r a h , to distinct and diff e rent from thos e on w hi c h it 0 "g of the alters modification, la nd it rest. It was his determination to take the am:a , ' t he t Commitme on the question—(heir)—notwithstanding el, sure Noble ,t, a L s o Lord's je.stionslear.) Mr. C. P. TuomsoN amid that the Hen. ge' a t l i ie i r s had stated that his Majesty's Ministers had placfb"i:h measure on grounds entirely different from these" ‘ li ni , o o) he thought it should be placed. He (Mr. Vi ° ` - 1 was glad they heal done so, and sorry should he have ,l to for l%,as th s e till pr l i ia, n b e l i e pl:m o of ai t i h t e ;city if any Government in that house could be preP a i re ,,er place a greet measure of national importanee oo t ee elusive gerunds of the two interests mentioned Wray Han. Member. The lion. Member wan prepared to ts of ' bite the question solely with reference to the interetto the colony and of the ship-owners, and to let the int' of the consumer, that is of th e cou n t r y, he forgotteaso'cb (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Thom so n) trusted tha t pt. grounds would never be adopted by an y Goverileee The interests of the colonists and time ship-owners ha il bt to considsied by his Majesty's Government as they Mt tr ail be, in connection with the interests of the count r y' ,et wisely so, because it was in vain to say that one he was to he hoist, real up at the expense of another ; an eel would be a short-sighted legislator who would acitio other interest than the interest of th e co mmunity ge ee r e gi' The objection of the Hon. Member w as , that the i r e , slature had no right to interfere with the duty n 0 C o rn' posed, and he had read an extract from a report 0 f a u sly mittee, which he endeavoured to show bore out his re or sion that a pledge was given that the duty was to b e o ' e met manent and fixed. But he (Mr. Thomson) had hied heard it contended that even when a duty vta a , 04 0 by Parliament, it was not in the power of Par ha su ietr to alter it ; and when nothing was said upon that t' v jer• Parliament had not only the right, lout no plea of n i u the r tice could be set up.--( Hear.) He would refer to read (t part of the very report the Hon. Member had rea° ‘ 0 et' the Lords' Committee in 1820), which alluded t°, a ro bte' tempt to set up exactly the plea of the Hon. )i e rt ioa The Lords' Committee, in that report, gave this As?, -, 019 a distinct denial ; and what were the words ? 10 Committee were informed by those of his Maiee t s Y st th e sisters who were Memb e rs o f th e C om mittee, tu"„ t ioa Canadian merchants were l e d to b e li e v e that the alt er ; dr of duty would be permanent.--(Hear.) But i t W e ti r l Glared that the duty of 21. Is. w ou ld be C0° 60 13 010 some coromiderable time, but that there was no toil' s ° arla whatever as to time •war-duty and the duty of IS l „' r 0 46 that the exemption from duty of the Canadian the temporary.—(hear.) This ha i been explained the Canadian merchants in conversati o n with them o ° ( 4e it Baltic trad ers ." A n d was th e r eso l iv i on cf the If ea f the ' conformity- with the report ? No ; the resaiati ° ° di o f House was' n a different scale. As to the brea tity, faith, he wo u ld re f er t h e H on . M em b er t o an aa th ` l o t ert which he would not think a crude visionary Ph ila4P re 'eat iC a Minister of the Crown iii the House of Lords: h e - 4 ,ert Lord Bathurst, who had distinctly said, when the was was considered by the House, that the arrangernetiotere subject to revision in three or four years, or at a°Y d i t he time.—(Hear.) H e (M r . Thomson) did agre e s*l • but Hun. Member so far, that there was a pledge given t 0 the the pledge was to the consumer, not to the colony ° , r I,od ship-owners. A distinct pledge had been giver, vy toer th oit Bathurst, th a t if th e d u t y presse d on the consu subject should c om e un d er th e cons id era tion of Pa rb r a d He bsd never h ear d th e place where this was utte beibite cased of b e i ng a nursery of crude notions; i t '4. ealit; all the slowness the lion. Member could desire, Ano ness and haste were not attributed to that assenalrlliol ip what was th e measure w hi c h h a d b een charaetet to s 0 b ° , such strong t e rm s ? It was t o come in three Ye b y t. e protection exce e di n g by one h a lf th a t prop osed blige d :; Lords in 1820.—(-fear.) He was sorry to be ° et e P - e , [ trouble the Committee with details, but where th e y t;'j been exaggeration of facts and figures, it WAS only 0 0 0 currence to facts and figures that these exaggerati°:tioa o f he met. With respect to the nature of the Al t : „Olt,'" • deals, the Noble Lord had stated the extreme in g e t ) a' p e the duty on deals, lout he had not dwelt so ni t t j is eo'f o might have done on its eff e ct upon time labour of ti. Pat try, which needed it so much. It was obvious 1U s pr deals were admitted at a duty which gave th e n o' 4 o rence over timber, the l a bour of this country .--broa,, fair protection against that of another. T hi i : er 's e r g e t him to an important point in the Hon. MI gel s vt anent,—that we gave assistance to the trade ° ! tier° to f the expellee of our own colonies. But the 1 1° "" s ift"' it The lac e could not know the nature of the measure. t op t pd - it, instead of assisting- the trade of Russia, " 44 , e ,1ea ,be on a fair and equ a l f oo ti ng w ith the trade of ° ,s i ri st or e Norway, and amongst th e represen t a tion , i ' e fla', by measure was one from individuals engaged io e : o p t ea trade, stating that their i n tere s ts would rajualro., it. The measure was calculated to effect g litie r lose nearer approximation in duty between the t he r i s e nada, America, and Europe. But he woul d e'd t he P ,• rnittee to consider the nature of the trade , 30 Tha t . V i sit paid for the unequal protection to the c olonis t : to diial o id tection Ministers professed not to remove, ti° afero ber 1 be to a certain extent; and when the Hon. tel i3 c tlY they intended to destroy it, he could not kee°l„ee the said. When this subject was considered h the same statement was made. In the evidea , ' ropos no ir de e Committee of 1820, it was said that it rtimeet,tirere• duty was altered, the Canada trade would being tbiaThere stroyed ; instead of which—instead of rea" z , sou , deu ce diction—the r e sult had been exactly time rev c iee ere tio e , were good grounds therefore for hesitating t°gonticiP°o4o to the same parties. In 1820, when the , s ; ‘ ,? In tra de were formed, what was the state of the tr s u, , the ditte rY it was said, that in the years 1818 and e j at the 0r e t i ll had sustained an unnatural impulse, and tri , it; Y e - r i s en nature of the trade was not to be judge°_: ) ,j, .A°, - t ele 1817, the timber imported from our 0 20 ' 6,0 00, possessions amounted to 180,000 loads; in t 44 , 2 , 0 51, ed 270,000 loads ; but in 1829 the airmu%g des trOl 100 ., loads.—(Hear.) So that, instead of hem re duc e j beet' the alteration of 20s. in the duty (the m e l' tra de ha od t he the other raised 101.), the increase in th Hou se s co ot more than doubled, or as two to five. T he should r se hich, Committee would see from this, that theY torie o" 1 , 0 10 with considerable caution, indeed, an) s ata ' s e jell were put forward on this subject.---(llchea'a been t ri bb ,,t' rn take as an instance, the statement Whi ch - g tO -an Hon. Member opposite on a former evlotiatleoleo thia trade there were engaged 1,600 shiPe9,, 0 00 e ea b e ing, to 2y , o re 430,000 tons, and giving e mploymen t f oss an this WO for when that Hon. Member talked et - 0 9 - calculated to throw out of employmoenue Who 10,000 seamen, which he took as half -qt n a b Nhicl 'tk Prep h e ' , tret e l '4 ' t 'ng P r h i. a t—e co e Y for t it letrito k, t 'llttt o f 4 ti ner ' ea n rlt of ee "l o pot betty pie hbo w i j W ' h l ? ".B the leh the cti If 4 . '