The Sun. — London, England, 1831-03-12 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The manner in which addresses in support of the pre sent Parliamentary Reform are pouring in to Ministers, in order to be laid before the King, exceeds all credibility ; and great must be the gratification of the Sovereign, on finding hie own views so perfectly in unison with tire wishes of his subjects on this important topic. But it is remarkable, that from no part of his Majesty's dominions are the addresses more frequent or more warm than from Scotland. How does this fact agree with the assertion of a couple of jobbers, that north of the Tweed the measure would give no satisfaction ? One address from Edinburgh is peculiarly deserving of attention, as being signed by nearly half of the thirty-three persons who return the Member for that place ! But there are , besides, four or fire addresses more front the city of Edinburgh. It is now seen and felt that petitioning has its effect. The powerful voice out of the Houses does nut, indeed, change the heart or the nature of those who, within its walls, would still adhere to the cause of corruption, hut it represses their audacity, it confounds their impertinence, and it drives th e wavering into an open desertion of their ranks. Any one who speaks against the Reform, is now mer e ly lenghed at : he is most likely so rdid, and !elfish, a n d stupid, but he is withal ridiculous. There is no doub t of the ultimate success of the Bill in all its essential parts. Mr. John Smith, Lord Cleveland, the Duke of Norfolk, and others, professed their readiness to secrifice their close boroughs at the shrine of Parliamentary Reform, and they have ensured the gratitude of their c ountry f or so honourable a declaration. We perceive, also, in the Edinburgh address; to which we have shove alluded, that the petitioners express the wish that " it should be die tinctly u nderstood by their fe'lo w-citizens, end by the public, that they h rye no desire to c li ng t o a n y pr i v il eges which are i ncons istent with the interests of the people of Edinburgh, and with the prosperity of the country." It will be seen by the debate of last night, that Sir Charles Wetherell expressed extraordinary impatience for the bring ing in of the Reform Bill, and was not to be tranquillized till he was assured that it would be forthcoming on Monday next. We are pleased at this anxiety of the Learned Gentleman, and augur from it that this important measure will net have his support.— Times. The debate on the Reform question has already hosted sa long, and the value of the Bill brought in by his Ma jesty's Ministers is by this time so rightly appreciated, that it becomes almost impossible to add new light to the views which have been opened in favour of that great measure, or to heap fresh refutation—we might have said fresh opprobrium—on the cavils, for arguments there are actually none, by which its adversaries have ventured to I uphold the present abuses, The cry against disfranchising corporations, against the interference with vested rights, I and with " property," which was raised at first by Sir Charles Wetherell, and has been vociferously echoed by Mr. Attwood—(both these persons being, we desire the country to recollect, representatives of a Newcastle bo rough I)—that cry has been pretty well disposed of by reference to the Act of Union with Scotland,—to the Act of Union with Ireland,—to the Act for remeving the civil disabilities of the Catholics, involving the abolition of Irish forty-shilling freeholds,—to every case in which Parliament has interposed, for cause alleged, to with draw powers, whether from individuals or bodies, which were held by the Legislature to be incompatible with the public welfare, at every stage of the Parlia mentary history of this realm. It is not a little worthy of observation, t h a t w h en t h e propr i e t ors hi p o f boroughs, or the influence which decided who should sit for them, was described, and truly, to be not so much a property as tt public trust, Mr. Attwood exclaimed, " Why, what is all property but a trust, to be exercised for the good of the community ?" and this from Mr. Attwood—from the Duke of Newcastle's Mr. Attwood—from the Mr. Att wood sitting in Parliament for Boroughbridge, under the that of that very Duke of Newcastle who, when reproached by the whole nation with converting his power as a holder of property to purposes the most oppressive and pernicious to " the community," turned upon his censurers this me morable question, " May I not do what I please with my own ?"—a question upon which his Grace was not then aware that his own gentleman of all work (Mr. Attwood) would have furnished a commentary so edifying, but so cutting-_" Your Grace's property in Newark is a public trust, and you are responsible fur the use you make of it." But neither patrons nor corporations can plead title to property in the return of Members to Parlia ment. If it were a property, it must hare been always inviolable : if a positive right, the enjoyment of it roust have been always inalienable. Now how stands 'the case ? We published some days ago lists of places which had, cen turies back, returned Members to the House of Commons, and which had bean afterwards virtually deprived of that pri vilege by the non-receipt of summonses to proceed to election at the calling of successive Parliaments,—of places which bad been represented in one reign, and in the next had been wholly passed over,—nay, which in one year had been honoured with writs, and in another of the same reign had been refused the favour, or saved the trouble, of send ing up Members to the House of Commons. Nor was this an irregular or incidental practice ; it was the settled habit and character of the Parliamentary Constitution in both parts of the United Kingdom, recognized under a long line of Princes, and for a course of ages, in Ireland as well as here. But it was not badly stated by Mr. O'Connell, who demanded of the Tory Opposition that they should either abandon their charge of " robbery," " confiscation," &c., in respect of the rotten boroughs now proposed to be disfranchised, or join with him in condemning and redressing the " atrocious spolia tion" committed on nearly 100 Irish boroughs, all dis franchised at the Union; while several hundred thousands of forty-shilling freeholders were equally disfranchised by the Act under which the Catholics were relieved. I . V as have been the arguments (none, indeed) brought for ward against this measure, we are perplexed by the mul titude of the objections raised, and still mere by their ex travagance and folly. The military Statesmen are tak ing the question by storm. Had the Duke of Wellington and Sir Henry Hardinge been accustomed to consider much before they pronounced decided opinions on portant subjects, we should scarcely have heard the illus trious Duke make the existence of this constitutional mo narelry depend on that of the close boroughs, or Iris gal lant friend the late Secretary for Ireland predict that this revolutionary measure would tear the crown off the King's head." Bold a man as is Sir Henry Hardinge, we are sure that a little refl"ction would have made hint more afraid of risking such an absurdity, than most other persona would be of mounting the best defended breach. A very large portion of the power of the State, enough greatly to influence, if not sway, both King and people, is now in the bands of an oligarchy : the thing is notorious, we should be laughed at for arguing it. Now an oligarchy in other states, where, moreover, there is no lack of nominal prerogative, but where there is ab solutism enough to satisfy the most craving soldier—an oligarchy, we say, has more than once conspired against she Sovereign, and has succeeded, too, in " tearing the crown from off his brows." It is in comparison easy for an oligarchy to conspire ; they are few,—they are secret, — they have frequent access to the Monarch,—they may have a common interest in some criminal cabal,---they may have objects alike injurious to the Sovereign and the nation,—they ought always to be dreaded by both. But the purpose and direct operation of this Reform Bill, is to substitute for a narrow anal selfish oligarchy, an aristocracy en-extensive with the property and intelligence of the land, with the enterprise and industry, the morality, the instruction, and personal independence of the whole community—agricultural, commercial, and proessional. This great people of England call aloud for Reform,— for the very Reform projected by the King's advisers. Where is the power that can oppose it ?—at least the native and domestic power, for we make not much ;recount of Russian and Austrian Allies, at least since the change of Ministers. Of the 500,000 electors who are to be added to the present mass of freeholders and free man, there is not a single individual who must not Ire a man of property. The designed improvement on the existing system is, that instead of a great family here having five or six votes, another 50 miles off commanding as many more, a speculative borough-dealer elsewhere having two or three, while all the intermediate or sur rounding estates and families have no direct influence whatever, and are at the mercy of those who do possess it, there will, acc or di ng t o t h e pl an of Reform, be no parti II or divine -right monopoly of borough power at all ' • but there is no proprietor or householder throughout the country, able to subsist without manual labour, who will not have such a fair, equal, sod m o d e r a te proportion of direct political power, as falls t o the lot of every other Englishman in the same circumstances, quoad mere for tune as himself. Then, see how the military monarchy a rgument applies in the ease jug stated. If Sir Henry Hardinge's and his commanding officer's objection be good for any thing , they m us t alle g e tha t the great majority of the British nati on—of the educated and independent ' classes are foes to constitutional monarchy, and bent on having a republic ! Is that trite Is it not m an i festly a ridiculous falsehoo d ? But ! f it were true, does the Duke of Wellington think that it would then be possible, under any circumstances, to uphold the monarchy, except bv the bayonet—that is, b y ma king it an absolute t mo narchy, and raising taxes by pure coercion wherewith o pay the troops? This, then, is the t rue spirit and ten deney of the Bill—it destroys a narrow oligarchy, and establishes a broad aristocracy, the breadth of which is measured only by that of British property and intelligence. It has been said over and over during these debates, by gentlemen who deem a little empty praise of the Consti tution to be a discharge of all the duties which they owe to it, that our " invaluable Constitution" is chiefly to be prized for adapting itself to times and exigencies, without suffering any injury or shock. There is, indeed, no doubt that the susceptibility of improvement, as new occasions call for it, and thr o u g h means prov id e d b y t h e Constitution itself, ought to be considered the most precious of ail its attributes and merits. The present Bill is calculated, like every one of the political ameliorations which have been effected in this country since the first framing of our Constitution—to put the above capacity of self-amendment to the tent, and bring it into useful application. There is this difference, therefore, between the Whig Ministers and their oppo nents—that the Whigs are desirous of reforming through the Constitution, and by means of it, while the Tories are for leaving the much-applauded quality of " self-redemp tion" a dead letter, and waiting until change shall be forced upon us from without by some extrinsic and sub versive potver. The speculative admiration of borough Members for these constitutional pvinciples which they are anxious to condemn to inactivity, may he taken for— just what it is worth. It is said that if this Reform be passed, the nation will cry out for more : we answer, can you prevent the people of England from obtaining this Reform ? Will you, Duke of Wellington, or you, Mr. Peel, dare, if you are appointed Ministers, to oppose it? Can you do so and carry on the Government for one hour . : We tell you, that it this be not now granted, be fore six months the country will have more ; and, taking more, will probably take too much. But at all events if more be hereafter reasonable, then rational desires must be gratified. The tide has already become a torrent : swim with it, or we are all overwhelmed. But the threat that Parliament will be compelled to make further concessions, is quite puerile. The people of England well understand the degree and nature of their own wants, and have already put down the fanatics. At all public meet ings the wildeet theoretical reformers have struck their flags, and gratefully and eagerly pressed forward to range themselves under the banners of the Government. The authority of the Member for Preston is decisive, that he is not now listened to, when he attempts to preach in favour of the vote by ballot. The advocates of the borough oligarchy affect to commiserate the lowest order of pot walloppers, and others, who are to be deprived of votes. The inconsistent spirit of this complaint is more apparent than real ; for a pennyless and beggar constituency is easiest corrupted by the ambitious and the rich. But the House of Commons is to be demoralized by this nsea sure, and we are (by Mr. Attwood) referred to France for an illustration of the peril in which a Chamber of Peers has always been placed, when it presumes to differ with a representative democracy. The French Peers have nothing in their condition at all dif ferent from that of the elective body throughout France, and hardly any thing but the name of Peers in common with the nobility of England. They are not a natural Aristocracy : they have no mass of property to serve them for a prop to their own elevated rank, or for a lever whereby they might operate upon the rest of the community. They are looked upon in France as so many pensioners or placemen,—without one of those ties or anchors of authority by which every Peer of any respect ability in the British empire is safely moored in the county that contains his property, and in which county and which property are to he found the elements of his eternal incor poration with the whole frame of Parliament, of the mo narchy, and of the realm. Our final answer to such de claimers is, that the Bill is one for investing the general mass of:property with the general mass of power, and for annihilating that uns ;If and unreasonable system, under which the relations between power and property have be come partial, unequal, and at length unmanageable—an overflowing source of corruption, oppression, and discon tent. The most striking phenomenon of modern times is the perfect unanimity of a free and investigating people, in favour of a political change at once so diversified and so vital.— Times. It is among the remarkable coincidences of political life that Earl Grey shoulsi be the leader of Parliamentary Re form in whom the country placed its hope and confidence, not only in youth and in age—not only in Opposition and in the highest office, but as two of the most eventful pe riods in the history of modern Europe—namely, soon after one revolution in France, and immediately subsequent to another. In the interval which has elapsed between these two peri , cL how many political promises have been broken—how many pledges of public men have been for feited—how many champions of patriotism have become recreants to honour—Low many stern pretenders to prin c'ples have figured as apostates to their early creed upon the stage of public action, while Earl Grey pursues the same course, as Prime Minister, in 1931, which he ad vocated as the youthful reformer of 1793—thus consis tently giving to Parliamentary Ref rm the ardour of his early vows, and the more reflecting support of his veteran wisdom ! It was in 1793 that his Lordship—then Mr. Grey—made his first 'notion relative to the state of the repre sentation. Several petitions had been previously pre sented to the House, praying for Reform, and among them the celebrated one from the society called " The Friends of the People." Mr. Grey moved that these petitions be referred to a Committee to report upon the subject to the House. Mr. Pitt, who had entered political life under the colours of Reform, and who, as the champion of that cause, had more than once invoked the spirit of the Con stitution against the practices of the boroughmongers, op posed the motion ; and, by the assistance of the dense phalanx of mute Members, whom those very borough mongers sent into the House, was enabled to negative it by the overwhelming majority of 282 to 41. These were the golden times of the Anti-Reform cause ! with a Mi . nister of distinguished eloquence, and no less distinguished apostacy, at its head, and a majority of seven to one in its favour. Bat " time," as Lord Bacon says, " is a gre it innovator," and the rotten boroughs, which were them selves but innovations upon the Constitution, are about to experience some of the mighty changes which that power that measureth the duration of all things human can effect. It era, in 1797 that Mr. Grey again brought forward the subject of Parliamentary Reform, and sub mitted a plan to the House, which was not exactly the same as his present measure, though it in some respects re sembled it. He proposed that the number of county Mem bers should be increased by twenty, one Member to be added to the larger counties in proportion to their popula tion—that the counties should be divided into districts, each to return one representative—the right of elective franchise in the districts to be extended to copyholders and leaseholders—the remaining four hundred to he chosen by householders—the poll to be taken throughout tile kingdom at one :time, and the same person not to be permitted ti vote for more than one place. It was also a pal t of his plan that Parliaments should be triennial. In advocating this plan, Mr. Grey drew an ingenious dis tinction between two principles which are generally con founded, by observing that, according to the proposed measure, " Members would bold their seats, not on the basis of universal suffrage, but of universal represen tation ; for the qualification would be so axed that no man, however mean, might not hope, by honest industry and lair exertions, to raise himself to this distinction." It was in vain that the masculine reasoning of Fox, and the splendid eloquence of Erskine, were exerted in support of this measure. The venal majority which Mr. Pitt com manded again bare down all powers of argument, and sixty-three only voted for the motion, which 258 rejected. The war which the boroughmongers had commenced for the restoration of the Bourbons, and for the benefit of loan-jobbers, contractors, and public speculatere, had then continued four years; and, during that time, Government had flung away no less than 130,000,0001. of the people's money, and laid on the country to the amount of six mil lions and a half annual taxation. That war was con tinued with a few months' intermission, for eighteen years afterwards, and at an expense of which the present state of the national debt is a melancholy memorial. A Re formed Parliament would have saved the nation from this prodigal purchase of " military glory" and its calamitous consequences.—Morning Herald. Our correspondent, O. P. Q., invites our attention to intelligence received from Poland, which leaves no doubt upon the subject of the Emperor of Russi a h av i ng de termined to attach Poland to Russia as a province, and observes— " It is to this that you must address yourself. The Emperor is about to violate treaties—to break faith with Great Britain —to extend the Empire of Despotism from the north to the centre of E u o ro r the human ne race, isabout to and coalesce to with h e Austria las against the ig liber ties fi s hat will E ng land say to project of uniting Poland to Russia as one of its provinces Will the Earl Grey, Lord Brougham, Lord Althorn, and Lord Palmerston consent to such a robbery—to such a system of Im perial insolence and breach of faith and national honour ? I will not—l dare not say—yes. But rather let me hope that Po land will owe to British influence, and British diplomacy, the preservation of her national independence, and that in some after time she will have to raise to Great Britain a national mo nument of gratitude and praise." If any recommendations of Great Britain could benefit the Poles, we have no doubt that our Ministers would readily afford them. But if Russia have determined to attach P o l an d to R uss i a, t h e E mperor w ill no t b e t urne d aside by mere admonitions from England. Ought England to do more than use her good office in such a case? They to whom the disposal of the resources of a nation are committed have a serious responsibility. We maintained, at the dine when the French invaded Spain to put down the Constitutional Government, that however unjssetifiable the act might be, we were not called on to interfere, on the mere abstract principle of preventing the commission of injustice by one State against another. We do not say justified is in no conceivable case England would not be ia taking part in a Continental war ; but we say that, except the security of England demands the sacrifice, we ought not to interfere in any such war, and that it is highly improbable the security of this country can ever be endangered from the Continent. What might be true policy in a Continental State would be Quixotism in the English Government. In a p implilet, just published, under the title of " Thoughts on the present aspect of Foreign Affairs ; by an Englishman," it is observed— " Let the free eountenance the free, and liberty will he re stored to those who have so inhumanly been depriv e d of it. In France, both Government and people are unanimous in favour of Poland. When has England shown such sympathy with suffer_ ing nations ? In truth, the great came of the unpopularity of England on the Continent is, that she will help nobody ; or, if ' she does, it seems to be indifferent whether the cause of liberty or absolutism be benetitted ; and this in spite of her boasted at tachment to freedom. France, on the contrary, whatever party rule, stretches forth a willing hand to any friend in distress. When Spain was divided between liberty and tyranny, the Abso. lutists got as ready assistance from France thouas the Liberals would now. The Liberal party have always looked to England as the protector as well as the provoker of liberty, and they have in. variably been disappointed. So that even the speeches of Lord Holland and Lord Brougham, proclaiming as they do to the world the finest principles of civil liberty, and the deepest com passion for those nations who do not enjoy them, act but as false lights,to decoy the unwary patriots of the Continent into danger s which they are left to their own resources to extricate them selves from." The conduct of France ought, in all c ontinental dim putes, to be different from that of England ; because her security must always be materially effected by the state of the surrounding nations. To take the case of Poland for instance. It would be a Quixotism on the part of the Government of this country to take part with the Poles against Russia. But it would not be difficult to demon strate, that if Austria, Prussia, and Russia be ill-affected towards France, and only wait a favourable conjuncture for attacking that country, she ought not to allow Poland to fall. In like manner, if Austria be determined to put down the revolution in Italy, France ought not to suffer the Italians to be crushed. France, under a King with absolute tendencies, enabled Ferdinand to trample on the Constitution, because it was important to a Monarch wishing to crush the libiTties of his own country to have an absolute Monarch for a neighbour. If there were now a struggle between the Liberals and Absolutists in Spain, France would naturally favour the Liberals. In fact it is the interest of an enlightened people to endeavour to remove all obstacles to the diffusion of knowledge among its neighbours, because the existence of ignorance supplies a bad Government with blind instruments for purposes of aggression. In a work just now published at Paris, under the title of " Recollections of the South" (Souvenirs du Midi), by Richard Faure, Physician of the military hospitals, the writer terminates a very unfa vourable picture of the Spaniards by the observation-- " Let I/3 hasten, as far as wishes go, a revolution which shall Fe -establish man in his rights ; a revolution so desirable for the interest of this people and those who surround them, for at pre sent the political existences are securities for each other in Europe ; the nations in arrear being a drag on those who wish to advance in the career of civilization, Spain is in this respect a very heavy burden on the rest. . . Who will place Spain among the nations of the South of Europe, and render her capable of concurring in the common defence against the invasion with which we are threatened by the unfortunate nations of the North r The extension of civilization among the neighbours of France is the diminution of her enemies, and the increase of her allies. So long as a moiety of the population of Europe remain brutal and ignorant, and blind instruments in the hands of their rulers, her civilization must be re tarded by the waste of her resources in preparations against possible aggressions. Our insular situation prescribes to us a different policy. We are interested in the prosperity of our neighbours of the continent—we sympathise with them in their good and their bad fortune—we are not in different to the progress of civilization ; but, as we can never he in danger from any Power in consequence of our insular position, we must always be very remotely inte rested in the struggles of the continent. The United States wish well to the cause of good government ; but they studiously avoid all participation in the quarrels of Europe. The writer of the pamphlet alluded to observes : If, then, an opportunity is afforded us, almost beyond what the most sanguine hope could have imagined, of repairing a po litical fault—of aiding a gallant nation to recover her freedom and independence, qualities which we so highly prize ourselves, and of which it is, at least in part, our fault that she ever was deprived ; will it not seem almost a dereliction of duty not to use our influence in preventing the destruction of a nation, which our diplomacy helped to place in its present state ? England is always in request when the sanction of her name is wanted to an iniquitous treaty, and equally disregarded at other times. If she has not the power of a trustee, to ask a question respecting the fulfilment of contracts to which she lent the credit of her name, her signature is a disgraceful mockery. . . . . . We might raise up to ourselves a powerful and, if national character is to be relied on, a sincere friend in war, who will otherwise be in the hands of our enemies ; and a mutually useful intercourse, which its present Government forbids, might exist between us in peace. But we are tied up by a debt, which those who contracted it were not clever enough to bequeath us the means of paying ,• contracted w to subsidise hireling Princes—the first t o d eser t us hen our in terests were not identified with theirs. In a crisis of Reform of all kinds, we must be content to leave the first post in this ho nourable undertaking to France, happy to be on such terms with that regenerated country as to be able to engage in the same en. terprises, and maintain, hand-in-hand, the same principles. But let us follow with earnestness and honour ; a fleet in the Baltic, and the Euxine, may show that Britain does not sleep. Let us remember that Poland has often armed for the protection—never for the invasion of the liberties of Europe." • . It is true that lord Castlereagh made a bungling job of it at the Congress of Vienna ; but if we are prepared to insist on the performance of all the treaties to which he was a party, we must return to the policy of the King's Speech, which preceded the overthrow of the Wellington Administration ; we must oppose ourselves to every at tempt to alter the arrangements against which half Europe is now complaining. Were we without debt, we should not the less protest against the creating one to maintain ware of romantic sympathy. It is true our debt has chiefly been created in wars for the support of the Eu ropean aristocracy. The Government of this country has hitherto been long in the hands of men whose sympathies have been with the European aristocracy, and who, when they took a side, employed the resources of the country in furtherance of the cause to which they were inclined. W e have now a Government not opposed to foreign improve ment—not inclined to support every despotism against its subjects; but, believing that the Administration will use their influence in promoting the good cause, we should be sorry to see them depart from the line of prudence which a British Statesman should constantly keep in his eye.—Morning Chronicle. The Reform Bill of his Majesty's Ministers appears to have allayed the ghost of discontent in Ireland, and to have produced union among all parties to a much greater extent than even the Emancipation Bill.of the Duke of Wellington. The correspondent of air evening paper, writing en the subject, says,— " As I anticipated, the Unionists and Apti-Unionists have coalesced to support Ministers and Reform. The requisition, a copy of which I sent you yesterday, bears the names of the Duke of Leinster, the Earl of Meath, Lord Cloncurry, Sergeant O'Loghlen, Alderman NPKenny, John David Latouche, Daniel O'Connell, Robert Roe, William Murphy, Frederick William Conway, David Lynch, Christopher Fitzsimon, Michael Staun ton' John Redmond, Joseph Dennis Mullen, Robert Cassidy, Richard Barrett, &c. The number of signatures is immense, but I have selected these names in order to show you that men of all parties, differing ever so widely upon other questions, have merged their peculiar opinion in order to give full, effective, and decided support to the grand measure of Reform. Perhaps there never was in Ireland such perfect unanimity upon any question—all have set their hearts upon Reform, and if Minis ters should deem it necessary to appeal to the people of the empire will give a very unequivocal and salutary'this portion response. " I have already noticed the two discontented parties—the Cor porators and the ultra Anti-Unionists, who dread tranquillity , because it would sink them to their natural level, and divest them of the fictitious importance thrown around them by agita tion. The Corporators have a much more substantial cause for dissatisfaction, because Reform cuts at the root of the abuses and monopoly on which they have fattened. They have got up a re quisition for an Anti-Reform meeting, which, in all probability, the Lord Mayor will convene, whilst he refuses to act upon the Reform requisition. The reformers are prepared for this, and will, I am informed, convene their meeting for Tuesday next. It will be the most important public assembly that has taken place in Ireland for many years. " The ultra Anti-Unionists who refuse to join the reformers, are even less numerous and respectable than I could have sup posed. They say that the people are deserted, and will not be sa tisfied : but they deceive themselves. Reform will occupy the whole attention of the great mass of the people, and, for the present at least, absorb all other questions. " The views of the moderate and practical portion of the advo cates of repeal are sanctioned by the great majority of the Ca tholic Prelates and Clergy, letters from several of whom I had an opportunity of perusing this morning. The most distinguished of those Prelates, who has been a supporter of the repeal ques tion, has expressed himself to this purport." This news is most gratifying, and may the good feeling which has thus been created long continue ! The inte rests of the two countries are bound together by ties which appeal to their affections as well as their independence; and we would fain hope and trust, that from this moment the cry for the repeal of the Union will be no more heard. —Morning Advertiser. A scandalous report is current in the City, relative to a gentleman who represented one of the southern counties of England in the last Parliament, and who is said to have absconded with a very considerable sum of money. The particulars, which we cannot ven ture to repeat on mere rumour, will probably transpire in a few days.—Morning Paper. ART AND LITERATURE.—The association of great general talent with high excellence in the practice of Art has seldom been so brightly manifested as in the instance of the late HENRY FUSEL', whose life and wri tings, edited by his friend and executor, Mr. KNOWLES, have just come before the public. It it seldom, too, that a professional life has been so marked with diversity of in cident as that of FUSELI—and seldom, moreover, that the personal character and habits of any man have presented so rich a theme as exists in his for anecdote and for study. FROM THE GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT. St. James's Palace, March 9, IF3L . This day the Prince de Talleyrand, Ambassador Extraordi nary and Minister Plenipotentiary from the King of the French, had an audience of his Majesty to deliver two letters from her Majesty, the Queen of the French, to which audience he was introduced by Lord Viscount Palmerston, his Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and conducted by Sir Robert Chester, Knt. Master of the Ceremonies. St. James's Palace, March 9. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knight hood upon Colonel Charles Wade Thornton, Aide-de-camp to his Majesty, Knight Commander of the Hanoverian Guelphic Order. St. James's Palace, March 9. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knight hood upon Major-General James Campbell, Major-General of Marines, Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guel phic Order. Office of the Lord Chamberl.lin to the Queen, St. James's, March 11. Notice is hereby given, that the Queen will hold Drawing_ rooms, at St. James's Palace, on the following days : March 24, April 14, April '24, May 12, May 26, and May 28. At the Court at St. James's, the 9th day of March, 1831, PRESENT, The King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council. His Majesty in Council was this day Pleas,ecl to appoint Thos. Duppa, of Llanshay, Esq. to be, Sheriff of the county of Radnor, in the room of Richard Duppa, of Llanshay, Esq. deceased. St. James's Palace, March 9. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon William Henry Poland, Esq. Sheriff of Lon don and Middlesex. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knight boon upon Chapman Marshall, Esq., Sheriff of London and Middlesex. Whitehall, March 10. Notice is hereby given, that an Adjourned Assize for the county of Norfolk will be holden at the Castle of Norwich on Thursday, the :nth day of March instant. Whitehall, March 1. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Thomas Lovegrove, of Reading, iu the county of Berks, Gent., to be a Master Ex.traor dinary in the High Court of Chancery. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. GILBERT BURRINGTON, Stock Exchange, stock-broker. WILLIAM LITTLE, Macclesfield-street North, City-road, tea-dealer. JOHN DOUGLAS COOPER and CHARLES KELLY COOPER, Woodeaves, Derbyshire, cotton-spinners. THOMAS and CHARLES GREASLEY, West Smithfield, clothiers. BANKRUPTS. THOMAS FROST, Vine-street, Waterloo-road, miller, to surrender March 18, at twelve, li, at one, and April '22, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners. Smith, Great Eastcheap. EDWARD NORRIS and THOMAS WRIGHT HODG SON, Manchester, cotton-spinners ' March 2:3, at nine, 25, at two, and April at nine, at the York Hotel, Manchester. Jackson, Manchester ; Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-row, London. HENRY BROMWICH, Newgate-market, butcher, March IS, at three, 25, and April 22, at two, at the Court of Commis sioners. Smith, Charter-house-square. FREDERICK JOHN DEBATT, Poultry, London, pastry_ cook, March 18, at eleven, 29, and April 2'2, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners. Leigh, tieorge-street, Mansion-house. JOSEPH WEBSTER, Leeds, dyer, March 17, at ten, at the Commercial-buildings, Leeds, April 13, at eleven, at the Leeds Court-house, and 2'2, at eleven, at the Commercial-buildings, Leeds. Battye, Fisher, and Sudlow, Chancery-lane, London ; Holt, jun., Leeds. JAMES ARMSTRONG, Raskelf, York, miller, March 25, at three, and April 23, at eleven, at the White Swan Inn, York. Butterfield, Grav's-inn-square. BENJAMIN BOWMAN and WILLIAM THOMPSON, Commercial-road, Middlesex, paint-manufacturers, March 15, at eleven, 29, at twelve, and April 22, at two, at the Court of Com missioners. Richardson, Ironmonger-lane, Cheapside. JOSEPH VEAL, Fordingbridge, Southampton, draper, March 15, 25, at three, and April 22, at two, at the Court of Commis sioners. Osbaldeston and Murray, London-street, Fencburch street ; Davy, Ringwood, Hants. GEORGE lON, Great Musgrave, Westmoreland, innkeeper, March 30, 31, and April 22, at eleven, at the King's Head lnn, Appleby. Addison, Verulam-buildings, Gray's-inn ; Atkinson, Appleby. DIVIDENDS. J. Graves, Langharn Chambers, London, merchant, April 5, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners—W. Harrison, Dart mouth-street, Westminster, army accoutrement maker, April A, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners—S. Partridge, Bir mingham, tea dealer, April 5, at twelve, at the Hen and Chickens Hotel, Birmingham—lt. Reed, Birmingham, gun-maker, April 2, at one, at the Royal Hotel, Birmingham—C. Finney, Derby, joiner, April 4, at two, at the Hotel and King's Head Inn, Derby—A. Sheath, C. Sheath, J. Steel, and J. Wray, Lincoln, bankers, April IS, at one, at the Saracen's head Inn, Lincoln— T. Sparrow and W. Nickisson, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stafford shire, bankers, April 5 at elcven,at the Roebuck Inn, Newcastle under-Lyme—D. Hodgson,i Harrington, Cumberland, grocer, April 2, at eleven, at the Office of Mr. Hodgson, Whitehaven. CERTIFICATES-APRIL 1 J. Whereat, Romsey, Southampton, ironmonger—J. Richard son, Regency-place, Great Surrey-street, currier—J. Robertson, Berkhampstcad, Hertfordshire, surgeon—J. Cherry, Coventry, painter—J. Porter, Manchester, publican—T. Potts, Rotherhithe wall, baker—W. Boldron, Aldborough, Yorkshire, lodging-house keeper—N. and W. Nathan, Mansell-street, Goodman's-fields, quill merchants—C. Bull, Birt's Morton, Worcestershire, farmer —J. Harris, Fore-street, linen-draper. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. S. Watson and Co., Asholt and Guiseley Mills, scribbling millers—C. and R. Neal, Edgeley, Cheadle, Cheshire, hatters— J. and C. R. Lomax, Dunsters, Bury, Lancashire, bleachers—l. Butterfield and R. Shackleton (alias R. Butterfield), Keighley, Yorkshire, worsted spinners—S. Brooks and S. Hodson, Man chester, calico-printers—W. and J. Avery, Studley, Warwick shire, needle manufacturers—J. Jenkins and Co. Pillgwenlv, Monmouthshire, coal merchants—D. Pearson and T. Bennett, Altrincham, Cheshire, surgeons—J. Fairclough and Co. Man chester, calico printers—J. Coupland and C. Seely, Lincoln, bone-grinders—R. Hcrries and J. Wilkinson, Leeds, Yorkshire, flax-spinners—W. Taylor and J. Roope, Great Yarmouth, Nor folk, surgeons—B. R. and E. R. Vickers, Leeds, oil-merchants. PRICE OF SUGAR. The average price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, computed from the Returns made in the week ending March 8, is 245. d. per cwt., exclusive of the duties of customs paid orpayable thereon on the importation thereof into Great Britain. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH ii. The Royal Assent was given to-day by Commission to the Pensions Duties Bill, the Exchequer Bills Bill, the Consolidated Funds Bill, the Appropriation Bill, and twenty private Bills. The Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and Lord Durham. Lord DACRE presented petitions in favour of Parlia mentary Reform from the Ward of Bread-street, in the city of London, and three places in Hertfordshire. Petitions were also presented by Lord King, from St. James's, Clerkenwell, and several other places, in favour of Reform, and also thirteen petitions, from different parts, against the duty en sea-borne coals; by Lord Kilburne, from Dumfries and several other places, in favour of Re form, and also from Glasgow, against the post-horse duty ; by the Duke of Gordon, from Aberdeen, against slavery ; by Earl Stanhope, from Hull, against the increased duty on Canada timber, and from Bexley; complaining of great distress, and praying for relief ; by the Earl of Rosehery from the Trades of Edinburgh, and from Linlithgow, in favour of Parliamentary Reform ; by the Marquis of Bute, from the ship-owners of Greenock, Port Glasgow, and Cardiff, against the proposed alteration in the duty on Canada timber ; by the Duke of Argyll, from Argyllshire, in favour of Reform ; by Lord Farnham, from Galway, against the repeal of the Union ; by Lord Glengall, from Cashel and Clonmell, against the repeal of the Union, and from Tipperary, in favour of Reform ; and by Earl Spencer, from Market-Mat-borough, to a similar effect. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from a Mr. Golfing, a freeholder in Kent, complaining of the hardship of the Game Laws. In doing so, the Noble Lord expressed his pleasure that Government had taken this subject under consideration, and promised them his support when the Bill to which be referred was brought before the House. The Marine Mutiny Bill was read a third time and passed. CLERKENWELL CHURCHES. Lord KING stated, that he had in his hand a petition from the churchwardens, and others, of the parish of St. James, Clerkenwell, to which he begged leave to call their Lordships' attention before they proceeded to the order of the day on the Church Building Bill. The petitioners complained of the conduct of the Commissioners for the building of new churches, in inflicting, on the parish a new church, which was quite uncalled for and unnecessary. Of course, he had no other information on the subject than what lie derived from others; but the petitioners stated, that there were already in the parish three churches, in each of which there were a number of seats unlet. In St. James's church there were 429 seats unlet ; in Pen tonville chapel, 203 unlet„ and in St. John's church, 150 unlet; making in all, 762 seats unlet. The churchwar dens of St. James's had objected to the building of the last new church, and they were, therefore, much surprised when they found that the Commissioners had begun to build another, and they remonstrated against it without effect. In another parish in the neighbourhood, they had in the same manner begun to build a new church, and the people of that p ar i a h remonstrated, and the b u ildi ng in that instance was stopped ; and yet the petitioners said, that when they appli e d to t h e Commissioners an d remon strated, their application was treated with contempt— that was what they stated. There were certain cir cumstances likewise to be attended to ; for in one of these churches there was a very popular preacher, and a greater number of p eop l e attended in consequence — some of them being from the neighbouring parishes, and yet, notwithstanding this, there were a number of seats unlet. The Commissioners proceeded on the principle of the a mount of population, but that was a very uncertain and precarious criterion, f or a great port i on o f t h e population might be Dissenters. And then the parish was already at an enormous expence—no less than 2,0001. annually on account of the churches. In the new churches, the gross amount of the pew rents !vent to the preacher, and the parish was left to p a y th e sexton ' s sa l ar y, and otherinci dental expences. That really appeared net to be just, for it ought to be the nett produce of the pew rents, and not the gross amount, that should be given to the preacher. The petitioners stated, that they had expended 3,0001. on the decorations of the last built new church of St. Mark's, and that now there was very great difficulty in raising the poor rates, and were unwilling to be loaded with the additional expellee on account of a new church when it was not necessary. The petitioners stated that they had the strongest desire to promote the interests of morality and religion, and that they only objected to the other church because it was unnecessary. The petition was signed with about 1,800 names, and the petitioners prayed relief in this matter. The Bishop of LONDON thought himself called upon to say a few words on this subject, as the parish was in his diocese. The population of that parish was 52,000, and if the Commissioners did, in building the new churches, act on the principle of population, they did so by the direction of the Legislature ; and if there was any thing erroneous in it, they were not in fault. He did not know whether any remonstrance had been made by the petitioners against the building of St. Mark's church ; but, were he to judge from circumstances, he should say that the remon strance, if made, could not have been very strong : for they had, as they rightly stated, expended 3,0001. on the deco rations of that church, which was more than was required. If in some of the churches the seats were not all occupies!, it was, perhaps, owing to some temporary circumstances ; for that of St. Mark, as soon as it was built, was filled to overflowing. Soon after, a representation was made by many respectable inhabitants of the parish to the Commis sioners, that there was still great need of another church for the accommodation of those who resided about Battle bridge ; a circumstance which was sufficiently obvious, and this representation was accompanied with the offer of a site for another chapel. The Commissioners were, at the time, rather straitened for funds, but they did, in the execution of what they considered to be their duty, make preparations for erecting a cheap chapel for the accommo dation of the poor. All this was well known, and yet no remonstrance had been made till the labourers had been engaged, and the work, in fact, been begun. It was true that then a remonstrance was sent to him, which he forwarded to the Commissioners, and it was then repre sented to the parties that they did come too late, but the remonstrance was not treated with disrespect. The Noble Baron had stated the facts in a very temperate manner, and no blame could attach to him or to the petitioners for bringing forward their complaints. The Commissioners, however, did think it their duty to provide, as far as their funds allowed, churches for the accommodation of the whole of the population if they chose to attend ; and the objections probably did not come so much from the petitioners, who, he believed, were worthy persons, as from others of a different description. Lord KENYON begged permission to say a few words on this subject, as he happened to be present on Tuesday last, at a meeting then held by the Commissioners, when this subject was under discussion. The grievance was certainly a small one, for the parish was not called upon to pay one farthing towards the building of this chapel ; and if all the seats in the churches already built were not taken, it was still a great object to give a❑ opportunity to attend to those who chose to do so. It ought to be ob served, that accommodation already existed only for 4,000 out of a population for 52,000, and this additional chapel would only accommodate 1,200 more ; and the whole ac commodation would still be rather below the mark. As to the expense, if the petitioners had thought the expenses extravagant, they would not have laid out so much on the decoration of St. Mark's. Lord KING—The petitioners did not object to a pro per expense, and therefore they had laid out the 3,0001. on the decoration of St. Mark's, since, as the thing was to be done at all, it was reckoned desirable to do it handsomely. But what they complained of was, that when they were already at an expense of 2,0001. a year fur the parish churches, they were to be saddled with an additional and uctiece,sary expense. There was no denial of the correct ness of their statement, that in the existing churches there were 762 seats unengaged. The petition was laid on the table. The Bishop of LONDON moved that the report of th• New Churches' Bill be now received. _ _ It was received accordingly, and the third reading was fixed for Monday. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a peti tio❑ from a place in Devonshire, praying for an alteration in the tithe system. PRINTED CALICO DUTIES. Lord AUCKLAND moved the second reading of the Printed Calico Duties' Bill. He was not aware that there was any objection to this Bill, but if there was to be any discussion upon it, the subject might be taken up on Mon day. In the mean time, he hoped that their Lordships would allow the Bill to be read a second time now, as it was highly desirable that there should be no delay in passing the measure if it was to be passed, for there were no less than 200,000 workmen and their families whose labours were suspended t,ll their Lordships' opinion on the Bill should be given. The Bill was read a second time, and ordered for a third reading on Monday. The Mutiny Bill and Scotch Creditors' Bill were com mitted.—Report on Monday. Adjourned tilt Monday. II 0 USE OF COMMONS, M.i.ncE 11. In consequence of there being a ballot for Committees to try the petitions against the return of Members for Mayo and Athlone, the gallery was not opened till past Five o'clock. Several Private Bills were read a third time and passed, and others forwarded a stage. COLONIAL TRADE BILL. On the motion of Lord ALTIIORP, the House re solved itself into a Committee of tle Colonial Trade Bill. Mr. P. THOMSON said, that it was only necessary to recall the attention of the House to the Order in Council issued in 1826, to prohibit the intercourse of the colonies with the United States of America. That order had been in force from 1826 until towards the close of the last ye ir. The suspension of the order rendered the enactment of a Bill, such as was proposed to the House, indispensable. He would not enter into a discussion of the policy of the prohibition in 1826, but the consequences of that mea sure were found to be so inconvenient, that the late Admi nistration had found it necessary to propose a Bill to per mit and to regulate the trade of the colonies in the West Indies and in Canada with the United States. The first documents, which the present Ministers for the Colonial Department found upon coming into office, were protests, not only from the American Minister, but from our North American colonies, against the Bill of the Right Hon. Gen tleman opposite. From an inquiry into the matters com plained of, he (Mr. P. Thomson) had found it necessary to make some alterations in that Bill ; and although these alterations were but trifling, they were yet such as would give satisfaction to all the parties interested.— (Hear.)—At the same time that he proposed to pro tect all those articles of colonial produce in which the Co lonies are extensively concerned, he should take off the duty from those articles, the production of which was not of any great importance to them.—(Hear, hear.)—By some of the proposed alterations (that of the duty on wheat and flour, for instance), the British West India Islands would be benefited to the amount of perhaps 20,0001. a year. The duty upon st heat was to be re duced from Gs. to 55., which would give a sufficient pro tection to our North American shipping, at the same time that it would confer some considerable advantages upon our West India Colonies, where lie was confident the diminu tion of the duty would be regarded as a great bsen. He found that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had raised the duty upon staves and beards; but that in order to afford to that branch of the Canadian trade an efficient protection, it was necessary to raise the duty from 19s. grey, and 18s. white, to Ms. and 23a.—(The Hon. Gen tleman was so indistinctly heard throughout his explana tions of the details of the Bill, that it would be vain for us to attempt giving an account of them.) Mr. HERRIES thought that it was necessary to sub mit the schedule of the Right lion. Gentleman to he there carefully examined. He did not think that any person who had heard the Right Hon. Gentleman's explanations could perfectly understand the mode which the Hon. Gen tleman intended to adopt, or the effects which he anti cipated. He would, therefore, recommend the Hon. Gen tleman, instead of the irregular course which he was pur suing—(Hear) —to allow the particulars of his schedule to be printed, so that the whole subject might be fairly understood and fully discussed. If that were agreed to, he (Mr. H.) would consider it the less necessary to state his objections at present to the proposition of the lion. Gentleman, for if he did enter into the discussion, he could expect only to be as little understood as he really believed the Hon. Gentleman had been by those who heard hint. The question was, whether the principle, which the Bill professed, had been acted upon ? It was to him matter of surprise and satisfaction, that gentlemen opposite had abjured the principles on which they had formerly opposed the Government to whore they succeeded, and that they had returned so far to sound and just principles as even to increase the duties, which be (Mr. H. ) had thought suffi cient for the protection of our colonial interests.—(Hear.) Whatever deficiency of support they (Ministers) might ex perience in their present course from some Hon. Gentle men, who had lately rendered them on other subjects very zealous and efficient support, he hoped that deficiency would be compensated by the support which they would certainly receive from those who had a l ways k ept t h ose principles in view. The principal alteration proposed by the Hon. Gentleman was, that of the duties on flour and staves. Now, although he (Mr. II.) was aware that the duty on staves might advantageously be raised, yet, as the importation of flour to the West Indies was connected with that of staves, he considered that the du l l! upon the flour was a sufficient protection to staves. to could not say, therefore, that he was quite prepare" acquiesce in the proposed alteration of the duties on fiou' t He was aware that there was a difference of opinion an l° P 6l o the Members of the present Government nn the " br ,l i t connected with the present Bill. He was aware that to t oo ht President of the Board of Controul was oppose d principle of protection. That Right Hon. Gientlerna7.l' no a former occasion, had addressed him (Mr. C. Grant) I in , the prite, friendly terms of admonition, when he acted upon i n separta; ciple now adopted by the Right Hon. Gentleman "Pr s i l en t Ile should be much pleased to find that the pre of of the Board of Controul concurred in their chang!be opinion. The Bill was founded not certainly upon h ' er principle of political economy, but upon a m uch The principle—that of doing j ustice to the colalie'' the s,heilule which had been agreed to in 1822 was, , House knew, acted upon during a period of thr ee Y e 3 0 0 ,0 n comely, to 1825 ; thus it had a fair trial, and the result of that experiment ? Nothing less than s he 52'de, decrease in the British and West India tonnage. s and melee amounted to the difference between 76,000 O n ht 3..•,000 tons, and all within that short period. H e t lic)° , g ,,,ci that afforded just matter of regret, and abundant Ile Ile for the ab an d onmen t o f so unsuccessful a syst em ' the thought that this country 111,1 a right to complain he Americ n duties upon British tonnage, and he th° !:l 4 also that other g r o un d o f j us t complaint was to be +no, lii the tortuous policy pursu e d by th e American G . ' h fs too l• nient throughout the whole of the n e go c iationa alt place upon that subject. He wished the House t 0 of serve that, after the year 1825, the sy stems t ht protection was renewed, and the effect was, t° , 3 " t .,et tonnage of the country was brought back to it' `",ao level. The three years' trial failed, and in his op iote " one but a theorist would recommend a return to i t. o af to opinions expressed by Gentlemen opposite, Rhea ,c).)04 office, he had much gratification in perceiving , that did they had been doled to the Councils of the Kings the.loslf not act to the full extent of the principles they Prervi the : expressed. With these observations he should, '"'„ o r. present, content himself, intending to t a k e a future Otos tunity of entering more in detail. The Bill, as rf or he stood, in sonic respects would have his support , ate was glad to find that the Right Hon. Gentleman b't , rf ° ,olo to sounder principles than might have been expect e ' his former declarations. sOj Mr. P. THOMSON explained ; adding, that he ',. 0 0 take the earliest opportunity of effecting the a lter' j ot mentioned. The Right Hon. Gentleman who sl°,% - o eci l was the author of the repeal of the Order in which took away the protection, and he seernea ° ro te" fault with his Majesty's Government for refusiogkoe tion. He urged the Bill upon the adoption of the P on the ground that it called upon the West Indies f mate sent sacrifice with the view of securing to there 01 V benefit. He defended the consistency of the pre vernment, and maintained that they had always 14 1, 1 % 1 ' vourable to the protection of the coloni e s, and h es a ° ,l° endeavour to render his protecting measure hoer , 'the the empire at large, without, in any respect, sacrideieg true interest of the colonies. flos' Mr. ROBINSON said, that although the Rig ht , a tti Gentlemen at both sides of the House expressed the affection for the American colonies, the colonies, he l e vi e) were very likely to be ruined by them hoth.-- 4 - c alr They were now discussing one of the most imnportaoool, mercial subjects that could came before Parliament, liet; observed with regret, nut in a very full House. v . „ fic or s t o e n nns s t , extraordinary now, en matters thellth March, they v connected with weretbiso e ' 01 1; during the schedule of duties which were to be is td o si', trade which was carried on since October last. Th i loo l specimen of the rummer iu which the commercial s'i t afi: this country were man aged. After a long nego c ,' oo ' during which the American Government had always with an anxious eye towards a renewal of the direot l o eol course with our West India colonies, the late Gover ° t i e io gave America the advantage of repeating an offer al sod 1825, and then refused ; the interval between 1 62 ,.ditr° 1830 having been passed by America in a course WO', commercial hostility to this country. By the triad . o ' ll the Congress had, in effect, prohibited the importshrio{ British manufactures into the United States, and, in of fact, the only trade carried on was by smugghng"tßight Boa. Gentleman (Mr. Herries) had atteloP /o el 0 justify 10 his proceedings by the opinion of Mr. Ilw ° e il but, from the speech which Mr. Huskisson deliver.oool that House in 1828, upon moving for the produ et k l a, the American tariff, he contended that Mr. fi es pl ? would have been very unlikely to have sa nctiooVe, concession that had been made towards Americ a 1 , 1 40 sober last, after the system of direct hostility that country had pursued. In the negociation oa rr ," t ic i !, between Lord Aherdeen and Mr. Maclean, the Ah;;, / ,0" diplomatist had the address to persuade his Lee to mix up the general commercial question bet o 7o o two countries with the question as it related to th e r e re; trade. No man of common sense could say, hold that the commerce between the two countries she tt irr s be looked upon as a whole ; and that if the 141° te f, ' 0 1 4 , would not let our manufactures into the United Sts o o should not give them the boon they had so long and admit them to have a direct intercourse with leettoco India colonies.—(Hear, hear.) There could ha ve o il difficulty in our saying to the United States, " ye t " 0 , think proper to revive the tariff of 1824, we sh , a h ve,,, certain the question of colonial intercourse. to ,eo` o , Government adopted the views of Mr. Macleanrcr.rette'rt without any condition, allowed the Americans 3 ) tercourse with our West India colonies, which s*- o je , little less than giving them a part of our coasting f i ght t ; (Hear.) The North American colonies had s aeeo o; complain, after the correspondence of Lord Ahe r d i o s Mr. Maclean, that the trade to the West fh. thrown open, on the scale of duties established red fre, It would be raid that the West India trade I - ce ll - t ies' tection. He admitted that it did ; but if those geopoi, who had an interest in the West India propertf ; c r y el, that this Bill would operate as a boon to thern, t arit ,g o , greatly mistaken. So far from being an ad v t tt go l ,. them, it would be made use of as an argurne h , he s o p , granting them a real benefit in the reduction 01. " s bat o l a duties. But the present Bill amounted to a to tal ment of the shipping interest. It might y s i h 3 of about 50,000/. a year, but the injury to the, ,t interest would outweigh not only a saving, of but all colonial questions whatsoever. He fuel be S ° e l plained of the measure as calculated to increase a t bst o t time power of the United States, while it redu ce t o ; r o t; our owe. The policy of this country should hettiolciej no concession to the Americans without an c(1 o ° , o' for America was not actuated by the liberal r l , l lies ooc by Mr. Maclean, as appeared from the heavY a ti oc t,d , had imposed upon West India produce. Its ers ° ,l4 country never had, and never could hav e, ',10 13 course of greater commercial hostility against us /P e a were practising at this moment. eree Mr. C. GRANT thought that the wisest e on this Government could pursue, was to bury ine 4 plV all animosities with respect to America. Th e ly S O FI V of the United States had exhibited the most 0 13 t: or e P 8 sect conduct, and his Majesty's late Governmch,rse. feetly justified in throwing open the intere°,ol3,ooe correspondence between the two Governments"optr/ honourable to both, and, he thought, Wou ld oo nh i e etr much to re-unite the feelings of the two e 6 1 0 8 (Hear, hear.) The Bill which the Right 1/ foor,( i. man (Mr. Berries) had introduced was not 'i o tP;er present Bill, bemuse it increased the duties, sr' ll f he o'4 sent reduced them all, with the exception °,! e ,ealt assbe e' ); two, which experienced a slight increase. b. vg l l3 fore, not guilty of any inconsistency in opr" Ol ii3 the Bill of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and P r a fs l : l , which was now before the Committee. • o irejar Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS said that time Pr' 'c or e , !I!, Bill was to promote the intercourse betscernro eill o f ro ," American colonies and the 'West Indio' ; ; o n' ° ,6l / Bill came to be discussed on its next stages, s; c 0 , 0, ;( 0 his opinion on th e d u ti es gener ally, by io°' # posed to eff ec t thi s o bj ec t. Th e o bject of t 1 isreO l ote c , o give protection to th e intercourse between t he t he and Canada, so that the firmer might find I n eer tai° co o o market for her home productions. In 1821 , O ft h . 9 l,lo l ec had been fix e d, i n consequence o f the reP er o ta o ,o t 'oo mittee which then sat upon the subject ; a r st s oof e do had grown up under those duties, to so t i e o ing o 04 , that this Bill would hove the effect of d 'r oa d tons of shiping engaged in the Norta Ar ato tP; p f ' fur the purpose of putting 600,0001' otri jes fullsy, in violation of that order which the e°° those 00. er ave been a final settlement neawhich Mr. at hg o C r cti O egdi t: tRno.,T timeEh e N ( A i a r s ti n k at d :ci teohdnasatitdae:r. time hreir 13get);o:i.,boee5ref30,:e00:: pire. They were founded on the princiP 3 ' e _ liot aeo' t oreP c a , porary protection at the discretion of l': ,o re tosl d e Sir HENRY PARNELL slid that s he r d in oeo be was a recurrence to the principle abandon' l'3`l,ef, pressly on the ground (as Mr. Huskiss°l't fortricom Deed Blared) that it was not prudent to coerYth Ames rade intent of the measure was that the Nor it 1 4 1 0 0 0, nies should be supported, and therefore the Ac e iot o oter , to lay heavy duties on the timber trade t 0 o ls This was palpably inconsistent with t o F t l eo p d, for there could be no question but t o li t o: l6 ,, e o , would retaliate by raising the price m u s s es in in effect, be abe ivy tax on the co