The Sun. — London, England, 1842-02-15 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—There is " no mistake " about the recep -' 'tion of the Peel Corn-bill atnongst that inmense body, ' ivlio,had been led to cherish expectations of Sir Robert Peers intentions in favour. of co m merce. " We*Must de . Clare," says the Leeds Mercury, " that never, since the _ temporary defeat of the Reform Bill, have we known strong a feeling of disgust and indignation excited in Yorkshire and Lancashire, and among the trading classes generally, as has burst forth on the announce meat of the Government juggle. It has been reported, • on the other hand, that " some of the Tory Members, Eardley Wilmot and others, thought Peel might saft4y have gone farther." What is very certain is, that if it was safe to take a step at all, it was not safe to take • sliOrt a step as the Minister has now3taken. There t. as no safe alternative but staying on his own side of the c,lou;h,orclearingit. But Sir Robert was looking backward to Hansard, not forward to the requisite length ofleap. lie was looking backward to the Tory benches, not forward, to.the - public feeling and interests. How to reconcile sqttireish support, and verbal consistency with some show of change, was the only problem he seems to have felt himself called on to work out. It i s astonishing he should not have felt that if there was 'any necessity to seem to do something, it must have amotintvd to a necessity to do something in earnest ! There could not be any mere Parliamentary necessity for change. There sat an assured majority behind him, obtained by mere panic of change. What then was it .that rendered change imperative, despite that majority There can no answer, except the roused expectations • of the commercial community. Now, if those ex pectations could compel the show of change from hostile majority, Must they not compel its reality ? at is, indeed; passing strange that a Minister, whose apposed disposition to concede to public o pi n i on , an d to consuit public necessities, was the true source of his s ,„.,s lig th,. should not have now thrown himself on that strength, and shown himself in reality what he has always „been anxious to appear in words, the safe and indispen . mule link between stubborn Conservatism and rash Re .; form. That delusion has now vanished for ever. It has ~uow been too thoroughly proved that the present Prime Minister is a man of words, and - nothing but words. But there is a point where words necessarily fail those . , who care no thi ng for things. There is a time when • their verbal issues must be paid in more solid currency. That is the moment for distinguishing the statesman • from the mere party leader. The former keeps in view, through all changes, the aim of national objects. his language may:be unguarded, unmeasured, and even,- at some times, mconaistent. But he always means some thing ; he always means to du something, having the 'rho mere party leader means nothing but to be thee. e ht to mean what will serve his party best. TANI).IIII).—We have felt it a duty to our readers .mid to truth to print all the communications upon the subject of the proposed modification of the Corn-laws that have reached our hands to-day, without any • reference to the agreement or disagreement of the writer ,with our own views, It will be seen how few -- thev aids, and hoW nearly they approach to an unqua 3itiCal approval of Sir Robert Peel's plan. The attempt to disunite the Conservative party upon this question may • be considered, indeed, as utterly hopeless ; and we rejoice to that that the manufacturers-as many of them as are intelligent and hottest, as many of them as do not seek to ilestroythe aeieultural interest—are beginning to express their satisfactio n . The purpose of the plan cannot be hater described than in the words of our Manchester correspondent ; it Is an arrangement admirably devised to give to the manufacturers the benefit of all the late Teat improvements in agriculture without checking the rfr9lttess. (1: Such improvenients. This is just • the mann tPeturets are entitled to share in the benefit, terause, with whatever ill grace on the part of Some, they have in part paid for it. But the landed :interest are surely entitled to preserve their pro portion of the benefit, the greater part of which they have paid for, and the whole of which has been 10 - ,cured by their exertions. The noisy party at present is, however, one which looks, not with satisfaction, but !-•with malignant spite, at the improved resources of the country. These men, so far from rejoicing in the im provement of agilculture, regard that improvement as a. calamity. Willingly would they see one-half the jiroduce of our fields blighted ; and if Providence in it bounty should increase the present product two , they would feel the common blessing as . a severe affliction. An abundant home supply • -would„ they know, raise the rate of wages, and deprive . them of the steady foreign corn • trade. - True, domestic abundance would improve the home market, but not in the same pro roriien in which it would raise - the price of wages, The pressure of want upon the humbler classes is in every, Country the spring of manufacturing industry, as _was well known to every politicalphilosepher, before, the principle was strained by the New Poor-hyl Commis .. sinners and the Mill-owners of Manchester, &c., .teste :11r. Ashworth. The Leaguers have not yet ventured to • say directly Aliat. what they want is to diminish the ' home supply, in order to have a more completely pauperised population at their mercy ; but this is what - they mean, and what they say, too, very unequivocally, though indirectly,. when they com- Plain that Sir Robert Peel's plan will not ensure a " regular and steady foreign corn trade." A. regular and steady foreign corn trade can be en sured only by so constant a deficiency in the home produce as shall prevent that produce ever meeting the demand of the country even in one year out of ten ; for ' thiti rare' interruption would be quite sufficient to ilii.;trOy; the regularity and steadinesS of the trade. The whole .purpose of the present aeitation is to get the wOrking classes more absolutely . than they are 'Within the grasp of the monied capitalist ; and this ought. to be shown to the people without reserve. The time, is not a time for delicacy in the matter. Nothing but the utmost frankness in speaking to the people can !VI Tt very serious dangers. The Leaguers mean blood shed, if bloodshed be thought necessary to the effecting j or their object ; witness their incendiary harangues, wit ness some of their acts, and the countenance given to thoSe act* . by, the men who ought to prevent them. WeAtaVe received a letter from Derby describing the proceedings on Thursday of a "League. mob of 7,000 • or 8,000 persons assembled by torch-light, who held the town at their mercy for a considerable time, until two • or three Conservative Magistrates, of inferior Magisterial • rank, felt them-elves at liberty to interfere. A recol lection of the libel laws forbids us to publish all the par ' oculars that have come to our knowledge, and during the sitting or - Parlianient it ought to be unnecessary for us to do so. THE CORN-LAWS MEETING AT SOUTHWARK. THE ADJOURNED MEETING, The adjourned meeting was held in a room of one of Mr. Alder- :nail's warehouses, to which the High Bailiff and the other gentle. Alen, proceeded in a body. They were joined here by several hundreds, who could have found no place in the Town Ha'l. But the room, though spacious, atThrtied in other respects hut very im perfi.et accommodation, either to the press or to the public; and ,egret to state that our report of the procedings must therefore, be • ye, y imperfect :sir Wit Liam Hawes seconded the adoption of the petition 4 to Parliament which had been moved by Mr. Weston, against the proposed metsure of Sir R. Peel, which the petition denounced as insuilicient and utterly valueless. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to s that Sir Itabeit Peel himself acknowledged that the measure would afford no adequate relief for the distress at present e;?eisting in the country. It, would satisfy no class—neither the laud- Jr.i.ls °lithe one hand, nor the people on the other; And the Ministry who proposed so heartless and unavailing a measure, should be driven by an indignant people from the offices which they filled , 1 , 0 unworthily —(Cheers.) Mr. ItaiNstEtc, a Chartist, then addressed the meeting, con_ dom ning the Corn-laws, but contending that It would he impossible to, obtain a repeal of them, till the working-classes were cssed of the franchise. He pointed out that the arsistance' 'of the werking - classes was absolutely neces sary to ,the middle classes to enable them to carry their mea sures, and contended that the middle class, as a body, was not friendly to the, labouring put of the population.—(Cries of " Ques. lion," "Go on," and great confusion.) Mr. Rainsley farther ad , dressed the meeting to the same effect, but so great was the confusion (pat his, observations were unheard except by those on the platform. Ile concluded by proposing an addition to the petition, asserting the principle of the adoption of the People's Charter. , Mr. PA 1:1411, a ChartiA, .said that Mr. Rainsley had prepared ail addition to the petition, similar to the one moved on the last %.ccaSion. it then received 5,600 signatures from the borough of So,uthwark alone. i hey were now called on to petition the House COllltrollB riot to pass Peel's Bill on the Corn-Jaws—that House had treated thrill with so much contempt and contumely. IG was,useless to petition them, or to have anything to do with so teet,a lot.—(Cries of " Question.") They would not destroy class ... 14 etislation till. the Charter was the law of the land. The working ,had as great a stake in the country, and as great . right to the franchise as any aristocrat, or lauded pro- Trietor or millocrat.—(cries of " Shut un," and " Question." Under the present system there was no hope. The people must the power of snaking their owa laws. There would be no use an attempting to bolster up the falling Whigs, who had had power • (tering the last ten years to repeal the Corn.laws if they had honesty , i . ough.—(Criee of " Hear, hear," and interruption.) If the • Anti-Corn.law party then were honest, they 'would join the stoking millions of the country, and persevere until they bad) procured a democratic House of Commons, in which Would be soon done away with those laws that pressed upon • the food and industry of the people. Let not the Tories gull you as • the W hies did.--(Cheers and uproar.) Let theprcsent electing do its dins', and give atone to all the (MK meetings sf the country. Let. the middle classes unite with the working classes, and they would soon I aye- the elective franchise extended in favour of both, for the b sec of public opinion would be irresistible.—(Cheers.) Then they vould have a House in which the people would be fairly repre sented, and the operatives would have a fair day's wages for a lair `lay ' s work.—(Cheers.) With these words he supported the Moti on. —(Cheers.) el Mr. BIACKMORE warned the operatives against the middle asses, who called for their assistance now because they wanted them to hell' in repealing the Corn-laws for their own benefit. Would the working men now abandon the people's petition and the Charter ?--(Cheers from the Chartists.) if they did they would git e the public and the press just reason to insult them.—(Hear, hear.) Let the working Well remember that they never would get their rights either as regarded food, or any thing else, until they bad a share in returning the Parliament, and a voice in making the laws. The Anti Corn-law party said to them, "If you will help us to repeal the Curn.laws, we win help you to get the suffrage." but the operatives should answer, you help us to get the suf frage first.''— (Cheers) It was no use to repeal the Corn.laws, . unless the people were allowed to exercise the power of a con . . stitueney.— (Uproar.) Mr. HEARNE said that the meeting was called for a spe cific purpose—to present a petition against the Corn.laws. —(Loud c heers-) It had been said th a t the Chartist peti tion was s i gn ed by 5,600; but the petition they were met to adopt was signed by nearly three times that nuasher.—(Cheers and interruption.) They should act like sensible ruen.—( Hear, hear, and Contßsion.) Mr. FEaantls O'Cosisioa then presented himself amidst loud cheers from the Chartists, and proceeded to say that he w as nor. prised to find that whe n the pro poser anti seconder addressed t h e meeting in support of t h e petition, these were no S i gns of interruption; but when the working.esen to speak they were met by cries of " Questioncommenced , goes_ 2 tkm." And yet it was net tbeir intention to come between the People and the Corn.laws, or to drive that measure from the House `it commons, but to dislodge Sir Robert Pee l from his posi. tot,''' rr.s, c ers.) The question was, h o w they could best ert t ,Thwi ' ll4 ' %Red of theft laws. ,apd. the adoption the People's Charter in the shortest time.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think that the most effectual means to attain those ends would be to pine the repeal of the Corn.laws before the Charter. (Cheers from the Cl,artsts.) Did not the present constituency send into Parliament a great majority in favour of the Corn.laws, and could their repeal be expected until the constituent body was enlarged?—(Cheers.) Was there ever such a disproportion in the distribution of wealth as at present ; so much money in the hands of one class, and so much poverty endured by the other ?—(Cheers.) And was it not curious that the poverty should fall on the unrepresented, and all the wealth on those who were represented ?—(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. O'Connor) had lately fallen in with a cobler, who told him a story about the Bishop of Exeter. " Well, Daniel," said the Bishop, "I am informed you are a Chartist, and, let me tell you, that you cannot be a Chartist without being an infidel." "But, my Lord," said Daniel, " I have got 10 c hild ren, and you have got none, an d I want something to feed them." "But don't you know," said his I.ordship, " that God does not send any months without at the same time giving food to till them." " Very true, my Lord," said Daniel, "but his good designs are • thwarted by evil men. How else, my Lord, could he have given me all the mouths and your Lordship all that might fill them."—(Great laughter.) If at quarter-day Sir Robert Peel, and his brothers in office, wire to be refused their salary, it might bring them to their senses; and they would then, perhaps, 'think of the comforts of the wor king men. People had talked of the bad agitaton of Chartism. Let them show him (Mr. F. O'Connor) an instance in which the Chartists had refused patiently to listen to reason. The Whigs were originally, opposed to them, but now the Whigs were opposed to themselves. Lord John Russell wished for an eight shilling duty, while Mr. Villiers went for a total repeal, and Sir Robert Peel came in at the end with his slippery pigtiil.—(Cheers and laughter.) They, the Chartists, knew very well the character of the Whigs. Thy knew very well that the present agitation was merely got up to get them back into office. —(Cheers from the Chartists.) For seven years had the people petitioned the Whigs against those laws, and during that time the Whigs told them that the distress of the country was caused by fluctuations in commerce, attendant upon all great commercial nations. But when they got on the shady side of Downing-street, they said to them, the Char. tists, " Do you assimulate your cause with ours, and let us get into office again." When he (Mr. O'Connor) had gone to the Con ference held last week, they told him that he could not be ad mitted without a ticket, and thus was he prevented from going to express the principles he held, and of advancing the great cause to which he was pledged. One of the speakers at the Con. ference had alluded to him (Mr. O'Connor) and said there was a person going about the country in a fustain jacket, while a black one would have suited him better. Me (Mr. O'Connor) had come to that meeting in a black coat. He never attacked a man behind his bask. He called on the gentle men of that Conference to name six, twelve, or eighteen of their number, and they (the Chartists) would do the same, and meet them, and put the principles of each to the test —(Loud cheers) :Die Whigs had introduced the Reform Act, and that was to do away with Toryism. That Act had been fully tried for ten years, and what was the consequence of it? Why, it had put a majority of Tories of from sixty to ninety into the House."—(A. voice, " It was you and your party that put them there.") — (Great uproar.) The Tories had property, which they con. sidered the standard of the franchise; and so long as another man's property entitled the elector to vote, so long would the present state continue. The Charter would strike at the root of all this—(Great cheering.) It would take the suffer ing from the people. He had sufficient confidence in the working classes to feel that should a famine come upon the land, they would bear the decrees of Providence with patience and submission.= (Cheers.) Now, there was not a single article of luxury denied to the table of the wealthy, while every thing OM , waY necessary to support life was taken from the table of the poor man. This was not the wish of an all.dispensing Providence., —(Cheers.) The battle was now between the two extremes—the people and the aristocracy. The Whigs twelve months ago promised them household suffrage, and if they were sincere, let them join the ChartiSts, and go for the whole Charter, and thus, for the first time, let the Whigs and Chartists be united. Let them all unite in this object, and then would they be worthy of the name of Englishmen, and thus would every poor man be proud to say of England, '' This is my own, my native land." —(Loud cheers.) After thanking the High Bailiff for the pleasure, and the high honour conferred upon him, be said he was proud in supporting the amendment of the working man. Theamendment, "That the National Petition, or the Charter, should be adopted instead of that submitted to the meeting," was then put and carried by a small majority. Three cheers were then called for for, Mr. F. O'Conner, which was answered by a call for three groans for the same gentleman, but the cheers had it. A vote of thanks was passed to the High Bailiff, and the meeting eparated at half-past three o'clock. LONDON AND GREENWICH RAIL- WAY COMPANY. The Half-yearly General Meeting of the Shareholders in this Railway was held yesterday, pursuant to public intimation, at the London Tavern, Bishopsgate-street, William Shadbolt, Esq., in the chair. Mr. WILSON, the Deputy Chairman, read the report of the Directors, from which it appeared that the profit from the traffic during the last year was only 1,1371., a sum too small to war rant a dividend among the increased number of Share holders. The receipts for passenger tratfi I' as com pared with the same period of last sear, showed a decrease in number of 41,321 passengers, and in amount of 1,635/. ; the Croydon toll had fallen short by 3741. 4s. sd. ; the footpath being necessarily closed, on account of the new works, made a deficiency of 1991. 12s. 9d., and a portion of the rents have been absorbed by the new works, to the amount of 1-.4/. 10s. Bd.: whilst the only item of increased inceme ap peared in the Brighton tolls of 9871. 13s. 3d. The classes of carriages on the line had lately been reduced to two, and the fares had been fixed at 9d. and fid. The total expenses con nected with the line during the last six months, ending Dec. 31, 1841, amounted to 25,205/. 16s. Id., and the receipts to 26,137/. ss. 4d., showing a profit of 9311. 9s. 3d. The Engineer's Report was then read. It was very short, and merely stated that the whole of the works were now so nearly completed, as to leave no doubt that they would be con siderably under the estimate, and within the specified time. The CHAIRMAN moved the adoption of the Report" Mr. WILSON seconded the motion. Mr. HITCHINS wished to know why the fares had been al tered on the line? He thought it had done them a great deal of mischief. The CHAIRMAN said that they had altered the fares, in con sequence of a resolution adopted at the last meeting of pro prietors. Mr. HINToN objected to the want of comfort in the six penny carriages ; he thought it a shame that a number of men should be compelled to stand huddled together like a cargo of pigs, or other cattle. With regard to the arches under the rail way, he understood that they had been lately asphalting them, he hoped they had made them quite correct and watertight now. There was great talk some time ago of getting 1,000/. a year from these arches. _ • The CHAIRMAN said the arches were now quite dry, many of them were let, and there was every prcspect of letting more. ➢lr. HINTON wished to know how it was that none of the Papers except the Courier ever published the price of shares of this Company. It was explained that the Directors had no control over this, every information was freely given to gentlemen connected with the Press. Mr. GOLDSMID said if they made the sixpenny carriages too comtortable,,they should have no passengers in the others. Mr. ENTWISTLE agreed with Mr. , Goldsmid. He could mention at least half a dozen railways where the passengers in the lowest class carriages were obliged to stand. There were the Manchester and Leeds, the Northern and Eastern, the Nottingham and Derby, the Brighton and Shoreham, the Croydon, the Blackwell, &c. Messrs. Walker, Wheeler, and other gentlemen addressed the meeting at some length, when the Report was carried unanimously. The election of three Directors then took place,. in the course of which a good deal of discussion ensued, which having been set tied, the meeting soon after adjourned. MEETING OF CONSERVATIVE MEMBERS, YE STE RDAY. )—The Conservative Members of the House of Commons met yesterday at the official repidence of Sir Robert Peel, in Downing-street. Two o'clock was the hour ap pointed for meeting ; hut some time before that most of the. Conservative Members were in attendance. • The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London had a lot2l interview with Sir James Graham at the Home-office yesterday morning. During the frost the men employed upon the forti rations in the Bois de Boulogne were engaged only on subter raneous works, at such a depth, that the soil over their heads termed a solid vault; but when the thaw came this dissolved in mary places, and became liable to fall in. The day before yesterday, at that part which is opposite the Porte Alailiot, the earth came down upon two men at work, and buried them both. They were almost immediately dug out, but one was already dead, and the other expired in• the course of the day. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Fth. 14. The Loan CHANCELLOR took his seat on the wooliack at Five o'clock. MIXED MARRIAGES (IRELAND). Lord STRAFFORD presented petitions from Lon donderry, Donegal, and other place.) in Ireland, praying the House to legalize Presbyterian mixed marriages in Ireland. _ _ CORN-LAWS. Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from Edin bur*, praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. He had been requested to support the prayer of the petition ; now, although he had tho greatest respect for the petitioners, he was not able to go so far as to vote for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws; be cause considering the number of years during which' the Corn-laws had existed, he thought that great evils might ensue from so sudden and violent a change. But he was not prepared to support any modification of those laws which would not admit of a tree-trade iu corn at all times—(Hear, hear)—because a measure which would not do that would not produce a steady price— would not promote the sale of our manufactures—would . not prevent the evils of the existing system—would not prevent the derangement of our monetary system, inasmuch as it would not tend to promote a barter between England and corn growing countries, but when we required their corn we should have to pay fur it in bullion. It would thus tend to perpetuate all the evils of the existing system. He would not consent to any alterations of the Corn-laws which would not at all admit of the free importation of corn at a moderate fixed duty. REGULATION OF BUILDINGS BILL. The• Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition from the Mayor and Town Council of Birmingham, praying that the carrying out the provisions of the Bill, might be confided to the town council, instead of to cer tain commissioners, as had been proposed in the Bill. The petitioners likewise prayed to be heard by counsel on the subject, at the bar of their Lordships' house. The Bill was then read a third time and passed.. DRAINAGE OF TOWNS BILL. The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to impress upon the Noble Duke opposite, the necessity of drawing the attention of his colleagues in the Government to the pro priety of introducing a Bill for the drainage of towns into the other House. BOROUGH IMPROVEMENTS BILL. The Borough Improvements Bill was read a third time, and passed. APPROPRIATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion of the Duke of WELLINGTON the Appropriation Act Amendment Bill was read a third time and passed. CORN-LAWS. Viscount MELBOURNE presented _a petition from Leeds, praying lbr the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws; also a petition from the Lord Provost and Town Cotileil of Edinburgh, praying that masters and mates of merchant vessels might be subjected to an ex amination as t o th e i r nau ti ca l skill before they were ap pointed also a petition from Antrim, praying for the THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING,' rEPRUARY 15, 1842. introduction of some measure to legalise Presbyterian mixed marriages. The Noble Viscount urged upon the Government the necessity of speedily introducing some measure for that purpose. PRESBYTERIAN MIXED MARRIAGES. Lord CAMPBELL referred to the recent decision of the Judges in Irelat:cl, and observed that the former decision upon the subject of those marriagesovere much more to be relied on, than the decison alluded to. It was much to be regretted that a question of such infinite import ance was not determined otherwise than merely by the conviction of a criminal. The Noble Lord suggested to his Noble Friend, before he introduced the Bill upon the sub ject of these marriages, it would be of the utmost import ance to consider what the law was precisely, though he perfectly agreed with his Noble Friend who had pre sented the petition, that no time should be lost in de termining so serious a matter ; it seemed to him (Lord Campbell) of vast importance, first, to determine what the law upon the subject of those marriages was. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had written to Ireland to ascertain what the precise terms of the decision in the case alluded to was, and when he had received a communication from the Learned Judge before whom the trial took place, then he (the Lord Chancellor) would introduce a Bill either declaratory or enacting. The Marquis of CLANKICARDE concurred with the Noble and Learned Lord who had suggested the necessity of considering what the law was upon the subject of those marriages. It was also of the utmost importance that time should not be 'unnecessarily lost, because every day serious evils might arise, and were actually arising every day. For instance, a person in a humble rank of life, who was a member of the Church of England, had been married for some years to a Presbyterian, by a clergyman of that per suasion, and since the decision had been made upon the subject by the Judges in Ireland, that man deserted his wife, who was obliged to go into the poor-house to procure the necessaries of life. The Noble Lord then presented petitions from the Presbyterian con gregation.of Galway, and front the Presbyterian con gregation of Stewartstown, in the county of Tyrone, praying the House to pass a law for the immediate regulation of Presbyterian marriages. . . _ Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Kendal for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Also a petition from working men of Kendal, which stated that the rights of industry were tampered with by unjust restrictions, imposed by the Legislature on labour ; and, therefore, they prayed for a total and immediate repeal of all monopolies on commerce, by which the petitioners would be enabled to sell their labour .in the best market. The petitioners also stated that the repeal of these laws would be the most effectual mode of regulating the labour of children in factories. The Noble Lord also presented a petition from a place in Surrey for the repeal of the Corn-laws ; also a petition from the manufacturers employed by Messrs. Mann and Sons, of Arbroath, to the same ef fect ; also a petition from the inhabitants of Stourport, and several other places to the same effect. The Noble Lord also presented a petition from Jedburgh, an agricultural district, the inhabitants of which were wholly dependent upon agriculture for support, and they prayed for the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. THE CASE OF THE " CREOLE." The NOBLE LORD, who spoke in an extremely low tone of voice, and with his back to the gallery, said lie had then to bring 'before their Lordships the subject to which he had called their Lordships' attention, and in conformity with the notice whkh he had given, for the production of any correspondence with his Noble Friend opposite relative to the ship Creole. Whether there was any such correspondence he could not tell, but if there was there could be no objection to bringing it forward. In - bringing the subject before their Lord ships, he would state that he had considered it in all its bearings, and the examination which he had been enabled to give the subjecthad only confirmed him in the opinion he first held respecting it, with respect to the right of a foreign country to demand any person to be given up who had taken refuge in that country, hav ing committed an offence. It was necessary to consider in regard to this question the right of one nation to de mand or deliver up this person. This was one ques tion ; but there was another to be considered, whether with all this right, even if they were to legalize the right, whether it would enable one Government to demand, or render up a subject charged with an offence, who had taken refuge under that Government—and what right by the municipal law of the land in which the alleged criminal had taken refuge--what right the Go vernment of this country would have to seize, detain, and deliver tip that alleged criminal ? Whatever right they had, even if one nation should have made a treaty with an other, they had no right or authority by the common law . of nations to deliver up such subject. If such a treaty existed between this country and Ame rica, and legalised by Act of Parliament, allowing on the one hand, the American Governnfent to detain a subject of this country, and empowering this country to detain a citizen of America, that treaty became inap plicable to the purpose intended, because the municipal law of the land prevented the possibility of such treaty ex isting. 'He did not mean to say that such treaty could not be entered into, but, as in the present case, if that treaty had been entered into, it would remain a dead letter, unless it were acknowledged and recognised by the Municipal law. He thought they had not kept the two questions suffi ciently apart. there was no power, by law, to seize any person, much more to surrender him, on the charge of having committed an offence without the limits of this country. Whether he were an alien or a natural born subject, they had no power over him to give him up on such a charge till a law be made arming the Government with the power to do so. lie had referred their Lordships to cases where the Government had been armed with powers to perform these obligations ; but without the power conferred by Act of Parliament it would be impossible to perform these obligations. He had stated that the only doubt in his mind with regard to the Creole was, that a piratical case had been committed. The case of piracy stood in two particulars in a very different position from any other case where the charge is against an alien, for crimes committed beyond the jurisdiction of the country; for whereas in any other case they would have no power to arrest and detain, in the case of piracy it was un deniable they had power to seize and to detain, though the person charged should be an glen. In the case of piracy, also, they had not only the power of seizing and detaining a person, but they could send him to his trial, so that here there would be no fear of his going unpunished ; but in case of murder committed in a foreign country they had no power either to detain, seize, or give him up. It was impossible to deny, and he (Lord. Brougham) did not deny, that this was a state of law which ought not to continue. The rights of justice required, and the rights of good neighbourhood required, that in two countries bor dering on one another, as the United States and England —in referenCe with their colonies and even in England and France, Holland, and Bel gium, there ought to be laws on both sides, giving power to each Government to secure offenders who have committed offences in the territory of one, and taken refuge in the territory of another. He could hardly imaeirie how nations could maintain the relationship which ought to exist between one country and another, ithout being 'armed with some such power ; at present however, such power did not exist ; there was no law in this country to justify such a proceeding.— He understood that in the year 1822 a law was passed by one of the border States of America, conferring the power in question; about the same time by our province of Canada conferring the same power; and in consequence o f those two laws there was a mutual giving up of persons charged with offences. A similar law had been passed in Belgium, but only under certain restrictions, and op , rating only in eases where certain proceedings had already taken' place k ith respect to persons charged ; and, above all, only in eases where there was a reci procity in other points between the two countries. It was on these grounds that he had troubled them with observations on the subject, both now and on the first night of the session. Lord ABERDEEN said, in answer to the ques tion of his Noble and Learned Friend, he begged to inform the House, that communications had taken place between the Governor of the Bahamas and her Ma jesty's Government on the subject. Perhaps the Noble - and Learned Lord would not press for the production of those communications in the present stage of the trans action, particularly when he informed the House what the course of her 'Majesty's Government had been on this question. As their Lordships might well imagine, her Majesty's Government had given the question their most serious and anxious attention, and after taking advantage of all the assistance which they thought de • sirable on the subject they have satisfied themselves that by the laws of this country there is no machinery or authority for brin4ing those persons to trial for mutiny dnd murder, still less for delivering them up. The Secretary of State for the Colonial Department had therefore sent out orders for releasing those persons who had hitherto been detained. He was not certain but under our colonial law these persons might be brought to trial. It was possible, as the Noble and Learned Lord had cited the existence of such a 14tw in the Canadas. If such a law did exist, of course it could be acted upon ; but should there not be such a law, direc tions had been, sent by the Government to release the parties. including rbneiesnh e d t e h x - the expressed isensnesctdha ehnce r e e Nof whateverb l t e h E e f oar s r d a l. m elTi e .Nte o r l a i g l i i ‘ i ,u o or n f Lord DENMAI'sI . laid he b e li eve d t h at all Westminster- E ah san had j.: d justfu persons accused of crimes committed in a foregn country. When the Alien Bill was before Parli ament , the lawyers came to the same opinion.' Sir Charle s Wether a ll, a man not likely to be led by political opinion, had ex- Pressed a strong opinion on this subject, and had given a strong example in support of it. He expressly stated that offences committed in a foreign country form no reason for refusing protection to the parties if in this country. He said that if the re gicides of Louis XVI. had4ought shelter in this country, they ought not to have been sent away; and that refugees for crime ought to find an asylum in this country. This was not a new doctrine ; there was a passage in Lord Coke to the same effect, and one winch , could not be read without interest :—" It had been holden and resolved, kingdoms in league with one an other should be a sanctuary to the servants and subjects of each. if they fly for safety from one coun try to the other ; and if a demand be made for them they cannot by the laws and liberties of this kingdom be delivered back." lie then refers to a text of Scripture in support of his opinion, and goes on to meriaon two cases between France and England, one in which the Ambassador of Queen Elizabeth made a demand for one Morgan, ac cused of treason, to which demand the French, Court replied, that if he had committed an offence in France the law would be acted on, but he was not given up ; and the other, where Elizabeth afforded Protectio n to the french liuguenots when they were demanded to be delivered up for having committed rebellion against the French Crown. These opinions were not confined to the lawyers of this country, as one . to exactly the same effect had been' given by Judge Storey in America. After citing the same passage from Lord Coke, he states that this doctrine was indirectly confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. He was quite sure that no Govern ment could give any decision that should appear in the remotest degree to favour the slave-trade, and he reminded that House that enforcing a seizure of such persons, without authority,, might subject the Go vernment officer to the responsibility of an action for false imprisonment, or even the still more awful responsibility of murder should the parties resist, and they would be justified in resisting any force that might be used to seize them. He reserved his opinion of the case, but was sure that their Lordships would re joice that two hundred human beings in a state of slavery had restored themselves to a state of freedom. Lord CAMPBELL should not have presented him self to their Lordships ' had it not been stated that during the time he had held the office of Attorney.. General, he had given it as his opinion that foreign Governments had authority to demand that their subjects, accused of crimes, and who had taken re fuge in the territories of other Governments, should be delivered up to them. Ile had never given any such opi nion; on the contrary, he had always given it as his decided opinion, that, according to the law of nations fo reign Governments had no right to make any such demand and that by the municipal law of England there was no p ow er given to comply with any such demand. This had been laid down by all the authorities, and Mr. Martens, the Professor of Law in the University of Gottingen, had in his work laid down the law very explicitly on th© subject. No State could have any such right unless it acquired it 'by treaty. In that way an imperfect right might be acquired, but, according to . the law of na tions, there was no perfect right to make any such demand. Mr. Week, the American Minister at Berlin, had laid down the law that no State had a right to make any such demand unless there was a specific compact existing between the two States reciprocally to deliver up to each other, all persons charged with crimes. But there ought to be the greatestcaution in entering into any such compacts. A treaty existed between the State of New York and Canada, reciprocally to deliver up re fugee criminals against whom true bills should hare been found by Grand Juries. A slave had escaped from New York to Canada,; to facilitate his escape, he rode a part of the distance upon his Master's horse, which he had sent btu* before he crossed the frontier. The Americans knew full well that England would not deliver up a run away slave, and therefore they presented a bill to the Grand Jury of New York against the slave for horse steal ing. The bill was found, and on that ground they demanded the slave to be given up, but the Governor re fused, as it was clear he was not actuated by, the animus furendi. He (Lord Campbell) had been cousulted, and had given it as his opinion he ought not to be 'delivered up, and he never had been delivered up. With regard to the claim for compensation, as slavery was not recognised by the law of England, the slave was free, ipso facto, as soon as he had set foot in the British territories; and therefore America could have no claim for compensation. He therefore trusted America would see the justice •of our refusal, and that the affair would be amicably settled. Lord COTTENHAM entirely agreed with the Noble and Learned Lords who had preceded him. The LORD CHANCELLOR likewise agreed in the ' opinions that had been given by his Noble and Learned Friends. Lord BROUGHAM had reason to know that the Noble and Learned Lord (Wynford), who for some time had been Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, enter tained similar opinions. After what had fallen from the Noble Earl he should not press his motion.—Motion withdrawn. Their Lordships then adjourned. 8,000 unemployed operatives of Manchester to the same effect. . Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from the mer chants of Wolverhampton, praying for a total and im mediate repeal of the Corn and Provision-laws. The Hon. Member stated that this petition was agreed to at one of the largest in-door meetings ever held in that impOrtant borotigh. The Honourable Member also presented petitions to the same effect from Montrose, and seeral' Catholic and Protestant congregations of Liver pool ; ,and ten petitions, with the same prayer, from the working men in Manchester. , Colonel RAWDON presented a petition from Armagh, praying for a measure to legalise Catholic and Presbyte rian marriages. PRIVATE BILLS. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET gave notice of his intention to move several resolutions respecting p e titi ons for private Bills ; they are to the following effect —That as regarda such private petitiens presented in the present session, and which proceeds from the same' parties, pacing the same objects as were sought by any Bills that passed a second reading in the last session, and were pending at the dissolution of that Patliament, a com pliance with the Standing Orders, preparatory to the in troduction of such Bills in that session, be deemed suf ficient to authorise the introduction of such Bills in the present one. That the minutes of Com mittee on petitions for private Bills of last session, be taken as evidence of the compliance with such stand ing orders ; the Committee to call, for further evidence if they deem it necessary. The Committee to ascertain whether such bill be bona fide for the same objects as the bills presented last session. The parties promoting such Bills, after the introduction, and previous to the second reading, to give notice in the London Ga zette, and the local or county paper of the district, of their intention to proceed with such Bills. Lord DUNCAN and Mr. BUSFIELD presented petitions in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition from the inhabitants of the borough of Rochdale. The petitioners alleged that the present Corn and Provision laws were oppressive to every class of the community— only excepting the owners of the soil. That the truth of this allegation was rendered more manifest each succeeding year by the rapid decline of oommerce and manufactures. That vast multitudes of their countrymen were suffering privations from want of employment and want of food, which must breed burning discontent, and portend alarming cala mities to the nation ; that these laws increased the rental of the landlords of Britain, at the expense' of a grievous wrong committed upon all other classes of the community. They, therefore, prayed for the immediate and total abolition of all laws which prevented the free importation of grain and provisions. The petition was signed by ten thousand and ten names in the borough of Rochdale. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from the Society of Friends. They alleged that any obstruction to the free importation of provisions was directly opposed to the divine dispensations of ProVi denee ; that such laws doomed thousands to the horrors of famine, and were at variance - with not only the tem poral but the eternal interests of man ; that such unrighteous legislation must bring frightful retri bution, and inflict awful calamities on the nation. The Honourable Member also presented another petition from the congregation of Wesleyan Methodists. 'These petitioners, among other allegations, stated, that these laws were injurious to the morals of the people ; seriously hindering the spread of religion, and prevented, to a deplorable degree, the benign effects which Chris tianity was calculated to produce. The Hon. Member also presented three petitions from the congregations of Water-street Chapel, Hope Chapel, and Baillie-street Chapel; and ene from the Sunday School Teachers of the Baillie-street Chapel, all setting forth similar allegations. These petitions were signed by 903 names. The Hon. Member also presented six petitions from the villages of Lower-place, Miln-row, Rahewood, and Shaw Clough ; also one from the printers at Gale Print-works, signed by 2,301 names. All the above petitions prayed for the immediate and total repeal of the duties on corn and provisions, and were signed in the whole by 13,214 names. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from certain Members of the United Secession Church, and others belonging to West Kilbride, Ayrshire, agreed to at a public meeting joining in a like prayer, and the petitions further prayed that the People's Charter might be made the law of the land. Mr. SHAW presented a petition from Dublin, praying for the adoption of some regulations with respect to Dissenters' marriages, Dr. BOWRING presented three petitions from Kirk aldy and two other places, praying for the protection of British industry, and the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. JOHNSON presented several petitions from Lancashire, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. lIAWEi presented thirty-four petitions from places adjacent to the metropolis, praying for the rG peal of the Corn-laws. He presented also thirty-three petitions from Dunstable, Hertford, and other places, to to the same effect. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from a place in Scotland, of which the name was not heard in the gallery. for Universal Suffrage and Annual Par liaments. Mr. -ALDER presented a petition from Leeds signed by 3,517, persons ; ten petitions from congregations of Protestant Dis'senters, and numerous other petitions, all praying for an immediate and total repeal of the Corn laws. Mr. RIGBY WASON presented a petition, nume rously signed, from Ipswich, to the same effect. Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from Man chester, signed by 68,850 persons to the same effect. The petitions stated that by the last census the town of Man chester contained upwards of 240,000 inhabitants, and it was the centre of a district, with a population of no less than one million, which were entirely depen dant on manufactures for their support. The distress which that large population were suffering was unparal leled in extent and duration, and they were convinced that it was brought about by the Corn-laws, which pre vented them from exchanging the pr o duce of their labour for the food produced in other countries, and they prayed for the total repeal of those laws. He presented a great number of petitions from Salford, and from various Dis senting congregations in different parts of the country. Mk. J. IIEATHCOTE presented a petition from Ti verton, for the repeal of the Corn and Provision-laws. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented petitions from Exeter and Hull, to tha.same...effect. Mr. B. WOOD presented a petition, signed by 15,000 inhabitants of the borough of Southwark, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws, and the removal of all rest•ric tions on the industry of the people. Mr. MACAULAY presented four petitions from Edinburgh to the same effect. Mr. J. PARKER presented a petition, signed by 15,912 inhabitants of the town of Sheffield, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Petitions to the same effect, from Derby, were pre sented by Mr. William Evans ; from Barnstaple, signed by 9,000 persons, and from Milford, by an Hon. Member; from Nailsworth, by Mr. Poulett Scrope ; from Wick, by Mr. hock ; from Southampton, by Mr. A. Murray ; from Renfrew, Stirling, and places in Lancashire, by Air. P. Stuart ; and from several places also in Lanca shire, by Mr. O'Connell. Sir R. FERGUSON presented a petition on the sub ject of Dissenters' marriages. Mr. HASTIE presented a petition from Paisley for a total repeal of the Corn.laws. Mr. RUNDLE presented a petition from the agricul tural district of Ashburton, Devon, for a repeal of the Corn-laws, to which the petitioners attribute the de pressed state of agriculture to their operation. Mr. COBDEN presented forty-two petitions ' from Dundee and various other places, all praying for a re peal of the Corn-laws. Lord J. RUSSELL presented several petitions, with the same prayer. Alderman HUMPHERY presented a petition from Southwark, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 14. The SPEIiER took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock. Sir E. COLEBROORE, the newly-elected Member for Taunton, was introduced by Mr. Mangles and Mr. Dirett. Mr. GREGORY was introduced by Mr. Shaw and Col. Conolly, and took the oaths and his seat for Dublin. The Sheriffs of London appeared at the Bar, and pre sented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of London, praying for better regulations with respect to the burial of the dead. Returns were presented of the population of Great Britain in 1831. THE CORN-LAWS. Mr. WILSON presented petitions from Freshfield, and several other parts of the West Riding of Yorkshire, for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. HINDLEY presented thirty-three petitions for the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. One petition signed by upwards of 5,000 persons from the borough of Ashton-under-Lyne ; one from Mossley signed by 1,000 persons, from Audenshaw, from Horsley Hill, from the Ryecroft Branch of the Ashton Reform Association, from the workpeople of Messrs. A. and S. Buckley, Rycroft, from the workpeople of Mr. Peter Platt and of Mr. Evan Leigh, Ashton, from Mr. Boulton A.loli neaux and his family, Warrington, from the workpeople of of Mr. T. Eskrigge, of Messrs W. and J. Hicks, War rington, from the Independent Dissenters, Upper Mile Saddleworth, and the Wesleyan Methodists Ashton under-Lyne, and from the workpeople employed in twenty different firms in the parish of Manchester. Mr. SCIIOLEFIELD presented a petition from Bir mingham, signed by upwards of 3,000 persons, praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws, and the removal of all restrictions on national industry. The Hon. Member also presented the full, ing petition : To the Honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled, The Petition of the Church and Congregation worshipping at Ebenezer Chapel, Steelhouse-lane, Birmingham ; Humbly showeth,—That your petitioners beg to state, that, in their opinion, the agricultural interest is of vast importance to the prosperity of the British nation, but as what is morally wrong cannot be politically right, they are decidedly of opinion that to attempt to support that interest by any indirect taxation on the commercial interests of the kingdom is no less impolitic than unjust, and necessarily calculated to injure rather than promote it. Your petitioners therefore pray Tour Honourable House at once to repeal all laws which tend to enhance the price of bread, and for the following reasons : I. Such laws are based on injustice, as the following state ment will prove . The Cern-laws, and indeed all laws, which tend to enhance the price of provisions are a tax, not on wealth but on poverty, and the tax becomes oppressive in an exact ratio to the de grees of a man's poverty. This is evident from the following scale of calculation. Assuming that the tax raises the price of a loaf from sixpence to eightpence, every consumer of such a loaf pays a tax of two pence. A man has a family, consisting of six members, who consume one loaf a day, his income is one guinea, two, five, ten, fifty. His neighbour has also six in his family ; but as they have no meat, or fish, or eggs to eat, no ale or wine to drink, they will consume two loaves a day. This man's income is three shil lings, two shillings, or eighteen.penee a day. Thus, while the rich man, whose income is fifty guineas a day, pays only two pence as his quota of the tax, the poor man who has only eighteen-pence a day pays fourpence. Your petitioners, therefore, solemnly protest against a law which is based on such unjust and iniquitous principles, and now appeal to your Honourable House, and ask whether you can reasonably expect the great mass of our labouring popu lation to remain contented with such a scheme of legislation. 2. Such laws, by their practical operation, inflict such a vast amount of suffering on the great masses of the people, while they tend, at the same time, to increase the wealth of the affluent. The rich landlord, whose rent is raised by the operation of the Corn-laws, can afford to indulge his appetite with all the luxuries which the most remote countries can supply; but this indulgence is gratified by entailing the most appalling suffering on the poor. They are doomed to a con dition of half starvation in the land of abundance. They wander about the streets telling their tale of woe, or remain within their dreary habitations pouring forth th e i r lamentations in tones too agonizing to disclose. Thousands and tens of thousands are not half fed, and while they are compelled to devote all their money to purchame food, they are all left with out a sufficiency of clothing, of fuel, and of all the other com forts of life. 3. Such laws tend to promote universal discontent, and, un less repealed, will cause the suffering poor to long for some or ganic cnange in the political constitution of the country. The suffering poor know that many of the aristocracy are dissatisfied with the laws ; that the late Government and their' gracious Queen wished to effect a change in these unjust and cruel laws ; that some of the members of the present Administration have, by their speeches and pamphlets, protested against these laws as the primary cause of national suffering ; that the manu facturers, tradesmen, and especially that the patriotic Dissent ing ministers of the country, denounce these laws as in opposi tion to the laws of God as laid down in the Scriptures ; and to suppose, while they know this accumulating amount of dissatis faction is daily increasing amongst the classes above them, th at they will patiently submit to their sufferings without cherishing feelings hostile to the Government, which could, but which neglects, to relieve them, would beno less childish than absurd. Your petitioners, therefore, hope that your Honourable House will take the subject of an early and entire repeal of these unjust laws into your serious consideration. And your petitioners will ever pray. Mr:C. WOOD presented several similar petitions frum congregations in the town of Halifax. Mr. DENISTOUN present ed 128 p etitions from Glas gow and other places, one of, which bore 54,658 signa tures.—(Hear, hear.) That petition denounced the measure of. the Government as an insult to the country, and in that he cordially agreed with thein.—(Hear, hear.) The petitioners, however, had no hope of any beneficial remedy from the House as at present constituted. Mr. BROTHERTON presented 14 petitions from places in Lancashire and Cheshire, for a total repeal of the Corn laws. The petitioners viewed with astonishment and indignation the attempt made by the Government to impose upon the common sense of the people by their proposition respecting those laws.—(Cheers.) Mr. GRANTLEY BER KELEY p resented sever al ley; Caine, and !Similar petitions from Kendal - and other places were p o e th ti e t i i . o p n i s ac t e o s t i h n e Gsinomuceesetfte'erschtirfr Dure present e d by 'Mr. G. W. Wood, Mr. Carter, and an Hon. Member ivhose name we did not learn. COLONEL CONOLLY presented a petition from Donegal praying for an alteration of the laws affecting the laws relating to Presbyterian marriages. Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition from Preston, signed by 16,800 persons, praying that those unjust law s m i g ht be struck ou t of the statute - book, be cause they defeated the bene volent intenti ons of Provi dence. Th e H on . Member also presented a petition from the Mayor, Ald erme n, and Burgesses of the borough of Pres ton ; and one frOm Fleetwood, in Lancashi re; and 26 from different parts of the W eSt Ridin g of Yorshire, to the same effect. Mr. EWAItT presented a petition from 28,000 of the inhabitants of Edinburgh; also from the inhabitants of Preston in Lancashire ; fr om Forfar shire ; from the borough of Selkirk, from a Congregational Church as sembling. in Fife ; 13 from different families in Wigram, and one from the inhabitants, all praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. H. BERKELEY presented 47 petitions from 47 different trades in the city of Bristol, praying for It repeal Of the Corn-lawsi also from 17,799 inhabitants of the cif and 'county of Bristol to t he sam e effect. • Nr.3IIINER GIBSON presented a .petition from - 01IDNANCE ESTIMATES Captain BOLDER° presented the Ordnance estimates. Lord PALMERSTON presented a petition from the Trades' Union of Manchester, paying for a free trade in Corn. • NEW WRIT FOR SALOP. On the motion of Sir T. FREEMANTLE a new writ was ordered for the Southern Division of the County of Salop, in the room of the Earl of Darlington, now Duke of Cleveland. Dr. BOWRING postponed his motion with respect to the quarantine laws to Thursday week. Mr. THE SIGER gate notice that upon the question relative to election petitions being brought before the House, he should call the attention of the House to two of the petitions which have been presented. Mr. VERNON SMITH gave notice of his intention to call the attention of the House to-morrow to the sub ject of emigration. Mr. IYISRAELI gave notice of his intention shortly to move the blending of diplomatic bodies. On the motion - of Mr. SHAW returns were ordered of the mortality of infants in the North Union Work house of Dublin. On the motion of Dr. BOWRING copies of instruc tions given by the British Government to the Commis sioners; a statement of claims to the Mixed - Commission by British subjects; a statement of the awards given by the Mixed Commission, and a copy of a report to the Commissioners by the Government, were ordered. STADE DUTIES, Mr. BUTT wished to put a cluestion to the Right Honourable Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury on a subject of great importance. He wished to know whe ther her Majesty's • Government recognised the right of Hanover to exact duties under the name of Stade duties, except in conformity with the treaty of 1691, which fixed the maximum at one sixteenth per cent. ad valorem. Sir R. PEEL said that the subject was under the con sideration of her Majesty's Government and a Com missioner had lately arrived from Hanover fur the pur pose of concluding the negotiations between the two Governments ; and he trusted that in that state of the affair the Hon. Member would not press him for any more determinate ans►cer. BONDED CORN. Sir D. ROCHE begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentle men, for the satisfaction of the large holders of bonded corn und cattle—(Great laughter)—when it was intended to apply the new ditties, should his. measure ever pass the House —(Laughter)—t o provisions now in bond. Sir R. PEEL understood the question to be• —sup posing the measure should pass—in what time was it proposed to apply the new duties to corn bonded in this country ?—(Hear, hear, from Sir D. Roche.) He could not see why the new duties should not come immediately into operation on the passinc , of the Act. As to cattle, he was not aware of thero being any—(l4tighter) — but perhaps the Hon. Bart. was referring to a former statement of his (Sir R. Peel's): "What he meant was, in reference to other articles of provision besides corn ; it was his opinion, and that of his colleagues, that the prohibition ought not to exist.—(Hear.) PRODUCTION OF SUGAR IN THE WEST INDIES. • Mr. G. BERKELEY begged to call the attention of the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, to the state of the West Indies, as regarded the production of sugar. He understood that the cost of making a hogs- • head of sugar was greater than its value in th marke when 'made.. We understood the Honourable Mem ber to attribute the excessive cost of producalon to the deficiency of labour ; and to inquire whether it was intended to introduce any measure for the general importation throughout the Colonies. Lord STANLEY said that the House would see that the last question was one of considerable importance, to which it would be impossible to give a direct answer of yes or no without entering fully into details. In the first place, ho did not suppose that the Hon. Gen tleman's question was intended to apply to the West India colonies generally,- but to the colonies of Deme rara, British Guiana, and Berbice. He was aware, al though he was not aware of the fact as related to the West India India colonies generally, that a committee of planters—highly intelligent men, he was bound to say — had met together some time ago, and after examination and evidence they came to a resolution confirming the fact, which the Hon. Gentleman had affirmed, that in past years the expense of refining sugar in the West Indies was greater than its value. Now it was manifest that under such a state of things, cultivation could not go on, and that some step or other should be taken with the view of preventing a competition among the pro ducers of sugar, which appeared to him to be abso lutely ruinous as well as entirely unprofitable, to the planters. He doubted, however, whether the planters were taking in all respects. the best mode of ffecting their own objects. With respect to the second question, the Hcn. Gentleman had asked wheiher he was aware that in certain cases there was an opportunity fur dishonest agents to defraud their masters in that country by giving false returns of the amount of sugar raised on the estates. Now, there was no question but that absentee proprietors in the West India colonies, as elsewhere, entered into competition with resident proprietors under very great disadvantages in all matters which might require their presence and superintendence. Undoubtedly, while it was required that returns should be made from a distant country, it was, and must be, in the power of dishonest agents to falsify those returns, and to defraud their absent employers. If he might be allowed to give his opinion very respectfully upon that question, it would be that in the present critical condition of the West India estates, a condition which he did not deny, and which was deeply to be lamented ; but, with increased facilities which also existed between this country and the West Indies, it appeared to him most desirable that the superintend ence and attention of proprietors iu the West Indies should be extended to their property there with a view to effect, what he knew and believed might be effected, a great saving in the management of their estates, and in various charges which it is very difficult for him, or for any one in that House, to understand or enumerate ; mid also that they should endeavour by their local influence to facilitate that great trade, which he believed was inevitable and desirable, by-a transfer of trade from the hands or agents to those of resident tenants. That trade he believed to be now in progress, and he believed it to be most de sirable for proprietors themselves, and for the public ge nerally.—(Hear.) Ho would venture to say this with respect to the expense of cultivation, that there was no single instance 'in which this natural consequence had not followed as effect and cause—namely, that where they gave to the negro labourer an inte rest in the amount of work to be performed, and in the amount of produce raised, there they would obtain constant and industrious labourers ; but .where they did not,give that interest there they would not obtain them, and the amount of competition, the consequence .of the wages which the planters are willing to give, and the ruinous competition between them for a certain time, and certain portions of work neglectfully and unskilfully performed, would necessarily lead to those ruinous expenses to which the West India colonists were now subjected. With regard to emigration from Africa, he believed it was most successful, indeed most beneficial to all persons, except to those from European countries ; and her Ma jesty's Government had received the most saiisfactory accounts on the subject.—(Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Gentleman must be aware that great difficulties exist in the way of emigration from Africa, or from any quarter where the power of her Majesty's Government with regard to emigration is so affected as in the case of Africa. He would not say it may be advisable with respect to some of those settlements on the coast of Africa, except Sierra Leone. Great evils may result with regard to the slave-trade, and to the labour of the free population. He saw, however, great difficulty in sanctioning emigration from those places. Those settlements became places of refuge for fugitive slaves ; and it would create the jealousy of all ; and it would give rise to opinions that their emigration was not voluntary but forced ; and, at all events, lead people to imagine that it would encourage the sale of slaves. He believed he gave the best answer in his power to the question of the Hon. Gentleman .on the . point, feeling it to be his duty to state distinctly his views and those of her.. Majesty's Government on a subject so intimately connected with the office he had the honour to fill. COLONIAL DUTIDS. Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Gentleman the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, respecting the regulating duties of the Colo nies, which he was bringing before the consideration of the House. It was relative to the importation of corn from America into Canada. The House was aware that at present the importa tion of corn and flour from America into Canada was duty free, and the question he wished Le ask, was whe ther he was to understand the effect of the schedule of duties laid on the table of the House, to be to put a duty . of 3s. a quarter on American flour imported from America into Canada. Mr. GLADSTONE said that the resolution which had been announced to the House was unquestionably one which would raise the,question of placing a duty of 3s. on corn imported from America. The question would be raised, and he would then state the intention of the Government. IMPORTATION OF FLOUR (IRELAND). Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir.R. Peel) whether it was the intention of Government to allow the importation of flour into Ireland, which was now prohibited under the new Corn-law. Sir R. PEEL was aware that Irish Members took great interest in this subject, and remembered the op position they gave last Session to the proposition in volved in the present question • but he was bound to say, that in case of a change of the Corn and Provision laws, he could adopt no special legislation ; for though it was a provision exporting country, no exception could be made in her favour.—(Hear.): Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice to the effect that when the question of the importation of provisions from the Colonies came before the House, he would take the sense of the House on the question, whether or not it was competent for the House to tax the Colonies.--(Hear.) Sir E. PEEL moved that the Order of the Day be now read, but Mr. ROEBUCK said he begged first to put a question to the Speaker respecting the rules of proceeding in the House. n It had been given out that the Speaker had said that no Member of the House had the power to move a resolution in the House, as distinguished from a Com mittee, to the effect that no duty ought to be levied On corn. Now he (Mr. Roebuck), begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman, whether he as Speaker, deemed it im competent for him (Mr. Roebuck), or any other Member of the House, to move a resolution in the House, as'dis tinguished from a Committee, to the effect that this House is .not prepared to 'adopt any plan which purposes to impose any duty on corn imported from foreign countries ? Before a motion condemning a. sliding-scale was proposed by the Noble Lord, he (Mr. 11.) wanted to know whether he was empowered to pro pose a resolution proposing any duty whatever ? The SPEAKER said that all questions directly relat ing to trade were required by the Standing Orders to be moved in a Committee of the whole House ; but it was possible by wording the resolution in a general, way to take the sense of the House on the question, whether or not a duty should be imposed on corn. Certainly this would not be the regular way ; the regular way would be in a . Committee of the whole House. Lord ELIOT, in reply to a question, which was a l mo st inaudible proposed by Mr. Powell, on the subject of Grand Juries in Ireland, said that he (Lord Eliot) could not give a distinct answer until he had received the report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the subject ; and with respect lo local governments, any gentleman hereafter placed in such a situation, must be perfectly liable to any alterations that might be made. THE CORN-LAW S. --A DJOURNED DEBATE. Sir R PEEL now moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, and resume the debate on the duties affecting the import of foreign corn. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, Sir, I believe I_ should in no way diminish the difficulties of the task I have undertaken, or obtain greater power for my arguments, if I were to commence my address to the House by pre face or introduction. Therefore, Sir, I shall at once call the attention of the House to the position in which they now stand. The question of the Corn-laws has been submitted to us by the first Minister of the Crown, In proposing the scale he has laid before us, he has not only acted upon the authority of the Government over which he presides ; but he has also informed us that having collected the opinions of those most interested in agriculture, he found there were but very few of that class, who were not in favour of some modification of the existing Corn -laws. We, there fore, now stand in the situation of considering the Corn-laws with a view to alteration by almost gene ral consent.—(Hear, hear.) The cry is no longer that of no surrender.—(Cheers.) The question is as to the terms of the continuation.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, if that he the case ; if we are prepared to condemn the present Corn-laws as unfit to be longer continued on the ' Statute Book as inapt for the purpose for which they have been enacted, of regulating the tlade in corn ; I it say then, .witho u t f ear o f contra diction, that is of the utmost importance that you should make--that change upon sound principles ; that you should endeavour to make it give as much as pos sible of general satisfaction ; especially to that dis tressed portion of the community, of whose condition we have heard such lamentable accounts from both sides of the House ; and lastly, that it should be such a law that it would not be liable to cause an immediate fresh agitation of the question, but that all who arc to live under that law, all who have transactions. in that most important of all articles, the article of food, which com prehends, in its various classes, the whole community, that they should be aware of the state of him under which they are to live ; and be prepared to state that for a time at l east, i t w i ll not be disturbed—(Hear) Because, although it may be wise to concede, yet, when we concede, w e oug h t to l ook for the fru i ts o f concilia tion. It may b e w i se to d i stur b a law t h at now exists; but when we mak e t h at di stur b ance, we oug ht to do it for the purpose of settling it afresh, upon better foundations. T o conce d e an d not conc ili a t e , to disturb . the present state o f thi ngs an d-y e t to settle nothing-- I (Hear, hear, hear)—would be, I conceive, of rerurfoineel, cases that could be conceived by .; and a Parliament, the most imprudent for Gover , n ,ic t' . i t h ti e p ar r . o , p ) ose s s a i n r, d f l or Pthaiinikiamietntnetcoeusdsoatr);..,—h(oCnriceis,eorf `ll.:llnce,r,: be obliged to trespass on the indulgence of the Hogs: .': 1 giving you my reasons for opposing, in this early.str,.g;,, 1 the measure of the Government, to state as D ad t ,, as I can the general principles which shouldf sk. our legislation upon this subject. I do so , becat.fe; though in one point I should agree with the. priti c 4,,,, laid dow n by the first Minister of the C re wel, T r ; nt are other points on which I entirely ,dof e h re him. I suppose it will be agreed that ~} - ke „ spect to corn, as with respect to everythingl, roil i 'he general principle is one of not legislating' ,o t a -t!" ith he subject.—(Hear, hear.) The general principle; , the ettird to all commodities is, that the producer thr seller endeavours to produce anti to bring to 'Parke which is most likely to find a ready and immediate r e ; chaser ; and the purchaser, on his side, goe' 1 ' ) r ' ll . thte to obtain the goods of which he is most in .1 1 e i .i t ,,,, best in their quality, and the cheapest in their I The therefore legislators have no place on the subject. n -' - th , community themselves arc far better judges th e ro ily wisest Senate on the matter. The eurtleli themselves, in their several capacities, choose ' itee d are the articles of which they stand i these —they choose from whom they purchase them , an /e lves elve s articles which afford profit. The producers t he : au s ce* are the best judges of the articles they shall .° Pro' and of the markets to which they shall bring / thl r ,d at , 'uctions. This is a principle generally acknoleab it is the present day, but like other excellent prineiple s ' re a re exceedingly violated in practice. No doubt the rhea limitations and exceptions with regard 1 the.elorti cation of that rule ; and with respect to Cora le .sick` cular I should say there are many limitations ell io ra t°' I myself often had occasion to observe. With r, e6 ,,,,, no general taxation, as Ricardo ably says, you, u v nt ries right to tax corn corning from foreign e ee e esi because your own people bear a largo : g e ivolti taxation, and because that taxation would go l ir ' 1 „ 1- s . F or to factors and importers. But with regard to a"t,i/vita titular taxation, without entering now — as Ido D u , A O to enter—into that question, as to what taxatieli l','„lie what its amount should be, the farmer and thos t t iit , cultivate the land bear a peculiar tax, it is unin t ' uti der that they should bring their products into the mar k ` re boil this peculiar taxation, which protects the te c io .10 of foreign countries. There is another princ i c , , i f down upon the subject by Dr. Adam Smith, PS " t o ;V tations embodying it were s h o rt, h e w ould read it it o a s Horse. (The Noble Lord then read the extract✓ e t 'cte 6 to the effect that when a manuf a ctur e rhad beenlirefver and encouraged so as to employ a great number e * r the sons, it should jbe a question of prudence whe t ' f : o tar er protection duty which encouraged the inalu!':'' 00] should be done away with that if " ~o r done away with, it should be done so with cautioa , c eo r9 not to throw those who were employed in it ou t l' j ) 0 ployment. The Noble Lord then proes e , t h sal: ' prove this is a principle laid down by a I "g oo de./ thority, and one to which no objection could he n a t he • I therefore think your legislation is unwise, e .e the effect of this legislation of yours has been to eaejoolo occupation of certain lands, and the employment ",. et 0' labourers np6n them: Yon should ii,:l eavo ur to pre`; it ioti . labourers in your own country from ail excess of t g tes til, But, Sir, I come then to agree to so much of Tfre .s botS , as might be asked under these two heatls. if, it t i - sef' s3 , be found in Committee— if it should be found. m att e, re ing this matter in Committee, that there av'e iln i , - , 1 1 ;1V, ferences in the country I mention, I think the,Y s yt ea r ; removed. If, however, it should be: proved P it m e n ' are no such preferences, if there be enCourageoe:,,to.„.,' to agriculture by this law, that should likewise lt j gir ' into consideration, but the Government in proposil I lif4 plan now before the House, take a wider rape? ; 0 0 f t laid their principle far more wide ; they laid tau v cctet` principle adopted by Malthus, which principle w° Der' upon by the Legislature of this country on it fOrin c e f i rce sion. You ought to make yourselves independent)'' 0 ' o so! nations.—(Cheers.) Now that is the princip le . pc fpir which the present law is framed—that is the l' rl 4o lo, upon which the proposition of the Right Hon. h it iti is framed, and which tends to prevent, by pro 0 ,, ' other nations from sending food into this coou , t b ' e e%;, confess, therefore, although this propoSition InaLbtir,' cellent to some remote and sequestered State-- -- t,% - be," j it might suit a State in Mexico, I cannot coneetr'ettl it can be applicable to a great e", l°/ % 11 . .,' country. Supposing it . were desirable, u l „ Yr manner would you establish it in practice r, e . i must recollect; it is not merely with respect t?, thr i The Right Hon. Baronet stated the other iligdiiol they bad had for four years au importation of 4;'"dtk . , quarters, so that it might be said that the peopt w oe' conntry w ere depend ent:upon foreign countries til ether fone million ofquartersayear. With respect to aloof; commodities the employment of the people engag e e th i,, nufactures as much depends upon the supply 19 ', A v t ir t ,r, material as food. If the supplYof cotton from Alil e 'V c ifil i t , stopped, or the supply of foreign silk, there woui,deli., less than five millions of people deprived of We i l? ur There would be seven millions ofyour people, ifYisa( t 1 this principle, who were dependent upon ' for e pie% tions for - their food, and who cannot but e t •it e i o to be so dependent—(Hear, hear)—so th f ' o le ' 4 , evident that any attempt which you have Ili tr iej, li fce make this country independent of foreign collo :1; 0,1 1 , failed, and every such attempt must necessarily 'Alit consequence is, as poitited out in the Report of th e tt el 4 s o tee of this House in 1821 ; the consequence is, y y p o ri u ce rais o e f th o e th price e o o n f ti f n ob ei d ita i l n this eou n e ti ° •i ll e n a, tr l Y lo 74 Z!. stimulus to agriculture, and the . c,,, ,"it t, stimulus in favourable seasons was to p e roal te- 0 in which it was impossible to dispose of all the' e° ,p, duced.—(Hear, hear.) Now, the i n evitable:Cont!,l , of that is, that in those years you have the agfteler'; distress referred to in the report of 1821.—(Ileac, These were the years in which Agricultural distrvro 14 referred to in the speeches . of the King, in r ee/9 4 , Committees, and in speeches in Parliament. -^ o, l t cheers.) You will find that these were the ~ , o t l, , of agricultural distress, because there . was no d , rb and vent for the produce.—(Hear, hear.) A ° sett l A follows? You will find that after this glut ther e „ 11 1 :,. a check to the production, which is restricted 00,,i which is suited to average years ; so that in °lolitit! able seasons you do not have the Ill' / ' fir` food which is necessary, and you a re to f t l f to make a large importation, and thus the obj ec t sal Di' law is defeated, and you have not that const un a ly' s t d which is desirable in all years.—(Hear.) Th e '' iv ls '4 in which I conceive this object of the law to b e fore,'" eo for at all is .in . the case of war wit h , bo ol . o ",,c, nations. I cannot conceive greater time of a war "_.,...(h 0 'i 0 this country was struggling against Napoleou'„ fel!' , hear.) But, during the time of that war, t ic- seg r 'tr quarters of corn were imported in one sing le tia stj t (Hear.) That importation was greatly dirninisbe cont,,, sequent years ; but still at that time thi s 0 0 j !, 1 1 1 ; was admitting foreign corn, there being re lit' t e to prevent the importation, and the people L e is t i ; C , partly on the produce of other nations. 1 3 U,, haP if any chance or probability that you wl„" -110. 0 ,0 greater war than that to contend with , t , ,ii there was, still I say, that restin' tofit; are upon commerce and manufacture, the, not' pi of food would be in danger ; but it woulu I . lletls in the danger that is apprehended.—( l4ell ;of',flie' Therefore, the remedy should be the very rever s , ~i,t which is proposed to the House.—(Chee l 'i l l o 1 14 ; f 11 remedy proposed to tho House as taken from 1 ,,„ ili d l 0 , Hon. Gentleman's argument, is to endeavour 5, 0 ,11) ' as possible to protect our native pi odutiOU., stOos make such a law as never to have anlsarepf except from the northern parts of 41 111) or The Right Honourable Gentleman in tha t „`` ti r 0 , said that the countries with which we ha ve '' ;t art? If merce are nearly in the same latitude as thi s ca ofigis and that, consequently, their seasons we re t ot , the same as ours. In other words, th em t l ,s Honourable Baronet endeavoured to mah lt , eltiy' as a necessary consequence, when ti t A tlt l f e tries had abundance of provisions, so ri a 10,i , country have abundance, and *hen we wq OP f o' scarcity, so Would they.—(Loud cheers from t"eeheslll;ich Lion Benches.) All that argument went upou: ho t ` ‘ , 4 e sition that we should have a law such as .' -. 1 " be lie'•or J exists at present, which confines the supP,,id . O•ettj country.—(Hear, hear.) A real remedy e ° '" r esl t i `;', had in that way-our supplies should not he io te f t, or confined to those c ountri e s alone, hilt di e P .c il' e , having our supply in those countric:, and ill i . e d IV, t a t'l of Europe exclusively, We should be suplu l eo t i j : Pr; North of Europe--by the countries adiali -co' e .0 , Black Sea, and by every other country ° 0 ely world. Our commerce should be extended ° 54 ' l ,, e whole world for the purpose of giving us tha t o4, , v, food of which Ave so greatly stand in need. ~.t (` ,,i s e,,si.° ‘ ! ictoit.noiehl Opposition einiloprattssi principle iii ) tnonisocni i ' s ni sliding 1 ilbl i rnereeo,gnoppt benches, hcis e taae: p (c;eih, r p, o ibiga p eysni o loidt s rfi a i .de l acut n oisti o uyie, i l ng.d i t ehfii m nrtr(gs a ll_Lte d sohoo e c tnebai t idel. o eelß. t e,se l .ata i )hi e lno. enu i niej - 111eloste tit vooj i; oi t i 01 1 . 0: t ; ji :if el . is, that a high and prohibitory duty, I sb et iiir e eth y l ways, forms part of that scale.--(llea r ' . eS tat'. z loud cheers.) I can understand a scale nu t i5. , ,07 10s. or 125., and going down to 45., or 25., u r ,„ it ' 0. 1 , 11 ; find that whenever Hon. Gentlemen speak4,itoll I ` . l scale, it always contains a high and a profit or e ? t o What is the first duty in this proposed lu e (l l ,.. et :tda 9 :l' first duty is 20s. upon all foreign wheat; . h ito 1 d o ot*: 00 wish now to show, first, that that is a proqieb, e 0 1 „, —(Cheers.) • I have looked at the papers °. sa° ii o'e r i, the latest information the House h a y whi e tie oo 4l ., , the subject. I have looked at those paP er " . Ge ° ' ( 1 1 °' ' . presented to the House by the Right 11 0 . t ti t' de , a ° V e it the Vice-President of the Board of r ii wer e t iefe s i o , I have looked at the papers sv l " e ii ; : ,.e ti f orol o t stinted to Parliament, last year, b Y t , or sta te 0 , who was expressly sent to the No rt 'ioci t oics for the purpose of ascertaining the Pr . , e ' e otnt a ‘ , til:g trade there a gentleman who ha" hit t ai' o ro;• tions there not only with official perso t t r '''. o , os ' 4l ,i r ( F4l l merchants and persons in trade there. ,t' . - ,.. tit leui°;eser e y, at first that the Right Honourable , y os itig, ,, e r eer o Robert Peel) in the course of his sp (-'clintleina° `tietas,..o, as he did, his information from that Ge Gen fjere sbhitottillvdhhenavie l m oo a k d e e d an at at o ta e ck e uppaornertshan?t )1,1.16:13.tr11t aiste,,riellrio ther ceased, for I discovered that it ~`_ ~ j3igt" . , other proof of the discretion of tin`'elieel", Vim" nourable Gentleman.—(Laughter aT io ttie . I t rill 1 1(1 find that the dufy upon wheat ill _` . ' 4 ne ces,',` ool ti e that the charges which they say ,it detal,l e j to l ie , incurred, and of which I need not go into be : ,(10 po po pe be 4s. 6d. to 55., making in all 10s. 6(1 .: rice of ,goolaiiil original price ; that as the origin.:,llc, 1 2 1 0tillt sy, it w o o when brought from the interior of 11, t 0,,, sd.:, 4 55. 111 ,. 355., they say, with the addition .01 „rice 0i ,..0., o .‘ „, be sold in England, making th e ih e ar) -- o f Ou r. st What have we to add' to that ?........ win ,. _ e ,„. i y . , i , e ing 655. 6d., when the price here i." Tc ri ' the 6 3 . 4; vil i ll 0 prohibitory ditty.—(Cheers.) t i ; - int the v , st sou p , Odessa it is statedin the return, No pit . ~....a , of c ourse , t !cos tP" -- 265.. and the freight 10s. ; t ta u # that some charges which we canny " .1411 `Oll . k 11 c ~ ~, s 3 kr, _