The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-27 00:00:00

LETTER-OPE ''''UNC . ; AT THE POST- 01 FIC . Last night - a numerous- meeting of the electors of -the borough of Finsbury was held at the White Conduit-house Tavern, Pentonville, relative to the opening of letters at the Post-office addrused to Mr. T. S. Dunceinbe, the representa tive of the borough. Mr. It TAYLOR having been callei to the chair, said that he had for many years examined the elective franchise in the borough of Fin;bilry ; he had therefore readily consented to take the chair on that occasion. That borough had done itself great credit by the choice of its present representatives ; they were both gentlemen of great ability, perseverance, and courage. In proportion as a public man was courageous he became an object of suspicion to the Government. The power of opening letters in the Post-office might be a most danger one weapon in the hands of a tyrannical Government. He (Mr. Taylor) recollected that during the time of, he believed, the Sidmouth Administration, when it was deemed necessary to get up sham plots, the letters of Mr. Coke, of Norfolk, the late Earl of Leicester, were opened in order to obtain mate rials on which to ground a charge against him of hostility to t;,_ Government of the day. Thit such conduct would be ni, t•)r the people ,- ould n:t s.ibmit to such vluktic , r of that conthience ivh h oug:it to i•et.Aeen toe Members ann their cou,,Litufints. The .dectors I)! t , instinry were bound to call upon the Government to wipe oil al., ..,tiona which it had attempted to cast on the charac ter of Mr. pl!iicombe If they did not, they would be un ww.tilly of tl:4t rerntetion for public spirit which they had }Althea.; rni Sir C. Na:)iPr, MA'., an Mr. Waklev, M.P., here entered the mom, and were sheered. The : - -EcnErAtty then reAd the following letter from Mr. Dnrieohd,:— " TO TUE ELECTORS OF YINSIKYRY IN PUBLIC MEETING ♦SSEMBLED. " Gentlemen,—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of invitation and to express to you my regret that recent events in Parliament have rendered it imperative on the borough of Finsbury to meet on my account—the fault, however, rests not with me, but with her Majesty's Ministers. " I need not assure you how happy I am, at all times, to meet those whom it is my pride to represent, when questions affecting public interests are under their consideration, as, upon such occa sions you will do me the justice to admit I have never shrunk from doing that which I felt to be my duty. "But, gentlemen, the question which you are convened to discuss appears to me to be of so peculiar and of so purely a personal character, that I think it would be most indelicate nn my part to be present upon the occasion. In declining, however, the honour that you have proposed to me, I hope I may be permitted to state that all that I have asked of the House of Commons is that which I think I have a right to demand, viz.—an opportunity of removing those base suspicions implied by the fact of the Governmant having violated the sanctity of my correspondence. The expression of your independent opinion, I hope, will assist me in. obtaining that satisfaction without which, I am convinced you will agree with me, I cannot continue a Member of the present House of Commons with either advantage to you or credit to myself.—l have the honour to be, gentlemen, your obedient and faithful servant, "Albany, Feb. 20. "THOMAS. S. DUNCOMBE." The reading of this letter produced vehement cheering. Mr. LINTON, in moving the first resolution, observed that three distinct charges had been made against the Govern ment, one wag—that letters had been illegally opened and detained at the Post-office; the next—that seals had been counterfeited to conceal that examination, and the third was —that it had been done to serve the interests of certain despotic Governments. Mr. Duncombe had called for expla nation, but he obtained no answer. By Sir J. Graham he was met with dogged silence—by Lord Aberdeen with subterfuge and false assertions, and by Sir H. Peel with shuffling and evasion. The only answer given to Mr. Duncombe was con tained in the reports of two Committees which did not agree with each other. Mr. Duncombe's character had been moat foully stigmatised, and it was the duty of his constituents to demand a full vindication from the Government. The reso lution was as follows : " That this meeting learns with mortification and disgust that there exists at the General Post,office a secret spy system under which letters are broken open, their seals counterfeited, and post marks falsely imposed, in order to deceive the persons to whom such letters are directed, and to whom they are afterwards for warded, while the information thus obtained has in some cases been used to promote despotic interests of foreign Governments—that this meeting strongly denounces the existence of such disgraceful transactions, and refusing to be satisfied with the Report of the Committee published at the close of the last session, deems it es sentially necessary for the honour of this country, and also for public satisfaction and security, that a strict, searching, and open inquiry should be instituted into all the circumstances referred to in certain petitions presented to Parliament on this subject, in order that by such inquiry the manlier in which such illegal and unconstitutional practices have been carried on, may be clearly ex. posed and brought to public shame." Mr. HODGKIN seconded the motion. The question was between Sir J. Graham and Mr. Duncombe, the one a rene gade to his former party, the latter a straightforward gen tleman, who had stood fast by his principles, and was at all times the zealous and independent advocate of popular rights. The motion was carried by acclamation. Mr. WALKER moved the next resolution : " That this meeting have rea I with indignation the statement made by our representative, Mr. Thomas Duncombe, in his place in Parliament, that his correspondence has been clandestinely in. bercepted and secretly opened, under Government authority, at the Post-office : that in the opinion of this meeting the only excuse for the exercise of such power towards Mr. Duncombe, would be that the Government had good reason to deem him capable of conduct which, if true, would, in our opinion, render him totally unfit to continue the representative of a free and independent constituency; that we therefore feel it due to ourselves, as well as to Mr. Dun. combe, to demand from tie House of Commons such an investiga. tion into the proceedings towards him ,as shall either justify the implied suspicions of the Government, or fully establish the inno cence lf our long-tried and faithful representative." Mr. ROGERS seconded the motion, which was also sup ported by Sir C. NAPIER, M.P., who said that whatever excuse might exist as to opening the letters of foreigners suspected of plotting against their country, the Government had no right to violate the sanctity of correspondence between a re presentative of the people and his constituents. Mr. Dan come had put to Sir James Graham a plain simple question— " Did you open my letters, or did you not . ?" He could get no answer. The matter was referred to two Committees, but the reports were silent with respect to Mr. Duncombe; upon that part of the case they made no report whatever. The question for the electors of Finsbury to decide was this — he had been suspected of carrying on a treasonable corre spondence with some persons in this country :—Was Mr. Duncombe capable of high treason ?—(Cheers, and cries of " No, no.") Well, then, you must believe either that Mr. Duncombe was plotting against the Government, or that Sir James Graham was plotting against Mr. Duncombe. Under these circumstances, the electors of Finsbury had done right to demand a full inquiry into the subject. The resolution was carried unanimously. On the motion of Mr. COOPER, seconded by Dr. EPPS, a petition embodying the resolutions was then adopted. Mr. WAKLEY, M.P., then addressed the meeting at very great length, pledging himself to present the petition. Mr. BLEwirr, M.P. for Monmouth, promised it his best support. Thanks were voted to the Chairman, and the meeting se parated. RAILWAY COMMITTEES The Sub-Committee, No. 2, met yesterday. Pre sent Sir J. Y. Buller, Mr. F. Mackenzie, Mr. Kemble, Mr. Yorke, and Mr. Walker. SHREWSBURY AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY. The Committee was occupied the whole day in inves tigating objections to the petition. The opponents sus tained a great number of objections, arising out of omis sions and misdescriptions on the plans. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till Friday, when they will take the objections arising upon the errors in the books of reference. THE MURDER AT HAMPSTEAD. 111 LATEST PARTICULARS LAST NIGHT, Immediately after the conclusion of the examination of the ac cused man, Thomas Henry Hocker, yesterday, at Marylebone Police-court, Inspectors Shackell and Haynes, of the detective poi* force, feeling convinced from the evidence adduced that the party who had undergone examination was in reality the murderer of I,fr. Delatue, considered it necessary further to prosecute an in. quit.) with respect to him. The :mpression made on the mind of the officers was that a sufficiently minute search had not been made of the lodgings of th• alleged murderer, or of those of his father, by Inspector Partridge and Sergeant Scotney, at the time they apprehended the prisoner Hocker. Acting on this impression, and under a fear that unless they were prompt in their movements the evidences of giiilt against the prisoner might be removed, Inspectors Shackell and Haynes at once proceeded to the residence of Hocker's father, No. 17, Charles street, Portiand.town. The inspectors, on their arrival, made known to the father of the alleged murderer the object of their visit, and at once, without any hesitation on the part of the father, every facility was offered them to make a search of the premises. They were first shown into a front room on the first floor, which was the one occupied by his son, who also had a lodging where he was captured, No. 11, Victoria-terrace. In this room the officers found that which is presumptive, if not conclusive, evidence of the atro. cious guilt of the prisoner. Secreted in this room were a pair of trousers stained with blood and covered with dirt; a pair of stock. ings, the leas of which were also bloody, the blood having gone through the trousers, and a Mackintosh the front and back of which were also splashed with blood. On these things being shown to the unfortunate parent, he identified them as those of his son now in custody. A further search was pursued, but nothing else was discovered, and Shackell and Haynes left the place with the clothes in question in their possession, and Inspector Shackell at once proceeded to the Marylebene Police-court, where he explained to Mr. Rawlinson, the magistrate, who had not then left the bench, the important discovery which he had made. ARe: this Inspector Haynes proceeded to the New Prison, Clerkenwell, to which place Hocker was conveyed in the prison van immediately after his remand, for the purpose of making a minute examination of the prisoner's dress and person. With this view he directed the prisoner to take off his coat, which he wore on Friday night, the cuffs of which, upon examination, were covered with blood. A button was found in the field near the spot where the deceased was murdered, and also one found at the lodgings of the accused, in Victoria-terrace, and on Inspector Haynes comparing them to. gether they exactly matched each other, and what is more con. elusive, on the inspection of the prisoner's coat two buttons were missing, and on comparing both of these buttons with the remainder of those on the coat they exactly tallied with .them. The pair of drawers which the prisoner had on were on examination found to be also spotted with blood. • Whilst at the station.house the prisoner, in reference to a large sum of money he was stated to hare been seen to spend on Saturday, said that it came into his possession fairly, having been given to him by a woman with whom he was acquainted in the New-road; but this, it is understood, will be disproved. The defence which Mocker vet up when before the magistrate, that he could prove that he did net leave his residence till a quarter or 10 minutes to S o'clock on the night of the murder, will, the reporter is informed, be denied by several witnesses. An official report of the above facts was last evening made to the Commissioners of Police. It has already been stated that there was strong reason for believing that there were three men whe were concerned in and supposed to be the perpetrators of the horrid *ine. The inspectors h ave i nstituted the most rigid inquiries b n this Point, and from the information they had received there is but little doubt that more than one person was engaged in the murder. The reporter was informed that a belief was entertained that another man would be in custody early this (Thursday) morn. ing, if not last night. The a'leged murderer is stated to be a teacher of the ♦iolin, but formerly was a teacher at the Christ Church District Schools, lit. Marylebone. STATE OF TRADE.—The news from India received , , by the intermediate mail, yesterday, though not con . sidered very favourable, has not produced any injurious effect upon our market. The demand for all descrip• tions of yarn, and especially for those suitable to the eastern markets, was very good yesterday, and prices continue to advance. There was also a fair demand at good prices, for nearly all descriptions of manufactured goods, except twenty•seven-inch printing cloth, which has begun to accumulate in the hands of the manufac ktrers.—Manchester Guardian. I MPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 26. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. W. H. P. CAREW took the oaths and his seat for the county of East Cornwall. INCOME-TAX. Lord JOHN MANNERS and Mr. ROEBUCK presented petitions again,t the continuance of the income-tax. Mr. G. HEATHCOTE presented a petition from Rutlandshire against the Medical Reform Bill. Mr. TATTON EGERTON brought up the Birken head Docks Bill, which was read a first time. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY. The Eastern Counties Railwayßill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. Lord ARUNDEL presented petitions from places in Somerset and Westmoreland, against the sale of intoxi cating liquors on Sundays. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY. Mr. HOPE JOHNSTONE presented petitions from each of the Parliamentary districts of Glasgow, signed by upwards of 13,500 inhabitants, in favour of this Bill. BRIDGWATER RAILWAY. - The Committee reported that the standing orders had been complied with on the Bridgewater proposed line of railway. BARNSLEY JUNCTION LINE. The Committee on standing orders reported that the order had been complied with on this line. SHEFFIELD AND HUDDERSFIELD RAILWAY. Pt titions were presented fur Bills fur the formation of the Huddersfield and Sheffield Junction Railway. THAMES AND MEDWAY CANAL. The report of the Committee on the Thames and Med way Canal Bill was brought up. The standing orders had been complied with. SUGAR DUTIES. Sir W. CLAY gave notice that, on the House going into Committee of Ways and Means, he should move an amendment, to the effect that an ad valorem duty should be imposed upon sugar. COLONIAL ACCOUNTS. Dr. BOWRING gave notice that, on the 11th March, he should move a series of resolutions on the system of making out the Colonial accounts:—lst, that there should be an uniform system of accounts for the Ex chequer receipts and payments of the several colonies; 2d, that there should be a statement of the whole amount of the receipts and expenditure as they occurred, without any distinction ; and, 3d, that the payments into her Majesty's Exchequer should appear in no other way for the future than as credits for disbursements on payment into the Exchequer. SUGAR DUTIES. _ Mr. WILLIAMS said the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that this after noon he would state when the sugar duties was to come into operation. Would it be convenient to do so now ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, considering all the circumstances of the case, he did not see any ground for altering the time set down in the resolution. Mr. WILLIAMS gave notice then, that he would when the resolution was proposed, move that the re duction should begin on the Ist of April.—(Laughter.) Mr WALLACE wished to know if any allowance would be made to persons holding sugar in bond? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was understood to reply, that persons who had sugar in bond would have to maintain it there until the duties were remitted. If it were removed in the meantime, of course the sugar would be liable to the duty. The Hon. S. WORTLEY said it became important then to know when the duty would be taken off. He should be glad therefore to know when the resolutions were likely to be agreed to ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished it was in his power to give the Hon. Member the in formation he required. There were so many orders of the day standing on the paper, that it was quite impos sible to say when the resolutions would receive the sanc tion of the House. GLASS DUTIES. Dr. BOWRING wished to put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He wished to know whether, supposing the existing duties on glass were re moved, it w as his intention to repeal the duties on foreign glass ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if the Hon. Gentleman would look to the schedule that had been laid on the table, he would find that a cor responding alteration had been made in the duty on foreign glass. SUGAR DUTIES. Mr. VILLIERS, seeing the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his place, wished to put to him a question affecting the debate of the evening. It had been stated as one chief justification of the high differen tial duty that those restraints which used to exist with foreign countries would still continue. It was also stated that the duty on refined sugar would still con tinue as usual. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the resolutions on the table of the House would answer the questions of the Hon. Member. It would be seen from them that it was intended to introduce refined sugar at increased duties. MEDICAL REFORM BILL. Lord HOWICK presented a petition against the Medical Reform Bill. BISHOPRIC OF BATH AND WELLS. Mr. COLLETT rose to put the questions to the First Lord of the Treasury, of which he had given notice, with respect to the bishopric of Bath and Wells. He wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to appoint another bishop during the life of the present incumbent, and whether it was their intention to unite the diocese with that of Salisbury on the death of the present Bishop ? Sir R. PEEL could not avoid expressing his astonish ment when the notice was first given by the Hon. Mem ber. To the first of his questions he. could only reply that the Government bad no power to make any such appointment, and, therefore, his answer was decidedly in the negative. To the second question he would defer all answer, at least for the present. Mr. COLLETT then gave notice that he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to consolidate the dioceses of Bath and Wells with that of Salisbury, on the demise of the present Bishop of Bath and Wells.—(Hear.) METROPOLITAN GRAVE-YARDS. Sir P. EGERTON wished to thaw the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, to a shocking circumstance which came out in evidence before a police magistrate. It appeared that, in some of the crowded burial-grounds of the metropolis (one was instanced in the neighbourhood of Clerken well) it was the custom to inter the bodies pro tempore, and shortly afterwards to burn them. He wished to know if the Right Hon. Baronet intended to adopt any measures to prevent this desecration ? Sir J. GRAHAM , bad never heard of the practice referred to, but the circumstances mentioned by the Hon. Baronet would have his best attention. SUGAR DUTIES.—SUPPLY. On the motion that the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of Supply be read, Mr. MILNER GIBSON begged to offer a short ex planation of part of the statement he made on the sugar duties question a few nights since. As it had been sup posed that, in his estimate of the cost of producing a hundred-weight of sugar, he had not included all the expenses, he begged to say that in his estimate he had included salaries, wages, taxes, &c,—(Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN. RUSSELL then rose and said—Sir, I believe that the House is now about to enter upon the consideration of a question of very great importance, brought forward by the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is a motion of great importance, not only in a financial, but in a commercial point of view. The Right Honourable Gentleman, in this proposition, has laid down these two propositions—first, that it is desirable and necessary to renew the income-tax for a further limit ; and, secondly, that the use to be made of the surplus revenue which this tax will create, or a great portion of it is to apply it to the relief of the country from certain other taxes, and to in crease the trade and commerce of the manufacturing districts. With regard to the first of these proposi tions, I need not dwell upon it, for the House has already, by a great majority, agreed to the renewal of the income-tax, thereby declaring that, if the other taxes about to be proposed shall appear to this House to be the best that could be proposed, the House has no objection to try the experiment proposed in this respect by the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government. But with respect to the second proposition, that appears to me to be one of such vast importance as to require naore careful and deliberate consideration, as it would materially affect certain articles of consumption. And the first of these articles is sugar ; and it would appear to me, though such has not been stated by her Majesty's Government, that the views of the Government are to make such an alteration in the duty on this article as will place the ma nufacturers of sugar in a position that will not give them room to complain that those duties had been lightly altered. If that be so, I think this House should take care to see that certain necessary and indispensable con ditions should be complied with. The first of those is, to take care that no enactment on the subject should be of an inconsistent or contradictory nature in itself ; and secondly, that there should not be taken from off arti cles of commerce a greater amount of taxes than would be necessary for the purposes of the revenue, and at the same time do justice to the West India grower, by giving him such an amount of protection as may be necessary. The first objection that I have to this proposition is, that it professes to keep up a distinction which I hold to be impracticable, between the produce of foreign free and slave labour. That this project is illusory seems to ine a proposition so plain that, if it were not that the plan of the Government contemplates a contrary course, I should hardly attempt to detain the House any length of time in arguing so obvious a proposition. But when we discussed the question, last year, certain answers were offered to the proposal which I then made, that all foreign sugar should be subject to the same duty, whether it were the produce of free labour or of slave labour. I think it necessary now to take some notice of these answers. I objected that this distinction was illusory. I said there was no ob jection to take toLacco or cotton at the same duty from the countries where they were slave-grown as from the free states. It was answered that certainly the Govern ment did not propose to interfere with the tobacco or cotton duties, or with commerce long established ; but that r in all new regu l a ti o ns which might be in troduced, th ey would make the di st i nct i on be tween the produce of free labour and that of slave labour. But this is not the fact, for the proposal of this year, a s we ll as that of last year,' does make an alteration ; but the distinctionn T b a tveeti foreign free and coffee ild. forlnvsedt to 6d., slave labour is not observed. last year the duty was reduced fr p o o m n forel l ip p and the same duty was imposed u o it is proposed this year to admit with out sugar as upon the produce of free labour. With rgersPwe:t to copper ore, duty that which is the produce of slave labour. And with regard to cotton, you are going to take off the whole duty this year, and you do not propose to make any distinction between that which is raised by the labour of slaves in foreign possessions and that which is raised in the East ladies, and die where, by free labour.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I find, ac cording to those who are the greatest opponents of slavery—philanthropists who take this view—that we ought to discourage all productions of slave labour. These persons admit that we cannot exclude alto gether the products of slave labour, yet still some of them regard with dissatisfaction the encourage ment which is given to slave-grown coffee and cotton. But, in point of fact, you cannot discourage slave labour, for although you profess to limit yourselves only to the produce of free labour, yet, if the distinction could be kept up—if your Custom-house regulations could be so maintained that none but free-labour produce should be admitted—still the free-labour sugar, kept from the market of the world for your supply, would be replaced in the market of the world by the slave-grown sugar which you excluded. 'The reply to this was of a very refined nature, and I own I think not a very successful one. It was, that you would in fact make a difference of price in the markets of the world between free and slave-labour sugar ; that the free-labour sugar of Java and other countries would command a better price than slave labour sugar, in consequence of your restriction. Ido not think that this will be the case, for supposing the whole consumption of sugar to be 670,000 tons,gyou take away 20,000 tons for the consumption of the continent, as there is no difference made on the continent between free-labour and slave-grown sugai ,the probability is that the greater part of the want thus created will be supplied by the sugar of Cuba and Brazil, which admits of great extension, and that this 20,000 tons additional will be the produce of slave labour. But in the next place there was this difficulty in the project you proposed, that you could not in point of fact, confine your consumption to the free labour . sugar of foreign countries. You had certain treaties with foreign Powers by which you had agreed to admit their articles on the same terms as those of the most favoured nations ; therefore, you could not exclude the produce of those countries consistently with the maintenance of those treaties. There are se veral countries which come into this catalogue ; and the fact as accorded with the argument then ad vanced, that you would not effectually exclude slave labour sugar, for the only sugar, and that but a small quantity, which has been imported under the Act of last •cear, was said to be the sugar of Venezuela, and was, in fact, sugar produced by slave labour. I have heard various statements with regard to this slave-grown sugar. Some say it has been recognised as the sugar of Porto Rico, others say it is the sugar of Surinam or Bra zil. But those I have seen on this subject generally agree that it was not the sager of Venezuela, but sugar which by some fraud or other was passed as Venezuelan into this country.(Hear.) This is but a single in stance, but it has happened very early in the course of your experiment. It has happened so early, that it has preceded any of those importations for the sake of which you altered the law. Now, if this is the case already, what may you expect from the whole of the next ten years, for instance, if you preserve this distinction ? What can you expect but this—that ingenious persons will contrive schemes by which they may more effectually evade your regulations, and that the sugars of Brazil and Cuba will be sent to the ports of Venezuela and other ports, where they may find a consul who is not suspicious, or Custom house authorities, who are open to a bribe, and by this means constantly evade the provisions you have made for the exclusion of any sugar that is not the produce of free labour. If this be the case, then I submit that it is impracticable to keep up this distinction. You are attempting that which is contrary to the nature of things— you are attempting that which you cannot follow out in practice. I will not say that there has been any by in this proposal, as I do not wish to use any ar gument of that sort ; but admitting and giving every credit for good intentions, as much as was claimed, it is not a proposal that can be carried into effect, and it is impossible that your regulations can actually exclude that slave-grown sugar which you propose to exclude. It is hardly worth arguing this question again. It is quite clear that the manufacturers of sugar in Brazil and in Cuba, so long as you send value for their sugar, are indifferent whether you yourselves consume the sugar or not. All that they ask for is, a market for their pro duce, and when they obtain that they are satisfied with the resut. Such, Sir, is one of the obvious defects of the measure, defects which I think will, from year to year become more and more obvious and striking. I proceed next to what I consider another fault in the measure, and that is, that I con sider it rather aggravates than otherwise the protec tion given at present to the colonies. I was happy to hear, the other night, the principles of free trade admitted by all who spoke on the question, except by the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member fir Newark, who so lately quitted the office of President of the Board of Trade, made a most remarkable declara tion on this subject. He admitted that the East Indies had no claim for protection—he admitted that nothing but the scarcity of labour in the West India co lonies, resulting from the Emancipation Act, could form a ground for protection respecting sugar. This is a most important admission.—(Hear, hear.) It is most im portant, because it evidently admits this, that it was no reason because the produce was the produce of our colo nies, that any protection whatever should be extended. Mr. GLADSTONE—I did not say that these colo nies had no claim for protection. What I said was, that they had no claim for greater protection than 10s. per cwt. Lord J. RUSSELL—Then I misunderstood the Right Hon. Gentleman. I thought he said the colonies had no claim for protection. However, this admission of only lOs. per cwt. protection narrows the question of protection very considerably, because a protection of 10s. or 10s. 6d. per owt., according to the proposal of the Right Honourable Gentleman, is not required by justice with respect to 70,000 tons which come from the West Indies. With respect to the Mauritius, there:-is a sufficiency of labour for the Mauritius. Newspapers even tell us that the labourers cannot get sufficient employment. This demand of protection to the amount of 10s. 6d. does not apply either to Barbadoes or Antigua, because those colonies have likewise a sufficiency of labour. Then the demand of protection made on behalf of the West Indies amounts only to a claim of protection for that amount for Jamaica, Trinidad, and De merara. Now this, I must say, makes a great difference in the case; because you are proposing an equal protection of 10s. 6d. both for those who may in justice demand it, and for a great many others who have no such claim. Now, Sir, let us examine the protection which is thus proposed. My Honourable Friend the Member for Manchester, in bringing forward his motion the other night—and I find it impossible not to refer to that debate, because it raised what was a' part of the present question—(Hear, hear)—my lion. Friend stated on that occasion that the protection given amounted to a tax of about 2,300,0001. on the people of the United Kingdom. My Noble Friend the Member for Sunderland stated that it was a protection to that amount, a .d at the same time he said that there had been a difference of above 7s. 6d. in the price of colo nial and foreign sugar. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Newark, to whom I must again allude, said that there was an evident inconsistency in these argu ments—that if the difference was no more than that, it was impossible that the protection could be more than 14s. Now, certainly, when I heard that declaration, I felt impressed with the importance of it as corning from the Right Honourable Gentleman, but, at the same time, I could not agree in its justice; and I will state my reasons why I think it is not correct. What the Right Hon. Gentleman proposes is, not to continue the present importation and the present duty, but a new importation and new rates of duty. If the present importation were to continue, and the differ ence of price, which was 20s. and 275., we might say that there was only that difference of' price, and that with the present rate of duty there was no greater protection. But let it be observed, that the protection proposed to be given is on a consumption of 250,000 tons of sugar. What is assumed by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite is, that the consumption of sugar will increase from 207,000 to 250,000 tuns ; and the consequence must bo, that until this foreign sugar which is proposed to be admitted, comes into the market, the West India sugar will continue to rise in price, Therefore supposing, Sir, that the price of sugar now was 205., it appears on the admission of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the imposition on the 15,000 tons of foreign sugar would make it 2Ss., and make the price at which foreign sugar will be brought in the market not less than 48s. Now, supposing that the price of West India sugar is now, as it was a few weeks ago, 285., it acill then, by the addition of a 14s. duty, be raised to the price of 425., and will not be until it has risen to 485., that foreign sugar can be brought into the market to compete with West India sugar. If sugar be, there fore, at the price which it was a few weeks ago, the price at which it will be sold will give a protection of 14s. a cwt. to West India sugar. If this be the case, the measure of the Government will not give to the consumer the benefit which will be lost to the revenue. This competition, therefore, Sir, does not seem to me to give any benefit to the country. By the calculation of the Right Hon. .Gentleman, if the price of sugar has risen to 30s. or 325., the consump tion will be decreased, and foreign sugar cannot come into the market. The price of West India sugar will, in that case, rise, and there will not then be the con sumption of 250,000 tons, which has been calculated as as the consumption of the country; and of the 250,000 tons, 15,000 tons being subject to the foreign duty, it Hill be a natural consequence that the price will rise to 345. Now, Sir, what is the effect of this rate of 14s. ? The rate, I am aware, is actually 1 ls. 2d. ; but the rate being 255. 2d., and that 255. 2d. being reduced to 1 ls. 2d., there is a difference of 14s. But this will be enough to prevent any benefit to the consumer, The fact will be, that there will be in this a remission of is. to the consumer, and 6s. to the West Indian planter. Other calculations have been made, and these give 6s. to the consumer and ss. to the West Indian planter. But, supposing all the duties equal, and these not more than Bs., the benefit given to the West Infliffn planters will not be less than 1,100,0001, and this tax will be imposed simply for the sake of the benefit of the West India planters and the Exchequer, for the tax will be equally divided between the West India planters and the Exchequer. It is a tax divided between the Exchequer and the West India colonies—one part of it going to the revenue, the other being for the benefit of the planter! BO then, Sir, it is said that you must give this great protec tion on account of the state of the West Indies, and the abolition of slavery. Sir, I could not vote foe my Honourable Friend the Member for Man chester the other night, because the West Indies two a very emiderable claim upon uo, owing CQ ' THE SUN, LONDON, THITRSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 27 1845. the recent abolition of slavery. Let us observe what is the state of the West Indies in consequence of the very great advantage given to them. The -West India labourers have had the advantage of a great state of prosperity ever since the passing of the Aet of emancipation. During the last year that state of prosperity had diminished, in so far as the amount raised from labour had decreased, and the s ages of the labourer had not been more than 7s. per week. Now, under this state of affairs, what has taken place in the West In dies has been this :—There has been a great stimulus to immigration—there has been a great number of labourers attracted to the West Indies, in order that there might be a sufficiency of labour to supply the sugar of this country. But, Sir, the way in which that scheme has operated has been this : a tax has been imposed under these circumstances, which has borne with great severity on the labourer. In proof of this, I hold in my hand a letter from a person, who was a remarkable man during the anti-slavery agitation, and who now has a most ex traordinary influence over the winds of a great part of the population of Jamaica. The person to whom I al lude is Mr. Knibb, the Baptist missionary. and this letter was written by him in 1844. Mr. Knibb says, "I do not believe there is another labouring population on the face of the earth who would so patiently have borne this reduction in their wages. It was made, too, at a time when a tax was imposed upon the country which had no other effect than to increase the price of provisions, and, of course, as this tax pressed more upon the articles of food which they consumed, it must have tended still further to reduce their wages." Now, Sir, this proves that the plans you propose, though they may have the effect of giving so large an amount as a million or upwards to the planters, will not have the effect of increasing the comforts or happiness of the peasantry of the West Indies. I believe that the admis sion of 'labourers from Africa to the West Indies, if conducted under regulations, and allowed to take place in small numbers, would be for the ad vantage both of the West Indies and of Africa. I have recorded that opinion, and I still believe both that the civilisation of Africa would be promoted by persons going from Africa to the West Indies, and that the ge neral prosperity of the West Indies would be improved by that plan. But I did not like to hazard the scheme of proposing to carry large numbers of persons from Africa to the West Indies. In the first place, I should beg the House to look back—and seeing the Right Honourable Gentle man the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment, with whom I acted in the Committee that preceded. that Act, in his place, I would ask of him what made the Act of Emancipation so successful, as it was universally allowed to be, so far as the peace and happiness of the people of the West Indies was con cerned? Why, because, much to the credit of the masters of slaves of that day. the slaves were so far brought into a state of civilisation, that when the Act of Emancipation took place, society fell into its natural order, and no outbreaks or riots were committed, as might have been expected from the sudden change from slavery to freedom. But be it re collected that the change had taken place nearly thirty years after the slave trade had ceased ; thereby the people of the West Indies had become to a great degree civilised, and this great revolution was made without convulsion.—(Hear, hear.) lam stating what is to the credit of the owners of the slaves in the West Indies. But if you were now to introduce vast numbers of Africans from the shores of Africa—if you were to take them from places which were still in a state of barbarians—if you were to transplant them into the West Indies, and turn them at once to labour, I cannot but foresee that, in no long course of time, you would have a population whom it 'would be difficult to bring into that state of civilization which your present negro population of the West Indies are in. And yet that is the attempt you are now making. I hardly think it will succeed, because I think the very great cost of carrying labourers from Africa to the West Indies is very much against it. But still the attempt is making in this way, by makinglarge loans in Trinidad and Demerara, and taxing the people and especially taxing the admission of their food—for the pur pose of raising means to bring great num bers of people from Africa to the West Indies. Any law which you may pass in this country which has a great tendency to give a monopoly, as far as this country is concerned, to sugar, the produce of the West Indian colonies, will produce a disadvantageous effect upon the labourers in the West Indies. In; the first place, it will tend to the oppression and disadvantage of the labouring population of the West Indies. I state this upon the authority of Mr. Knibb.— (Ironical cheers from the Ministerial Benches, answered by counter-cheering from the Opposition.) Mr. Knibb is a man who possesses great authority among the labouring population of the West Indies—a man of most remarkable talent, and of great influence and authority. In the next place I think it would endanger the future condition of the West India colonies, making it doubtful twenty years hence—when we consider the immense numerical superiority of the black population over the white—whether the colonies may not be the scene of some most frightful convulsion. And all this is done to keep up a system which is contrary to your own professed prin ciples, and is proposed to be brought about in the most artificial manner. I am free to confess that it appears to me that this attempt to produce an artificial price of sugar in this country, as you say, for the purpose of giving an advantage to the West India colonies, must result in producing effects which must be very dangerous, and may be quite fatal to the interests of those whom you are anxious to protect.—(Hear.) But when gentlemen speak of the additional advantage which this system of protection is to confer on the labourers in the West Indies, let them not entirely forget that there are also labourers in this country.—(Cheers.) That there are labourers employed in agriculture—(Cheers)—and that there are artizans employed in manufactures who also require some little consideration.—(Cheers.) I can readily conceive that a sudden and immediate reduction of all duties on for. ign produce, as compared with the produce of the West Indies, to 14s. or to 285., might produce such an immediate disadvantage to the West India proprietor as to cause a great shock ; but, on the other hand, if you attempt to give an additional advantage to the planters you will put off to a still further period the time which we all hope to see arrive, when the principles of free trade shall be universally adopted.--(Hear ' hear.) I heard the other night an Hon. Gentlem an , w ho has re cently become a member of the Government, state that the principles of free trade were true in the abstract. That principle I believe is universally admitted ; but I wish to see the practical application of those principles with regard to such great articles of consumption as that which we are now called on to consider.—(Cheers.) I now come to the results which the Right Honourable Baronet stated would ensue from his proposition, as far as the finances of the country were concerned. He stated that the result would be an increase in the consumption, from 207,000 tons to 250,000 tons, with a consequent increase to the revenue of 1,300,0001. Now it ap pears injury whatever to the West g anyhtremit the whole of that—if Indies, you without might were to have, for instance, 20s. or 28s. ; or it re ducing the duty very largely, you were to have a similar duty to that proposed by the Right lion. Baronet of 10s. or 125., and of 18s. or 20s. on foreign produce—you might not make any difference in the present prices between the colonist and the foreign producer, but you might preserve a very great part of your income, and you might have the means of making this experi ment. The Right Honourable Gentleman has pro posed this experiment with regard to sugar. He might make that experiment with regard to sugar, and he might preserve the whole of the revenue, it' he would but admit all foreign sugar, and decrease the pro tection he proposes to give. Suppose the price of foreign sugar to be 20s„ if he were to add a duty of 205., he cannot have a less price than 405. If you were to have a very mush less duty, it is evident that the consumer would obtain a great benefit, and you would very much increase the consumption of sugar. It is very doubtful, as you now stand, whether the loss of 1,300,0001. will be the total loss the revenue will sustain ? Unless consumption increase at the rate the Right Hon. Gen. tleman anticipates, the loss to the revenue will be 1,800,000/. or 1,900,0001. Now if you could but save that revenue, I think I have shown that there need be no additional price to the consumer. You need not make the consumer pay a single farthing more for sugar, and at the same time you might preserve the whole of the revenue. Now, when I consider the various duties there are which press heavily on the consumer, which might be lightened if you had but that sum you could spare as part of the surplus, I cannot think this great sacrifice to the West Indian planter at all desirable or advisable. There are various duties with regard to which the Right Honourable Gentleman has declared his disapprobation. There were duties which were mentioned when the tariff was discussed— I will take a small instance, cheese and butter.—(Hear, hear.) When these duties were mentioned, it was said that the duty was thirty per cent., and in some inferior descriptions of cheese 100 per cent., and the Right Hon. Gentleman the late President of the Board of Trade said, it was impossible to look to maintaining that duty. That dnty was absurdly high. But he said it was then' impossible to make experiments in the revenue There are other duties that press heavily on silk and other things, which ought to be removed ; and if the lion. Gentleman has a surplus of 1,300,0001., I think the experiment ought to be tried whether or not some reduction might not be made in the duties on those articles without affecting the re venue.—(Hear, hear.) When there is no surplus, of course the experiment cannot be made, but when the Ministry have one, it is their duty to try how far they can reduce taxation. It is proposed by the Government to impose a duty of 14s. on sugar the produce of our own colonies, while in colonies where the slave trade exists, it is pro posed to exact a duty of 28s. The consequence of that is a great burthen upon the consumer.—(Hear, hear.) It may be said that the subject is one for a Com mittee, that is, whether or not it would be wise to take away all duties on sugar, or make a gradual reduction, but, in my opinion, the plan proposed by the Government does not give adequate benefit to the consumer, while it keeps up a distinction between free and slave labour. It risks the revenue, not for the sake of the Queen's revenue, or the army or nav y, but for the sake of a particular class, which forms only a small portion of the population of the country. The No ble Lord concluded by moving the following resolution: —"'That it is the opinion of this House, that the plan proposed by her Majesty's Government in reference to the sugar duties, professes to keep up g distinction between foreign free-labour and foreign slave-labour sugar, which is im practicable and illusory ; and, without adequate benefit to the consumer, tends so greatly to impair the revenue as to render the removal of the income and property-tax, at the end of three years, extremely uncertain and iiilvr9- ba1310." The SPEAKER having put the question, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and said, that when the Noble Lord who had just sat down had first given notice of his motion, he (the Chan gepor of Ow ;chequer) yip ipalico SP hor that it would be found the more convenient course for himself and the House to introduce this discussion after the Speaker had left the chair. lie (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was, however, prepared, wiih confidence, to advocate the measure proposed by Government, and he was quite ready to meet the Noble Lord on the ground he had himself laid down. He could assure the House that he met the Noble Lord on that ground with perfect confidence, and he hoped that he should emulate the Noble Lord in the tone and temper with which he had conducted that discussion, for he considered that a question of the greatest inte rest to the consumer should be discussed as far as pos sible without any of that acrimony which was too often exhibited on the floor of that House.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord objected to the proposition of the Government, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) therefore forbore to make any comment on the peculiar terms of the resolution submitted to the House. The Noble Lord did not say one word on that objection to the proposition of Govern ment, because they attempted to draw a distinc tion between the sugars the product of free labour, arid those imported from what were termed slave-holding countries. The Noble Lord dis claimed on this occasion all imputation,: as to the views of Government, and he (the Chancellor of the Fxchequer) would not refer to any such. The Noble Lord repeated most of the arguments used on preceding occasions, and he said that he could see no distinction between the admission of sugar produced by slave labour, and the admission of cotton and other materials produced in the same manner. He admitted that there was one common principle involved in the admission of those articles, the produce of slave labour ; but the Noble Lord had not ad vanced any new view—he had only repeated over and over again the arguments which had been so often urged in that House, not only in the previous debates on this question during the present session, but on occasions antecedent even to those ; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) maintained that there was a very great distinction between the encourage ment given to the slave trade in the admission of that commodity and those others to which the Noble Lord had referred. It had often been announced in that House that there was a great waste of human life in the cultivation of sugar as com pared with the growing of coffee.—(Hear, hear.) The great importation of slaves from the coast of Africa to Cuba and other foreign countries was carried on, not for the purpose of the cultivation of cotton, but of sugar, by the aid of slave labour. There could not be a stronger proof of this than the testi mony of those who were on the spot, and wit nessed it. He had now before him the report of the Brazilian consul on this part of the subject, and he would take the liberty of reading an extract from it. The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the extract, th substance of which was to the effect that the slaves em ployed in that country in the cultivation of sugar, ave rage about one-third of the whole number of slaves em ployed ; while the proportion of those employed in the production of cotton and of coffee averaged about four fifths ; so that it appeared that of the Creole population of that country four-fifths were employed in producing coffee and cotton, while the remaining one-fifth were slaves that had been imported into the country prior to the year 1831. Indeed, on nearly all the sugar estates in the interior of the country, such a thing as a recently imported slave was very rare to be met with ; while upon those estates along the coasts of the country the slaves employed upon them were slaves imported from Africa, because they afforded greater facilities for that trade than the interior, and received more profitable employment. The report went on to state, that at pre sent the sugar estates in that country were in a state of very little better than half cultivation, for want of slaves, and therefore that a reduction of duty would have the effect of increasing the profits to such an extent as to enable the grower to import slaves, in spite of all that the British Government could do to prevent it. The Right Hon. Gentleman having concluded reading the extract, resumed by saying that by that report the House would see that in Brazil an extensive importation of slaves would be the result of keeping up a high price for sugar, and that therefore when the price could be reduced to a moderate standard, by a certain reduction of duty, the same inducements to slave importation were not created. The Noble Lord had told them that the soil of Brazil admitted of greater cultivation, and that the cultivation must be extended only by importa tion of labour from Africa, and therefore it was that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would adhere to the principle recognised by Parliament, that they should use every endeavour in their power to put down the slave-trade, by whomsoever it might be conducted. But the Noble Lord said that, if they did so. they would draw away from the foreign markets an amount of free labour sugar at a higher price, which would be replaced by the cheaper slave-grown sugar, but that in the mean time slave-grown sugar would be fraudulently introduced through the medium of other countries with whom we had treaties, and he referred to Venezuela. It was true we had treaties with Venezuela, by which that country was to import sugar into this country on a footing with the most favoured nations. Very great ingenuity indeed must have been exercised by those who fraudulently in troduced sugar from the slave-grown countries under the name of Venezuela, when they-imported one single hogs head only, as if for the purpose of a basis for the Noble Lord's argument.—(Laughter.) When he was told that Venezuela encouraged slavery, he admitted that in the case of that country and all others with which we had treaties, and which used slave labour, we could not ex clude their sugar. But if our market wer e l arge enoug h to consume thir produce, there were circumstances con nected with them, and with the United States, which se parated our receiving their produce From the charge of encouraging slavery. In the first place they did not continue the slave-trade, and in 1822 Venezuela passed a law that every person born subsequent to that year should be a freeman, so that every individual under the age of 23 years was at the present moment free, and each succeeding year was advancing towards the term of human slavery. Whatever part, therefore, Venezuela might have taken in introducing slave-labour sugar into this country, to encourage the cultivation of sugar in that republic was not to encourage slavery, but the contrary. The Noble Lord had told them that the exclusion of the sugar of Cuba and Brazil tended to aggravate the burden of the protection on colonial sugar on the people of this country. He confessed himself unable to wader stand the proposition the Noble Lord had intended to enunciate. If there was any truth in the argument of the Honourable Member for Manchester, which he addressed to the House on a preceding evening, his argument went to this, that whatever was the amount of the protective duty, to the extent of that duty a burden was imposed on the con sumers of this country. He made no distinction what ever between the protective duty applied to free-labour sugar or slave-labour sugar. He said, whatever that duty was, it was a burden on the consumers of this couutry. Whether the protective duty of 10s. was given to the free-labour sugar of Java, or the slave-labour sugar of Brazil, there could be no difference in this re spect. Therefore, there was no ground whatever for assuming that the burden which this protective duty might impose on the population of this country, had any connexion with the distinction attempted to be drawn between slave and free-labour sugar. But when he talked of the burdens this protective duty imposed on the consumers hero, he must beg leave to differ from the argument of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and which the Noble Lord had repeated on the present occa sion.' He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not coutemt to assume that the burden on the consumer of this country depended on the differential duty alone, which was imposed on the commodity introduced from fiireign countries. He believed, and he thought it could not be denied, that the price of the commodity here must depend on the extent of the supply, compared with the demand—(Hear, hear)—and if they could show that by the admission of free-labour sugar from other countries, in conjunction with the sugar of their own colonies, they should secure such an amount of supply as would be more than ample for the consumption, even with the great increase of population, the West Indies would come again to the position in which they stood previously to the abolition of slavery, and there would be a consider , able surplus, which, coming into competition with foreign sugars in the foreign markets, and so regulate the price here, that it would not greatly exceed that which sugar obtained on the continent. Who ever, at that period, thought of arguing that, because there was a great protection in favour of West Indian produce, the public were taxed to an amount equal to that differential duty? What would have lot en thought then, had such a statement as this been made to the Muse, that when there was a differential duty of 245. on colonial sugar, and 635. on foreign, that the consumer had to pay an additional tax of 295. as a consequence? Mr. GIBSON—It was Put as a supposition. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said if the Right Hon. Gentleman would allow him to finish his argument he would find this was no argument at all. Who would then have thought of urging such an argument? And why not? Because the supply then obtained in this country was greater than the demand. It then necessarily followed that the difference between the protective duty was no measure of the extent of the burden on the consumers.--L(Hear, hear.) And if, there fore, we admitted our own sugar from the colonies, and free-labour sugar from the Continent, such an excess of supply would be created in this country as would be quite beyond the demand. We could not, under these circumstances, in the view of relative cheapness, impose such conditions without their being, in the end, injurious to the consumers as well as to the producers. . That some burdens were imposed by those differential g a t t y l )(L s nt hde expressed besought abolition not o t d f u l their slaveryiire sno willingness tle ? m pe a o h n p a l people ioisouoaltefdr hfipEecrenep g t es e ol ° n ap, dnnl people t f o i naElgn : en y ; bat ha d the Parliament to make those sacrifices?--(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord's views had undergone much alteration since last year, but he still admitted that the colonies were entitled to some protection. The immediate in troduction of Brazilian sugar into this country would lead to immediate cheapness, to; be followed by a gradual and excessive rise of price. They knew that at the present moment a great number of the estates in the West India colonies were thrown out of. cultivation, and that the produce was reduced one-half.. If - by the introduction 'of Brazilian sugar they were to create a vacuum by causing the abandonment of the cultivation of sugar in particular islands, the effect must be a rise of price in this country, causing a severe pressure on'the community. The wheie producer of the world, the Noble Lord told them, amounted to only 670,000 tons, independent of what the sugar-growing parts con sumed themselves ; and one-third of that amount was grown in the free British possessions. If 51 - 1,(100 or 60,000 of that amount were iyithdrawir, the effect would ineyit4bly lie a great rise in price. In 1792, the island of St. Domingo produced 40,000 or 50,000 tons of sugar per annum, for the consumption of the world ; when, by of the National tatlvTisa yo C ol o u n tuh v t e er tiroo conse quence nse, the repeated insurrectionsan that island, and the d?u,eea y from 50 5. whole sugar a t s z 5 t6hs t ic; 6 i production was pricec7t swept o w f 7 uaa r 1 and even 755. This was the effect of this event on the slave-trade ; enclaves he speaking without authority in this matter ? UndOubtedly not. He would refer Hon. Gentlemen to the returns on the books of the House. By those returns it appeared that the vacuum which the proceedings in St. Domingo had created had been supplied by ithportations into our own islands, and they enjoyed the benefits of those pro ceedings. The planters in the Nest India islands had been blamed for entering so extensively into this trade; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not one of those who imputed that blame. It appeared by the returns, that after the discontinuance of the cul tivation of sugar in St. Domingo, the number of ships chartered in Liverpool for the West Indies was not 88 in one year, and 92 ships in another year ; but the number had risen to 122 in one year, and 150 in another. From those returns it also appeared, that the number of slaves who had been entrapped and deported was not ac tually, as it had been, 9,000, 10,000, and rising to 12,000 slaves in one year ; but the number had risen to 30,000 in one year, 32,000 in another, and as high as 36,000 in another. Such had been the effect when the increase of sugar in our own islands had given an im p,tus to the slave trade. And what had been done in our own islands, the motion of the Noble Lord would effect in Brazil. The same impetus would be given to the introduction of slaves into Brazil. The slave trade would be revived in full force, but it would be revived with tenfold horrors, for it would be conducted without any of those humane regulations which had been intro duced into our own vessels. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) must also be pardoned if he presumed to doubt the assertion of the Noble Lord that the success of his motion would produce any permanent benefit to the consumer; for he did not believe in a certain calculation into which the Noble Lord went to show what would be the high price of sugar after the new rates of duty had come into effect. The Noble Lord objected to a protective duty, and yet he was de sirous of imposing some duty, and could not vote for the amendment of the Hon. Member for Manchester. According to the Noble Lord's calculation, the sugar of Java and Manilla could not be brought into the market under 485., when the price of West Indian sugar was 425. If this were the case, there would certainly be a protection of 6s. on West Indian sugar. Now, he believed the Noble Lord to be wrong in this calculation, for he believed sugar, whether from our own possessions or from abroad, would be subject to the same rule as every other mercantile article. When two articles came into competition, under similar circumstances as colonial and foreign sugar, the natural result was, that one would be a little raised and the other a little depressed. He did think the Noble Lord had been wrong in his figures. Ndw, Java sugar was quoted the other day at 225.; the best at 245. 6d.; and he believed that ordinary Java sugar might be bought at 235.; the average quality might generally be bought at 20s. Now, to take the average of these prices at 235. 4d., and to impose the duty upon it, the long price would be about 425. The average of West India sugar was 295. 7d. ; add to that 14s. for the duty, and West India sugar would only be about 3d. dearer than Java sugar. He had taken the average upon the whole, and of course to the higher class of Java sugar they would have to add 16s. 4d. This would make a difference in the results ; but upon the whole he thought the calculati,ns he had made might be relied on. The Noble Lord next entered upon the subject which had more connexion with the state of the colonies than the immediate ques tion before the House. The Noble Lord had entered into a description of the happy state of those who were formerly slaves in the West Indies, but who were now enjoying the blessings of freedom, with occasional re laxations from labour, and receiving wages quite ade quate to their respective merits. The Noble Lord had said that a loan had been effected in the island of Ja maica to ensure emigration ; and, to provide for the in terest of this loan, a tax had been imposed upon the labouring population. Now in this the Noble Lord was entirely wrong. No loan whatever had been effected, and of course they could not impose a tax on the working man to enable them to pay the interest. With respect to Demerara and Trinidad, in those places the Government had sanctioned no duty whatever which pressed upon the labouring community. Still the Noble Lord had spoken of loans being raised there also,' but it would be gratifying for the House to know that such was not the case.—(Hear, hear.) The taxes imposed on those colonies were limited to a tax on the exportation of sugar, and of course this bore upon the proprietor of the produce, for whom the immigration was intended. The Noble Lord had said the House should have considera• lion for the artizans and mechanics employed in the colo nies, as well as for the proprietor. The ar:izans, whe ther in the West Indies or at home, were, he admitted, entitled to every indulgence, and every remission of taxation that could safely be made. But what he con tended for was, that those classes were not willing to purchase exemptions from burdens by the sacrifice of principles for which they had been all their lives con tending ; and he thought he could produce to the House evidence to show that, if they would not consider imme diate but permanent interests, the course recommended by Hon. Members opposite, of overwhelming the planters, would only give temporary relief, and would not in the end answer the views for which it had been in troduced. With respect to the financial part of the sub ject, the Noble Lord objected to the reduction of the duty on sugar, as one of those articles which should not-- Lord JOHN RUSSELL—What I said was, that the reduction you effected went partly to the planter and partly to the revenue, and would not much benefit the consumer. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ad mitted that the burden arose from the protective duty, but the Noble Lord had agreed with him that there should be some protection. He believed it was gene rally admitted upon both sides of the House that some reduction in the article of sugar was desirable.—(Hear, hear.) That was the sentiment which had been gene rally expressed, and if he had formerly resisted the re duction then proposed, it was only upon the ground that as the supply of sugar on which we relied was ne cessarily drawn from a great distance, it could not arrive contemporaneously with the reduction then effected. He wished to make a preparation for the period when they would be able to make the reduction in sugar, and so as that reduction might not operate upon a limited supply.—(Hear, hear.) When the in come-tax came under the consideration of Government this year, he thought it necessary to review this part of the subject, and whilst he would propose some protec tion, he would nevertheless afford a material reduction to the consumer, and so contribute to the general good. They might either have retained the existing law, made without classification, or adopted the proposition now submitted to the House, making a division into two classes, and imposing a lower duty on one class than on the other. And this scheme appeared to have this ad vantage, that it enabled them to lower the protective duty on the cheaper class of sugar, and thus contribute to the comfort of the lower orders of the community.— (Hear, hear.) The reduction of duty, whether right or wrong, under the present proposition, would admit of the sale of the article to the consumer at 1 id. per lb. cheaper than at present. They were prepared to sink the amount of revenue, that the change might be felt universally among the lower classes. The Noble Lord talked of a gradual reduction. He would propose to take off 3s. this year, and 3s. next year, and so on. Now he confessed he did not expect to hear such opinions from the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord ended his resolution by rather a captivating announcement to the country, that no portion of the income-tax would be remitted at the end of three years. No vhe (the Chan cellor of the Exchequer) did not believe that any man, whatever his latent ingenuity or experience might be, couli possibly speak with certainty of the changes which would take place either in politics, commerce, or finance, at the end of three years. But this he would say, that upon reference to former periods during which taxation had been remitted, that the pressure which had thus been taken from the springs of industry, had been attended with the best effects, not only to the consumer but the revenue itself. Events might occur which might defeat the best considered arrangements ; but if they looked to the past, he found that in three years, after a judicious remission of taxes had taken place, the revenue had not only recovered itself, but was placed in a better position. He had looked for many years back, and found that the resources of the country had exhibited the same elasticity. In 1816 the income of the country was 51,500,000/. ,and in that year taxation to the amount of 3,250,0001. of positive taxation had been remitted. Now, upon ordi nary calculation, the revenue should have been reduced to little better than 48,000,000/ But what was the fact ? Three years after its repeal, in 1819 the revenue, instead of being 48,000,000/, amounted to 52,000,000/.. ; thus surpassing the revenue previous to the reduction of the taxation. Take again the year 1822. The revenue in that year was 55,000,000/. It was then thought expe dient to make a large reduction of taxation. A reduc tion of 2,400,0001. had then been madP.Now the effectshould be the reduction of the income to 53,000,000/. But in the very next year the revenue exceeded the original amount. In the year 1823 the revenue was 53,100,0001.. in 1823,1824, 1825, and 1826 taxation had been repealed to the amount of 11,000,000 L The ordinary effect of this reduction would be that the revenue would stand at 42,000,0001. ; but in 1829 the revenue amounted to 51,000,000L.—(Hear, hear.) The same thing followed in 1830. when a large reduction was made in the malt duty, and in 1834, when the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proposed a reduction of 1,000,0001. Thus the remission of taxation had in all these cases been attended with advantage. What occurred before might occur again; and: if so, there was a fair prospect that the income-tax might be, if not alto gether remitted, at least the duty upon other articles which came into geaoral consumption might be lowered without any loss to the revenue. Was the House pre pared to abandon the object for which it had so long contended ? Were they prepared to give up those prin ciples which they had so long cherished ? Were they to cease exerting themselves in making treaties with Spain and Portugal for the suppression of this odious traffic ? If they did so, they might be sure to find some tem porary relief, but they would tarnish the high character of Englishmen, who had, at much expense, and with such zeal for so long a period contended for the abolition of the slave-trade. He believed that if Honourable Gentlemen would consent to abandon the slave to his fate, the horrors which those creatures suffered in their passage,when they came to the knowledge of the people of this country would excite the sympathies of the benevolent, and create such sensa tions and such a feeling that it would be impossible to withstand.—(Hear, hear.) There was no doubt but a great impetus wonld he given to slavery by sanctioning the free importation of all foreign sugar, for this was the article on which slave labour was chiefly expended. Upon the whole, therefore, he was strongly opposed to, the proposition of the Noble LAO as impolitic, and in expedient, and above all, because it was subversive of those principles fCr which they had been so long con tending.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL explained—He did not contem plate any such gradual reduction as that mentioned by the Right /lon. Gientlempt, Whet be meant, Was, a moderate protective duty, which was not to be of $ porary character.—(Hear, hear.) l3°l3' Mr. LABOUCHERE gave cre dit t o the right re Gentleman for his si ncer ity, but did not think the sent nu asure ba se d on sound principles. Se tb° the attempt to draw a distinction between foreiga Ay slave-labour sug a r, a mos t unsuccess f u l one, and 1 lit generally so considered by the mercantile classet r of did not think it had been conducive to the _ i° ,. - tbeo, of the colonists themselves. He thought tha h ,% st never was a more untenable supposition than . f the Right Hon. Gentleman, that the proposition Noble Friend would promote slavery. But wi l s B ,TV the statement of Hon. Gentlemen opposite ? o 0 computed that 60,000 tons of free-labour sugar o nJ be produced in Java, Manilla, and other plac i s : o ,o they calculated, that whil e thi s c ountry tom , tons, the remaining 40,000 would be sold 1 "„ o general markets of the wor ld. If that were the 10 the price of 20,000 tons sent to this co o tbi would be govei ned by the price ° the 40,000 tons sent abroad, and th e i r legislation 0 1 ' so J 20,000 would affect the sugar sent into Germ i lffee elsewhere The present measure would clearly_ rer the sugar of Cuba and the Brazil s , and as far as t he, position therefore went, they were not giving °, gt labour sugar the advantages they pretended to giv, t bef would, for the sake of argument, suppose thilbota were enabled by the measure to exclude sla ve do g sugar (he doubted greatly the possibility of 's,e. d t bel however) from the mark e t s o f thi s count* al pot imagine that frauds upon a very large scale wo e ! , or be attempted ? He had it from a person intimate) g oo of versant with the sugar trade, that the very Manilla sugar which had arrived in their port 9, w 2 oco , mised to be the production of Surinam or po r g erh' Now his first objection to the proposition of the Gto importance, ment was one which, if well-founded,.was of th e 1. to importance, as proving ti - at this was not like ),, h t he a permanent measure. He perfectly agreed "' r ks fr ) Chancellor of the Exchequer in some of the rear ° t o; first co s sor, had made, but he (Mr. Labouchere) must sar i/ A ° s'ete if when the Chancellor of the Exchequer was 5 " s age upon the advocates of a gradual reduction of t h e o g lit irides, he was astonished at the conduct of the de Hon. Gentleman in thus pronouncing a censure nr og fr Government, and upon those who supported Re - " ( sr stie` i ter.) Never was so unfortunate a co urse as that tye st by the Government upon this question. TheYlss-5, tb ° made such an alteration in the sugar duties p made such an alteration in the sugar 01te ratio they left no doubt of a further a 0 13 r this year, and now he hoped that, :after the ?T ie c ht l s warnings of the Lord Chancellor, th e y would not v rai ° peril the other branches of the trade of the coun tr their similar manner.—(Laughter and Hear, heal' - ) t po r trade with the Brazils was interfer e d with by the sure which was now proposed. There was a ls° ; ts pe r : went introduced into it which could not add t ° frau d; manency, and that was the encouragement to re t, upon the revenue.—(Hear, hear.) He would yen; otr say, notwithstanding the smile of incredulity no site' served on the faces of some H on . Members ert':boe that the West India cultivators themselves, farcoutsB benefit they were asked to sanction that anomainl e of legislation, were alarmed at the course ert i o olt; vernment were pursuing. His eye was eaug ht , ts telli e % ing over a newspaper of that morn i ng , by 3 .ojo o copied from a respectable o rgan o f public OP.I t the West Indies. It stat e d th a t the Pr'll e t e 13r 1 ' the admission of Venezuelan sugar to Gre 3 oo3 l tain had caused the utmost excitemen t t hat the agricultural interests of those colonies ; G Q ; meeting had been held to memorialise her lktai es i ee l vernment upon the subject, and th e w riter supt,°; island' those meetings would be held in ever y part 0 t ' b u t p er ; He (Mr. Labouchere) greatly feared, therefore, to tt t manence did not attach to the sugar duties Ito present proposition of Govern m e n t was intende d s lain It proposed to draw a distinction between free 313 „erfit lf A ' labour sugar which would be useless and inA o and yet nevertheless irritating to the feelings c" ;` t he 10 `, f try.—(Hear, hear.) In that way they entailed • Jost" 10 ot unfortunate consequences on the commerce a nd red t of their colonies and of the country. He oh t,.... e igs a do this measure was not likely to increase in ' ° "; r e t ° r il tions a belief in their sincerity, and in their cif.stil reef with the slave trade and w ith s l a very. 14 , 1 mt to the other points, he could n o t un d e rstand ` se ltio'; e were discouraging the sla ve t ra d e by 01;0 slave-grown sugar from this country. Cou l d say, that when they admitted free-labour sug sr ' o lle h to not raise the price of slave-gr own suga r just a s bea ell t b ie if in the first instance they had given the, .he `use them? He agreed with the other portions the Lord's resolution, that this plan, without anY,.„" p aif,' J benefit to the consumer, tended so greatly t e ,„';orSe:;o' revenue as to render the removal of the .7,, - t oelf;re property-tax, at the end of three years, ex' - t oy 'lO certain and improbable. Without entering inL ° o o ll ,o calculations on this question, and t a king the 11 01°;) mere financial merits, he was afraid that it hair, answer the expectations of the Right Hon. 13a i r , chy,et under these circumstances he could not he t t " so he tensing it as trifling with one of the greate s g i f ell te of revenue. He believed that they might have th at, consumers of sugar the same advantages, an, - ~..(P- t t ie by a more moderate protection to the colonist s i vj eeswl hear.) But by this important distinction h e ll jouv, o p, sugars of free and of slave countries, he 0 3 ° 0 0 1 0 whether they would receive in a moun t of ce, n los t t ° , be y at the end of three years, the sum at presen t, ea rs revenue of the country. At the end of three Y ts e-t il lii would find it still nec essar y t o cont i nue the ine ° oe o et a a part of the permanent revenue of the countrY . 13a r°fi tlid not enter into the details of the Right ss°, l.- measure. His own view was, that that P"„ ° se; eee not discourage the cultivation of slave-10 ° ," ft r ael `` ( r r isi foreign countries further than to the amour' agar t hat that they in England consumed of free-labct r ia ' t , those countries; and exactly to that ame...„ of s the only, would they encourage th e productr, o pec r ," be o labour sugar in foreign cou n tri es . H e woul d u pon " s poll first part of the resolution of th e N o ble lona pat, re' grounds, and he would also support the se e 7 gr' o ole cause he was convinced that while they In; t e the same ductions in the duties on sugar, they coulu t „, s tier; tera time place their differential duties on a,,h; eoa su d' e though diminishing the cost of sugar to t"" ke eP,,, for in this country, they would at the same tir ile , te cess' : , revenue in such a manner as to prevent the any continuance of the income-tax. per Mr. GLADSTONE said that he might beethe the by the House to speak on the amendment o ,i' ha d '7„ 1 0 5 ' Lord, both on account of the share he ha'„ Cyst loce , decision to which Government had come uf e "„ t offbee° tion, and as he was most anxious, although !)- bad the hich to claim his share of the responsibility w- d se a te d' incurred. He thanked both th e Noble L er , 0 1 0 gentleman who had just sat down, for the t °ll oe per they had manifested on th a t o ccasion- td w hit e ou' that the Noble Lord a n d hi s su pp or t e rs won' to tn e rs bl e vocating their own opinio ns , y et g ive credi t ho os s el . vernment, for not perhaps ve r y high or verY h ' s is of motives, but at least for ha v in g a cted in s ue hs estl: t ,be as to render the charge of lukewarmness te fr o rd is the oppressed inapplicable to them. With r alte. i s et as il ,. motion of the Noble L o rd, h e h a d to than k Geo' t oe" for submitting it in such a form. If the liol i ti ro og otr who had just sat down had no difficulty le r d, be each and all of the propositions of the Noble ri n ieu ying e te; Gladstone) had equally little difficulty in " lie obl e e rv ea and all of them.—(Laughter and cheers.)._ pre' Oa first, that the distinction sought to n e oss, eo e o between free-labour and slave sug ar, 0 v . op , e sory and impracticable ; that it ga ve b ,, its th to the consumer; and'that the income DO, up° l ;disi tion was likely to be continued a ? burden s houl p te country. With regard to the income - ta x jug his iflid ti de very little; but lie could n o t help "pees. t hav nishment that the N o bl e L o rd should ab e , t o. 9o l of exhibit so strong an opinion on the ina nn tbe Whid the the Noble Lord expect a revolution in 1 3 0 0 1 ;0 fortune ? Did he consider what parties ti lt fael lo ble reins of Government, and that that tax n 3 1 g The yi efa their doings three years hence ?—(Cheers.) bee ito tip hi. Lord said that the distinction kept , t icsu,,,the free labour sugar and slave sugar was iniP7 os , o P or bich u ntri es goe r granted that the real and practical questio they should exclude sugar from certain Th e 04 ,4 at present carried on an African slave true 9 , ou r 0; tion of the exclusion of sugar from art a ;;; e 3 ! co s might be principally confined to Cuba ea,,„ . G ent,i,, t it and one of the grounds on which the Py re was e pee' founded his arguments against the meo ll , ther e e v io eo f ' gave scope to the perpetration of frauds uif h , t gat,. or. He was prepared to contend against. o f sous e i g lu The Hon. Gentleman quoted the opinzork I vo e-4 0 , - porta r " tlemen, that sugars from Surinam and„„ ezu ela ( . ) 00 enter the country as the produce of v opin' jot'!" to mee t d t iler f nilla. Now it was impossible wo ul d o his pressed in those general terms, and he he gott a a ro t : request the Hon. Gentleman to on thu_ooo., He would not ask the House to deal to ort ioll opinion, in order that it might bgeivuentddeersteed s - va luv of an opinion given in this loose and g t _c of t his P _ o ar He last session went into the paranoia 5 , t ly OP; d i e perm , ru t; other sideh tru of the subject, and he (Mr. Gladstone) beret! that the Hon. Gentlemen on the .e of tt e se _ ii ., Hcuse had expressed their full COny' j a a g ' ot ris those lion. Gentlemen made use of very mot e xt f of those assertions. During the discuss: L : l o , g la reat ti. nary law—such a law as was never e tti __ ;ps d a tio st s i : otr or e in speaking of some law of Americabelre bes. rd ll o _ law by which, through some strange 3"i other, thl'thorit tie payment made by one hand to ms countrY vl , O a ° t a i l' That was to ° l ie; p A a m ym er e i n ca t e w f us an i y ntro d d u u ty ced w i h n u t t o ev t er. t of the inlagt,tl_4ol p th o e pt p il u a h r, lie a mmion s d t , t u el u l d in e g er a v r e gu th m e e n p t i urp a e n se ar e g f u rp - a rt tolo ir no palmed on the credulity of tee public believed t wou that was a mere fabrication, a , figree an d goo• oior i men opposite, by a purpose worm. Oen' upon them and serve ed a ll of . not be of any avail now. heated interrupt The Hon. Baronet was his appl th • „ some person,.aLirbe Members opposite, who depre .0 y sal i t common report. c oadd not arta ! w ont e Mr. GLADSTONE--He ated or' from Veils whom the report originated, b n orniat • h the e. and he had read it in the Et o unient, wh ich ir cas e ' h wasd ce p r r ta7n a l g y, a t rd :., It s i n n' a p t e h r a . t 1111 0 ti on aL • any rate, it was one of those a rgfor proving t w bi Gentlemen °nate had used . , ques tion c os. B th u e t y emsugar was ill r r od , forel s li sugar for un der ir ihnisthoiphsintoanttert.uu it was or o A , ; e d, sequence from whence the thi shOu w ld as t n ur o n t, L i o n that he (Mr. Gladstone) be 11 did not believe LI e uld r br duties imposed last session Cues and Bras il not e _ . u NI Gladstone) L li e differ 1 7 9 countries would be readily introduc ed ' est th e be troduction of sugar from if tu 1,1 that Wl oue-_,i o g a conviction strata to expressthat ealed a paying transaction. He it tial duties were reP s lavery mlisbor led ies wh sv i Jo e 'rd gyp'` the produce of those countries Noble,, were n g di t l ast found to give a stimulus. to employed for its production. decided fee s e ers taS of too . 10, him ; there was in this coentreysadvan_vs of up aware that common feeling and °Pull— every thing that promoted h t tlemen ° PP °S I by she the slave trade, Mon. Gen ork ou - er ..1,1 they ( C (/ ''' . great national principle . But politicalj dogma, and expected to w pep 40 0 i . , , ~~_ C