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

IMPERIAL 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 against 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. ThaEast.ern 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. Petitions were presented for Bills for 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:-Ist, 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 bound? 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 Vf as his intention to repeal the duties on foreign glass ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if the Hen. Gentleman would look to the schedule that had been laid on the table, be 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 i 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 BATII 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 A f his questions he could only reply that the Government had 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.—(Bear.) METROPOLITAN GRAVE-YARDS. Lord F. EGERTON wished to draw 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 had never heard of the practice referred to, but the circumstances mentioned by the Right 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 fur 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 more 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 cure 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 he 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 ham such an amount of protection as may be necessary. The fir s t o bj ect i on t h at I h ave to t hi s p ro p os i t i on i s , that it profess es t o k ee p u p a di s ti nc ti o n w hi c h I hold to e impracticabl e , between the produce of foreign free atondmselaa prop os i t i on sove labour. Th at t hi s pro j ec t i s ill usor y seems plain that, if it were not that the I should hardly attempt plan of the Government t 9 contemplates detain t he a u c o o o n s t o r a a r n y; len course, gth of time in arguing question, o ae o st b io vt a ou l s a proposition.. But when we discussed theg proposal ? l eer, certain answers were offered to the I to the th n e ma s d am e, o th d at ot a y l! foreign sugar should be subject le whether it were the produce of free labour or of answers. now to take slave labour. I think some notice of these sam was no this distinction was illusory. same duty fr from il I said there objected that ob jection to take tobacco or cotton at the the countries where they were slave-grown free states. It was answered that certainly the G o o m ve t rn e ment did not propose to interfere with the tobacco or - cotton duties, or with commerce long established ; but that in all new regulations which might be in troduced, they would make the distinction be tween the produce of free labour and that of slave labour. But this is not the fact, for the proposal of this year, as well as that of last year, does make an alteration ; but the distinction betwee n foreign free and slave labour is not observed. Take coffee for instance — last year the duty was reduced from Sd. a pound to Gd., and the same duty was imposed upon foreign slave-grown sugar as upon the produce of free labour. With respect to copper ore, it is proposed this year to admit without THE SUN, LONDON, TIITTRSD AY MORNING, FEBR r'ARY 27, 1815. 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 Indies, and else 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. I do not think that this will be the case, for supposing the whole consumption of sugar to be 670,000 tons,lifyou takeaway 20,000 tons for the consumption of the continent, as there is no difference made on the continent between free-labour and slave-grown sugar,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 bad 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 ars, 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 year, 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 thatit was not the sagar 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 to 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 eonsul 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 hy pocrisy 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 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 ob!ain 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 lion. Gentleman the Member f it 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. GLAI)STONE—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. RUSSEIZ—Then I misunderstood the Right Hon. Gentleman. I thought lie said the colonies had no claim for protection. However, this admission of only 10s. per cwt. protection narrows the question of protection very considerably, because a protection of 10s. or lOs. 6d. per cwt., 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 examiae the protection which is thus proposed. My Honourable Friend the Member for Manchester, in bringing forward his motion the other night—and I ficd it impossible not to refer to that debate, because it raised what was a' part of the present question—(Hear, hear)—my Hon. 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, aad 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 coming 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 tons ; and the consequence must be, 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 lion. Gentleman, the imposition on the 15,000 tons of foreign sugar would make it 285., 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 will then, by the addition of al4s. duty, be raised to the price of 425., and iS 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 fro 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 260,000 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 will be a natural consequence that the price will rise to 345. Now, Sir, what is the effect of this rate of 148. ? The rate, I am aware, is actually lls. 2d. ; but the rate being 255. 2d., and that 255. 2d. being reduced to Ils. 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 ss. 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, arid these not more than Bs., the benefit given to the West Indian planters will not be less than 1,100,0001., and this tax will be imposed simply for the the Exchequer, sake of th e b ene fi t o f the West India planters and te `hest for lnd the tax planters will a n b d e equally th E Exchequer. divided between h It is a tax divided n between e the Exchequer e and x t e he e l q \ u re e s r t . ) India coloni es —one j e t n o e f fit it going to the revenue, the other being for th e Sir, it is said that you must give the planter. But then, this protec tion on account of the state ort v h e e Member for Man_ the abolition of slavery. Sir, I could not end for my Honourable Friend the chester the other night, because the West Indies have s very considerable claim upon us, owing to 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 wages 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 minds 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 hav e 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.) I am 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 barbarism—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 et that is the attempt you are now making. I hardly think it will su.ceed, 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 labeuring population of the West Indies. I state this upon the authority of Mr. Knibb.— (Ironical cheers from the Ministerial Beaches, 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 Ice ep 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 artisans 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 attrnapt 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. Gentleman, who 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. Ile stated that the result would be an increase in the consumption, from 207,000 hens to 250,000 tons, with a consequent increase to the revenue of 1,300,0001. Now it ap pears to me, without any injury whatever to the West Indies, you might remit the whole of that—if you 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 Hon. 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, if 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 titan 40s. If you were to have a very much 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. tlernan anticipates, the loss to the revenue will be 1,800,000/. or 1,900,000/. 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 Hon. 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 revenue.—(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 i educe 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 cr navy, but for the sake of a particular class, which forms only a small portion of the population of the country. The Noble Lord concluded by moving the following resoluticn:—" 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 a 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 impro bable." 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 cellor of the Exchequer) was induced to hope 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. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was, however, prepared, with confidence, to advocate the measure proposed by Government. and he was quite ready to meet the Noble Lord on the ground he bad 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 nut 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, and 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 Fxeh - quer) 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 bad 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 Neil:oe 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 frcm 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 chi eper slave-grown sugar, but that in the mean time slave•grown sugar would b 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 argurnent.—(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 were large enough to consume their 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 s!avery. 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 under 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 here, 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 content 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 foreign 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 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 snore 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 been thought then, had such a statement as this been made to the House, 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 than the supply t he demand. then his argument he would find this was no argument at all. Who would then have thoug ht of ur g in g s uch an argument? And why not? Because obtained in this country was greater It then necessarily followed tha t the difference between the protective duty was no measu re of the extent of the burden on the consumers.—(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 th is countr y 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 duties no man • would preten d to den y ; bat had not the people of Engla nd alwa y s ex p ressed their willingness to sacrifice someaing to the abolition of slavery ? Had not the peop le of En g land besou g ht the Parliament to make those sa crifices?—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord's views had und er g one much alteration since last year, but he still admitted that the colonies were entitled to some protection. The immediate in lteraodducttnionimomf e ß d r ia a t z e ilia e n he s a u p g n a e r ss, into this country would to be followed by a gradual and excessive rise of price. They knew that at the present moment a great number o f the estates in d i ced one half. If by the introduction of Brazilian sugar the y and that the produce was re were to create a the West India colonies were th rown out of cultivation, vacuum by causing the abandonment of the cultivation of sugar in particular islands, the e ffect must be a rise of price in this country, causing a s eveie pressure on the community. The whole produ ce 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-thirel of that amount was grown in the free British posse ssions. If 50,000 or 60,000 of that amount were withdrawn, the effect would inevitably be a great rise in price. In 1792, the island i s land, and the decrees of St. Domingo produced 40,00 0 or 50,000 tons of su g ar per annum, for the consumption of the world ; when, b y the repeated insurrections in that of the National Convention, its whole sugar production was swept away, the consequence was, that the price of sugar in this country rose from 50s. to 565. ,625., 715., and even 755. This was the effect of this event on the slave-trade ; and was 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 importations into our own islands, and they enjoyed the benefits of those pro ceedings. The planters in the West 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; fur 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 be 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 Gs. 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. Now, 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 calculations 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• tion for the ar:izans 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 nut 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 view s 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, reeking 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 lid. 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 ho 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 v he (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 51,500,0001. ,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 2,400,000thad then been made. Now the effect should be the reduction of the income to 53,000,0001. 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 11,000,0001. The ordinary effect of this reduction would be that the revenue would stand at 42,000,000/. ; but in 1829 the revenue amounted to 51,000,0001..—(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; an& 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 general consumption might he 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 he 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 would be given to slavery by sanctionieg the free importation of all foreign sugar, for this n as the article on which slave labour was chiefly expended. Upon the whole, therefore, he was strongly opposed to the proposition of the Noble Lord as impolitic, and in expedient, and above all, because it was subversive of those principles for 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 Hon. Gentleman. What he meant, was, a moderate protective duty, which was not to be of a tem porary character.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. LABOLICHERE gave credit to the right Hon. Gentleman for his sincerity, but dirt not think the pre sent measure based on sound principles. He thought the attempt to draw a distinction between foreign and slave-labour sugar, a most unsuccessful one, and it was generally so considered by the mercantile classes. He did not think it had been conducive to the interests of the colonists themselves. Ile thought that there never was a more untenable supposition than that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that the proposition of his Noble Friend would promote slavery. But what was the statement of Hon. Gentlemen opposite ? They computed that 60,000 tons of free-labour sugar would be produced in Java, Manilla, and other places ; and they calculated, that while this country took 20,000 tons, the remaining 40,000 would be sold in the general markets of the world. If that were the case, the price of 20,000 tons sent to this country would be Bove: ned by the price of the 40,000 tons sent abroad, and their legislation on these 20,000 would affect the sugar sent into Germany and elsewhere. The present measure would clearly affect the 'sugar of Cuba and the Brazils, and as far as the pro position therefore went, they were not giving to free labour sugar the advantages they pretended to give. He would, for the sake of argument, suppose that they were enabled by the measure to exclude slave-labour sugar (he doubted greatly the possibility of so doing, however) from the markets of this country, did they imagine that frauds upon a very large scale would not be attempted ? He had it from a person intimately con versant with the sugar trade, that the very first cargo of Manilla sugar which had arrived in their ports, was sur mised to be the production of Surinam or Porto Rico. Now his first objection to the proposition of the Govern ment was one which, if well-founded, was of the greatest importance, as proving that this was not likely to be a permanent measure. He perfectly agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in some of the remarks he had made, but he (Mr. Labouchere) must say also, that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer was so severe upon the advocates of a gradual reduction of the sugar dnties, he was astonished at the conduct of the Right Hon. Gentleman in thus pronouncing a censure upon the Government, and upon those who supported it.—(Laugh ter.) Never was so unfortunate a course as that pursued by the Government upon this question. They last year made such an alteration in the sugar duties, that they left no doubt of a further alteration this year, and now he hoped that, ;after the oracular warnings of the Lord Chancellor, they would not lightly peril the other branches of the trade of the country in a similar manner.—(Laughter fled Hear, hear.) Their trade with the Brazils was interfered with by the mea sure which was now proposed. There was also an ele ment introduced into it which could not add to its per manency, and that was the encouragement to frauds upon the revenue.—(Hear, hear.) He would venture to say, notwithstanding the smile of incredulity he ob served on the faces of some Hon. Members opposite, that the West India cultivators themselves, for whose benefit they were asked to sanction that anomalous course of legislation, were alarmed at the course the Go vernment were pursuing. His eye was caught on look ing over a newspaper of that morning, by a statement copied from a respectable organ of public opinion in the West Indies. It stated that the project for ttes admission of Venezuelan sugar to Great Bri tain had caused the utmost excitement among the agricultural interests of those colonies; that a meeting had been held to memorialise her Majesty's Go vernment upon the subject, and the writer supposed that those meetings would be held in every part of the island. He (Mr. Labouchere) greatly feared, therefore, that per manence did not attach to the sugar duties which the present proposition of Government was intended to enact. It proposed to draw a distinction between free and slave labour sugar which would be useless and inoperative, and yet nevertheless irritating to the feelings of the come try.—(Hear, hear.) In that way they entailed the most unfortunate consequences on the commerce and industry of their colonies and of the country. He objected that this measure was not likely to increase in foreign na tions a belief in their sincerity, and in their desire to do away with the slave trade and with slavery. With regard to the other points, he could not understand that they were discouraging the slave trade by excluding slave-grown sugar from this country. Could any one say, that when they admitted free labour sugar, it would not raise the price of slave grown sugar just as much as if in the first instance they had given the benefit to them? Ile agreed with the other portions of the Noble Lord's resolution, that this plan, without any adequate benefit to the consumer, tended so greatly to impair the revenue as to render the removal of the income and property-tax, at the end of three years, extremely un certain and improbable. Without entering into any more calculations on this question, and taking the plan on its mere financial merits, he was afraid that it would not aaswer the expectations of the Right Hon. Baronet, and under these circumstances he could not help charac terising it as trifling with one of the greatest sources of revenue. He believed that they might have given the consumers of sugar the same advantages, and that; too by a more moderate protection to the colonists.—(Hear,' bear.) But by this important distinction between the sugars of free and of slave countries, he much doubted whether they would receive in amount of consumption, at the end of three years, the sum at present lost to the revenue of the country At the end of three years they would find it still necessary to continue the income-tax es a part of the permanent revenue of the country. He would not enter into the details of the Right Hon. Baronet's measure. His own view was, that that measure did not discourage the cultivation of slave-labour sugar in foreign countries further than to the amount and degree that they in England consumed of free-labour sugar from those countries; and exactly to that amount, and that only, would they encourage the production of slave labour sugar i❑ foreign countries. He would support the first part of the resolution of the Noble Lord upon these grounds, and he would also support the second part, be cause he was convinced that while they made great re ductions in the duties on sugar, they could at the same time place their differential duties on a footing that, though diminishing the cost of sugar to the consumers in this country, they would at the same time keep up the revenue in such a manner as to prevent the necessity for any continuance of the income-tax. Mr. GLADSTONE said that he might be permitted by the House to speak on the amendment of the Noble Lord, both on account of the share ho had had in the decision to which Government had come upon that ques tion, and as he WAS most anxious, although out of offiste, to claim his share of the responsibility which had been incurred. He thanked both the Noble Lord and the gentleman who had just sat down, for the tone and tem per they hail manifested on that occasion. He hoped that the Noble Lord and his supporters would, while ad vocating their own opinions, yet give credit to the Go vernment, for not perhaps very high or very honourable motives, but at least for having acted in such a mariner as to render the charge of lukewaramess to the cause of the oppressed inapplicable to them. With regard to the motion of the Noble Lord, he had to thank him again for submitting it in such a form. If the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had no difficulty in affirming each and all of the propositions of the Noble Lord, he (Mr. Gladstone) had equally little difficulty in denying each and all of them.—(Laughter and cheers.) He objected first, that the distinction sought to be preserved between free-labour and slave sugar, was illu sory and impracticable ; that it gave no benefit to the consumer; and that the income tax by its opera tion was likely to be continued a burden upon the country. With regard to the income-tax he should say very little; but lie could not help expressing his asto nishment that the Noble Lord should at that time exhibit so strong an opinion on the income•tax. Did the Noble Lord expect a revolution in the wheel of fortune ? Did he consider what parties might hold the reins of Government, tied that that tax might facilitate their doings three years hence ?—(Cheer;.) The Noble Lord said that the distinction kept up between free labour sugar and slave sugar was impracticable. He granted that the real and practical question was, whether they should exclude sugar from certain countries which at present carried on an African slave trade. The ques tion of the exclusion of sugar from certain countries might be principally confined to Cuba and the Brazils; and one of the grounds on which the Hon. Gentleman founded his arguments against the measure was that it gave scope to the perpetration of frauds upon the revenue. He was prepared to contend against that statement. The Hon. Gentleman quoted the opinion of some gen tlemen, that sugars from Surinam and Porto Rico might enter the country as the produce of Venezuela or Ma nilla. Now it was impossible to meet an opinion ex pressed in those general terms, and he would, therefore, request the Hon. Gentleman to give the ground of his opinion, in order that it might be understood and met. Ile would not ask the House to decide on the value of an opinion given in this loose and general manner. He last session went into the particulars of this portion of the subject, and he (Mr. Gladstone) perfectly remem bered that the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House had expressed their full conviction of the truth of those assertions. During the discussion last session those Hon. Gentlemen made use of very strong language in speaking of some law of America—a most extraordi nary law—such a law as was never before heard of. A law by which, through some strange manipulations, by a payment made by one hand to the other, the sugar of America was introduced into this country without the payment of any duty whatever. That was a most popular, a most telling argument, an argument to catch the public mind, and serve the purpose of a party. Yet that was a mere tabrication, a figment of the imagination, palmed on the credulity of the public and Hon. Gentle men opposite, by some person, with a view to impose upon them and serve a purpose which he believed would not be of any avail now. The Hon. Baronet was here interrupted by Hon. Members opposite, who deprecated his application of a common report. Mr. GLADSTONE—He could not certainly say by whom the report was propagated, or from whom it originated, but he had certainly heard it in that House, and he had read it in the Economist newspaper. But, at any rate, it was one of those arguments which the Hon. Gentlemen opposite had used for proving their case. But this was not, in his opinion, the question to which they should turn to in this matter. It was of little con sequence from whence the sugar was introduced, for he (Mr. Gladstone) believed that sugar from foreign countries would be readily introduced, for under the duties imposed last session he did not believe that the in troduction of sugar from Cuba and Brasil could ever be a paying transaction. lie (Mr. Gladstone) did not he sitate to express a conviction that if the differen tial duties were repealed that it would be found to give a stimulus to slavery by increasing the produce of those countries where slave labour was employed for its production. The Noble Lord must be aware that common feeling and opinion were against him ; there was in this country a decided feeling against every thing that promoted the advantages of slavery or the slave trade. Lion. Gentlemen opposite took up a political] dogma, and expected to work out by it some great national principle. But they ',could never carry - _ for, this political dogma ut into its full consequences ;10,ri if they did, it would defeat and overturn the s O thing which they desired to prove. They had a Pree this political dogma to the subj e ct of bringing labour into the markets of this country. It was sij: that many of th o s e d ogmas were corre ct in the ps is which they were intended to support, but there svas s , o l a certain tendency in them, and if this tendency "0 unqualified, those Hon. Gentlemen would find th st ' es i the application of their dogmas, they defeated th eir i s end. In the dogma which they had applied te se question of the introduction of s ugar, they had 05 looked the market's element. The sugar gre we el foreign possessions had the command of a great Cu, of the markets of the world. It was a common roc sary of life—at least it had nearly become so—a °e d so sequently the sugar of the British possessions 118 see opportunity, for they were confined to fewer mark The sugar of the West India possessions were lob quently placed under disadvantageous circtunstleat Those parties, who w, re deeply affected by these chai:ii in the law—parties who, from their long experienee,e, large Stake in the interest now before the House, etlfbs in his opinion, to be heard with great respect led subject—these parties were fair judges of the e° ll the alterations propo.ed in the sugar trade, an d TOO be admitted with advantage as ey:dence °, Be , consequences of the competition which the Prios ation of the differential duties would e ss Those gentlemen had entertained great fe l ''' s str the competition to which they were about to b e t ss jetted, and had expressed their deep conviction t s b r es dell exclusion of the sugars of Cuba and Brazil 1 1 E 1 % 1 ' to greatly to secure to them a benefit w hich they fel!, s etS necessary to their welfare. Had this not been tbel' es st viction—had they not been assured that they had %Oa stake in the matter—they would surely have long v es yielded to the pressure which had lain so heavq eta them, and would, if from no other cause, yet fort oe of merely setting this question at rest, and thu s 0 themselves from the injury which the constant dis c s f ie of this question occasioned—hate last year joine"(sit Hon. Gentlemen opposite. But they knew, as be e be Gladstone) knew, that there was a great differ ee la boo l tween this country and Brazil. The cheapness of. from the employment of slaves would have g o a l of Cuba very grtat advantages after the reP d e s itido these: duties. This benefit, the Noble Le r 00 0 must inevitably have been shared among the con s e stef Now it appeared to him (Mr. Gladstone) that an uos ses was very prevalent in the country, and in that 0) 0 respecting the quality of the sugars introduced le of t)* country from Havannah. The average quality 1 10 . Havannah sugars was a high quality, and net, 1 0 - 1 0 supposed, a low quality; and therefore it Was,LtO i s dogma of Hon. Gentlemen opposite to this sumc - i sor, an unsound one, for the application of this foe' 09 overturn the conclusion at which they had There was little doubt in his mind but that the! 00, of the differential duties would give a great sold they the increase of Cuba and Brazil. It was bel iev this stimulus would so act as to create a great ee 00 1 tition in the British market in the sale of MOT s . 11 0 ii this competition would increase the densands,-7esor this demand would be satisfied by the sugars 010 ill Brazil, so that there would be abundance for th e iss i without that elevation of price which would otheravtol occasioned if the demand had increased and the suPPpe, been limited to the sugars of our West Indian cod He (Mr. Gladstone) did n. t share in the alt. 144 0 ; 0 0 01 : that the sugars of slave countries would so grow O i ss er; as to answer the requirements of an increasing r i ses Lien. On the contrary, he thought that th eta s surer prospect of this increase from our We i d e: oi l colonies ; and he believed that if their interests W so injured as to interfere with their produce, WY", satist) the demands of this country. On these A g o elr k he thought the proposition of his Hon. Frie e ,, - s (r; iinpraesicable nor illusory. The Hon. Menr t sigf, s ir Labouchere) who had sat down had said that 't of .5 1 position was neither more nor less than a renew il s sissr s proposition of his Hon. Friend the Member fo r but that was not the opinion of Hon. Mensbei s t sil ss r side of the House. The Noble Lord had sale s ,* object in bringing in his motion, was to put t s eer o l in a position of some certainty as to their futurzie respecting the income-tax. Now he (Mr. °lt be ,0 must say that, for his part, he thought tba n ottid seldom heard anything more shadowy and in s ee ts lldge than the argument of the Noble Lord. He hou si t a duty of 145., and laboured to show : . ;4 t 1,0 .4 0 there was a duty of 14s. on Br' o s sugar, there would be a duty of 28 5 • a pd which was the produce of foreign countries, OD intimated that this difference was acting as fln ilia' s of meat to the sale of the sugars of Java and gal l 10 04 were liable to the duties now imposed. 11 ,1 We? polled to differ from the conclusion of the . I .` e o sa for there was nothing to prevent the sale of the 00,4 either in bond or free. 1 his he would endeave h is l To and to prove, from the statements of the Pse : es kje The fact was that the sugar likely to be intr o(' this country was of two classes. These h e ' v 0 olt scribe as the clayed and the Muscercido sugar!' r qa!'4 01 .0 1 of the finer quality, and the former of the infe r ol He was aware that he was not quite correct io, „or s '? the inferior quality of foreign sugar as claye e „ s cl' s ss it was sufficient for the purpose. Now the dutiiptio foreign sugar was 98.4 d., while the Noble ell s! ) talking of 14s. The same terms were applied ° gip tr ea duce, the higher duty to th e hi g her V I/ AA British possessions as well as from foreign 4 , 0 10 5 , s 0 1 and the lower duty t o th e i n f er i or quality fro Now, it was assu m ed th a t a ll th e sugar i n troa fi bisl,. Manilla—which was the largest source fre le /Oiiig h might expect to derive eur foreign supplieg to tbp f tlo o that all the sugars from Manilla were subjee l s l oe e st ss i duty of 235. 4d. According to the intint s al7so Noble Lord and of the Hon. Gentleman wbeL t ye'soo down, this sugar would be subject to r 1 while that from British possessions would le tse O i sk oo ' of only I4s. But here was a great mistalt e l os litiod , introduced from Manilla was not all of the g o gor td jest to the high rate of duty, nor was the orio f v4 Java. In the sugar manufactured in those e e , he k clayed and the brown, it was the former, ' is quality, which was best fitted for these rear l t e be sttl s th i the producer were inclined to send sugar of thl, ti t se k and which was subject to the highest r s - the s r country, the merchant who acted for him t hat ferenee of the commodity would select of f j oi was best fitted for the markets of this CO he (Mr. Gladstone) would appeal to the e 1 ;,5 elite any Hon. Member of that House acquStm peal/ subject, and hs might, in this instance , lt s F A Hon. Friend the Member for Dover, as te co e 'r ness in this respect. He (Mr. Gladstone" to y b o# then conceive that any great injury C0, e1 , 0 the imposition of these duties. Compla i t e : made, that the sugars of the West Ineoe' o iteel o to s risen Is. or 2s. per cwt. Now, when he re e ls: o: o lv . , trying circumstances through which the P r ieg fer estates in the West Indies had passed de. s el o per, year, and the difficulties which for s er s ie g led i s they had endured, he must say, that he i l e co ° s lt ,d r ceive these grounds of prosperity ,• atm ritY, O r s ; say that he grudged them the little Prel st e s tee this small advance evinced. It had been Friel' s , other objection to the measure of his Hol:: eoe fit e sie o if any benefit were derived from it, tha t ''Tee tf l o to o t b e o not go into the pockets of the consumer• e go st was not whether the benefit would at ac t th at . 31:; pocket of the consumer, but whether h e gf e seetX, at all. It was well known, that when a the pr i , took place, the benefit invariably went t° tha t le v e l in the first instance, but who doubted hi lt ised %it n ; mutely went to the consumer? He had r e e ro tee' er ea` o 'i frc m Manchester, complaining that in t 00 40 *v o siol e .e . cotton which had just been made, theshgst the.be r in the slightest degree cheaper, but ' O3 of • ee o m the 700,0001. had gone into the poel 5 , 0 ft t ,O ducer. Now, he (Mr. Gladstone), did sh; p itto o t P so prima fa , ie case of any difference in t " do obt g o 1:1 the general principle, and he did nct. oss teli, e s 1 the benefit of the reduction would n" 2 the pocket of the consumer. The fact le y ° se st• Java sugar sent over to this coullwas, t o d for the refiner. But the fac t n alitiSoe ij „est finer wanted sugar of a lower cl _s. best Java sugar was sent over to HollabestA r s Gentleman here produced a sampled th e o,oolj oes, 0 _ 6 ec of exceeding whiteness.] Hon. G en tle bleb try! the sample which he presented, and his sottlideii!‘;o better quality than any usually seen in, won t o wid it was unfit for the refiner, if not, in m e hserall/ t tattt, yV The Noble Lord had stated that he had s tate a seo b e protection—a protection of Bs., and ild b is ve e '" oo some mystical process this duty would ,et the inconveniences of the elan of his _, h i s Sill .d . 4 1 Friend. He had stated that the plan of aPoiss!ss Friend was wasteful and extras,.ll6 the coo ken, his substitute would save 1 that it sy coO " l ig springing from it—(Hear, hear)—on to t he ere " it l bo ss suc h w . to 0 relieved the sugar trade, given a and saved any loss to the revenue. ..I s t as b o unt! tis s, the case he thought the Noble Lor y cl a w,.. ovne ral! ie I,o d it in strict detail, and not deal in T he isloo l ' a it se; o . (Mr. Gladstone) however, would eV) Noble Lord w° 0 ,... stroll principles to practice. The _ 00 for ei g n l ove a duty of 10s. on the British and . P6s n or 121. tb° ° or 12s. on British or 205. on foreig .., ye .0 0 , and thus he to co° bell' the two kinds ofsugars; iven to hen es . . of the 1,300,0001., which was g Friends-41370,9t the plan of his Hight Hon. of 12s. o n , us i the r ioi It might be assumed that a duty great er f i g ht N . . r 20s. on foreign, would give ag r fight "" y ear. on British, and 235. on foreign. ss of t he one e lo ae computed the whole would that the , o a ou l opee , 280,000 tons ; and lie woulil w libera t ed a very es 300,000, which he consider or the duty co r is under the stimulus of the (A laugh.) Then the product 000 op . tons of Beitllio'g L lO t y Noble Lord's phiroo ,y increased import of 230,0001 ; es - 1 4 w s a t 70,00 0 to cw ., WO 0 creased foreign impor t at 2 05. pe r the/ is tO that would yield, 12s. per cwt., would be 2,76 0 , 300,000. togeth er, OU , ? fir lore , %t potting oa the n tawt P an /Hear.) of W O° there 'rho pe g so ive th o a n t l , y 4, i 6 o : 0 1,500,0001. from the revenue.—(Lor_wats co ostl o, lr British and of 18s. on all foreign raise t he to 29 ti e position of the Noble __ t stuhgeerci.ilew beoPseti°ll 00 0 from 280,0 laug h) —or o t sob - le d ° Op by 10,000 tons—(a althougu ntoo which would cause a greater lt,ents Gladstone) would allow that to ineput 91 10 /1 finance or arithmetic to p amount of reve n % vat ficiency. He would ask any gel 7 ,git ; q l i n c rh o, te an d fist Noble Lord's plan, the owN that art s te - i s er ss e , placed ?—(Hear, hear.) Noble tan was " t ' l3 iden ts 'h'e n of the I'IT O T t ee tOr asj c d gJl woa r s isi s t o le r r r a y ti t o h n at f t u h r e th was vow hich he supposed the omission oletLiot an P l3° ; f o r hi ie is a rj i caused an hiatus in the N b Lord John Russell hadselid up.—(At this moment me laughtel.),lo,t t s h e s ocY of not suppose the Nob took his seat amidst so .bie fisaires, s leneell shown, by incontroverla wou r, leo .° a ye sa ci_ n e Noble Lord meant to ten, owe oele 1,290,0 e— tt ., loictii; 1,560,000 L, and by anothery the Lord's plan, by one scale, f n th e 1 0 on that part of the subject few words 3 ' L r 04 ° 0 he could not help saying a d free-label* cilia tion between slave-grown an etend t° $1)1 thought that if they were to pr n le Pi 0) 2 aga Ili p i °fl