The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-08 00:00:00

T• 7• a t on b g A 1 her , e whicP lga ti yin thc; flnzaro , )f Otabete' a a petition le enacon sbnite The l ' `' is o n to ro w :1 iblic dale )+, 1 ehs ile cipo t h t e d into .- I `f ti t the e n" a .5i191151 from r : :heck jute° ed a sim"sr VS. Bill to in Q jou sh persu t o 705 Pee to reo 3 ed to be ND. • f ig that • tion,ith pro , t i on o. e it 3g either z t 01 00 . the post 0 the discusl dePar tmeg iste t he ber o a mem be r of t de hat bate the be t for th‘'''' ot il ng it on etor the insp understana yjo;t ad beeT be Bu tha t a ch t ° nen- o w Ivas p 0 :s.ke (hall e it, rron't hav fer): T, n ight pl eev rn'Ettence lot :t to tsl‘ e e t , lint ( J 11 , 10 0 1 .; c his t t, o e parties,. goo l d i e oth@ ero e ally covcenve eng a g efi3 v f/1 0 ne cessa r o , l e re t d Ir e land 1 0 °V, w hen et a ho d ; )r - g el l e b r ich lht (the ' be e 0 ie g arn of ~f late 113 )use ` - ‘ ,olle' h y h d he re- '0 c" r as ju' 10 1 J' lace en d. nopu r to ,ost c ou p t r o out the diffle,oo xec tite att eatt io ; , nary e ,tober s ' o prt s 0 1 the s itioll te , the P ° ,eb J oe s at 'as ider ~TOO ,ttiottl3o3b of forc e i e t at th is a I ° o -50 d ro t 0 the c°- ref der he t t lit relan d. e tbe at th e re e d f" °I . Mary f o rC9 , fer faor! 'C h Ca 0' ,stater, the cat) head e pae °l o t ° ,havi l i e °°l ll ji that aeael t straanedg, 11:rte$Per;'/ Ills o f l‘ tbe t° tet t '' 'r° ben t tie fi iie b ig ct t t a not s id0 „1:, heir tell is t /the eti e p AitY °, t he l ite o,. o ie keP h l k o ee p l He t P • oo tog ging tnan. a 4 11 e„ he bad 5e n osl te o t °Cr er, ilia Oftc t ow an the ad" JO - ' tp‘• tylidis voaid e the oer e to o r , vre e 01 4 .61,4 le COl o° _,l l ri t rc i t s l l : th e 11P eo p' ie I. elt tall the ari 0 10 0 ,1 s tePe es ti 0 ent rif il le h tis% ti' f the_ id ip . l ,4oo rr tli vu ° Bt i l r ra e 0$ 1 0 100e1 " t • A t °t le d s taf ed t be hif resod e be_ ; pe et er i e ctli o w as ,P od of, pel 0 oh) eoo,tickl be 0 1,!e ° d ot e sPe, c bO t i r jer e be ro y It ap ,1 3 4 1er f ik e nt laie r g a ilo°' ~t t he ht te ,fore je jto oe o ty d o%,rlis Jo of pro"1;e0 ,p , ro ot 4 geu ti r e eo ft tt r•tbe' i iee; allay be V a dje o, al t ;ref e ,„ jl dee the iie, • pro' ter v e a l r ube rioeh ad , ch ie o b. ill p of a per , f ie I,t ler th e e e' co is , he tp be 0 0 6, . 0g e ° 'W b pri; cl? . ' t he 53 11 0 # 41 t1i , ,t 0 0 1_ I" ,e j.,2 0 j' S° b • ' o WP • 017 ; e 8 'the u t I „i e rte te e o f P i / (I °l' to °P- 0 1 ' ng „ 0 40 ief' r e v 'h ° , i f a . his , 3 to eti, 4 l, co u ip ' ifP f t# lll his ro ta ph ° os lo l r pold the ' h ritlg 19' 0 G L)U ht ° lig - 00 c 0 D°, , be but o otie c oo do r , the t he . ledg e T h e tha t Is' a,, btu hit, e 8,4 , e ta ;de y a the , 0 , 0 0 h ,r cp t hei e j, e t hat op t ot ustl p o ts; - .0 ie of b oor the r" to e ; l t,e r e: 0 0, 1 depr af e •dt i r e ,a t f loep_. l it? depo t 1 1 1 ;41 ,4 f sO e te rt) , we re re se, e tsi the" . t ih e t be ° t" a t he t 0 $ ; had 6rffirregif, t o pot h t ,eY. ' no t esl l t'‘, 4 ,: , ;I alr4 1: 11 : $ A t gee ing th e - tie 10' 5 ted a t 'savih t e 0 1, s ur u is d u o I ` ltd re Jaeg the 1 0 ' t tr y $ t ot :re‘ iy, f a 0 0 Ve ti r t he i',o • 9 th e ity ° t° eV 1 11 , ' e l u tret (th 00 1 . ' 4 ' „I nt otl e er e e l ci po ts) b d t o o r) w ho I,ef irie al t hetu .e ‘ , cO O 9 , 01, t- f r) l ,o' ° l7 lre o e, or." ye , , fo r ' S ' : :le t tl ii )el he " t tef t l e e ° o ast a'or ;011,011P? 11d b A e , s c att:jetl, 3 b - e t hi hle 'be 0 ,1 be f° 1 4 ` ) tro t fto r tic , 0 the 3 13 eo le o 5 , h i e t te t i f , n , 0 000,,,it„ i f t he of 1'7,01' 0 ,0 x of fice , r in tl , 3 o e pt ii • e v e r ;, , , , i'vrthia th f at,"baci .oitett:llo,fl;l4.i by hoop tet t ot 0 , ';t g c hile nee„hj,hl B lottcleofig Jerotoi:; ;t Lor d / 3o t tle: 0 d i d.) ,oiog ,o t h e of h . d e rl g e 0 11 " tor' tbe t SPee had $t P i ,f t‘ q i nt a th, o ble 0 0. I an d i e 1 ;0 eer0 .), 1 ,3 , n'aer bee r ' 311 0a llf b "th e i pti? to je , e d be els er 3te 4 i dis4 b bo rc' . ~. _ Made by the magistrates sh o uld h erea ft er be made by the Lilliinector.genesah This, he b e li eve d, was t h e un d ers t an di ng come to. i t appeared desirable that he was to become " eonsible f or t h e regulation and conduct of the men, should g ensi n ate and se l ect them. This person was the inspector s,e "'II. Such was stet' d to be the understanding, but. what „a! the fact, and how did it. appear that these appointments sad been made from the records which had been made of the 4PPZiattrients in the constabulary force in Ireland? By those re tiade tot was evident that the appointments in that force had been n the plan of the Metropolitan Police Force Bill ? Well, ( - 0 " a! was that plan? 'Was it that the officers at the head of that f a res had the Power of appointing the superior officers of that 1 , 0 '7, 11 aueh as Captain May. Certainly not. Those officers were ta ,,, is lated by the Secretary of State, and the magistrates the these appointments under this understanding. Was this Co'losyatern on which the appointments were made under . g sse hel Shaw Kennedy, under the Act of Parliament which and so Shaw of those appointments to the inspector-general, eettaers to the Lord-Lieutenant 9 Did the Noble Marquis . t h the re commendations of Colonel Shaw Kennedy ? The Marquis of NORMANRY—He spoke of promotions. al e Duke of WELLINGTON—He spoke of promotions th-r"--of promotions from the positions of inferior officers to , Tp?sitions of superior officers. Did the Noble Marquis act 1r,t1:1.3 principle —on the principle of the very Act . which he j , 4 hitnself introduced ; and were the recommendations of the arcsl:ector-Genersil carried into effect ? Why, by the very first thatutifensent entered into, with respect to Col. MsGregor— aiderecie a ppointments, which were, of all appointments,.eon e aft the most valuable, those from the position of ordinary The ables to be head constables, were taken away from him. We re also from the rank of sergeant-major to be . officers fail. a_ 4 o carried on under the same rule's. By this means,. to 'wo-thirde of the patronage which ought, according th e h representations of the Noble Marquis, to be vested in lie "u s of Colonel M'Gregor were taken from his office. eh trendedco that the Lord Lieutenant had a right, if he IlsZe, make all those appointments. All he (the Duke of cona e ul a r h n) desired was that he should not be called . upon to t ! m ei, to this motion to criminate the . Lord-Lieutenan , Oto: ° l l „the ground of an understanding which had never ea gles, Ile said that the Lord-Lieutenant had a right . to make Pat! aPPointments. Not a word could be said against the Mee erna n who had been appointed, and to whom the Noble q' had hi ghest referred. That gentleman was a man of th motion, character. There was no ground, therefore,for . this Na r a and he called upon their Lordehips to resist it. With ett sa `„: a t lil the second motion he confessed that he b thought . it t as r ' s 'aar that th Noble s Lord should found sue a motion ,riia ll e a l ;: t l ; ?u e s Y e on a spe e echmade bya ' Member of Parliament to l aded nls on his election.. The Noble Marquis had al reotat th e state of Ireland in 1840 and 1841. Were there no Lisa t h at Meetings in those years ? He thought he could show Lisa 'at there were at least a dozen in each year. Were s aln e ,!' u ,„ speeches made at those monster meetings, and no ( s i letirTha by foreigners? He thought there were.— atrr Those meetings were supposed . , by th . e t ican, b be held for the purpose of procuring peti a s St e d sae , not a word respectir g petitions was ever uttered " N esial°' those meetings. At these meetings threats of all , ° , f :the l s ' a ' u h s s Were held out against the constituted authoritiss ;sat taaahntry. And yet they were told that the country at he Ras was in a state of tranquillity. If this was tranquil.. th; "ad never known what tranquillity was. With respect theta • r eturns he had not the slightest objection to give to i tas, l f . e h w ut he s h ou ld l i ke at the same time the Noble Lord to t n g tsh words t o hi s mot i on, call i ng for other returns, show thehts Is at n umber of traps were sent away from Ireland in e a -t he year s . He thought the Noble Lord would find that thereaMbers sent t o and taken away, ware nearly equal. "ere note few troops either in this country or Ireland that tkteNetnal!sollitey and essentially necessary to provide re'fo the a le PloYed abroad to guard our foreign possessions, id ille4 Ire the lives of her Majesty's subjects in them. Ire tileirhY the forces wer not kept at hoe till th tie of Sea s enle service s had expired and at m this moment e m there ahowt to be sent from this country who had not been a' a nd a sufficient leneth of time to admit of their being b°ll4„ritliPlied• The Noble - Lord, therefore, would find op; these returns to commit the Government, the Se- Os 1,,%ar, or any other person connected with the army. l ihtio:"' he find anything to support his argument, that any force had been kept in Ireland. hitiaß be he ep of FORTESCUE said that some observations f well e h Made by the Noble Duke, implicating his co . nduct, 'h atet that of his Noble Friend who preceded him, with re t4,',4this t 0 understanding which was stated to have existed a:Pesto — `:jeet, and relating to the power of the constabulary a, h e nominate persons entitled to promotion in the te e e trusted their Lordships would allow him to trouble 11 14 , 1 , 1 tt ‘ r ! lf ith a a few observatiens. He would remind their Lord ts'a of h speech made by the Right Hon. Gentleman at the f I t s er alajesty's Government, upon the introduction o Co noabulary Bill, on the 15th of February, 1836. tt s°lo 4l 44 ht Ron. Gentleman, ' on that occasion, stated that e st s 4 s a w Kennedy shoud have the appointment of all aaalerthl i klee him, for whose conduct he was responsible. u nderstanding he believed that Colonel Macgregor t th e to the appointment of inspector-general of the force. gaiprotnotions were understood to be of this description. li h ttse t ah .t colonel was to have the power to promote a t a ' ° „the rank of officer, and it was left, he be `he Lord-Lieutenant to promote the . officer!. th.lyttill e promotion of an officer to a higher rank was urn koern t l to the recommendat i on of t h e i nspector-general. iss a i ldr: a int made by C o l one l M acgregor was, t h at a person liktuinrnended t o fill t h e s i tuat i on o f a stipendiary maps sestrea not bee n appo i nte d to that s i tuat i on. Colonel h ah " ,' however, had no right whatever, under the terms i s ,. lea k' lierstanding, t o ma k e any suc h comp l a i n t, t h e elm fos e Y magistracy being a totally distinct body to the dstiesk„!. Still, he mus t con f ess , t h a t o f a ll th e st i pen - 11 4 1 , 14 se' s nr ates appointed in Ireland none performed their tic tltr a le efficientl or more to the honour of themselves, LPii ' is ho were taken from the constabulary force. No Vi t i ated' i ti ad been ade agaiust the gentleman who had been tli t6 Y of i h r ,t that instance • and so far as he had had an oppor tO"srai—ling, he believ ' ed the gentleman fully capable of al Oil the duties of the office; but he wished it by no -1 4t,,, til it ° 115 understood that he thought him superior , a ssl asresnect to the gentleman recommended by k it; l aagre or. The re commendation, however, ' ileat'isePeetor g g e . n . eral being slighted,. they complained that kaHrb:teetslid_ been . injured, and it was upon . this ground that he se w e motion of the Noble Marquis. The Noble Duke at ',hi e }, t e ased to refer to the state of Ireland, and the meet ksi th, "ad been held in that country in 1840 and 1841, teats, wiikht the Noble Duke would be fair and just enough , l a{s re ak it it h hirn that these meetings could not for one moment ishirk,with the monster assemblies . held in . the . year ,tkrte‘s, the with since been so frequently discussed in that as ,s other House of Parliament. If meetings of the S4,lil ae -a e t h i re described by the Noble Duke had been e a s llo o w ns e . d . „k sha the s 'he ( Lord Fort escue) would have been r . p i ; and, certainly, if they had jeopardized the Irel an d , he c o uld never h a ve be en abl e t o stand as House and defend his own Administration. stl l it ese a k t hst remind the Noble Duke that when '"e Government first took office, Sir R. Peel,. tthlr to tes e p r . some complimentary observation made by i n l end Lord John Russell, admitted that they found te,sb a eae , a ss ea, e , Paratieely tram - 1111 and peaceful . state. The s l 6-7 % ihoie uac t POintedly . to the collection of funds ,I,Arata Meetings. Now, during th . e whole time he had i Nree t te be connected with the Irish Government, th . e wa% i re 1' d r 100/. a-week, and never in a s iii stl t t , q ue nt un e d seoos Their Lord kbNsP,tl'as•:,W,,Se that during the years 1843 and 1844 the I tir ss i l - irosn 1 000/ to 2,000/. a-week, and even at the At all believed the collections amounted to 500/. or L 'lt 'ad avents, he might state the average to be between Zis t s i tl s i ad sh ., and this was sufficient to indicate the feeling t i lt i kta a t he subject of repeal. He was afraid, therefore, 01,0 sis; -h t eould be made in the state of Ireland now, with 1 1 7 t ,how ‘ w nen he had the honour to hold office. He . osai`lasasaer, abstain from drawing inferences until tot ' s ere before them—( Hear)—at the same time s A t remarkingi that the condition of Ireland had hit s at latter y ears. A c h ange, h e was g l a d to see , to d kvt - sal e '''‘an upon the country, and if the . Govern- i s lase t h ei r carry out their present intentions with regard 1114 4 t t „?sib „e Could be no question they would soon bring ItN4,to make s 'le of things. He thought the grants they l's t i st I , 4 N' p to increase the number and powers of Ro- Oo a l leas it ae rileges were likely to . secure the future wel ltNs s ti's , and create a better feeling in Ireland towards tat:heal to in I . l e had supported the appointment of the Com- J s ' 4, Stat I lan's , into the relation of landlord and t7 r ant a in k t l tlo as i was happy to say the results ot Isat inqu t y i h n _d ), nis original views on that subject. Cer amy Cp Sh t le a raa r ee in all the suggestions contained in the report ; aorne which entirely ariagreed with what he Vie t ,'asaa - a at° be done i c ri Ireland, dhe only hoped the ; ti i Pe r i "aid carry them into effect. The general tone i l p a t W hieh this report was drawn up was no more aret ti e 4 expected from the high moral character odf the I ‘ aji * , , sale re ts h9 headed the Commission ; and he h tb op t e eon 'ils`siSll to to 7eive at the bands of the Government a a Lt k st 1ta4 1 ",..,1eh it was so justly entitled. S 4 P„e Of th e said an observation had been made in litatats'e-let:lebate upon a speech delivered by a Right t, B e' i ss ' ' Li s upon the election hustings, which he could a tt it hsaythieas without a remark. He way perfectly certain th s tt H u g had been stated in the report of the speech ki Nal f tet ,1 1. " Friend which was not in strict accordance tos\ d At a l ji l ' e a v t his Right Hon. Friend had been misrepre kp,iistb, to hi m vents, if he hail made use of the expressions is'eaot h e must have used them asa figure of speech,. st e la l'" ern as a deliberate statement of fact, because I;`sel% t I the sn aes could have so grossly and diabolically stated k k t Led fa ct- No doubt the expression was uttered the l- q u eriue, and it was on that account excusable. t ee' that Colo 1 Macgregor had been consulted, th it t di va , ne It: l e ' on lu nal whom he reco,nmended was not taken, t ii t ;Sis i t ' i l e . e,, t r l a se as taken, one who was allowed to be a fit o s ,as te e usually taken in the appointment of magis hi NI 44 4 d ' ` in trY was for the Lord-Lieutenant of a county S ti Sti ev t ase t, such persons as he thought fit for the office to t b; 14 1 . 1 ,1,when the Government were desirous of ap . - ISej c' s a i t ‘7lq ual, or individuals, to the magistracy, it Lioh i,, qh l e r itsr o weol..ll,_s,ult the Lord-Lieutenant. That was Zs; eacii Lear"t; l -i e n l, he (Lord Br n m o i ham) had pur gw filled by his t. st 4 e alt,) ne. ,a t . he d office the Woolsack. lie had Vs '4 4 t tis % wi s i ri , le ci to u esi consult the on l ord-Lieutenants of counties t ssla l etes t hat t i th aPpoint magistrates, because . he naturally . N'i t 'st % s ad le ) ? were most likely to be acquainted with the lNsq ‘l,:cisttions of the gentlemen in their respective t is.es n o „ate fitted to fulfil the duties of magistrates. sVraes‘hd kw ays followed the recommendation which he Nssa"dett i- ti several instances he had deviated from those tts lr a rl a Q - e l' an d appointedother individuals whom they alt t lat ' e ' t 'n t Brougham) therefore thought as! sst had sever had been put on Colonel Macgregor, 'a Ani s , ou t , ° real ground of complaint, and he thought i t 'sio lt a l l 'eti li eut e Z tu nid not, interfere with the responsibility of t alr e i te eh h ,a, th a Pt. If the case put before him was a fit ease „NIL') 0-„,"ati - ,r r d - Lieutenant no doubt would follow the 1 ,1 '' s 'iaii, a ion °4 ( '„,uut if nut, he was not in his (Lord Broug ar` he c° to attnd to it, and if he refrained from 1;17 'saeas,;°nceived that his doing so was no slght to Ne s 'll 4s4 it nor ' and that there was consequently no t ground (1 1 41,' krq, r notj o , ll t ' Wi tt , o f , , eve,„ 'RMANBY said he had no disposition to ilethe‘Yrta°4 the speech of the Hon. Member le reaa tr ecoll e j• a t Salisbury, but he did exceedingly h:cs,„Pso ee ar • ea a , e ta'au had not been more accurate, when an tPtf - . a t° make observations respecting any t s " hos g wi thout a. c ss4 to y° , e a b se.... _ any expectation of being called to af eha c vations. A time would come when it would t a t al, ' d ot aeon __era of either of the Houses of Legislature l'h e Y• ThianY observations upon their personal fu h tios N t' he conceived, was an occasion of this . sa d ad ots:er"ensber had made a speech at Salisbury, in h t ;lo tt ",at (th e ye a d very strongly upon proceedings in Irhe h out "larquis Normanby ) thought that e r i ,ltth e ara L o t i fo r ti ( i lue course in conceiving that there was a n, at le th e r _ thence. observations.—( Hear, hear.) They iteZ,lts4.epte waseasronsibility of an Opposition. He, for , o 2 ne, 4 ;%s t • g hat a r esponsibility on the Governmen..— 'eltj a it th t hat G M ' t hen, would they say to a man who was Si e ce, at,,retioverninent, and a 'member of the Cabinet, k t ,d!ie I V yet that which was expected from a man in his ere Lia.t - e Was to incur no responsibility for to iee.ad all heard of the Tamworth manifesto, wri. ir a sly „ eire stos . " r helat which the principles of public men htteht,larrpre, were ; and did their Lordships conceive that eve e e r ,e not fitted for remark in that Hsiuse? ta t e ie ate aid recollect one which had excited no little 14ass at t . ant th th St we e declaration of a Noble Lord not then in i s Y) , who had de c l are d i n hi s sea t in .154 ._ a 4 that he could never think of joining Ppo3iti oo to whom the whole of his public THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, MARCH 8 1845. long explanation, for the purpose, as it appeared to him, of justifying the motion of which he had given no tice. He (Lord Lincoln) begged distinctly to repeat what he had stated on the last night, that this motion was a gross imputation on likuselr, as far as his public character was concerned. lie did not blame the Hon. forward this subject. If he sus pected a public servant, h e was qu it e r i g ht i n b r i ng i ng it he conceived he had a f G o r e l n y t a l r e d m . a n Whatfor b r I n e g right to say, was, that when the i(uLgord Lincoln) did say, and what Hon. Member had Placed the notice on the books of the House—a notice, the plain intent and meaning of which was, to charge corruption to a public servant in the discharge of his official euties— when such notice had once appeared upon the books of the House, it was an injustice to him (Lord Lincoln) and towards the public, who were as much interested in the character of their servant, as he himself was—(Hear, hear)—not to bring that subject forward at the very earliest opportunity, in order to give that public servant an opportunity of clear ing his character. The Hon, Member for Coventry had not yet even acknowledged the injustice of the imputa tion in the motion which he brought forward. He (Lord Lincoln):agreed with the Hon. Member that any Hon. Member giving notice of a motion should bring it for ward himself. But why, he asked, did the Hon. Member for Coventry not act on his own principles, and bring this motion forward himself ? Why did he leave it to the Hon. Member for Montrose to do so in his absence ? That was one cause of complaint he had against the lion. Member for Coventry. Another was, that he had put a notice on the books which bore on the face of it a most unfair representation of the facts. The Hon. Gentleman, with a perversion of vision, had read the motion on the books, and then the extract from the report of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, in a manner which was intend to convey to the House a meat unfair representation of the case, and he would not be wrong in supposing, with an evident intention to mis lead the House of Commons, and to lead the public to a different interpretation than the facts of the case war ranted. What was the extract which the lion. Gentle. man had quoted ? It would be found in the 29th page of the report issued by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests in August last—" To sale of certain parts or portions of land adjoining to the Hafod estate." What was the motion of the Hon. Member ? It was for a return of all surveys and valuations of 7,438 acres of land sold for 1,0491. 15s. 9d. The Hon. Member had shown by his statement—though he was absent from the House last night, that he had read his (Lord Lin coln's) observations upon this subject, in that morning's papers, and therefore he had made himself master of them, and of the explanation he (Lord Lincola) had given of this affair; and yet the Hon. Gentleman now professed to say that that which he had just read was a full and fair representation of the transaction through out. He ( Lord Lincoln) would not now enter upon any further explanation on this subject.—(Hear, hear.) He conceived that he entered upon it at sufficient length last night ; and he said then, and he would say now, that he was ready to produce, and he would produce, in spite of the remonstrances of the House to the contrary, ail the documents connected with the transaction, cal culated to give the fullest explanation, except, perhaps, a mass of letters which contained a quantity of matter irrelevant to the subject, and which it would be an enor mous and almost useless labour to wade through.— (Hear.) He said last night, and he would say now again, that, even in the absence of these documents, not the slightest doubt remained upon the mind of any other Hon. Member of the House ; but if a suspicion did dwell upon the mind of the Hon. Member opposite, he (Lord Lincoln) hoped, when all the documents were before the House—and indeed he thought he was bound to do so —to bring forward a substantive proposition upon it— (llear, hear)—and if he did not, he (Lord Lincoln) would then feel himself in a position to impute to the Hon. Member that which would be anything but creditable to him.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had said that if he were in the House last night, the result of the de bate on this subject would have been very different from what it was.—(Hear, hear.) Now he (Lord Lincoln) would insist upon the production and the reading of all the documents he had alluded to ; and when they had been read he did think that the Hon. Member would be bound, in justice to the public, in justice to that House, and in justice to the lion. Member's fair fame, to place upon the books of that House a motion founded upon this investigation.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. WILLIAMS rose amid loud cries of " Order, order," and said he merely wished to say _a werd or two in explana tion. H e b egge d t o rem i n d th e Noble Lord opposite that bis notice was merely to the effect that he would move for copies of the surveyor's valuation of the estate purchased by the Duke of Newcastle, and described in the report of her Majesty's Commissioners of Woods and Forests. When he had framed his notice upon the subject, he showed it to an Hon. Member opposite, who approved of it ; and he then sho we d it t o th e Hon. Memb er f or M on t rose , a nd it was at his suggestion that he had altered it to its present form. With regard to the other things which the Noble Lord had thrown out—( Cries of " Spoke, spoke," amidst which the Hon. Member sat down). Mr. HUME said, as he had been alluded to, he begged to assure his Hon. Friend that he was very sorry that he was net there on the p rev i ous cv ening.—( Hear, hear.) He had meant to act kindly to the Hon. Gentleman and the Noble Lord.—( Hear, bear.) He must confess that when his Hon. Friend consulted him, he said that the entry was very sus picious, but he advised him to get the papers first, and not commit himself before he was acquainted with the facts. He promised his Hon. Friend, not o n ly th a t h e wou ld assist him in getting the papers, but if they were not satisfactory, in obtaining " further inquiry." That was the usual and proper course for an Hon. Member to pursue under such (imams stances.—(Hear, hear.) He could not agree with the Noble Lord as to the course which ,an Hon. Member was bound to pursue, after bringing forward a subject of this nature ; he thought that if he were satisfied that was a sufficient reason for withdrawing.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He must now confess that, as long as he had been in Parliament, he had never heard an explanation more satisfactory, and more exculpatory than that of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) He would not be a party to' suspending for one moment the duty of freeing the Noble Lord from suspicion. Mr. MACKINNON wished to say a few words in expla nation. About a year and a half ago, he was treating for the purchase of this estate, and he was fully aware of the claims which the Government might have had upon it. With regard to what had been said by the Hon. Gentleman, he begged to say, that if the estate was sold by auction that it would not bring one-twentieth of what it brought by private contract, because it would be of no value to any other person except the Duke of Newcastle. The subject then dropped. CUSTOMS' DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice that if the debate on the property and income-tax was concluded in sufficient time on Monday evening, he would propose to go effect to th at resolution which repeals the ex pinto a Committee on the Custo ms ' D ut i es on t h at n i g h t, f or t h e purpose ort JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL . In answer to a question by C apta i n PECHELL , of duties. giving Sir J. GRAHAM said that if the Justice of the Peace Bill was read a second time that evening, he died not intend going me Committee on it till after Easter. RAILWAY RESOLUTIONS. In answer to a question by an How. MEMBER, Mr. GREENE said that some further resolutions, with re gard to railways, would be ready in a few days. Mr. MILES said that he had a motion for Monday night on th e question of the Speaker leaving the chair fur the purpose of going into Committee on the property-tax, upon which he was afraid he must occupy some of the time of the House. He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, did not intend by his notice to interfere with that debate. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment whether the permissive power, given under the 4th and sth of William IV., to the Poor law Commissioners to make alterations in unions had ever been put in force? Sir J. GRAHAM said that though such a power ex isted, it had, in fart, never been exercised. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government when it was intended that the abolition of duty on agricultural seeds should take effect ? Also, whether the list would include clover seed ? British public because 3,000 quarters of corn bad been ad mitted last week at a duty of 205.? Mr. HUME was surprised at hearing the statement of the Right Hen. Baronet. The Eight Hon. Baronet was positively misstating the arguments of his friends.—( Hear, hear.) His friends had always contended that the object of the corn-laws was to keep up the price of corn. —( Cries of "No, no," from the Ministerial benches, answered by cheers from the Opposition.) The Right Hon. Baronet had not answered the direct ques tion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stockport.—(Hear.) His Hon. Friend had stated the exact amount and the exact quantity, and although it was possible that the actual amount did not all go into the pockets of the West Indians—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—yet there could be no guess tion but that a proportion, and a very large proportion, of that amount did find its way into their pockets.—(Cheers.) The question was, what was that amount ? That depended en tirely upon the quantity. That was the question which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been called upon to answer, and to that question no answer had been given. Why, let them take even the case of corn. There could be no doubt but that the imposition of the duty tended to raise the price of corn throughout the country. They might tell him that a rise of one in twenty would not produce any perceptible efect. It might not, but a rise of one in seven or of one in five would produce a very great effect, and that would be suf ficient to show how fallacious was the argument of the Right lion. Baronet.—(Hea. ) The Right Hon. Baronet had, in fact, shirked the - question.—( Cheers.) Why did he go to corn ?—( Hear, hear.) Why did he not keep to sugar ? ( Hear.) He had gone to corn, because he thought it would attract more attention.—( Hear.) Sugar was the subject of discussion at the present moment and let them keep to sugar. —( Hear, hear.) Before he sat down he would offer a little advice to those Hon. Gentlemen opposite who were pressing the Right Hon. Baronet on this subject. He would advise Hon. Members who supported the West India interest not to drive their pretensions too far, or they would make it appear evident that that relief would not be extended to the country from the reduction of the sugar duty which the country was entitled to expect.—( Hear, hear.) The time was fast ap. proaching when any protection would be entirely out of the question. He was anxious to see the West Indians amply supplied with labour, and to see them prospering, but if they persist in pursuing the present course, the country would soon consider that they were not worthy of that consideration which had hitherto been extended to them. He wished to see questions denuded of all that intricacy and of all that fallacy which had been had recourse to, simply to hide the fact that this protection imposed a heavy tax upon the country. He wished the Claancellor of the Exchequer would consider the question, argue it fairly, and show what would be the real effect of imposing this additional duty on foreign sugar. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the argument which had been used by the Right Hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury, in reply to the question of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stockport and to the observations of his Noble Friend the Member for Sunderland, did appear to him one of the most extraordinary evasions which he had ever heard. The plan of the Government supposed a regular trade in sugar to this country, to the amount next year of 20,000 tons of foreign sugar. His Hon. Friend had contended that the price paid for colonial sugar would be governed by the price of the foreign sugar. Entirely evading that argument, the Right Hon. Baronet, with what in so able a debater he must believe could only be a desperate plunge of despair, said that he was bringing forward a precisely analogous case in the cir cumstances of the corn trade. What were the circumstances of that trade as described by the Right Hon. Baronet himself? That there was a quantity of 3,000 quarters of corn imported into this country, to meet 20,000,000 quarters of home-grown, and that this 3,000 quarters of foreign corn had the same effect on the 20,000,000 of home-grown, as the 20,000 tons of foreign sugar would have on the 230,000 tons of colonial sugar. But there was this difference in the cases—the Right Hon. Baronet supposed, when he spoke of those 3,000 quarters of foreign corn, that its importation had been a favourable speculation to the trader, but he believed the Right Hon. Baronet would find that this was contrary to the facts of the ease. Had it been under the operation of the sliding scale—( Hear, hear)—a winning speculation 2—( Hear, hear.) Had the transaction been of a nature to encourage the importation of curn in future ? He was astonished the Right Hen. Baronet should have ventured to use such an argument. What was the state of the corn trade at the present moment ? A large quantity of foreign corn, after having been kept in warehouses for a considerable time, at a loss to the importers, became at last so damaged that it was impossible it could afford to pay duty, and rather than pay it it was thrown into the river.—( Hear, bear.) By the operation of the sliding scale the trade in corn was rendered a destructive one—( Hear,' hear)—and the Right Hon. Gentleman gravely compared it to the sugar trade, which he intended to introduce into this country—he endeavoured to establish a perfect analogy between circumstances entirely dissi milar. He hoped that, however the scheme of corn duties might have pleased the Right Hon. Gentleman, the infliction of a curse in sugar duties, on a similar principle, would be spared to the country. His (Mr. Labouchere's) purpose in rising was to protest against the argument brought forward by the Right Hon. Baronet, that a principle founded on circumstances ap plicable to corn would afford an argument which would equally apply to sugar. There never was a more complete failure at an answer than in that attempted by the Right Hon. Gentle man.—( Hear, hear.) Because 3,000 quarters of foreign corn had, forsooth, been introduced in one week—and it would be absurd to say that that could have any effect on the price of the corn consumed in the present season—it was attempted to show that there was some analogy between that case and the ease of foreign and colonial sugar, as affected by the BB! in troduced by her Majesty's Government. Mr. GLADSTONE said there were two questions before the House, and there was considerable complaint on the on side and on the other, because they had not been answered. A question had been put by an Hon. Gentleman on the other side, which he had no hesitation in saying did not originate in a desire of gaining information.—(Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend, the Hon. Baronet (Si r Robert Peel), had ob served to the Hon. Gentleman, that two could play at that game, and had excited considerable irritation by his mode of retort.--(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Gladstone) believed that a fair answer was never given to such a question as that of the Hon. Member for Stockport. One Right Hon. Gentleman opposite said it was not fair to take the small quantity of corn which came in within a week, and to argue from that as if it formed an appreciable portion of the trade. He did not know that he differed from him upon that point ; but he would give a slight modification of his night Hon. Friend's question. In 1843, there were introduced one million, or one million two hundred quarters (that, at least, was not an imperceptible quantity ), and it paid about 15s. a quarter. In 1844, there came in about eight or nine hundred thousand quarters, which paid about 17s. a quarter. He asked Hon. Members whether, looking at the average of wheat in 1843 and in 1844, they would hold that the price of wheat was not raised in 1843 by 15s. a quarter, and in 1844 by 175., over what it would have been without a corn law ? The Right lion. Gentleman (Mr Labouchere) said that upon the 3,000 quarters money was lost. But did the 1,000,000 quarters introduced in 1843 involve a loss of money ? If so, why were another million imported? The Right Hon. Gentleman had said, that a quantity of corn had been thrown into the river in consequence of the prejudicial operation of those protective duties at one time. Why, of course, if the Right Hon. Gentleman referred to a trader in desperate cir cumstances for arguments of this sort, he could no doubt find many of them. The Hon. Member had referred to a paper of six or seven years old, and it was from that be had read the occurrence of a quantity of corn having been thrown into the river; but he (Mr. Gladstone) would ask, how could a state of things of a date so far back be made analogous to those of the present?-4 Hear, hear). On the whole, he (Mr. Glad stone) did think that the proposition of his Hon. Friend near him was founded on principles consistent with justice, and sound truth and equity.—( Cheers.) The Hon. Member for Stockport had said that it was a plain question of arithmetic, and he argued that if the duty, say upon 200,000 tons of sugar, was to be 10s. 6d. the cwt., that the price of the sugar to the dealer would be the same per cwt. in addition. But he (Mr. Gladstone) would ask, how did the Hon. Member mean to make the sugar duties applicable to the principle on which the duties on corn were regulated ?—( Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Member meant to argue that, because 10s. 6d. was the duty d o o n s s o u b r l ut 0 he s. 6 ( cl sho 3 . r.G ud b l l ad sto e o t e h ) e additiondiffered from thero him, price, a I nd e t him con tended that the fact was not so, and objected that such should be assumed as the fact. Amongst the many points which might be introduced into this subject, in order that it might be submitted to a full and fair discussion, was this one :—Suppose that British sugar was not worth by two-thirds what foreign sugar was, and that the duty on British sugar was 10s. 6d. per cwt., and that on foreign was 235., surely the 235. duty on the more valuable article was only a fair, proportionate ad valorem duty.--( Hear, hear.) As to the Hon. Gentleman putting this in the form of a question, and endeavouring to get an answer, whether it came to one million or two millions and a half, though as a mere stratagem in debate, there might be no objection to such a course. But as a question for information —though lie would not say it was deserving of no attention— yet it was desirable that an answer such as that given by his Right Hon. Friend should be given to it, who put a question to the Hon. Gentleman, which he hoped some Hon. Gentleman en the other aide of the House would be disposed to answer more satisfactorily.—(Laughter. ) Mr. ROEBUCK said that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) had said that the Hon. Member for Stock port had put a foolish question, which was answered by another foolish question of the Right Hon. Baronet.—( Hear, hear.) But the Hon. Member for Stockport put a very pertinent question, in his opinion, and it was answered with exceeding dexterity by the Right Hon. Baronet, for he answered one part but not the whole. The question of the Hon. Member for Stockport was a plain, clear, definite, and brief question, un derstandable by anybody. Nothing of that character could be applied to the answer of the Right Hon. Gentleman.— (Hear ' hear.) The question was, "if a cer t a i n amoun t o f duty be placed on foreign sugar as a means of protection, what is the loss to the consumer by that protecti on ?" That was the real meaning of the question. The Hon. Member said that the loss to the community must be measured by the gain to the planters. But that was not altogether the case, for the loss was derived in part from the quantity of labour and capital thrown away, and therefore the protective duty would only give a partial protection. The question of the Hon. Member for Stockport was accurate enough, but when it was asked whether the importation of 200,000 quarters of corn would in crease the price of corn, ho did not think that was an accurate question, because the quantity was so small, but if it were large, it would be an accurate question. And, therefore, the question put by the Hon. Menaher for Stockport was a question put for information sake alone. IWhat was the protection of ten shillings put on for ? On this sub ject he held a letter in his hand, a letter written by a Gentle man named Gladstone—(Hear, hear)—in the Times of that day, in which he said they must protect the colonists—that was, in effect, saying they were to have worse sugar at a higher price. It was supposed they derived great benefit from the West and East India colonies. He denied that altogether. The value of the West India colonies was to be measured by the exact amount of our loss. They paid them 'a large tax in the shape of duty on sugar, and it had not been shown why this country should pay them more than 2,000,0001. of money every year in the shape of protection duty. Sir GEORGE CLERK said, the Hon, and Learned Member for Bath advanced an argument which no other Hon. Member would, he believed, be inclined to support him in— that our West India colonies were rather a loss than an advan tage to us. He would not, therefore, apply himself to this question, but rather reply to the observations of the Hon. Member fur Taunton who admitted that some protection ought to be extended towards our colonies, and was not satisfied that they should enter into unlimited competition with foreign countries. The Hon. Member for Stockport had put a specific question, and had drawn an inference which the premises did not justify. He presumed that because there was a differential duty of ten guineas a ton on foreign free sugar, and the amount imported, 230,000 tons, that the people of this country were thereby taxed to the amount of 2,300,0001. Now, that argu ment was altogether irrespective of the quantity supplied by the colonies, and the greater the colonial supply the greater the amount of taxation on the people of this country.—(No, no.) He admitted that if the supply from the West Indies was in considerable, and that we were obliged to take our sugar from foreign countries, the protective duty would be very much felt. But at the present mement, when thes'jp ply imported from our foreign possessions could bel g r eaterll 6! o e o 0 0. (:. than ever was consumed in a single year by the peop 3 co oo nn ,ooo try, l. h ? ow lf c t o h u e l y d w th er e e y at be o s a u e b e je to cte r d em to it a at i a l tax of 0 pr the immediate consequences might be favourable oe t t c o t t v h e e d e n s - , be a sumer by a small reduction in the price of sugar, but would the consuming class, for afterwards highly injurious even to the growers would, in most instances, give np the i r pl an t time', and its culture would In to $ great extent discontinued. Sir R. PEEL said, the removal of duty would take place aftQr the present sowing ; probably, in the month of June. Clover seed would not be included. PURCHASE OF CALIFORNIA. Mr. S. WORTLEY said he wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Govern ment on the subject of a paragraph which appeared in the newspapers, and which appeared to receive confir mation, in a neighbouring country. It was stated in the Times newspaper that the English Government had offered to Santa Anna a sum of 25,000,000 dollars for the province of California in 1837, and that that beauti ful province was on the point of being given up to Great Britain. The paragraph stated that that was another proof of the undermining ambition of Great Britain ; and it also stated that 5,000,000 dollars had been offered by the American Government Now, though that was a paragraph in the newspapers, it professed to have some foundation, and considering the aridity with which all statements of that kind were laid hold of, both in France and in the United States, tending to raise prejudices against the policy of Great Britain, he wished to ask, first, whether the Right Hon. Gentleman was aware of any correspondence on this subject having taken place ; and, secondly, whether there was any foundation whatever for such statement ? _ Sir R. PEEL begged to state in the most distinct and explicit manner, in answer to the question put by his Hon. Friend, that he was not aware of the existence of any such correspondence, and he believed the report al luded to was as utterly without foundation as any report that ever existed. There were a great many reports re specting the un€lermining ambition of Great Britain, but he believed such reports were often spread as a pal liation for the insertion of others. lie was not aware of any such correspondence being carried on, and he could find no trace of such a correspondence, so that the report was utterly destitute of the shadow of a foundation. Lord PALMERSTON said, on behalf of the late Go vernment, that they had never offered in 1837, or any other year, 37,000,000 of dollars, or any other sum for any Mexican province. BUENOS AYRES. Lord PALMERSON gave notice that he would, on Monday, put a question to the Eight Hon. Baronet on the subject of a note presented by Mr. Mandeville, the representative of Great Britain, on the 16th December, 1842, to the Government of Buenos Ayres, on the subject of the dispute between that Government and Monte Video. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was not his intention to interfere at all with the motion of his Hon. Friend ; but it was very important that the question of the repeal of the export duties should be discussed. His Hon. Friend would have another opportunity of making his motion. Mr. M. GIBSON said tbat it would not take ten minutes to repeal the duty on cotton. Why not go on with it now ?—( Laughter. ) Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Member for Liskeard had a very important motion on the subject of the property and income-tax, and till that was disposed of he could not assent to the remission of any taxes.—(Laughter.) He hoped they would be enabled to proceed with the reduction of the Customs on Wednesday. On the question that the SrEaxita do leave the chairon order that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. COBDEN rose to address the House. As they were going to vote a certain amount of protection to the colonial proprietors, there could be no ol4ection, be thought, to that amount being known as well as it could. The Chancellor of the Exchequer calculated that they would receive 230,000 tons of colonial sugar. On that he granted ten guineas a ton protection ; he then calculated on receiving 20,000 of foreign sugar. Now, he (Mr. Cobden) thought it was evident that before they received that amount of sugar they would have paid the ten guineas a ton on colonial sugar.—(Hear, hear. ) Then, the amount they were able to vote in the way of protec tion was 2,415,000/., in fact, the tax they were about to vote would be 3,900,0001., and the tax they voted to colonial proprietors would be about 2,500,000/. That was an amount which would enable the Right Hon. Gentleman to relinquish the window and soap duties, and would leave him half a mil lion of surplus besides. He hoped, if there was any fallacy in what he had stated, that it would not go uncontradicted. " The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could net at all acquiesce in the reasoning of the Hon. Gentlemen, or the re sults he had arrived at with respect to the protection of colo nial sugar, in contradistinction to foreign. Lord HOWICK, whose first sentence was inaudible, said the point ought to be cleared up. It was one of extreme import ance. It was a clear and plain proposition, and capable of a categorical answer—aye or no. He understood the point put by the Hon. Member for Stockport to be this : the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed a protecting duty of ten guineas a ton on foreign free sugar ; therefore, if it were not for this protecting duty, the growers of this sugar could afford to sell it ten guineas a ton cheaper than they actually will sell it under the proposed arrangement. That was the point, and if it was incorrectly stated, let the Right Hon. Gentleman point out where the error was. If foreign free sugar could be sold ten guineas a ton cheaper, he wanted to know how it was, he repeated, if that duty were removed, why it would not answer th e grower t o sell it ten guineas a ton cheaper ? He saw no re ason w hy it should not be so. The only difference would b e th a t th e Ty the lion.reasurywo Member uldrecei frveoten guineas a ton le ss . T he point put b Stockport was, th at if foreign sugar can be offered ten guieneas a ton cheaper than colonial su g ar, this protectin g duty was imposed? would not colonial sugar, if obliged to come i nto the market on equal terms with foreign sugar, be reduced i n p r i ce t en guineas a ton ?—( Hear. ) And in truth was it n o t t o p reven t theHe confessed , f all of colonial that a sugar fte thatll the debating r on the s u bj ect , h e was at a loss to understand what protecting duties were, if it were not for this purpose. But if they did raise the p r i ce t en guineas a ton byl this arrangemen t, an d i f the quantity men tioned bp:the on. Member for Stockport would come i n t o the market, he wished to know where was the e rr o r o f th e Hon. Gentleman in saying that they were go i ng t o a impoze a tax on the consumer of 2,400,0001.? Sir R. PEEL said, in the course of last week 3,000 quarters of foreign corn had been brought into our markets at a duty of 20s. the quarter. The c onsumption of foreign wheat was esti mated at not less than twenty millions of quarters, and, with the exception of one million of quarters, the whole of the re maining nineteen millions was derived from domestic supply. Did the Noble Lord contend that, because 3,000 quarters of wheat were brought in and paid a duty of 20s. a quarter, that the remaining 19 millions was raised so much in price above its natural cost. How did the Noble Lord reconcile that with the statement made by hi m the other nighL on this subject ? An attempt had been made to show that, in Jersey and Guernsey, where the trade in corn was free, the price of wheat was not lower than it was in this country. Now did the Noble Lord contend that a tax of 19,000,0001, had been imposed upon the I life had been passed. Their Lordships were well aware of that Noble Lord's present position with regale' to the Go vernment.—( Hear.) Was ho then, when he saw such conse quences arising from such declarations, to be precluded from remarking on the speeches of public men, because they were de livered in other places, and were conceived to be without responsibility ? He decidedly felt himself entitled, in his place in Parliament, to make such observations upon any such apeeeh ; and especially when that speech was delivered by a Minister of the Crown—by a Member of the Cabinet. He was ready to allow the utmost limit for the heat of debate, and the impulse of eloquence. It was not this that he regretted. What he did regret was, that this speech was not too warm in its tone, but that it declared a fact, and it was of this fact that he (the Marquis of Normanby) complained. That Hon. Gentleman declared, that a punishment had been inflicted which would never be inflicted again—that Colonel M'Gregor had suffered that which was not to be inflicted on any other individual.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington), had said that he had found him (the Marquis of Normanby) out in some inconsistencies. He had received a letter from Colonel Shaw Kennedy, in which that officer had expressed his regret that he had been mis apprehended in the particular instance of supposing himself in vested with the power of appointing msgistrates. But he (the Marquis of Normanby) had not felt it his duty to continue Colonel Shaw Kennedy in the post which he had held. He did not speak in this motion of appointments but of promo tions. The Noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) seemed to think that he (the Marquis of Nor. manby) conceived that something had been taken from the inspector-general which he had previously possessed. Such was not the case. The appointment of head-constables had never been held by the inspector-general, but he had always possessed the power of appointing men from the lowest ranks to the several ranks of commissioned officers. The rule that had been observed ever since the institution of the force was to give two out of three of the appointments of commis sioned officers to the force, and the parties who obtained them were necessarily recommended by the inspector-general, and, if the persons recommended were fit men, he thought that it was not only wise, but right, that those recommendations should be acted upon. In the case immediately under con sideration, he was ready to acknowledge that Major Priestley was a very good man, but that Illr. Brownrigge was a more proper man for the purpose. The Noble Duke wished to know where the whole of this matter originated. He said he could net conceive where it had originated. He (the Marquis of Normanby) would tell him. It had originated in the speech of the Prime Minister of the Crown, in the first debate in the present session. Sir Robert Peel had said, in that speech, that, as the inspector-general had the direction and the responsibility of the conduct of the constabulary force ripen his shoulders, he ought to have the power of recommending the appointment of all the officers of that force. He, there fore, should move for a return of the appointment of the deputy inspector-general since the decease of the late Major Galway, of the constabulary force in Ireland, and of any com munications from the inspector-general respecting the ap pointments that had been made, and also a return of the number of her Majesty's army in Ireland, from the Ist of January, 1835, to the Ist of January, 1845, both inclusive. The House then divided, when there appeared— Contents Non-contents •.. 32 Majority against the motion —2o The return for the number of " Her Majesty's Army," &e., was subsequently agreed to, with an amendment by the Duke of WELLINGTON, to the effect that a statement should also be included in the return, of the number of soldiers sent out of the country during the same period. The Noble Duke thought this was requisite, in order to show the state of the country during the years 1840 and 1841. The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 7. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly 'before Four o'clock. NEW MEMBERS. Mr. BRINSLEY SHERIDAN was introduced by Lord Marcus Hill and Mr. Ord, and took the oaths and his seat for Shaftesbury, ill the room of Lord Howard, now Earl of Effingham. Mr. DEEDEs took the oaths and his seat for East Kent, in the room of Sir E. Knatchbull. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN, in the absence of the [lon. Member for Waterford, presented a petition in avour of the Limerick and Waterford Railway Bill. PUBLIC-HOUSES.—SABBATH OBSERVANCE. Mr. CAREW presented petitions from Llandrossy, and other places in Wales, praying the House to adopt measures for restricting the number of public•houses, and for preventing the sale of intoxicating liquors on the Sunday. Mr. THORNELY presented petitions from places in Northumberland to the same effect. Mr. KEMBLE presented petitions from Surrey to the same effect. Mr. J. S. WORTLEY presented similar petitions. Lord ASHLEY presented a number of petitions from places in Yorkshire, Lancashire, and Scotland, to the same effect. Mr. GREENE presented similar petitions. An HON. MEmenu presented petitions to the same effect from places in the West of England. Mr. HENLEY presented similar petitions. Mr. FOX MAULE presented similar petitions. Mr. LANE FOX presented similar petitions. AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION. Mr. E. YORKE presented petitions from landowners, and occupiers of land, in the county of Cambridge, com plaining that the interests of agriculturists had been overlooked in the past measures of the Government, and praying that an adequate protection should be afforded them. THE LIVERPOOL DOCKS. An HON. MEMBER presented a petition in favour of the Liverpool Ducks Bill.—Referred to the Committee on Standing Orders. AMICABLE ASSURANCE OFFICES. Sir W. HEATIICOTE brought in this Bill, which was read a first time. . BIGGLES\VADE AND HERTFORD RAILWAY. On the motion of Lord MAHON, the Biggleswade and Hertford Railway Bill was read a second time. G A ME- LAWS. Mr. T. DLTNCO MBE presented a petition, signed by 900 persons, inhabitants of the town of Pershore, in Worcestershire, against the game•laws. THE TEN HOURS BILL. Mr. DUNCOMBEireiented petitions in favour of the Ten Hours Bill. GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY BRANCH LINES. Mr. FORBES presented petitions in favour of thy. Grand Junction Railway Coln ,:any's branch lines. PAISLEY AND KILMARNOCK RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr. F. MACKENZIE, the Paisley and Kilmarnock Railway Bill was read a first time. • EASTERN 'UNION RAILWAY. An HoN. MEMBER presented a petition from the Eastern Union Railway Company in favour of the Nor wich branch, which was referred to the Select Commit tee for Standing Orders. SOUTH-E ASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY. An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from the South-Eastern Railway Companies, praying for leave to withdraw one of their Bills and substitute another in its place. Mr. BRIGHT presented petitions against the sale of intoxicating liquors from Birdsall, in Cumberland ; against the game-laws, the window duties, and the in crease of the navy. SEES OF ST. ASAPII AND BANGOR. Petitions were presented by Lord CLivE and Mr. W. MILES, against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. MALT-TAX. Mr. W. MILES presented a petition from Barrington Corney against the malt-tax. PUBLIC-HOUSES. Mr. ALDAM presented petitions from several places in the West Riding of Yorkshire, for the diminution of the number of pubsc-houses. NOTICES OF MOTION—CORN LAWS. Mr. WODEHOUSE gave notice that it was his in tention to move an amendment to the motion of the Hon. Member for Stockport which stood first on the orders of the day for Thursday next. The motion was for a Select Committee to inquire into the operation of protective duties upon the interests of tenant-farmers. To that motion it was his intention to move as an amendment the following resolution : That an inquiry into the operation of pro tective duties on imports, as regarded the interest of tenant-farmers and farm labourers, was objectionable in principle if the purport of it was to show that they had a distinct and separate interest from that of their land lords, or those on whose property they chose to live ; that the condition of tenant-farmers and farm labourers did indeed deserve the most serious attention of Parlia ment, and it was the bounden duty of the House so to shape its deliberation, as to make known to the occupiers and tenants of the soil the necessity for their having a continuance of all protective duties; and that the removal of all protective duties was averse to the general interests of all classes of society. PAROCHIAL SETTLEMENT BILL. Mr. PUSEY gave notice that, in Committee on the Parochial Settlement Bill, he would move the omission of the 33d clause. ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAY. Mr. SHAW gave notice that. on Thursday next, he would move for a Select Committee to inquire into the merits of the atmospheric system of railway. HONG-KONG. Dr. BOWRING g;ve notice that, on Monday, he would ask the Hon. Member the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he had any objection to lay upon the table of the house the correspondence which bad taken place between the Government and the authorities of Hong-Kong? AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN gave notice of his in tention to move, as an amendment to the motion of the lion. Member fur Stockport, which stood for Thursday, that a Select Committee he appointed to inquire into the extent of mortgages on landed property in this country, and into the cause of agricultural distress. Mr. COBDEN reminded the Hon. Member that he had not yet finally decided on the terms of his motion. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said he was aware of it, but the Hon. Nle - anher had previously put upon the paper a neition similar to his own amendment, and he wished to bring him haek to this motion. GAME-LAWS. Mr. BRIGHT gave notice that, on Monday, he should move the appointment of the Select Committee on the game-laws. CHARGES ON RAILROADS. Dr. BOWRING begged leave, on behalf of the Hon. Member for Greenock, who was unavoidably absent, to give notice that he would, upon an early day, ask a question of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite to this effect—whether it was the intention of the Right Hon. Gentleman to appoint a competent tribunal for the regu lation of the amount of charges to be made for pas sengers and goods going he the railways proposed to be made by the Bills now before Parliament, bearing in mind the present prices of machinery, materials, and labour? SCOTCH BANKING. Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Provost and Town Council of Montrc.se, stating that the banking system pursued in Scotland for the last century was most beneficial and advantageous to commerce and agri culture, and praying that no alteration might be made in it. POOR-LAW UNIONS. lir, BARING WALL begged to ask the Right lion. CHURCH EXTENSION. Mr. CHILDERS wished to know from the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government whether it was the intention of the Government to grant a Queen's letter this year ? He was desirous of knowing this, because the Church Building Society stated that they would not make any grant to churches which had been in the gift of trustees—that resolution being in contra vention of an Act of Parliament, anti also he believed in opposition to the wishes of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Sir R. PEEL said that the usual practice Lad been to issue a Queen's letter in favour of a particular society triennially. That letter was not usually issued till the month of August, and he did not suppose the usual course would be departed from. The subject, he be lieved, was now under the consideration of the Eccle siastical Commissioners. FIRE INSURANCES. Col. SIBTI-1011P gave notice of his intention to move certain returns connected with fire insurances on Monday next. COLLEGE OF SURGEONS. Col. THOMAS WOOD wished to know, from the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he intended to propose any remedy for the grievances under which the College of Surgeons laboured ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM was at a loss to understand to what grievances the Honourable and Gallant Member alluded. He was himself not prepared to ad vise any alteration. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, it was ordered that the House, at its rising, should adjourn to Monday. PROPERTY-TAX. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the report on the Property-tax Bill was postponed to Monday. WAYS AND MEANS. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. WILLIAMS trusted the House would give him an opportunity of stating the reasons for his being ab sent last night when the motion, of which he had given notice, was called on. He hoped he should be able to allay the feelings of the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests in doing so. He came down to the House last night to make the motion ; and thinking that the questions that were before the House would occupy a greater length of time than they did, he was too late to bring on his motion. He deeply regretted that cir cumstance from what had taken place. He could assure the Noble Lord, that in making that motion he could not for one instant imagine that in the slightest degree it could have been conceived that he had any intention of applying anything personal to the Noble Lord or his noble father ; and if the Noble Lord would compare his (Mr. Williams's) motion with the notice he had given, he would find that there was not the slightest difference, either in the wording or the meaning, between that and the entry which appeared in the Noble Lord's own books. He would read the Noble Lord's own statement, which was laid before the House. Tl , e statement to which he referred was !he Twenty-first Report of the Cornmi.,sion.rs of I , ‘ cods and Forests, and signed by the Noble Lord. The schedule to which he referred was the Appendix, No. 2 (B), which contained the manors, buildings, lands, and other heri ditaments belonging to the Crown, which had been sold by private contract by the Commissioners of her Ma jesty's Woods and Forests. It was respecting these that he desired to have some explanation. In the state ment to which lie referred it appeared that certain lands, containing 7,438 acres and 36 roods, had been sold to his Grace the Duke of Ne,castle. for 1,049/. 15s. 9d. Now, the notice which he (Mr. Williams) had given was for copies of all surveys and valuations of 7,438 acres and 36 roods of land, belonging to the Crown, adjoining the Duke of Newcastle's llafod estate in Cardiganshire, which had been sold by private contract for 1,0491. 15s. 9d. It' the Noble Lord or any other man—he did not care who—could paint out the slightest shadow of a shade of meaning in these words, he would submit that the ob servations of the Noble Lord last night were justifiable. —(Cries of " Order, order.") He begged pardon for alluding to what had occurred on a previous night during his absence. He would wish to go into those statements of the Noble Lord ; but, as it was contrary to the rules of the House, he would not further allude to it. Ile made the motion on public grounds, and submitted to the House that when they saw such a transaction, without any sort of explanation—a sale of property be longing to the Crown, the fee simple of it fur 2s. 10d. an acre—they had a right to demand an explanation. He wanted to know what the situation of this property was, and accordingly moved for the returns. He now regretted having entrusted the motion to another Hon. Member, which he thought a bad practice, and attended with great inconvenience.—(Laughter, and cries of Hear.) In 1839 he made a similar motion, and on the same grounds—he moved for conveyances and all other documents connected with the sale of this manor. What was the consequence of that ? A party had pur chased that property of the Crown, at a low rate, in con sequence of various encroachments which had been made upon the property, through the neglect and supineness of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. Poor persons had encroached upon the property, had expended their labour upon it, and had brought it into cultivation. This had been done because the property had not been properly looked after by the Crown. The pur chaser of the property had endeavoured to force those persons to return their holdings to him. A gen tleman of great public spirit took the matter up, on behalf of these poor persons. The cause was tried three times, and was at last moved into the Court of Queen's Bench—the purchaser still endeavouring to force those poor persons to return the property to him. A representation having been made to him (Mr. W.Williauss) on the subject, he represented it to Lord Duncannon. With that kindness of heart which was so charac teristic of the Noble Lord, he immediately in stituted a most careful investigation into the whole case, compelled the purchaser to withdraw his claim, and the whole affair was amicably adjusted. He thought that after such an occurrence the Noble Lord could not be surprised at his asking for an expla nation of the nature of the transaction attending the sale of the Hafod Estate. It appeared that the property had been sold at an excessively low rate. He had made no charge against the Noble Lord, either that he had sold, or that his father had purchased the property improperly. All that he wanted was, an explanation of the facts attending the sale, and if he had been in the House last night—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—he would have moved, as an addition to the motion, that a sche dule should be laid before the House of the encroach ments. It was necessary to have such a schedule, in order to show how the encroachments had been purchased. Ile was sorry that he had no opportunity of replying to the Noble Lord, or he should have shown that he had no ground either in justice or anything else for the obser vations he had made. He could assure the Noble Lord, if the purchase had been made by any one else, if it had been made by two of the most intimate friends he had, he should have moved for the return precisely the same as he had now. He had no motives whatever except to satisfy himself more particularly as to the means that had been taken to ascertain the value of the estate. The sales of Crown property by private contract were a fair subject of inquiry ; he thought all sales of Crown property ought to be public and not pri vate. The Crown received a sum of 385,0001. annually in return for thes, lands, and the Crown estates cer tainly produced a large sum ; but not more than 145,0001. of it went to the public Treasury ? He contended the department over which the Noble Lord presided re quired looking after as much as any other department of the Government. At present, most of the revenue de rived from Crown lands was spent for all sorts of purposes. With regard to the charge brought against him by the Noble Lord, he had only to say that he would never shrink from the performance of a public duty, however disagreeable that might be—(Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Ministerial benches)—and he repeated his regret that he was not in the House last night to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice. The Earl of LINCOLN said that the Hon. Member for Country had deemed it necessary to enter into a The colonies were entitled to protection. Legislative inter ference had given them that claim. He said again that the price of sugar in tins country was not to be measured by the amount of duty. Some years ago there was a differential duty of 395. against foreign sugar—would Ilan. Members hold that the price of sugar to the consumer was thereby so much en hanced ? The facts were entirely against such a supposition. If nineteen or twenty parts of the sugar consumed in this country were imported from foreign countries at the differential duties mentioned, then the argument might apply, but surely not when the case was reversed. We were now near the condition in which we were in 1813, when our colonies enabled us to be exporters of sugar. Sir WILLIAM CLAY said the speech of the Hon. Ba ronet who had just sat down was entirely beside the question of the Hon. Member for Stockport. If their colonies furnished a supply for exp,,rtation above what we required, then he ad mitted that there might be some force in the argument of the lion. Baronet, and that the differential duty would net raise the price of sugar, but that was not the state of things at present. The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had actually calculated upon being obliged to import a considerable quantity of foreign sugar—(Hear, hear)—and there could be no doubt but the differential duty enhanced the price, it not to 111 the extent mentioned by the Hon. Member for Stockport, at least to a very considerable extent. Mr BORTHWICK considered the supposition of the Hon. Member for Stockport as absurd, and thought he answered it in his own statement. Mr. C. WOOD said the question of the Hon. Member for Stockport related to the price of all colonial sugar, as compared with foreign sugar, and he (lid not think the slightest progress • had yet been made towards answering it. He hoped some Member of the Government would attempt to give a plain answer to a plain and practical question. The Government did not deny that the effect of this measure would be to impose a tax on the people of this country, for the benefit of the colo nial producer. The question asked by the Hon. Member was— what was the am Ault of the tax so levied ? In that Honourable Member's opinion it amounted to 2,300,0001. Ile might be wrong in that calculation, but let him be corrected if lie ss and told what the amount of this taxation really was. Lord SANDON thought it would be impossible to answer the question in the shape now put.—( Laughter, and-cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) But the supposition of the Hon. Member for Stockpot t was erroneous, for it might with as much justice be contended that we paid in tax ation on the 19,000,000 of home-grown corn consumed in this country, the amount of taxation imposed on the 1,000,000 of quarters of foreign corn imported here. It never was denied that protection was intended air the colonies, and that the people of this country were taxed in consequence.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Why, Hon. Members opposite were to some extent protectionists themselves—at least they recognised the principle. He admitted the colonial protection ; but what he denied was that they could measure amount of taxation in this country, in regard to protection, by the amount of differential duty. The argument of the Hon. Member for Stockport might be very good on the boards of Covent-garden Theatre, but would not be admitted in that House, because it was opposed to common sense and to experience. Mr. !MILNER GIBSON wished to make only one remark. Last year it was an undoubted fact that the price of foreign sugar in bond was 215., while the price of colonial sugar was 345., and therefore 13s. was squeezed out of the public by the system of protection.-13s. per cwt. was, on an average, squeezed out of the public by colonial protection, and, therefore, it followed that the British public was squeez able to the extent of 13s. Now, they reserve to themselves the power of squeezing 10s. 6d. out of the English people. By the late law they could squeeze 135., and they still re tained the power of squeezing 10s. 6d. more than sugar need cost in the markets of the world. They proposed to hand over 2,300,000 guineas from the consumers of this country (from taxation upon the consumers rather) to the West Indfan—to the colonial proprietors. They gave them, last year, 2,600,000/., with a 13s. en every cwt., and they now proposed to retain a power of charging 10s. 6d., and of giving 2,300,000 guineas to the colonial proprietors, out of the Exchequer. The Right Hon. Gentleman did not say it would not be so. He had only heard it stated that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Cobden) had not proved it would be so given, but the Right Hon. Gentleman did not say it would not be so. it might be so. They invited Hon. Members on that (the Liberal) side of the House to do their utmost to transfer 2,300,000 guineas to the West Indian and to colonial proprietors, out of the Exchequer of the country. Mr. BROTHERTON said that the case had been under stated by His Hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, for he (Mr. Brotherton) found that during the last five years the average price of British plantation sugar was 19s. 4d per cwt. more than for foreign sugar.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord (Lord Sandon) wished tohave the amount of a tax on corn at Bs. per quarter, supposing that duty to be imposed. H e (M r . Brotherton) believed that it might be roundly stated at 8,000,0001. of a burden on the people. It was "difficult, he confessed, to know what proportion of the duty charged on sugar went into the pockets of the colonial planters ; but he remembered that when they were discussing, in 1834, the propriety of granting 20,000,000/. to the West India planters, as some compensation for the emancipation of the slaves, a gentleman from Liverpool called upon him (Mr. Brotherton) and said that he might vote for that grant, as the country would have the whole 20,000,000/. returned to its pockets in the course of a few years. Since 1841, how ever, they had paid a sum of 19,000,000/. or 20,000,000/. more by this system of taxation. If four millions of hundred weights of British colonial sugar, therefore, came into this country every year, it was quite clear that 4,000,000/. of money was taken out of the pockets of the people of this country. Yes, England gave the colonial planters 4,000,000/. a-year, and they took in exchange 3,000,000/. of their manufactures. That was a poor trade, he thought, that E ng l an d s h ou ld g i ve the colonies 4,000,000 i. of money, and that they should take 3,000,000/. of goods. He thought the best and cheapest plan would be to vote a certain sum of money, and let the duty on British colonial and foreign sugar then be equalised. He stated the fact, and he hoped the House would bear it in mind, that during the last five years they had paid 20s. more for their sugar than they required to do. Mr. MITCHELL said the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem ber for Stamford had said, that if they took the duty off British plantation sugar it would rise the price of the foreign produce. But the Right Hon. Baronet forgot the fact that if foreign sugar were raised 3s. per cwt. in that country, it would be raised 3s. all over the continent. What they complained of was that they could not compete with foreigners in their manu factures, because they paid in that country higher for their sugar and their other necessaries.—( Hear, hear.) He did not care whether the price of sugar were lower or higher, provided the same price was maintained throughout the con tinent. Mr. VILLIERS said that the Right Hon. Member, the late President of the Board of Trade, had stated that the Hon. Member for Stockport had not put his question with a view of eliciting any information. If such were his Hon. Friend's wish, he eertainly had been very successful.—( Laughter. ) They had not yet got a specific answer to his question, and he trusted it would not go forth to the public in that way. Per haps the Right Hon. Baronet at the bead of her Majesty's Go vernment, or the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, could tell how much they had handed over to the proprietors. Perhaps either of them could tell how much the country had paid out of its Exchequer to the colonies by these sugar duties. There was an additional price given to colonial planters for their produce. That was done by these differen tial duties. Now surely the Government could tell them what was the amount of that sum? They knew what the sugar cost in the markets. They knew what it sold for here, and what they would be enabled to purchase it for from abroad. This subject had been deeply meditated during the recess, and they were no doubt prepared, when they brought forward this measure, to say what was the price necessary to be given on each cwt. of sugar in order to save the West Indies.—( Hear, and a laugh.) He would refer them to a valuable work, written by a gentleman connected with the Board of Trade, entitled " The Progress of the Nation." That gentleman was Mr. Porter, and his book was now read and quoted as an authority upon the subject upon which it treated. He would call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet to a statement in that work. It said that the people in this country had paid, in the year 1841, a sum more than they required to do for their sugar, of 5,000,000/. Mr. Porter, of the Board of Trade, stated that the British public paid, in 1841, 5,000,000/. more than they needed to do. He said that the value of the export trade was 4,000,0001. ; and that if they :made a present of all their trade for that year, and retained the money they had given to the growers of sugar, they would be a million in p ocket.—( Hear, hear.) If that had been stated by Hon. Members on that (the Liberal) side of the House, they would hare been charged with extravagance. Let it not then be said that the question could not be an swered, for if any person wanted to know bow much was paid to colonial proprietors in the shape of protection, they might look in that work, and know it. They had spent that amount every year for sugar, which, if bought at Ham burgh or Trieste, would have been five millions less, but got from our colonial possessions cost just as much more. They complained of this loss to the public, and they, naturally enough, asked for whom they were to make that sacrifice? They asked the Government for their calculations, and it was but barely just that the House should know precisely what amount of loss the British public sustained in colonial pro tection. Mr. P. BORTHWICK explained. Mr. THORNELY said they had on the table of the House parliamentary papers throwing sufficient light upon the subject, both as to the quantity imported and the prices of British and foreign sugar. He would take the papers moved for by the Hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Hawes), and printed for the use of the House on the 2d of May, 1843, and those papers he had then by him. He found that the consumption of colonial sugar in the year 1840, was 3,594,834 cwt. ; and in one column was placed the prices of museavado, and in another the prices of sugars from the Brazils. The price of muscovado, in 1810, was 495. per cwt., and that of Brazilian brown and yellow was only 21s. fid.—showing a difference, therefore, between the prices of British sugars and the sugars of Brazil to the ex tent of 275. Gd. upon the cwt. It followed, therefore, that on the quantity consumed—namely, 3,594,834 cwt., there was a difference in price, owing to taxation required for the protec tion of those colonies, of 4,957,8751., being within 40,000 guineas of five millions of money. After a few words from Mr. KEMBLE, Mr. P. M. STEWART said there was not much encou raeement for him, after hearing the opinions advanced by Hon. Members beside him, to rise in defence of the colonial planter. But lie would remind the House that the'great difficulty to those possessions competing with the slave-labour market arose from the monstrous legislation to which they had been subjected.-- ( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Salford had stated that a friend from Liverpool said, that if he voted for the emancipa tion of the negroes in our colonies, the amount of comFensation would be repaid in a few years. Probably that gentleman calculated upon an increase in the amount of sugar produced in these possessions. But how stood the fact as regarded pro duction ? In 1833, at the period of the emancipation of the slaves, the colonies produced 207,000 tons of sugar annually, but since the passing of that measure the amount had been re duced to 107,000 tons. This reduction of the productive powers of the colonies was owing entirely, or in a very great degree, to the difficulties thrown in the way of immigration by the Government, owing to the impediments thrown in the way of those who wished to emigrate to those colonies is order to receive a fair day's wages for a fair day's work. It it h a d d o been for those difficulties there would have been a naturalnot been set tlement of this question. Instead of 107,000 tons given as the exportable quantity at present, they would sufficient quantity for their own consumption, and been enabled also to export to oth er countries. If they dealt with the colonies as some of his Honourable Friends desired, the sooner they threw over the colonies th e better. The unfortunate proprietors in the West India i s l an d s were labouring under disadvantages which were unknown to his Hon. Friends. Let the Government give them encourage ment to get a sufficiency of free labourers under a fair arrange.. men —let them take o ff the restriction s , which amounted to pro hibitions —let the colonists carry t h e i r produce i po e st t iv e where they liked—( Hear, hear)—let them have their supplies whence they pleased, and, above all, let the Government take off the differential duties between British spirits and the rum imported from the colonies. If the colonists were to be thrown into competition with other countries, let them at least have a free stage, and they would do what they could for themselves. They were at present, he repeated, suffering from ill-advised legislation Let him not be mistaken—he did not mean the Emancipation Act—but the difficulties which had been thrown in the way of extending their trade with this country. He would say to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, do not take deleterious drugs or other mincr matters into considera tion ; but take up this subject in the way in which the great majority of the intelligent portion of the community would view it ; he would say, let the produce of the sugar countries be admitted into England upon term that would phow they S AV r were regarded as an integral portion of the ernp: have the same advantages in the disposal of th as had been conceded to Canada and other favoured c•o1; nies, instead of visiting them with' a mark of the displeae sure of the Government, which this " protective" duty in. (Heated. If England gave the same free laws and institutions to the sugar producing countries that her colonies enjoyed, then she would find that these countries were the strongholds of , the nation in time of peace, and its right arm in time of war, if such an unfortunate event should occur.—(Hear.) Mr. ESCOTT was of opinion that if these duties were to be reduced, that reduction should be met by a concomitant advance upon some other article. But the question put by the Hon. Member for Stockport was this : " Supposing these protective duties to have been removed alto gether, what. would be the cons , quence? Now he (Mr. Eseott) should admit that, to this question, no direct answer had been given ; but, at the same time, it did appear to him that very import-nt admissions on the subject of the sugar duties h.s.d been made. Last year the Hon. Member for Newark stated, in that House, that this protective duty was, in all cases, added to the cost price of sugar. Now, lie (Mr. Escott) begged • to say that he certainly never did uphold the principle of pro tective duty upon that ground. The reason he did support such an impost was, because he conceived it was a necessary protection to those engaged in the trade, and in order to secure a sufficiency of supply to the consumers in this country. • But when it was stated so plainly , by several Honourable Members that this duty was added to the cost price of the article consumed, they had indeed made out a very strong and serious case in favour of the abolition of ' them.—( Hear, hear. ) However. he was far from thinking it would be right to do assay with these ditties at. once, and thus suddenly throw their colonies' overboard ; and, under these cir cumstances, he could not support such a proposition. Mr. DARBY said his opinion was that if those differential ' duties were destroyed, he had not the least doubt but that, in four or five years, the consumers would have to pay just as much for sugar as they had now ; and therefore be totally denied that because Hon, Members opposite put four or five figures upon paper, they had made out, to the satisfaction of the House. ' that his duty was paid by the consumer. Mr. BRIGHT said he had often observed that, upon some occa ions, the Right lion. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government and his colleagues took a very active part in the debates in that House, while upon other occasions they exhi bited a silence not less remarkable. When great and plau sible sophistry or extraordinary ingenuity were the weapons to be brought into action, in the share of the debate par ticipated by the Right Honourable Baronet and his sup porters, then indeed were they most active ; but upon other occasions, such as the discussion of that night, when the Right Hon. Baronet well knew that. not all the powers of ingenuity which he possessed could make it appear that this was not a most grievous and oppressive tax, then, indeed, he remained silent, and permitted all those around him, whose admissions he knew could not damage his success, to go on. —( Hear, hear.) A very ingenious speech had been made to night by the Hon. Member the late President of the Board of Trade; but that speech was remarkable, less for its applicabi lity to the subject under discussion, or the prudence of its language, than for the deep personal interest which it was well known the Hon. Gentleman had in the subject itself.— ( Hear, hear.) Not a time that this sugar question was intro duced to the House, but a new concoction of the Hon. Gen- • ; let thea tleman was sure to appear in print in one of the morning papers, stating, in very positive and dictatorial terms, the manner in which this:question should be handled by the House. —( Hear, hoar.) It was true, the Hon. Gentleman was not now officially connected with the present Govern ment ; but whether he was a greater lover of the Government, or of the sugar planter, upon this question, it would be rather difficult to say. —( Hear, hear. ) The Hon. Gentleman was the representative of Newark ; but he (Mr. Bright) would like to ask the Hon. Member what possible interest the inhabitants of that town could have in up holding an increased price of sugar ?—(Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) But he could easily see what interest the planter had in doing so.—(A laugh.) The Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, who well knew the routine of the duties of a State Minister, had said that this was a tax which could not be measured ; but he (Mr. Bright) should say rather, that the arguments of the Noble Lord on the question were such as could not be fathomed.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord said it would be unsafe for the House to act on possibilities • but four year. ago, when the fate of the then Government depended on the decision of the House on this question, the Noble Lord had no such squeamishness at all, and upon his motion that Govern ment were outvoted and overturned.—(Hear, hear.) Well, perhaps, this tax could not be measured, but let Hon. Members opposite not forget that it was felt.—( Hear, and laughter.) Ihe Noble Lord wauted to make a character for himself as a great financier ; but he (Mr. B.) would ask what sort of a State Minister was he who would propose a tax, and yet admit it was one that could not be measured 7 ( Cheers and laughter.) Such an admission should not be made. —( Hear, hear.) This was a tax which should be measured, and its exact amount known.—( Hear, hear.) The labourers in Dorsetshire, and in Hampshire, and in Wiltshire, who paid for the pennyworth and half-pennyworth of sugar out of their hard earnings, should know what it was, for they it was who felt it ( Hear, hear)—and the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, he ( Mr. Bright) contended, should not have sat still and silent, and refuse the question put to him to. night.—( Hear.) Nail he (Mr. Bright) could easily suggest a mode by which this tax could be measured—it was this : they should have regular returns of all the sugar shipped to this court try, and a full and sufficient amount of remuneration should be paid in order to have these returns accurate. He did not know how the present Government would propose to do this in their offices ; but he would suggest that, suppose Sir James Graham should pay to Mr. Goulburn or Mr. Glad stone so much, say 105. ticl. per hundred weight for every hundred weight of sugar shipped from their estates for England.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) This might be very unparliamentary ; hut the Parliament was not the whole country; and people outside of that House were very much interested in having cheap sugar, though Members of Parliament might not care whether the price of it was a penny or two, more or less, per lb.—( Hear, hear.) He was under the impression that the Right Hon. Baronet opposite and his colleagues were always placed in a humiliating position on this question—( Hear, hear )—and there was! no question upon which the extraordinary activity of his mind was more readily brought out than in a discussion upon the sugar duties.-- (Hear, hear.) Then all his finer feelings for the interest of a certain class were in full exercise ; but he (Mr. B. ) did hope that, upon the present occasion, he would manifest a still deeper anxiety for the interest of the country.— (Hear, hear.) Yet he (Mr. L'.) should say that, in his opinion, persons who were interested in the levying of a tax for the interest of a class, should not belong to a Government who thought that a tax should be kept ep though it could not be measured—(A laugh) —or who would give a vote in that House in favour of a mea sure that was not for the benefit of the country but a class. Sonic lion. Members had stated that this tax would amount to over two millions, and yet no reason had been assigned for keeping it up, except the difficulty of procuring labour in the West Indies.—( Hear, hear.) But, with reference to the East Indies or the Mauritius, no answer had been given —good, bad, or indifferent.—(Cheers.) The late President of the Board of Trade said, upon a former occasion, that he defended those duties, on the grounds of a want of sufficient labour and absenteeism. Well, then, if the Right Hon. Gentleman was not prepared with a measure for sending back absentees, he ought to be prepared to say what other remedy he would propose, instead of lending himself to the spoliation of the people for the enrichment of the planter.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. ENTWISLE said he would delay the House with only a very few words. He would merely say that his belief was that, if the duty was to be taken off foreign free-labour sugar, the price of that article now, and in three or four or five years to come, would be very nearly the same. He could not agree in the conclusion which had been drawn from the question, nor did he believe that the Hon. Member for Stock port intended to increase the cost of sugar to the consumer, which the full extent of his question would lead them to infer. Mr. WARD said that he did not agree with the Hon. Gen. tleman who bad just sat down in believing that the Hon. Mem ber for Durham had meant anything personal in what he said. —( Hear, hear.) He said he believed the effect of the mea sure would be to put a higher amount into the pockets of the planters, and he proposed that those Gentlemen, one of whom was the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and another the late President of the Board o f Trade, should draw cheques for what was coming to them from their estates, and then allow the public to buy their sugar in the cheapest market they could.— ( Hear, hear.) There was no want of urbanity in that, though there was a great deal of truth in it.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) That plan would be less burdensome to the public, acd they would get rid of all the intricacy which the measure was acknowledge to possess, and the planter would lose nothing. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last had in troduced the question of slave-labour sugar and free-labour sugar, which was carefully eschewed on his side of the House. That was a distinction now known to be impracticable.—(Hear, hear.) It was a newfangled philosophy foisted into their Cus toms' regulations which would turn out to be utterly prepos terous. His Hon. Friend near him had proved, from the best sources of information which this great metropolis could afford, that the difference of price paid to the West India planters for their sugar, beyond the price of the sugar sold in the general market of the world, amounted to 13/. per ton during the last year. There might be some variation between one year and another, but about 13/. per ton was the amount which ought to be placed to the account of the protected interests of the colonies. He :did not mean to say that they ought to give up their colonies. That was not the question. The question was whether they ought not to leave their colonies to exert their own powers, and to relieve the consumers of this country from the additional price which they paid for sugar.? Even if the additional West Indian interest was entitled to protection, he should like to know why the sugar of the Mauritius, and the East Indies, where labour was cheaper than in any part of the globe, should be protected by 10s. per cwt. ?—(Hear, hear.) And when the question was put to the Right Hon. Baronet he took care to watch him, and he never heard a question which the Right Hon. Baronet seemed to dislike so much—which he touched so gingerly.—( Hear, hear.) It was his belief that the Right Hon. Baronet was forced by a ma jority of his Cabinet to fight a battle which he disapproved of, and he expected that the Right Hon. Baronet would in another year come down to the House with pleasure and announce that it being found impracticable under the proposed plan to exclude Venezuela and other slave-grown sugar, it was expedient to alter the existing arrangement, and put the sugar question on a satisfactory footing.-(Hear, hear. ) Sir W. JAMES he did not know whether the House was weary of this subject, but he knew he was.—(Laughter.) It was asked what right the West Indians had to protection ? He maintained they had a right to protection; and not merely to l t i ss e • n o , s. or ( t i h r r e e n e i , e e o l r e h fe e u e r r , but to e .)He should something like more tek l n i k e e wfortyif an mil- Act of Parliament l restricting the source from which w he could draw was passed, labourers to cultivate his estate in Cumberland to his own parish, and that his neighbours were at perfect li berty to go where they might for labourers, whether be had not a right to protection .! To such a state were they brought in the West Indies, by their bungling legislation. Philanthropy was a fine thing a few years ago, when it cost nothing.—_(ironical c heers.) Philanthropy was good, but a low-priced article was better. He thought, when they legislated badly, that those Al m r. they Hlc i A nj H u D red o o s u a g i h d t h to e od b u e n p d r e o r t s e t e o ted. the amount of money which the West Indians received was about 9 0 000 000/ and if, in addition to this, th ey were to pay3,ooo - ~ 0 00/. a year would l no 0, °°° que L question pro had t action, already)paid. that b e 0 dThere was n en a t d h d a i t ti t o h r e i t 2 0 0 7 0 11 00 a t oo th e l y . had been pa i d. I t was a sacrifice made by the consumer, said the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool. It was paying the price of the emancipation of the slaves, which the Hon. Mem ber for Evesham called paying for their whistle. It was a spoliation in his opinion—( Hear, hear)—but whatever was its name, something was paid, and when they came to ask what the amount was, the Right Hon. Baronet, who was so good u calculator—who calculated the amount of the duties, the amount of the income-tax—was not able to give any answer, because the amount did not come into the revenue, for that was the only reason, he could conceive, why he did not give an answer to a plain and fair question. — (Hear, hear. ) Mr. MUNTZ said he was not prepared to deny that some protection was due to the West India interest. He was not now, and he never was, a free-trader to the extent of not al lowing protection where protection was fairly due. But if they were to give this bonus to the West Indians, let them under stand why they gave it, and let them have the credit of giving it. The Right Hon. Baronet alleged that the reduction of the price of sugar was one of the benefits derived from the pro perty and income-tax ; but if the planters, and not the con sumers, had the advantage of that reduction, credit ought not to be taken for a benefit which they never had. If the planters bad the benefit, why not say so at once ? In answer to a question by Mr. PAR&ZR, relative to beet sugar, I=i H:-. -- ----f, , ,---. 0 C AA r:C N