The Sun. — London, England, 1844-06-18 00:00:00

Wi ckiteen), towards the close of tbe debate on Friday, in taile4 °ther gentlemen to join him in excluding cc"' • ea tte _ras from the clause; said, and said very truly, eetoeeedoption of this suggestion need not bind any ile to rPeort the particular proposal of his lion. Friend, to Nei se It motion was successful, it would be within t ' e tepn of those who might suppert bins to make thererilinsition they might think fit, as an amendment to e nti tl e - Gtee rinnent. I sin sure the Noble Lord will not k te /seer Maj sty's. Government from the same privilege:. "ee di. e Lord made a successful appecl to those who et/ Pesee to support the motion o f hi s H on . F r i en d, lth e "en assure the Noble Lord that there are others not be i n fl uence d b y i t. — ( L aug h ter.) F or ketie eon lkee of giving the House the opportiniity of re fr the subj ec t, an d say i ng w h et h er t h ere is •• nit the in the reasons w hi c h I h ave g i ven to - n i g ht 'lee te ad °Pting th e propos i tien of my Hon. Friend, ▪ dut'e proposition i s b roug h t f erwar d f or re d uc i ng ee l 'to 2 05.. I shall move that the duty be 24s I Leone athat pro Position, not merely because it is %etve welch I approve of as preferable for the pre- ' Wtke ,inte rests of the coun t r y, b u t b ecause I thini t e "wise to carry any f urt h er a l terat i on t hi s year. leet:,lsider that it is of importance that the countries ''ilts e it 'g.sllgar, ca s t o f th e Cape, should know what loon Will be t a k en i n the course of the ensuing trtleo re garding the sugar duties. We de not intend te.. 4r P ° se, at any time,' the admission of slave-labour tel the same fo,eine as we propose to admit sugar 4 fti l) "l• ee of free labour.—(Hear.) It may be said, tel pro l don't you abandon your measure altogether %like e Pese the c on ti nuance o f existing ditties until the „ 1 7 e r. 1. °d, or until some period in the course of the next will state to the house why I do not adopt that e ative • Suppos e we did altogether adopt that t,‘", -du ring the ne x t sesss i on , if `we were entrusted Pe e e 1 e Governm en t, i t m i g h t b e our d uty to ma k e a ier° 3 ll o 2kll ourse d O , the subject of sugars. That proposition ; t c involve the admission of tree-labour ‘%te e might involv e a cons id era bl e re d uc ti on o f d uty , L tlltr es LY were proposed on Briti s h col o ni a l sugar , an d a Ner a tling reduction on sugar the produce of free eti ce . (Rear.) But observe, if there were no previous i i ilt w en, and if you st ill requ i red certificates of (Ne e coliditi ittNitio • on of fr e e-lab ou r sugar—observe, I say, Nth e _ rl in which we would be pl ace d i n approach tseonsideration o f th e sugar d ut i es , w i t h out any • kite n otice or an y p rev i ous steps b e i ng ta k en b y ie a i t• (At this moment there was consider a bl e Net t he House. The Right Hon. Baronet waited a L'lee - he and then finding it did not subside, said he ste ps Tight be abl e t o o bt ain silence whilst he stated bltile Government inteetled to pursue. After a th evk e -e nts, silence having been restored, the Right Leee t t Pnet proceeded,) If they merely continued Ott a g sugar deities until next year, and then pro 07,,eseitieelli. with * the general question Of the sugar td. 'leap ,at leosition would they be ?—(lronical cries eele ' eear," from Lord Howick.) I know the h eld would be relieved from difficulty, because he to sugar indiscriminately from all countries ; 7 W hO entertain a distinction between the • te `' S e B —foreign sugar, free labour and slave 11- lve should • have to consider between • alternatives, either to reduce the duty on British t te e ls ilear to a considerable extent, and in that case Vateenet we should be doing—we should, in effect, tis" s ein" a monopoly in the British market for e i i L t f a , sugar for several months ; for we should Nee' certificates of origin before we could admit sugar (II ar ) Let us assume that we pro -44-eiictio British e. colonial sugar, amounting to kk k„ il ktit s i ll o i n li , lilg r :—unless we could open some source of the British colonial producers would have a It e liate M the British market, and the reduced amount i'liVewould have no effect whatever in creating cog- P ' ,.te e "'"(Rear hear.) If we took another course—if ttrllt the , db. course, to enable our competitors to Obi 0-, 7 On -U sepply we must make the reduction of the ritish sugar take effect from a certain day, ' 4 1 41 months from that period. Consequently, p eked,• causes would lie open to all the objections at present urge. The motion of my Hon. tail tie d a definite day or a definite duty, but the ZteeZ e r educed the amount of duty the greater was kPPIy to derange the market and to reduce the ees e (Hear.) On that ground lam not inclined to le a contintrince of the thepresnt sugar duties, a . nd 'he it ie • •• the general policy ete \vowel inter.ere w 4 44 v n Pr ‘V () se to pursue respecting the sugar duties. t 4 ' i tt e serw stated to - the House as fully as is necessary, e t iti aTly as I could, the course which the Govern . le ri- aes to and the motives which influenced 4ibileaking pursue, and proposal. lam not, I cannot be in tq the position in which the Government has mi d t e late placed—(The Right Hon Baronet here, 'leJlet i ng Many parts of the remainder of his speech, so heard tone of voice as to be frequently but tl t hl t i e lne h t „ l 3e . heard in the ller)—nor to the difficulties h e ''e s occurred in ge th progress of legislation.— e""li 'r.) I cannot belp e feeling that we have pro 4,ttlete e s a eleres in the course of the last and during the e ession in respect to which that progress has ter eel l ,lleade which is e thought might have been made, r Y h`eav not having been made, leaves us, I own, in a t o ' l ll 4lel lviabl n —(Hear, hear.) I will not e position.—(Hear, . 0 -) impute blame to the House, but cannot help e t , pr e , a t fear we must contemplate, at the close of iees e nt session, the same result as at the close hie o h f eitvesession.—(Hear, hear.) Those measures t _w e in he,Proposed—measures connected with h e N :ttie_,"neY of the kingdom—have not been suc- Q , NseeHear, hear.) With respect to some of tlee t n h t , have not received that cordial support, h ad e a h ee approbation from some of those Hon. Gen " e° usually support the Government, which we tta kt j` l tduced to expect, and for whose opinion and 14 We entertain the highest respect.—(Hear.) th' - tell ee n ,ti, to say, speaking with perfect candour, that t te:llter"' look for that co-operation and support oe an l ot'ellt occasion by holding out expectations of They il t er e l° the measure which we have proposed. . Cf.; we believe to be good, and we must not with elloter4apit. If tl measure does not entitle us to the- M le embers who usually vote for the ee"tiee ee "e we deeply regret th . e . forf . eit . ure of that s lee, ' We did not expect indiscriminate or ser feclrt, but only such as would enable us to ad et;4ll the course of useful legislation.—(Hear, hea s r t .) . been to maintain and protect the exi 1 15 }, i llt i e ee n4tri3t li a tiO a e s s of the country, and, at the same time, eet teal such improvements as are compatible with 41, rie; nt enance necessary for the purpose of w: the welfare and tranquillity of the commu et D e e h ave recorded our desire to relax the system to et and prohibition, and allow moderate com tieti' ett e petw een - domestic and foreign . produce. We seleted, to reconcile the introduction of prierh lt)t?..r e e e ll We believe to be founded on truth with (llecte ' e e s e r e for existing interests, and every precaution liet embarrassment and undue apprehension.---: it' 14 %.8„, 4 e r ) We feel it necessary to repeal some of !ler r tes s -Lu ch preceding Parliaments had passed, and e, l tW ee measure of reformation regarding the Ec oeiZe:rbeourts (Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Go ke, ri a - ave bee . : defeated upon that question ;it may e l ,,' l N'e v ery simple and isolated one ; but we cons , id f er e NI; Op p i 1 of great importance.—(" Hear, hear, ', t at e su°sition.) I repeat, we cannot pretend .. c r o nm t,43,e, tee by receding from the proposition si 't •e have et te e w ish to speak with perfect candour—l deeply ( ei',Nll • at we have forfeited the confidence of those who e ••'' give us their support ; but I cannot ask you e )t h t , tt e y I ° the Tory benches) to vote for us to e, te e encouraging expectations which we are art h ate pare d to realize. For the course which lre ci te eltherto taken with respect to the gradual, safe,_ s 'l' l l ' 4l o a ,, ki sPect relaxation of those duties on articles l eis"e into competition with the domestic produce ee le , di sea „ r eel,e, we cannot say that norwe entertain any tfil! re it - r egret or of repentance, l any conversion to l ) , r inciples. We are prepare( to n t h ) ide by the R) it '„" De' l eave p uree . e—we will continue profess the 1 1 "'Illee and to proceed in the sam i e course of 'neroveinent, and this I feel oblige( to declare when important consequences may be the G;;;, 1- IN ' R ) USSELL rose and said—The Right e,'Weeeelean has brought under the consideration of 4 1 ' 0 11- " ( ether and far different topics from that imme te'le'Ye i teee'e discussion. ' The Right Hon. Baronet has le t ee e, (- t t nerlis and discussion . upon subjects of deep rhofore 'es*, aryl from which, being so invited, Ican - What t(l . ‘i lt e ` i t r ir entering int.,.—(Hear, hear.) th 4,, th e IT ion. Gentleman proposes in the . Tiestion be teillie,„lneetise is simply to reverse the decision of Fri h'); cries of " lime, hear.") It was said t9 l:) „,e that, according to the statement of my e l ' e eend, it was competent, according to the a 0 1.. 41 of House to move an amendment or elle . - 1 e trer i teerns of house, proposition of the Hon. Member th ° ; but it does so happen that the change ( fl'it* ,1 1 1 actually proposed is neither more or . less than . to tie , ea majority, h -37 a the decision of Friday night.— e , r e) The proposal is, that the presentstig h a e r ne e far lae as colonial sugar is concerned, shall t 4 1141 N- -that all the duties on foreign sugar, least ° II t hat th e Produce of slave labour, be continued ; B r o ger t 6 l , a r own proposition, a duty of 34 . 5. per cwt., th e ~t 1 et, "e prod uce o f f ree l a b ou r, be contedrrha,t ti c ] qo u et, th e very proposa l w hi c h wa s placed before t atr i egal n " Friday night, and which the House de ete te st . I must say, although it is not for me to th a erie g e conduct of the Right Hon. Gentleman at tl e at hare c ' f the Government towards his supporters, it imposed terms were never, in my opinion, 2l'eale in , is ter —(Loud cheers from the O.pposition.) 411 I nt M e . that, according to the proposition of the e i ce ce - "; Gentleman, no measure of Government or which tik tv es f ee a f t l'i be laid before the Legislature tit, les . i'e P r epared to say, e Let us, as thuepeGnovern ‘le,:(l-or7ae prepared proposition—it is your duty to accede to 1 7 ( ' 3 it .- c,' C heers and cries of " Hear, hear,' from the Itbe n - , 1) ,,' and partial cries of " Hear, hear," from the . %reel f een s.) And, if b any chance in taking our ee"",tra-band independent y view of the interests of the eei e e llvo,,,e °ll come to a conclusion different to that at lieL'hee i r e rr iee, we will ask you then to retrace your steps. lrot heee ''' and" Hear " from the same quarters.) i qr sit°rt, affirm what you deny, and deny what te'4ecl n, and exhibit yourself to the country as a de -11-: of i4l disgraced body' of men."—(Loud cheers and W ear .) That is the proposition of the Right eq. not 4 e r eeti and that is the proposition to which I I eves VP a red to agree.—(Elear, hear.) I cannot, „ lee (e,„'eal eounted one of those who have been the te;llgetc,"'Pporters of the present Government,— te -i ne -1%) am not one of those ho enjoy that tit,Z .sVs---(llenewed lauehter)--and it is not likely th„Jeet. I t , be eompelled change my course on this th e Gee is for those who have been the supporters of ey erri m oft ar e meat to consider whether, on any subject, th Pre a te,„ v. l ) red to surrender their will to the dictation t Hon. Baronet. And be it remembered, ti th e cb ane• direct or long cherished principles Y are I 1 4 or th ea led upon to sanction—not in confirma iee Pla ce Z h e, principles upon which they acted when 14 Dri tle; ,"n in office, and supplanted his predecessors, e 'Pies -eie d itut the reverse of these.—(Hear, hear.) ab a t- )11 . Gentleman now showed them how t h ey Mon those doctrines to which they pledged rnE N, LONDON, IittSDAY EVENING, JVNE 18, 1844. themselves on the hustings, and join the advocates of free trade—(Hear, hear)—acid the sustaiiiment of the Right Hon. Gentleman its office was thought by them a sufficient excuse for this desertion. But they were now called upon not only to abandon those principles upon which they _ fuemtriy acted, but the most recent convictions of their own mind. I repeat, there never weee harder terms imposed on any supporters than those which the Right Hon. Gentleman impeded on hi s . The Right lion. Gentleman said that the proposidon of the lion. Member was the efroct of political combination of some of their own supporters, and of others opposed to him. The Noble Lord then explained, in order to show that there was no preconcerted plan between him self and the Right Hon. Gentleman the late President of the Board of Trade ; in fact, seeing Mr. Miles's motion was quite accidental, his Rght Honourable Friend, as soon as he heard the nature of the motion which Mr. Miles had originally made, and which he subsequently altered, announced his determination not to support that motion, but at the same time sated the nature of the proposition which he (Mr. Labou !here) could support, and if the Hon. Member framed his mo tion so as to obtain that support, it surely could not be called combination. Ido not see (said the Noble Lord) how the Right lion. Gentleman at the head of the Go vernment can, after the open declaration of my Right Hon. Friend in this House, term our votes the result of a "constructive conspiracy."—(Laughter, and cries o' " Hoar, hear.") Hon. Members on this side of the House, remarkable for their advocacy of free trade prin ciples, voted for the Government. If there has been any combination or conspiracy it is surely among the ordi nary supporters of Government.—(Hear, hear.) I think those Hon. Members on this side of the House who voted with the Government will find it difficult to reconcile their objections against a duty of 345. and 245., and their support of a duty of 63s.—(Hear, hear, and laugh ter.) Perhaps they think the Right Hon. Gentleman after all the most effectual promoter of free trade prin ciples. Well, now with respect to the former part of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, I do not think it is nteessary to advert in this debate. I do not mean to enter into the question which was so fully dis cussed on my proposition with respect to the duty on free-labour and slave-grown sugar. With respect to the income-tax I do not wish to follow the Right Hon. Gentleman at any length. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the reduction of the interest on the Three-and-a-Half per Cents. was one great ob jection to the re-imposition of the income-tax. But this reduction was decided on in March, and we need not have waited until after Easter for the consideration of these subjects. The Right Hon. Baronet says that a great many legislative measures have been passed. No doubt there was the Bank Charter, a most important measure, but we had also several other measures of le gislation which were not of so much importance. I will take, for instance, the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, the Irish Registration Bill, and other Bills, which the year 1845 would have been quite soon enough to have sub mitted to the consideration of the House. I think the Right Hon. Gentleman might fairly have said, " Here are great questions relative to finance—we have reduced the interest on the Three-and-a-Half per Cents., and we have now to bring before you questions of commercial policy, and the question of the eontinuance of the in come-tax." I think that the House in that case would have felt that it was desirable to turn all their attention to those great subjects. I should have distinctly stated that any loss to the revenue would be met better in three years than it could be met in two years, and I should have proposed the continuance of the income-tax from the next year. Now, the Right Hon. Gentleman talked much about the disadvantage of making a prospective reduction in November, but I cannot understand either from him or from the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, how that proposition, which is so beneficial with respect to foreign free-labour sugar, can be so very injurious to colonial sugar.—(Cheers.) But that, in many respects, it is injurious, I am quite ready to admit. But the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the other night, in arguing that question, and putting the case of colonial sugar, said, " Nobody will be ready to buy because of the pro posed reduction ;" but when he came to his own propo sition, he said " Everybody will be ready to sell because they will be glad to get rid of an article on which there will be a reduction in November." It, therefore, as I understood him, must be beneficial in one sense, and not in another.—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, with respect to the important part of this subject, the reduction to 345., I own that it does seem to me, generally speaking, to be a fair proposition that the raw article should not be sub jected— supposing both are the subjects of duty—that the raw article should not be subjected to competition with the manufactured article at exactly the same duty. It, therefore, does not seem to rue to be a fair principle on which the Hcn. Gentleman is proceeding. But, on the other hand, if that proposition should be adopted, I think that if there is a distinction with regard to foreign sugar, we ought to make a similar distinction with regard to colo nial sugar. It appears that such was the opinion of Mr. Deacon Hume, and that appears, from a letter in the newspapers, to be the opinion of Mr. Gladstone. He proposed a duty of Sc. additional in case of colonial sugar, and 7s. 6d. in regard to foreign sugar. I think we have the practice in the United States and Holland in favour of that example. I should be glad to hear from the Hon. Member for Bristol, when he comes to that part of the proposition, why it is that he thinks it absolutely necessary to entertain a duty of 345.; or what objection he can have to a 245. duty in the case of colonial sugar? But, Sir, this is matter of detail in regard to the Hon. Member's proposition. What the Right Hon. Gentleman now proposes is, that the House should agree to that which they negatived the other night—that they should positively affirm that as expedient which they then declared to be inexpedient. The Right Hon. Gentleman, as I understand him, does this as much on political as on commercial grounds.— (Cheers.) He declares that it is necessary to him to have that confidence from his supporters that they will be ready to agree with him in this proposition. I should say, as I commenced by observing, that it would be a melancholy proof of their own subserviency.—(Cheers.) That question has been fully argued, and in that full argument, and by the number of twenty in a full House, the Committee decided against the proposition of the Government. Again I say, that I see no reason for that majority to change their votes. But let me tell those who voted the other night, that if they now agree to the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Righ Hon. Gentleman will treat them with the same disre gard in future—will treat their opinion in the same overbearing manner.—(Cheers.) Let them depend on it, that however they may consider themselves as a ma jority of the House of Commons, that their opinions and their views will hereafter have no weight ; that the Right Hon. Gentleman being once assured of their sup port, would be enabled to make propositions which they might think most injurious to the country ,• but having given this proof of subserviency, they will find them selves unable to recover their independence, which will be gone at once and for ever.—(The Noble Lord resunied his seat amidst loud cheering.) Mr. MILES—I trust, Sir, that I shall not be trespassing on the time of the Committee if I now make a few observa tions. The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Go vernment told us that he thought some conspiracy had been entered into with the other side of the House. That, Sir, I beg to deny in toto.—(Cheers. ) The Noble Lord, the Mem ber for the City of London, has correctly stated the reasons why I altered the motion of which I originally gave notice. It is quite true that 1 gave notice for a reduction of the duty from 245. to 20s. in the first instance on sugar, the produce of our colonial possessions. in the first debate which took place on that question the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, asked me what hope I could have of perma nently maintaining that duty. In that same debate the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Taunton, said, as I under. stood him, that he would support a reduction of duty to 203. and 305., and he also seemed to say, from what I could gather from him, that he would be inclined to support a dis criminating duty. I also recollect that the Noble Lord, in 1841, proposed a dis:limina.ting duty of 6s. I hope that her Majesty's Government will give the West India body credit for having gone to them on several occasions, and told them that they considered that this measure, in the present state of the West Indian colonies, would amount to almost ruin, and that it ought not to be proposed until after a large immigration of Coollie labour had taken place. But, Sir, her Majesty's Government refused to listen to them, and it was for that reason that they framed this measure, which was calculated to give them a larger amount of protection than the proposition of her Majesty's Government. I confess, Sir, that I heard with regret the declaration of the Right Hon. Gentleman that he intends to persevere in his Bilk I think, Sir, that it would only have been paving a due deference to the majority of this House for him to have postponed his measure until another ; he would not then have placed a large body of his supporters on this side of the House in the painful position of either supporting him or withdrawing altogether from the House. I have undertaken tl.e responsibility of advocating the cause of the West Indian body, and I do not now intend to shrink from that duty.—( Loud cheers.) I can only say, in addition, that I will certainly take the sense of the House on the amendment which I have proposed.—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord opposite put a question to me about the discrimi nating duty ; I can answer that I thin k the whole of the West India body would have no objection to a discriminating duty of 4s. on colonial sugar, but there is a very great opposition to it from the East India body.—( Hear, hear.) I can safely say that I myself have no objection to a discriminating duty of 4s. I now, Sir, move the amendment which has been placed in your hand. Sir R. PEEL moved that the blank be filled up with 245. The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Greene) said he apprehended that the course they would have to pursue would be, to make amendments in the proposition as they went on, and that the proposition should then be put as amended. Lord HO WICK wished to know whether, after they had discussed the question of amount of duty, they could make any alteration as to the time at which the duty should commence ? The CHAIRMAN apprehended that they must amend the proposition as they went on. Mr. BERNAL said, there were two very important points for their consideration. He entertained very considerable doubt himself as to whether in a Committee of a fiscal nature, the Committee having determined that the duty of 245. should not be imposed, they could reconsider the imposition of the same duty.—(Hear, hear.) Ile had not examined any precedents on the subject, but it was his opinion, that they could nut reconsider that question. That Commitee was an ad journment of a former Committee on the B 11. In the course of the former Committee, they rejected the propo sition originally introduced, that 245. duty should be imposed on a cwt. of sugar. That was rejected, and when the motion of his Hon. Friend was brought forward to reduce that annual charge on the public, it was held that they could re-open the que stion of the Ms. duty . This was one ob j ectio n he had to make. The second was that the 20s. being the lower duty, it ought to he first put to the Committtee, and that if that should be rejected, then the higher duty of 245, should be sub mitted.—( Hear, hear.) The CHAIRMAN was understood to say, thet the question of a 245. duty could be reconsidered as part of the proposition. wouldlower dutyTlie Il m on u . st Ge b nt e lem p a u n t wafisrstr,ight an i d n sax e ng qu th e a st t iun the therefore be, that 11. stand part of the proposition. Sir R. PEEL apprehended that as the duty of three guineas bad been negatived by the Committee, it was competent for them to propose the 245. duty as a substitute. After a few words from Lord J. Russell, Mr. Hume, and Mr. Roebuck, which were inaudible in the gallery, Sir G. GREY said that the Right Hon. Gentleman, by the present amendment, proposed to adopt pro tanto the words which were negatived the other night. He (Sir G. G.) wished to ask, before they came to a vote, whether, supposing this vote to be carried, the Right Hon. Gentleman intended to pro- pose the tame fate df fluty on foreign sugar, the produce of free labour, as part of the proposition, and whether he intended to propose any variation on the proposition that was submitted on Friday night? Sir R. PEEL said that in case the House should affirm the 245. duty, he would propose the same amount of duty on foreign free-labour sugar as was originally proposed. Mr. B. COCHRANE said, that on Friday night last, he considered it his duty to support her Majesty's Government in preference to the motion of his Hon. Friend near him. Her Majesty's Government were then defeated by 20; and he understood that it was now their intention to put the same question unaltered again to the House. He had objected to the course taken by her Majesty's Governtnenton the Factories Bill. He considered that something more was due to the opinion of that House when once given than that it should have the same question submitted for its consideration again. He thought, therefore, that this question had ceased to be one with respect to the amount of duty—he considered it was now a question of the independence of that House.—( Loud cheers.) It was a question involving the Privileges of the House ; he would say more, it was a question involving r the personal honour of every ember who formed port of the majority of Friday night. Under these circumstances, painful as it was to him, and taking that extended view of the case, he could not support her Majesty's Government by voting with them that night.—(Laughter and Cheers.) After a few words from Mr. COLLET I' which were totally inaudible in the Gallery. Mr. KEMBLE said, he was one of those who generally supported her Majesty's Government, but he yet felt that there were questions on which he could not go the full length of supporting the Government; and he, therefore, felt he ought to justify the vote he was about to give on the present occasion. He was as independent of the dictation of the Government as any individual either in or out of that House. On two occasions, two important occasion., he had :voted against her Majesty's Government. He alluded to the factory question, and, not withstanding the declarations of the Prime Minister on that occasion, he had still felt it his duty, as an independent Mem ber of that House, to support the line of conduct which he had adopted on those two former occasions; and the third time he again voted in the same way. On the present occasion he was not about to alter the vote he had given before on the ques tion before the House. The Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had supported a principle which he believed to be right, and he stood forward as the advocate of consistency 'against her Majesty's Government, and in support of that consistency he turned round and declared that he would re verse the vote which he had given for the benefit of the coon try.—(Loud cries of "No, no.") If he had misunderstood the Hon. Gentleman he begged his pardon. He (Mr. Kem ble ) felt it necessary to maintain his consistency. With respect to this question of the amount of duty, he had no hesitation in saying that he was opposed to the proposition of the Govern ment, and was equally opposed to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol, and on that account he had abstained from voting on Friday night, because he could not satisfy him self by voting either one way or the other. The question on which they were about to vote was, whether the duty on co lonial sugar should be reduced to 20s. or not. He considered that the question was of too great importance to be entertained in that incidental way on that occasion. He said that the question was one of large importance, and he had no hesita tion in declaring it as his opinion, that if the duty on colonial sugar were to be reduced, a reduction of 4s. per cwt. was not that which would give substantial benefit to West India interests, or be beneficial to the public. He had not had the opportunity of hearing the discussion on a former occasion, nor had he heard the Right Hon. Baronet that even. ing, but he considered that this was a matter of great import ance with respect to the finances of the country. The income tax was about to terminate, and it was of the highest import ance that the financial situation of the country should be looked boldly in the face, and, therefore, this question of the sugar duties required their most serious attention. For these reasons, he should vote against the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol. Mr. WARBURTON said the character which the Hon. Member for Bristol had given of his amendment, contrasted with the proposition of the Government,:namely, that it afforded more protection to the West India interest, had induced him to vote against it. That was the reason that induced his vote on Friday last, and, therefore, unless the Honourable Member for Bristol was prepared to do away with the 4s. discriminating duty and leave the duty as 20s. on colonial and 30s. on foreign, he must repeat the vote he had given upon the former occasion. Sir H. DOUGLAS begged to state it was his decided in tention, under present circumstances, to vote with the Govern ment.—(Shouts of laughter.) Mr. LABOUCHERE said there was not only the impor tant question of the sugar duties before them, but there was this still more important question, how the course it was pro posed to adopt would affect the haracter of that House?-- (Loud cheers.) He was fully aware that circumstances might arise when—a Minister having committed an error or the House acting from misinformation—it would he justifiable to rescind a vote which had been come to. He had himself sup ported Lord Althorp when the vote upon the malt-tax had been reversed, and he had supported the Bight Hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) in his conduct upon the Factories Bill, and had approved the course the Government had taken. Those were both great and important questions, justified by the cir cumstances in which they stood ; but his fears now were upon the grounds on which the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) had himself put the present question. In the very unimpor tance which had been made of the question, his (Mr. La bouchere's) anxiety rested and further, the language in which the Right Hon. Gentleman had addressed that House, was language which no Minister ought to address to it—lan guage which Mr. Pitt, even in the plenitude of his power, would never have ventured to use.—(Loud cheers.) With regard to the question itself, he had stated his reasons for his vote so fully on Friday last, that he did not feel it necessary to enter again upon the subject. As he said then, so he thought now, that whilst the measure was far from perfect, still, in the amendment of the Hon. Member for Bristol (Mr. Miles), he found so much more benefit to the con sumer than in the proposition of the Government, that he must give it his support. He begged, however, to give notice that, at the proper time, if no one else proposed it, he should him. self submit a proposition to the House, to put an extra duty of 4s. on the highly-refined sugars from our own colonies—that is, to make the duty on the fine clayed colonial 245., and on the the fine clayed foreign 345. He thought if they applied the discriminating principle to the foreign sugars, it would be better to apply it as well to the colonial. With regard to the charge of conspiracy brought against him and his friends on that side of the House, he wholly repudiated as inapplicable to any par ties, and least of all to himself. When the notice on the subject of the sugar duties was given he was in Somersetshire, and on his return to town he found that he had actually misunderstood the purport of the amendment. The first time he heard of the intention of his friends to support the amendment was in that House, and if there was a conspiracy, all he could say was, that it must have originated across the table of that House.— ( Hear, hear.) He should regret, indeed, if the House re versed that night the decision it had arrived at on Friday last, because he was sure that such a step would have a tendency to lower that House in the eyes of the people. He hoped the time never would come when any majority of that House would consent to support a Government upon such terms and in such a manner as the Right Hon. Gentleman had considered it essential to the safety of his Ministry to attempt to force upon them. Sir R. PEEL, in explanation, said the word conspiracy had not been used by him. All that he had said was to express his opinion that what had happened on Friday night had, to repeat his words, " taken place with previous concert." Mr. D'ISRAELI said he was not present at the debate on Friday night, and therefore he was not acquainted with the movements of those conspirators, who now were merely called combinatory—( A laugh )—and therefore he was naturally some what astonished at that which had transpired. But he was more astonished to hear that they were called, at four o'clock, to witness the painful sight of the resignation of a Ministry ; and, under present circumstances, and seeing how matters stood, he could not refrain from congratulating the House that, instead of witnessing the resignation of the Administration, they had only witnessed the Prime Minister move an amend ment.—( Laughter.) There certainly were to be found cases analogous to the present one. There was the case of the malt tax, some years ago, when Lord Althorp induced the then Hon. Members to rescind a vote they had deliberately come to. He (Mr. D'lsraeli) was not in the House at that time, though he had read and heard a good deal of the proceedings which then took place, and he knew that step was alluded to by eminent men of both parties in the country as most extraordinary, and only to be excused by the inexperience of a House that had but then been reconstructed. Well, several years elapsed be fore a similar circumstance occurred, and that was very re cently, when they had been called upon to rescind a vote which had vastly interested the great body of the nation, and the House had submitted to that process which men of great ex perience some years before had accepted with great reluctance, and as the result of an overbearing necessity.—(Hear, hear.) And now only a month had passed—one month only—and that House was again to be brought before the country—( Cheers) —under circumstances, he could not help saying, that no man, whatever side of the House he might belong to, could only de scribe as such as must have an inevitable tendency to degrade the character of them all in the eyes of the people —(Loud cheers.) It was possible that Ministers might retain power by this stern process—(Hear, hear)—hut he for one certainly mistook the character of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) if he supposed he could much value power retained by means so extraordinary, if not unconstitutional.—( Great cheer ing.) He thought the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) should treat with a little more delicacy his supporters under these circumstances—(Cheers)—and, for his part, he thought they had a t ight to hope that he should not unnecessarily drag them through the mire.—( Loud laughter and cheers.) They were dragged through in May—(Laughter)---they were again to be dragged through in June (Loud laughter) or, at all events, the Right Honourable Gentleman said to them, unless you rescind the vote you came to, I will not continue to bear the responsibility of office.—(Hear, hear. ) He did think they had a right to expect from the Right Hon. Gentleman, after all that had happened, that he should place them in a position as little degrading as possible.— (Laughter and cheers.) I n hi s (M r . D'lsraeli's) opinion, those who managed the details of these affairs should frame a sort of tariff of Parliamentary disgrace—(Cheers)---that might tell them at what price came the prospect of the shades of private life.—(Loud laughter and cheers.) It would say to them "thus far may you go and no farther ;" we have guaged your inde pendence--go no further or you will have to submit to the pub lic disgrace of recanting your own votes, or we must submit to retire into private life. —( Roars of laughter.) Why, in the year 1841, when the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) op posed the motion of the Noble Lord (John Russell), he said he bad never entered into, and never would enter into the slavery cry, and he never would enter into that of cheap sugar. only two years had elapsed, and they now found what he said and did, not only about slavery, but about cheap sugar—(Loud cheers) —and seeing that, he chooses to stake his ministry upon this conduct, and expets his supporters to lose their characters in order to sustain his ministry.—( Loud cheers.) He detests slavery in every place except on the benches behind him.— ( Great cheering.) He repeated they must recollect this was the second time this session they had been called upon to res• cind their votes, and therefore it would be better for the honour of that House—better for the honour of the Prime Minister himself—that that system should terminate.—(Loud cheer ing.) The Right Honourable Gentleman himself, from his undoubted talents, deserved a better fate than that he should constantly be replaced and continued in power by menacing his friends and cringing to his opponents.—( Cheers.) The Right lion. Gentleman denied calling them conspirators ; he merely denied t charged them as conspirators, which reminded him (Mr. ho d bieeding thatar h ty c had od a enteredD'lsr ae 1 i intoo of thea conspiracy,defenc b defence of oFt,. acknowledgede sebi , who combination.—( A laugh.) Ile obtained power through the votes of the men whom he tried to coerce—he offered to them no distinct policy of his own—(Cheers) — nothing that they could count upon—no distinctive line whatever — ( Hear , hear) and yet he started amazed if any one dared to oppose any new doctrine which he himself might think fit to take up.- -( Great cheering.) lie thought that his system—and he was at least learned in Parliamentary ways—was the right one to adopt ; b u t h e (M r . D'l srae li), f or o ne, believed that it could not tend to th e h onour o f th e H ouse , or the honour—which he respected—of the Right Hon. Gentleman himself—( hear, hear)—and he might be excused, if, en this, as on a former occasion, he reg.istered his vote for the same purpose, and in the same spirit, and if he did not follow the example of the Gallant Officer (Sir H. Douglas), but endeavour to show that, at least, as he had given it not without thought, so he should not change it without purpose.--( Hear, hear.) And whatever might be the consequences so mysteriously referred to by the Right Hon. Gentleman, certainly he, for one, if he should have to appear again on the hustings, should not think he had a less claim on the confidence of those who sent him to that House, because he had not, within forty-eight hours, changed his vote, from being menaced by a Prime Minister.—(Cheers. ) Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS begged to say that he had changed neither his opinion nor his vote. He had disapproved of the proposition of the Government and had voted against it ; he disapproved also of the proposal of the Member for Bristol, and should oppose that also. Lord S A NDON said he thought the proposal of the Hon. Member for Bristol was a good one, and he should continue to approve it, and he regretted that the Government did not adopt it, or something of the kind. He had also heard with regret what had fallen from his Noble Friend, not so much in connection with the present question, as from the principle he seemed to lay down, which seemed to be this—that on no oc casion was the Government to be left in a minority that it would not be considered as a vote of want of confidence. If the minority were small, still it showed a want of confidence ; if it were large, the inference would be still stronger ; and whatever the subject might be,whether sugar, or a bishopric of North Wales, whenever there was a combination of parties he was afraid the decree had gone forth that a vote of a majority of that House, whenever it did not agree with the opinion of the Government, was to be considered a vote of want of confidence. This was a scheme of Government which had never been tried by any party, Whig, Tory, or Radical, and in a country like this would not only render this but every other Government impossible. He the more regretted this, as he should, in consequence of it, he debarred as an independent Member from lending it that efficient support which he could wish. With regard to the particular question at issue, he believed that the proposition of the Hon. Member was an improvement on that of the Govern ment. He begged the West India interest not to exaggerate the crisis. He believed the natural advantages of the West Indian colonies were so great, both with respect to climate and soil, that when the system of free labour should be developed, they would have no reason to despond. Mr. SHEIL wished to say a few words on this subject. He should not follow the example of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side, who had spoken more unkindly of her Majesty's Govern ment than he was disposed to do. As for the Noble Lord who had just sat down, he seemed to be ane of those who, in the words of Pope, could condescend Sometimes to call the Minister his friend !" He could assure the Right Hon. Baronet that he was under a mistake if he supposed that there had been any combination or conspiracy on this question. He believed the Right Hon. Gentleman was under an entire misapprehension if he thought there was any premeditated arrangement between his sup porters and those who generally opposed him. This was the question, putting individual considerations aside. The proposition was one for making sugar cheaper. In reference to this discussion, he looked back to the debate on Mr. Huskisson's proposition in 1819. That proposition was agreed to by the Cabinet, and was one for reducing the duty on foreign sugar to 283. Mr. Huskisson then argued that, though the Chancellor of the Exchequer anticipated from it a decrease of the revenue to the amount of 500,0001. annually, yet the reduction of price would benefit the public more than it would injure the revenue. Now, if the doctrine of Mr. Huskisson were correct, let them try the two propositions be fore the House by the principle thus laid down, and they must come to the conclusion that a reduction in the price of sugar must be the result of one proposition in a far greater degree than of the ether. That being conceded, he thought there ought to be no difference with respect to the choice they ought to come to. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER met the ar gument quoted from Mr. Huskisson in the same manner as he had met the argument of the Hon. Member for Taunton, by contending that an increased demand for sugar, consequent on a reduction of price, would immediately throw a great advan tage into the hands of those who alone had the means of at present supplying the market. This would raise the price to the consumers, and he contended that it was absolutely neces sary, before making a large reduction in the sugar duties, they should give such notice to those countries producing free labour sugar as to enable them to furnish a larger supply of that necessary article. It had been stated that the course taken by the Government on the present occasion was quite unprece dented, because they called for the revision of a vote to which the House had previously come. .They were told that to sub mit to the House a question which had been previously negatived or affirmed, was degrading to it.—( Hear. ) In that case, of what use were the forms of the House which enabled them repeatedly to bring the same ques tions under consideration ? It was admitted that this was done in a very signal manner on the subject of the malt-tax, when the House was galled on to rescind its vote not as now during the progress of the Bill. The Hon. Member for Shrewsbury had indulged in a speech affirming that the Right Hon. Baro• net had not the confideuce of all who supported him. He had seldom heard a speech so derogatory to the character of the House—( Hear, hear )—and the Hon. Gentleman should, at all events, be the last to complain, for, from the tenor of his speech it was evident that he had for a long time harboured in his mind the sentiments which he displayed.—Hear, hear.) He should be the last person to complain that the Government abused the confidence reposed in them. The question under consideration was, whether they should take off 4s. from the 245. duty. With regard to that proposition, they thought it would injure the revenue without benefiting the consumer. 'fhe estimate of loss to the revenue was pretty much the same as when Mr. Huskisson brought the subject under con sideration. They had been asked what consideration a loss of 500,00 1. was when they had such a large surplus ? Why, the way to contract debts and to have a deficient revenue, was to proceed in such a course. It was on this ground that he should continue to resist the motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol. Mr. P. MAXWELL STEWART said that none of the grounds alleged by the Government in support of their proposition were well founded, in his opinion. He did not agree with the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the ev.imates which he made of the sugar which would come in under this pro position. He denied the statement of the Right Honourable Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade with respect to Java. He had it, on the authority of a Java planter, that sugar was produced there under a forced system, which might be considered a description of mitigated slavery, under which the produce of sugar had increased twenty-five times in the course of ten years. But he did not mean to say that ought to exclude them under this Bill. The Government had, by their propo sition, produced the greatest stagnation in the West India trade. They had now the lowest average price for six years. The price that day was 345. Id., and the stock in hand was 8,000 tons more than the stock in hand in the corresponding period of last year. It was impossible that the adoption of the motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol could increase the suf fering which had prevailed in consequence of the conduct pur sued by the Government. Persons did not know what to do, because they were doubtful of what would be the result of their deliberations in that House. Was that a fitting way to treat a great colonial interest ? But there was more than this. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, told them that they were in a state of transition. He had been an advocate for an alteration of the duties, but the Government had by their conduct treated the colonial interest with insult, not meant perhaps, but certainly real. The ar gument of the Right Hon. Baronet was unworthy of him. He put forward the alterations of the tariff, but the Right Hon. Gentleman had not allowed time to see what the effect of the tariff was, for he had himself altered it in essential points. He denied that the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol would risk the revenue, and that it would benefit the consumer he thought there could be little doubt. His Hon. Friend the Member f or M anc h ester an d o th er f ree tra d ers were standing on thi s occas i on b e t ween th e con su mers and the colonists.—( Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend said he was going to vote for the Hon. Member for Bristol, but he was enlightened by going to the other side of Temple bar--(A laugh)—and voted with the Government. His Hon. Friend had given an explanation of his conduct, and said that he thought this was a trap. He (Mr. Stewart) was of opinion that his Hon. Friend did not mend matters by his explanation, and he would have been more discreet if he followed the "Trappists'—(A laugh) —and remained silent. He was sure they ought, looking to the interests of the consumer and the colonist, to uphold the vote to which they had come on Friday evening. Several Members here rose to a dd ress the House, among whom was Mr. Entwisle, for whom loud cries were made from all parts of the House. Mr. ENTWISLE said it was with the greatest pain that he found himself compelled, at such an early period of his in troduction to that House, to oppose the measure brought for ward by her Majesty's Government, as a supporter of whom he had been sent to represent hi s const it uents ; but it had been in defence of a principle to which he had taken frequent occa sion to announce his adherence, namely, that of affording a fair protection to the produce of the labour of all British subjects.—(Hear, hear.) It was en that principle that the contest was fought in which he was lately engaged, and he should not desert that principle now. —( Hear, hear.) They had an admission of the Government that their measure was hardly equivalent to the necessities of the case. It seemed to be agreed on all hands that there was a strong necessity for immigration of labour into th e co l on i es , a nd that without such immigration it was impossible for the West Indian proprie tors to cope with the foreign grower of sugar. In the state of transition which had been so frequently alluded to, it appeared to him that the protection proposed by the Government must be insufficient before an immigration of labour had taken place, and it was en that ground he conceived that the measure of the Hon. Member for Bristol was proposed, for giving increased protection. Whatever might be the effect upon the revenue, it was brought on by the proposal of the Government them selves. However, having recorded his vote in favour of the Hon. Member's proposition on a previous occasion, he would not further mix himself up with that party opposite, to whose views he was opposed. He would decline on that occasion to register his vote in connection with theirs. Mr. B. ESCOTT said he could not understand how this proposition could be supported both on the ground of increas ing the supply of the people of this eountry and increasing the protection of the West India proprietors. He agreed with much that had been said on the other side, and amongst other things in which he agreed, was the evil of holding one opinion one day and the opposite on another.( Hear, hear. ) He had heard an Hon. Member opposite (Mr. P. M. Stewart) in one part of his speech argue for increased protection, and in another part for an increased supply ; but he could not at all understand such an argument, nor could he understand how his Hon. Friend the Member for Somersetshire (Mr. W. Miles), or any other Hon. Member in that House, could sup port the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol on such grounds. Allusion had been made to the possibility o f th e re signation of Ministers, but h e believed the Right Honourable Baronet, the Secretary of State, would strengthen his position in the country if he were to adopt that course.—( Hear, hear.) He believed that the people of England were not attached to these antiquated monopolies which some in that House were inclined to support.—(Opeesition cheers.) Although, on the other hand, they were not disposed immediately . to abolish all protection to British interests, n e protested. r.ea w ega i r: s .l h Ani e sr d t.v to the. g Miles) o jui ner course e) g t r po l u d pr u sr a uo l ev l d y e with the work of amendment, because that was the only way of proceeding safely. by the Hon. Member for Bristol, and sup ) por ii te e d c b h y al s i o en m g a e n d y t o h n e that Hon. side Memberof t h for r H E o House.—( how the adoption of hi s S— H4n lie . resa ß ert ilative's motion could help the West Indians nut of their difficulties.—( Hear, hear.) In con clusion, he begged to say that he could not give his support to the proposition before the House. Lord Howick, Mr. Miles, and . several other Member s here rose to address the House, amidst loud cries of " Divide, divide," all of whom gave way to Mr. W. MILES, who said that although he himself was not interested in the West India colonies, yet, as his nearest and dearest connections were, he could not give his vote on that oc casion without making one or two observati o ns. Wh en hi s lion. Friend the Member for Winchester had so far forgotten his position in the county of Somerset, that when scarcely two or three years had passed, lie could gulp down all the senti ments indeed e it was not nients for which he contended a t two c ontested elections for They should not measure their corn by the Winc hester bushel.—(Cheers and tfhorehwimestteorntaldkivaibsoiount porfintchiaptlec.7ou(ntcyh,eethrse.n) laughter.) He had been perfectly astonished at the doc trine which the Honourable Gentleman had laid down. whilst taunting with inconsistency many of those by whom he was surrounded. The lang ua g e which he had used ap peared he t h e i s m t I t n o di b a e n at the same time? Now what was the G overn ment propo sition ? To reduce the duty on foreign sugar from 635. to 245. ; manodst the extraordinary co nsurnercould both be benefited but they did not reduce by one farthi ng the duty now paid upon West Indian sugar. If his Hon. Friend had only listened to what had fallen from his relative when making his proposi tion, he would have understood the positi on w hi c h th e y assumed. After the noble sacrifice of twenty milions, the West India proprietors did not expect that they would be able to maintain the discriminating duty of 635. They had always looked for a reduction of the duty on foreign sugar, but at the same time they expected some benefit for themselves.—( Hear hear.) Without going at all into the question, how the reduction in price was to be dis tributed, no doubt existed in his mind that both the planter and the consumer would be benefited by the proposed reduction of 4s. The condition of the West India planter was precisely the same as that of the English agriculturist. These were his reasons for supporting the proposition of his Hon. Relative. He was sorry that the question had been taken up as it had been by the Government of the country.—( Hear.) He thought that when it had been intimated that the sugar duties were next year to be put upon a different basis, they would have come forward and stated what their proposition was, in order that the House miga to, either assent or dissent from their proposal. But, instead of this, they had determined, notwithstanding an adverse decision, to force upon the House their own proposition. He could assure the Government that those high Conservative principles which they advocated were his own ; but, at the same time, he must have the power of freely and independently ex excising his vote ; and he conceived that he raised his party higher by exercising that power when, in questions of detail, he differed from the Government, than by obsequiously follow ing every movement of the Government.—( Hear, hear.) He trusted that the majority which had supported his Hon. Rela tion the other night would not forget the duty they owed to themselves, to the country, and to those who had sent them there; but that whatever might be the effect, they would again record their opinions in favour of the West Indian agricul turists.—( Cheers. ) Mr. B. ESCOTT said he had been so severely attacked, that he trusted the House would allow him to say one word. He called upon his Hon. Friend, in justice to him and to his own character, after charging him (Mr. Escott) with renounc ing his former opinions and contradicting his former principles, to point out one single instance in which he had avowed prin ciples or opinions inconsistent with those which he had avowed that evening.—( Hear, hear.) - Mr. W. MILES said, of course, he could only speak on the authority of the newspapers. His -Hon. Friend (Mr. Escott) however, had opposed his Hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Sand ford) as a complete protectionist.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. B. ESCOTT—No, no.—( Laughter. ) Lord HO WICK said he certainly did think that the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last had very sufficiently answered the charge made against him. He had, however, heard with great satisfaction the statement of the Hon. Member (Mr. B. Es cott) that the people of England were not in favour of anti quated monopolies ; and he trusted that when they came to discuss the corn-laws they would have before them in his speech and vote the undoubted - proof of his sincerity.—(Laugliter. ) But his object in rising was to say that it really did appear to him most extraordinary that the House should be called upon to rescind its former vote upon the grounds which had been stated that evening.—( Hear, hear. ) He thought that those gentlemen who had heard the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet and the speech of the Hon. Mem ber for Bristol must be satisfied that the arguments of the Right Hon. Baronet were not such as could warrant the House in retracing the step which they had taken.—( Cheers.) He thought that the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol was a just and fair one.—( Hear, hear.) He thought that everything which could be done to assist the West India inte rest in their difficulties ought to be done. What he understood from the measure of the Government was, that the West Indies should have a protection of 105. against the produce of free labour. The Member for Bristol had not objected to re duce the duty upon foreign sugar, but he wished at the same time that colonial produce should also be favoured by a reduc .. tion of duty, which would have the effect of cheapening the article, enlarging the market, and benefiting at once the West India interest and the consumer._ He thought that was a most just proposition.—(Cheers.) His Right Hon. Friend near him had made a proposition which would remove any difficulty which might exist in coming to such an arrangement. He was confirmed in that opinion by what had fallen from the President of the Board of Trade, on the subject of the dif ferent duties to be imposed upon different qualities of sugar.— ( Hear, hear.) There had been but one objection argued by the Right Hon. Baronet, which seemed to him to have con siderable force—that was, that the effect of the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol would be to throw an undue advantage into the hands of those traders who had stock, and of the retailers, who would gain at the expense of the public. However, that objection might be met by bringing the altera tion into effect at an earlier period, say the sth of July.— ( Cheers.) As to the distinction between slave-grown sugar and the produce of free labour, it was only the Government that set any value on that argument.—( Hear, hear.) But then the Right Hon. Baronet said that they were bound by the treaty to place Brazil upon the same footing with the most fa voured nation. Why then should the Brazilians not be placed upon the same footing as the most favoured nation, and give them what advantage they might obtain in three or four months, until the treaty could be settled? That could not encourage slavery in Brazil. He hoped the House was not going to re scind the decision to which it had come. He had heard with astonishment the statement of the Chan. cellor of the Exchequer, that the object of Bills being read several times was to . give the House an op- portunity of reconsidering its opinions, and of preventing surprise. It was true the object of the forms was to prevent surprise, but it certainly was not to institute or keep up a cus tom of rescinding deliberate votes, at the will of the Ministry. The Right Hon. Gentleman had told the House three or four times, that if they did not rescind their votes, he should regard it as a withdrawal of confidence.—(Cheers.) This had oc curred on the Factories Bill, the Welsh Bishoprics, and on a financial measure. He thought if such obsequiousness to the Government was expected from the House, it would save much trouble if, at the beginning of the session, the House should pass a vote of unlimited confidence in the Ministry.—(Cheers, and laughter.) But it was not in the power of the Right Hon. Baronet to resign upon this question. It was impossible for them to go to the country upon a question of a differential duty of 4s. per cwt. But the Right Hon. Baronet had in formed the House that there was something behind, that there were other and less ostensible differences between bins and his ordinary supporters.—(Cheers.) He (Lord Howick) believed that this was the case. He believed that the Government was supported by gentlemen who did not agree with the Govern ment on the important question of trade and finance.— ( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) That was a state of things not creditable to the Government, or to the House. 'Two or three times Ministers were on the point of resigning office, and were only enabled to retain their places I.y compelling their supporters to rescind their votes. The circum stance from which that had arisen had been stated by his Noble Friend (Lord J. Russell). When the Right Hon. Baronet was out of office, an impression prevailed in the House and in the country, that he entertained opinions on trade and finance very different from those upon which he had acted since he came into power.—(Cheers.) The Government was now under the pressure of enlightened opinion out of doors, with which the convictions of their own minds agreed, and they held the opinions of free trade as much as he did. There was a feeling of disappointment on the minds of those who supported the Government, and Hon. Gentleman and Noble Dukes were heard to declare that they were not satisfied with Ministers, but were more dissatisfied with those who might take their places.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Government had not the support of those who advocated protection for do mestic interests, and on the other hand those who were opposed to mischievous impositions, such as the present corn-laws were, could place no confidence in them. The consequence was, that doubt and uncertainty to a most pernicious extent agitated every interest in the country, agricultural, ma nufacturing, and commercial. The only way to put an end to such a state of things was by the Government adopting de cidedly and boldly either the principle of free trade, or express ing a bona fide determination to uphold things as they were.— ( Great cheering.) They claimed to have a majority of the House and the country, and if they honestly held that opinion there was nothing to prevent their adopting one decided course. If the contest was to end in removing restrictions, the sooner, surely, it was put an end to the better. He did not, from all had he seen, anticipate at present any change in the manner in which the affairs of the country would be con ducted. There was a rottenness in the present state of things, and the moment the country was subject to tempests such a state of things must be done away with. Was it not better then :to endeavour to do away with them when the country was in a state of peace ? He was persuaded that the continu ance of this sort of anarchy—for he could call it nothing else— would be attended with the worst results to the best interests of the country.—( Hear, hear.) Lord Stanley, Lord Clive, and Mr. Borthwick, rose together, amid loud cries of " Divide, divide." Lord Stanley caught the Chairman's eye, but gave way to Lord CLIVE, who stated it to he his intention to vote that evening in the same way he did on Friday night.—( Hear.) Lord STANLEY then addressed the House. The Noble Lord on the other side of the House had appealed to the pride and sense of honour in the House whether it would re scind a vote it had formerly given. The Noble Lord had done injustice to his Right Hun. Friend in supposing that in his observations he had held out any threat. What he had stated was, that standing in the situation of the Government, it was their bounden duty to state to the House the position in which they felt themselves placed by the vote of the House, though not exclusively on Friday. He stated that they thought it was due to the position of the Government to consider the situation in which they stood, not on this question alone, but other measures that had been brought for ward in the present session ; and his Right Hon. Friend at the same time stated that if they did net possess the confidence and support of the House, it was idle for them to attempt to carry on the affairs of the country. The Noble Lord had drawn a picture of this country, which, if true, was a conclusive argu ment for their declaring that if they had not the confidence of either party, it was incompetent for them to carry en the busi ness of the country. The Noble Lord had also said that the present Government had created a very different notion as to the views they entertained on commercial subjects when out of office to what they had done whilst in. Now, where, he would ask, had they created that sentiment? Certainly not in the mind of the Noble Lord opposite, for he had said it had not come upon him unexpectedly. The Noble Lord had said, you admit the principles of free trade, why not carry them out ? Why, had they not beers taunted by the other side with only being free traders in the abstract ?—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord had then said that it was admitted by all that we ought to buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market. He admitted that doctrine in the abstract, but in the application of it they would not injure those great interests that had risen up in this country and the colonies. The Noble Lord then stated that the Government were supported by a body of men who only supported them because they disliked their opponents' views. That was the condition of every Govern ment ; but he believed that the Noble Lord was entirely mis taken in taking the view he had done of the great Conserva tive party in this country. He believed that the whole of that body were perfectly satisfied with the cautious course pursued by his Right Hon. Friend, and that the agriculturists were not likely to be deluded by the friendship of the Noble Lord to ruin themselves by advocating the principles of free trade. The Noble Lord had stated it was time the present state of things should be done away with, and which might be done in two ways ; but he (Lord Stanley) did not be lieve that either of the ways pointed out by the No ble Lord would attain the ends he had in view. What ever might be the fate of the Government, so long as they were supported by a majority of that House, they would con tinue to maintain that steady, cautious course—( Laughter and ironical cries of "Hear, hear," from the Opposition)—they would advocate temperate and well-considered measure of im provement which would be best calculated for the rational pro tection of the main and leading interests of the country, and for the development of our national resources. But if the Noble Lord could not succeed by an appeal to the passions and pride of Hon. Members on that side of the House, if he could not foment any dissensions, or produce any divisions in the Conservative ranks—if the agricultural Members would not be attracted, he thought lie could succeed in placing the advo cates of the West Indian interests under his guidance and pro tection.—(Hear, hear.) The Government, he candidly ad mitted, called upon the House to reconsider its vote of Friday night, and the plan proposed by the Government. He ad mitted that the measure of the Government had been con demned by a majority of ten. —( " No, twenty.") Yes, twenty.— ' (Laughter.) He would not go into any question of previous consent or combination between the Noble Lord and Hon. Members on that side of the House. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—There was no combination. Lord STANLEY—What no concert between the Noble Lord and— Lord JOHN RUSSELL (advancing to the table with marked emphasis)—The Noble Lord is entirely mistaken. Lord STANLEY would not, as he had already said, enter into the) question of any previous concert ; but he asked the House to deliberate and compare the project of the Govern ment with that of the Honourable Member for Bristol. I admit that the West India interest are entitled to protection in a double sense—first, on the ground d a differential duty be tween our colonial possessions and foreign countries, supposing them to be placed under similar circumstances; and secondly, on the consideration oc the difficu!ty which the West India co lonies had to obtain cheap labour. The Government gave a differential duty oe 10s. against foreign free grown sugar, and a high rate of du y rgainst foreign slave grown sugar. The amount of protection offered by Government was identical with the protection asked for by Hon. Member for Bristol. It was not disputed that if the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol were carried into operation that the revenue would suffer very considerably. The reduction of duty would not be- , nefit the consumer or the West Indian interest—it would be ul timately most injurious to the latter. It had been objected, and complaints had been made, that they did not state the whole project of their plan on the sugar duties ; but they did not, be cause it was a part of the great financial system proposed for the consideration of Parliament next session. But they had in timated to all parties the principles upon which they meant to act and the degree of protection which they intended to esta blish. They gave notice that foreign free labour sugar would be admitted into competition, after a certain period, with West Indian sugar ; but they should have certain and permanent protection against slave grown sugar. The Government found themselves bound in honour, as they held themselves bound in opinion, to maintain these sentiments with respect to this question of protection to the West India interest. lie knew that the Government, in the late division, had been de`eated by an agreement or concert.—(Cries of " No, no.") It was rather difficult to select a word that would suit.—(Laughter. ) At. all events, those Members who usually supported her Majesty's Government, had not supported them on that occasion. He believed that this measure of the Go- vernment would aff )rd an adequate protection to the West India interest ; and he also believed that the West India body would find that By - , measure of the Hon. Member for Bristol would be injurious to their interests. He believed that the measure of the Governfncnt, by increasin; the demand in this country, would greatly bonefit the producer. He was, however, free to confess that the Government would not attempt to follow the example of the late Government, by retaining office against the will of the House of Commons, and when all confidence by that House had been withdrawn from them.—(Cheers.) He hoped that they would not be asking too much when they called for the confidence of Parliament under the circum- stances in which they were placed. He believed, gilt upon investigation those of their supporlers who had not voted on this question with the Government, would feel that the views of the Government were correct on this matter, although on the first blush, those Hon. Gentlemen might be unable to reconcile themselves to it. The Government bad to state firmly, but with respect, that they would adhere to their pro position; and in doing so, he believed that they were sub stantially benefiting the West India interest. Lord PALMERSTON said, that as the only question the House had to determine was the question depending on the motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol, he should not he prepared to affirm it. The great objections which he felt to the measure were the same which he entertained to the proposal of the Government—that it made a distinction which he thought untenable between _ sugar the produce of free labour, and sugar the produce of sla very. He thought the discussion which had taken place on this subject had convinced him that this distinction could not be maintained in practice, for it seemed to have now very little approbation from either side of the House. Another ground of objection to the abstract proposal of the Hon. Gen tleman was that it was founded upon the principle of protec tion. He admittesl, however, that if any case could justify the existence of protection it was that of the West India islands. He, therefore, was not disposed to oppose that degree of protec tion which this vote proposed on the supposition that it would not be permanent. The Government had declared that unless the vote of Friday night last were reversed they would cease to retain their office. Hon. Gentlemen on his (Lord P.'s) side of the House thought this threat could have no effect. But towards their own sup porters, it was a threat which the Government ought not to have indulged in. —(Cheers.) When a Government had lost the confidence of Parliament, it was becoming in them ti re tire from an office which they could no longer retain with credit to themselves or with advantage to the public. But had that principle always actuated Hon. Gentl men opposite? Did they forget the Government of 1835? They were beaten, not once, twice, or three times, but something like eleven times, before they determined to take these successive defeats as proofs that they had lost the confidence of Parliament ; and not only did they stand those numerous defeats, but they were not in a majority on any one question of importance—( Hear, hear) — and they said, further, it was not consistent with their duty .ightly to desert their posts; and, in truth they did not do so till proof after proof was given that they had no hold whatever on the confidence of the country.—(Hear, hear.) Another doctrine, however, was advanced now. On the Fac tories Bill, when a vote, adverse to their opinion, was given by the House, Ministers came down and said they would not be responsible for the conduct of affairs unless that vote was reversed. The vote was revel sed and much loss of character they curtained thereby.—( Hear, hear.) And what were they told now ? Why, that this is not a question of importance, and yet that they would not remain in office unless the House reversed the decision it had arrived at. Why what did this come to? That this House was a mere cipher, called together for the sole purpose of registering the edicts of the Government.—( Loud cheers.) If the difference between the Government and its supporters was of importance, then those supporters were to be affronted. by being required to reverse their votes; and if the difference was, as stated in this instance, of a slight character, still the vote was to be reversed, and thus was the affront made more pointed than ever.—( Loud cheers. ) This did appear to him (Lord Palmerston) a doctrine utterly new in the practice of a constitutional Government—one most dangerous in its consequences to the independence, the utility, and the character of that House.—( Cheers. Were he a sup porter of the Goverdment, however much he might value the stability of the Government, he should value his own character more, and he should say to the head of that Government, I cannot and I will not give a vote which is not consistent with my honour.—(Loud cheers.) Never in his life was he (Lord Palmerston) more surprised than when he heard the course determined on by the Government. Every one had speculated on what course they might take, but no matter how they speculated they would have taken that which they had resolved on. Government might have come down, and with much grace, and fair credit to themselves, have said they were prepared to acquiesce in what appeared to be the opinion of that House.—( Hear, hear.) They might have said, since Parliament had chosen to sacrifice so much revenue, Parlia- ment must make it good. This course would have been in honourable, and just.—( Hear, hear.) Or the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) might have said, there was such a -manifest difference of opinion between his Government and the House, that he should appeal to the country—not as an appeal was usually made against his opponents—but against his own supporters—(A laugh )--or ask of the country to return him a body of Members more disposed to support the general senti ments of the Government.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Then there was a third course which the Right Hon. Baronet and his colleagues might have taken with dignity and honour. When they saw how the votes stood the other evening they might most fairly have said, we perceive a progressive increase of difference of opinion between ourselves and our supporters — we are satisfied we have lost the confidence of many of our friends, and it will be better to resign on this plain and tangible ground, rather than call upon our party to rescind a vote to which they have deliberately come.—(Cheers.) Had the Ministers have done this there would have been no blush.— (Cheers, and a laugh from Lord Stanley.) But they had raised a blush—and it was not the first, and it would not be the last.—( Hear, hear.) When on the Opposition benches Ministers were strongly averse to the principles of free trade— having changed to the other side, they liked those principles in the abstract, but they said they liked them not in practiee— and now they sported them occasionally they were afraid to wear them out by too much use, and kept them, as it were, for high days and holidays —( Hear, hear.) But they still pre served specimens of the—he should rather say our—principles, in order to show that they did not altogether repudiate them. They opposed our proposal for a fixed duty on corn, but on the frontiers of Canada they had the fixed duty in operation. All the corn that came from America through Canada came in on the fixed duty principle. They opposed the principle of free trade, that of having no duty at all, except merely for re gistration. They had a specimen of that too. The corn that came from the State of Maine, nnder the Ashburton treaty, through New Brunswick, came in on the free-trade principle and paid no duty at all.—(Hear, hear.) Thus though they seemed to value these principles on the one hand, they took care to use them as little as possible; on the other hand, they took care to have specimens of them in operation, that they might be able to say for the future that they not only agreed with them in the abstract, but had applied them as far as the application was possible. He thought then that the great question they had to consider to-night was, whether they would surrender their independen t will, and their sincere conviction, to the dictates of the Government—whether the Gentlemen who voted upon their own opi nion, and their own deep convictions, on Friday night,. would vote on Mondayin ac cording to those convictions , persisting their consistency, although at the risk of losing a Government which they wished to keep in power. If the question were between maintaining that consistency and losing the Government they generally supported, he thought the sense of honour, and a regard for the character of Parliament, would leave them no alternative in such a choice. But let them not deceive themselves by such an apprehension ; let them not imagine, if they did persist in their former vote, that their doing so would lead to any change in the Govern ment. They need only look at this House, and see how it was composed, to see what were the relative positions of parties, when any question was really at issue between the opposite sides, and they would be convinced that this threat was an idle one—a threat that would not, and could not, be carried into execution. When the Government said that it had lost the confidence of the House, what did it mean ? He (Lord Pal merston) said that it meant, when a vital question was put be fore the [louse, not the mere rescinding of a vote, but when the Government knew beforehand, that a default must be the consequence of the vote about to be given. Well, when questions of that sort had come before them what indications had there been of a want of confidence ? Why, the Govern ment had a majority varying from 90 to 100, and he would venture to say, that whatever might be the decision to-night, if on any day during the present week, any gentleman on the Opposition side of the House should propose a resolution, as serting a want of confidence in her Majesty's Government, it would be negatived by a majority of not less than 90 or 100. —(lronical cheers.) Away then with this nensensical pretext of a want of confidence.—( Loud cheers.) Away with the pretext that it was necessary that gentle men should unsay what they had said so forfeiting all cha racter and title to indeperklence and consistency.—( Cheers. ) He said that the Government could not be in earnest when it said thst it had lost the confidence of the House. The recent votes of the House proved the contrary, and not wishing to say anything more severe than had been already said, he did believe that the vote which the supporters of the Government were called on to give to-night had be en most accurately described by the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, when he said that how ever anxious the Government might be to put an end to slavery in other parts of the world, yet they still wished to keep in chains those who sat behind them on the Treasury benches. —( Cheers.) Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said he was unwilling to let the debate come to a conclusion without tendering his thanks to the Noble Lord, the Membe r for No r th Lanca,hire, for the manner in which he had answered the Noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland. Ile begetel to assure that Noble Le r d t h at, however slight might b e the friendship of the Ri g ht H on. Baronet, yet the agriculturists of England co ns id ere d t h e hos tility of the Noble L ord and his party to be so inveterate and implacable, that it would be long ere they would lend him their countenance. The Noble Lord had s t ate d t h at a fr i en dl y dis position had existed on the whol e b e t ween h er M a j esty ' s Go vernment and the agricultural body. As the Right Hon. Baronet had told them, now was the time to speak out; he wished the tone of his speech had enabled him to feel that the Right Hon. Baronet entertained that feeling also. But he asked the House and th e country to remember what the con duct of the agricultural body had been since the present Go vernment came in to power. That was described to be the hour of victory and the hour of triumph for the agricultural party. He asked the House whether the agriculturists had availed themselves of that hour of triumph, or used that hour of victory to demand any fresh protection for themselves?—(Laughter and cheers ) That the agricultural body did not merit the thanks of the other side of the House was nothing; they never expected them. But they did look for the approbation of the country ; they did expect the approbation of posterity.— (Laughter.) Why n it was remembered that in their hour of triumph they submitted to a revision of all those duties which affected their own interests, and acquiesced in the lowest degree of protection, what had been the conduct of the agricultural body since? When they Weiss driven to a demonstration of ~,.._~. feeling by the violent proceeding of the Ant i-Corn.lar: League; he asked whether it was from tes side of the House that the question was put to the Right Hon. Baronet if he was prepared to maintain the corn-laws? Did not the question come fronts the other side of the House? Did it not pass wholly unre marked except by his Hon. Friend the Member far Kent, showing that they (the agriculturists) were satisfied with the declarations of the Right Hon. Baronet. Since then the Right Hon. Baronet had brought in a Bill for the abolition of all the duties on wool. He asked the Right Hon. Baronet injustice to say whether the agriculturists had opposed that measure ? Had they exhi bited any factious opposition to it ? The Noble Lord, the Member for Tiverton, had said, when any expression of confidence was asked from the House the Govern ment could command a majority varying from 90 to 100. Allusion had often been made to the division of Friday night. He ( Mr. S. O'Brien) would ask the Government to go one night further back, and remember the division of Thursday last. The question then brought forward was spoken upon by the Noble Lord the Member for London, and against all the strength of the Opposition they took the high Conservative, and he might say Protestant ground, and refused to injure the Protestant Irish Church, the majority being 95. If the Right Hon. Gentleman compared the vote of Thursday night with the vote of Friday night, he would find who those were who were ready to support hm. He trusted the Right Hon. Baronet would have a long tenure of office ; and he knew it was an object of his ambition not only to have a strong Government, but to leave it strengthened to those who were to succeed him. —(Groans.) But those who supported him would only sup port him on a principle —(Cheers)—and on all questions where high principles were involved, the party, of whom Le was proud to number himself one—(lronical cheers)—Were ready to stand by him in spite of all taunts and obloquy. Colonel SIBTHORP rose, but the confusion and uproar which continued while he was addressing the House, made it difficult to catch what he said. He was understood to say that ho was prepared to support her Majesty's Government —( Ironical cheers )—because, having listened to the arguments on both sides of this question, he came to the conclusion that the motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol would neither prove beneficial to the West India interest —(Oh, oh)—nor to the consumer—(oh, oh)—nor to the revenue.—(Oh, oh.) God forbid that the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire, should take a lesson from that side of the House.— ( Groans. ) What position would the agriculturists of England be in if the Noble Lord opposite came into power once more? (Oh, oh.) He was a stay to no Government.—(lronical cheers.) But having had ten years' experience of Hon. Gen tlemen opposite, he could not have the slightest confidence in them.—(lronical cheers.) There were some questions in which he differed from the Right. Hon. Gentleman, but he never gave him a more cordial support than he would give on the present occasion. —(Groans. ) Mr. M. GII3*;ON rose amidst loud cries of " Divide, divide." He said he should not detain the Committee many minutes. Ile wished briefly to explain the views he was con. strained to take of the present question. They were told by some that this question was simply whether there should be a duty of 245. or 205., and some might take that view if they thought fit, and there were many plausible reasons for taking it, but on reflecting he was induced to come to this conclusion, rat the question before them was one between the extreme irotection party and the Government of the Right Hon. Gen leman, who had brought forward this proposition in order to teeinish the protection of the West India interest.— ( Cries of " Oh, oh.") He might be wrong, but that was the view which he took. The Noble Lord, the Member for . London, talked of combinations and concerts, and talked of this as a party question on the Liberal side.—(Hear, hear.) Why, _ was it anything of the kind ? The Noble LerJ did not invite them to support acme Liberal measure of hit own proposition, but he wanted them to co-operate with the most uncompromising of their opponents—(" Oh, oh," and groans)—to defeat a measure which was looked on as an improvement by the erin stituency he represented, and by the great trading interest of the country. He admitted that the measure of the Go- _ v nment was not a perfect measure, but it was the onl y prat ti able reform in the present temper of the H ouse.—(t• Oh, ti .7) The Right Hon. :3aronet was willing to admit foreign s ar into competition with the West India inte rest, but the p tectionists said that they had no confidence in t he Ri g ht on. Baronet, and they proposed, in their own defence, to ad mit more foreign sugar than the Right Hon. Baronet. Now, he did not believe they had any such object iii view.— ( Hear, hear.) He believed they meant to have a larger measure of protection. They proposed a duty of 145., and the Govern ment proposed a duty of 10s. He would be most happy to vote . with the Noble Lord the Member for London, if he proposed any broad liberal measure. But this was a question • between the Government and the West India interest.. It had been stated by the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London, that when he (Mr. M. Gibson) asserted in that House, the other night, that the 345. duty on what was called white clayed sugar would apply to the large proportion of foreign sugar available under the proposal of the Hen. Gen tleman, he was not correct in that assertion. Of course he could make no such assertion founded on his own knowledge, but he had made the assertion on the best authority ; and he would take the liberty of reading a letter or two in his own justification. —( Cries of " Oh, oh,") If he were not permitted to do this, he should move to report progress. —( Hear.) (The Hon. and Learned Member then read a letter from Mr. Peter Marti neau, a gentleman connected with the sugar trade, stating that the effect of Mr. Miles's motion would be to entail an addi tional protective duty of 4s. on a very large proportion of the foreign free-labour sugar.) The leading men in the City, of Con servative politics, said that the Java sugar would all come under the denomination of clayed, or white clayed sugar, and would be subject to the high duty of 345. per cwt. ( The Hon. Member alsoread a letter from Messrs. Thorn'on and West to the same effect.) He had several other letters from gentlemen, who all concurred in considering the measure of the West India interest a demand for increased protection. He must, therefore, without any disrespect to the Noble Lord, call upon him not to throw a taunt of inconsistency upon himself, and those who voted in the House on that occasion. They were simply desirous of pro curing for the country the best measure within reach, and they were not taking this course with any desire to put them selves in the smallest degree in opposition to the Noble Lord and his friends.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. ROEBUCK said the view taken by his Hon. Friend might appear to call for some remark. There was a reduction . of. duty proposed to the House, but the Alember for Man chester objected that that the proposal emanated from the fries ds of free trade. Now what did he care for that?— ( Hear, hear.) It so happened that the West Indians conceived that their interest coincided with that of the consumer. They said, " If you reduce the price you increase the consuinption, and thereby enable us to get a higher price for our sugar." Without, therefore, in the slightest degree regarding the inte rest s of the West Indians, he was fully persuaded that the pro posal before the House was calculated to protect the interest both of the West Indians and of the consumer.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman and the Noble Lord opposite sad the object of those who voted in favour of the Hon. Member for Bristol was inimical to the Government. I-Ie begged to say that he had no enmity against them, and he would at that moment be very sorry to see them out of power. But they had had the remarkable confession of the Alinister that evening, that with a majority of 100 he was unable to carry on the ordi nary business of legislation. --( Hear.) The fact is, that when the Government came into power, and incurred the responsibilities of office, they found themselves brought into immediate collision with a small section in this country. The present Government had been again and again taunted with hav ing come into office under the pretence that they would sup port. protection. It will be the cry against all who shall come. into office hereafter upon the support of the .arne party. And in that, was the greatest victory of free trade, that there was now a small section who felt that protection did not serve them—( Hear, hear)—and asked for low prices as the best. means of promoting the interest of the producer as well as of the consumer.—( Hear, hear.) That would be the case also with the section which the Hon. Memoer for Somerset re presen'ed—the agricultural interest —( Hear, hear.) The supporters of the Gevernment net d never again complain of their leader.—( Cheers.) It was useless to talk of mysterious influences at work, producing coldness in May, discontent in June, and perhaps open war in July.—(Cheers and laughter.) There was some difficulty in accounting for all this. But it was one of those difficulties which were propounded by those who obtained a re putation for wisdom, by refusing to give an answer to their own questions.—(Derisive cheers from the lower Tory benches.) Gentlemen might laugh, but he had known that principle to be carried out throug,li works of fiction of three volumes extent.—( Cheers and laughter.) The support of the Government might be accounted for by a reference to the text from which a Rev. Prelate preached a sermon before a great Minister (Mr. Pitt), when he was elected Member for the University of Cambridge :—" There is a lad amongst us who has five barley-loaves and three small fishes; but what is that amongst so many."—( Great laughter.) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Com mittee divided, when there appeared— For Mr. Miles' motion 233 Against it Majority for Ministers The announcement of the numbers was received with loud Ministerial cheers. On our admission into the gallery we found, Mr. MILES on his legs, stating, that as the Committee was against his motion, he should not persevere. The Bill then passed through Committee pro forma, and the House resumed. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. WARBURTON wished to know the order in which the business would be taken to-morrow (this day)? Sir Et. PEEL desired to know whether Hon. Gentlemen intended to persevere in the motions of which they had given notice before he could fix the order of the business? Mr. HUTT would bring forward the motion of which he had given notice on the subject of soap, if there were a House, which in the present excited state of the public mind, be scarcely thought would be the case. 'The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that if the Hon. Member did not expect a House, perhaps he would abandon his motion. Mr. HUTT considered the subject of so much importance that he could not consent to put off his motion. Sir R. PEEL would take the Dissenters' Chals Bill after the Sugar Bill on Thursday, and the Bank Char pe ter Bill on Friday. Mr. WYSE had a motion on the paper relative to the system of education at Maynooth. He wished to know when it was likely the grant for Mayneoth would be brought on, in order, if possible, to avoid two debates on the same subject? Sir R. PEEL considered that the Dissenters' Chapels Bill and the Bank Charter Bill were measures of so much im portance, that he thought it better to proceed with them first, and afterwards he would fix a day for the Maynooth grant. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE had understood that Thursday was fixed for the New Poor-law discussion. He supposed that it eras to be postponed again.—( Ilear, hear.) Now, with regard to the Sugar Duties Bill, why did they not proceed with it at once. instead of going through the farce of a discussion ? Let the Chairman report progress, and have the Bill read a third time at once. Where was the use of this farce, if, after the House had decided a clause, a Minister was to get up and say, " If you do not rescind your vote I will resign ?"—(A la u g h. 1 It would be b e tt er t o proceed at once with the Bill. Sir R. PEEL would be glad to proceed as speedily as possi ble, but the third clause had been put off to suit the conveni ence of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. T. DUNCOAI BE— Why not rescind the vote you have just come to. and go on at once I—(Laughter.) Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question from Mr. Duncombe, said he was at present unable to fix the precise time on which the Poor-law Amendment Bill would be introduced. The Limitation of Actions (Ireland) Bill was then read a third time. On the motion for the further consideration of the Lords' Amendments to the Night Poaching Bill, Dlr. WARBURTON said that these amendments had been only placed in the hands of Members that morning, and he moved the further consideration of the Bill be postponed till to-morrow (this clay). After a short conversation, the House divided oa the motion, when there appeared— • For the adjournment of the question ......... 5 Against it Alajority On our return to the gallery we found Mr. WALLACE consenting to postpone the further consi deration of the Bill till to-morrow (this day). RAILWAYS. Mr. GLADSTONE brought in a Bill to attach certain con ditions to the construction of future railways, authorised, or to be authorised, by any Act of the present or succeeding sessions of Parliament, and for other purposes in relation to railways, which was read a first time. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter past One o'Clock. I t 1'