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

Perfect an d Kvstettiatic - eoni.ist. ncy in legislating on these matters, the p-op , sition of the Government must be sustained. But the question was now practically t his, whether a practical stanulant should be given to the slave trade b • e•vcouragina the sugar of Cuba and Brazil ? The questiOn„had often been brought before the Rouse by llun. Gentlemen opposite, and often been de eid din favour of the distinction. In 1842 the Hon. Member for Dumfries moved for an equalisation of the du tie , , and similar motions had s i nce b een b roug h t for ward. Ile (Mr. G.) would nut say that those gentle men who insisted so much upon the interests of com merce were indifferent to the claims of humanity. They °tight not to accuse him asd those who agreed with the L_ G°t 'erntuent in this case of being indifferent to commerce. . - yvliose in the Present case they were willing to make some ",crelrof commerce to protect humanity. The tnajo t.„ltY ef the British Parliament had determined for years that the distinction should be kept up. He regretted itillit.t!his. question had been made .. one of party, and that Bereall it led to a political crisis, the acerbity engrn v • he, bit which had not yet passed away.— Hear, i s a t) But he called upon G, ntlemen opposite to ( have % P e et for the ascertained and repeatedly-expressed 410 ioa fI, •• • H iuse —Wear, hear.) L i i o ,• the majority in that , .. h t B4 o the lion. Member for Dumfries brought the s su g e t et of equalisation before the House. He proposed sugar"/ of 245. on British, and of 345. on all foreign i 1..• This was negatived by a majority of 95. , I , ayes to tthe question was negatived, upon . a division, of 281 the I t o 3 71 noe=, making a majority of 90 against Itf„„..•••`,_°e• Member for Dumfries. In 1842 the Hon. "auer for Taunton proposed that the duty on British I ,lll h g a a t r bileuld be 20s ,and that on all foreign alike 30s. be n " W as negatived: the ayes were 164, the Honourable digleg k i en s a majority of 81. In 1843 the H o i u nvo _ v l .. ; Der for Lambeth moved a proposition, 1_ r , , for e igq a differential duty of 10g. upon . all occasion was RI sugar. The majority on that 222. That i' s ' , the numbers being, ayes 103, noes obi t ,: 8'44'411 that there had been no advance of public h et ?a in favour of those Gentlemen's views. —(Hear, tne .) In t he same year the Hon. Member for Taunton as,; e i ti t a proposition for the admission of Brazilia a n st sug .e a a r r , the i k," negatived by a majority of 73. 24 5. ° um Lord (Lord J. Russell) moved fora L duty 3 of ilet,.°.l ritish, and of 345. on foreign sugar ; that was th tia lie l Y i e d bY a majority of 69. That was the seven t° rec% 4 f P O years - , when Parliament was called upon . tiotto-tg°,lBe the principle of the Noble Lord's propos ,t'site and t ? n ight, and Parliament each time gave a deft • "'in ther'ensible response.—(Hear, hear.) He granted a gain t t . 12 was a commercial feeling in the country 8 14;3- the Micy of the Government,:but there . was still of the e extended sentiment against slavery, and in favour ] Lie s (. ° , l ll ,7 of his Right Hon. Friend.—(Hear, hear.) Slr ar., -e 'phN expressed dissent. shake k. -AD STONE—The Hen. Gentleman need not ski ,• uls head. —(A laugh.) He admitted the ability Of e itiee ritY of the Hon. Gentman in the advocacy hitt ,Mmercial principles ; but he could not agree w h ith wa : tn at there was not a strong feeling in favour of u iattglito`nt3:i‘n, this quarter. Sir T. F. Buxton, Dr. Lush ofth M. Sturge, and Mr.. Scobell, were all supporters sla p Political party now in opposition, but they were Pre",, l4 favour of the policy of the Government on the tass,-Int question.—(Hear, hear.) And it was to be re to - "e red that those were the men who had put an end Ili f a ii l l owery in the British dominions. —(Hear, hear.) ap,, 8 % he called upon Hon. Gentlemen opposite to re- f v. the often -ascertained opinion of the majority o oks i llite t e,nti he would remind them that their movement 0 • t ills subject excited little interest in the country l' is the House, and that the interest was diminishing °Po t s )? lear--(Hear, hear.) Surely it did not happen howl 4 an question of interest that the benches d be opp os; , so thinly covered, when the leader of the Ch ao 'tion brought forward a great motion, and the lietcellor of the Exchequer was to answer.—(Hear, the r Pd a laugh.) If he could see any likelihood that year, eble Lord would carry his principle even next 4 ,1 1 pi,, h ! (Nir. Gladstone) might think it better not to f 'eeli l ; 4 t. But when there was such a stagnancy . o k e n t'v"t doors, and when the feeling of Par the re (sad been incontestably expressed, he called upon ° ,,,Lliy , i '„ lle O Pposition) not to hold out prospects w 'heyei,',°°*aged Cuba and Brazil in perpetuating slavery. t r ,ilail . ;, -4 „ it in their power, by keeping up hopes of ( low 1 ,, - „,°°, to prevent the success of the policy of ~`°wtte r r -" k e n t in discouraging slavery in those places : - -44 'I, hear. With respect to the imputation ttitieitcP°; ° the British people of being hypo d d ; ,_.• , 1 ~,,'l l their professed desire to put an . en ‘l 4 3'--those imputations were more disc!e- Now: to those whomade them than to the British ‘ 4 ° - 1 '1 1 41 .--- 04 ( e ll , e i', hear.) He could not admit . that Mr. ft(.41.• s book was, as it had been characterised by an t ,, t atio il l ut h . er, a statesmanlike Production, and its im b:atlea n the p eop l e of England were wholly un e'la ol ' 11 4"Po :r co ntradicted by the facts . ; for the English made great commercial . sacrifices, in ex eol;4llrist the trade of Caba and Brazil rather than ea- G -so slayealeery __ Pro toes • (Hear, hear.) He begged of Hon.. to ~,,P e4i tion ° & Posite to csnsider what the effect of their Wr q t do s ,' carried, would have upon the efforts made lifetth,svlitttllthe slave trade by means of an armed navy. es td . e ‘t , ti 'ill t h eee ncY could they shed blood and take duet,,, l t Dee:toPs to suppress the trade, if they ren- Pl' sii -118 of " s tl i 4 rY by the increased demand for the pro lasen,;`ea was ;lave labour. The question of armed su i p e: %la of ti.i' l l a great measure prejudged by tlemo on (li e e .: the i e o g k e i ntlemen who supported the principle d 'Pol .. ' "oar, \ '''e Lord's proposition was founde . to h e tisio t ,' L i The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by li k e- p ione er s- thei House for . having detained them so ofb . 1 14 t - lA tsian he had intended.—(Hear, hear.) "its4"l,-,`'ULAY said, if the . motion had been one lile 4 , °NI' .nancial or commercial character, it would t he I,' b eta te ore becoming in him to have remained tooouse4se there were Gentlemen on both sides of tor,.."lki o Illore competent to deal with financial and s e T.ive tht matters than himself. But . he could not fraud the question before them was . either one of !Ipq4 that tlhor financial nature, for he did not und . er- Itf o ,Par e i„ eY were called upon to decide the question °Y ".traot e°lnmercial or financial grounds.. He took etl l l ll s zioo, that the objection to the motion proposed oLli t o l d e Friend was one purely moral. They tledtstio that they were under a moral o* -4 ,e o tl ff, t _° . make a distinction between the ttli k • I,oeli,n cc-labour and the produce of . slave labour._ 14 04' 1 %8;1 a s__ much averse to the abominable traffic, t te 0 a s th present carried on between . Africa and the 'uttt P h e wes , 0 Pon. Gentleman who had just sat down. 'soh bosom' e s' tu ought that it was in his power to show tletti moral, rounds existed as those alleged by mitt tii,:essra oppogsite existed. The Right Hon. Ge d n : l ass, that pa of the Board of Trade had a - 14osskis In te le moral obligation restricted the corn I , c 'tli t ,rt th i r ,ests of the country; and he (Mr. Macaulay) Thr t ioo - ",if he Succeeded in showing that no such sto b e s'ti 0 „h"4l exist, he proposition of his Noble I , 4 kt' ip o ll 'i t to be adopted t by the House. The Right I,'? ti' Elbe t l i ett 'lla who had just sat down had said : I ' ll e i tt - • ° 41 4 ; °u se were to agree to it, the Government to 0h t i t i t i t e, ..i . Z l G i e n n a tl pos a i n tion of considerable difficulty. krke 'owrstneetem dwelt upon the inconsistency k th e Do tits would be guilty of, if they were At 1 , Pr od ,, 4deletion between the produce of a slave AN' t° rs' ee of a free state. If they did not, the s ,'lwe° coot`.4entieman said it would be impossible for ?/ 4 osh i-g:°,e,their present measures for suppressing t It alt t ° say hi gh seas. Now it was impossible for allos to at, t; at a person, or a body of persons, pro iN''' e s 1, certain thing, for a certain moral 'kii. li d tli q be acting with consistency while tr, sr °Pted tI4L eisse another course with regard to a e - ` li ews i n ' It ,s was impossible, if this were so, lit . %ski' -oe sin 't of those persons, or to I t ene . Ceti y NS 6 1 0 their powers of discrimination. tqk Atir s , Moral Liti st , so so?, obligation were ledto'elal x,7,Be,luence would be to . throw the whole is ut,,ee th e ur il l . into a state of confusion, and he was (,` VA rh o 'gilt lion. Baronet's Budget was not ttls'the-ie,,kisteLeame principle. He was far from deny 'l.t,ll% Wl i s bli etris of this moral obligation ; but it could 1 1."°04 011 woo ' every case. He would give one in %114.11= Otte t h_dd not only illustrate his argument, but . it lei e ssti e , 4 w discriurinating powers possessed . by th e ')f . en ,;) • Ghl t t ~obae Pposite. He would take the simple o / by o;tea St Not only did they take the tobacco sf t le t i Nt e , k 4 tes and of Cuba, which was grown not i 11 14 (1 ' but by slaves who had recently been lin t% Il aht • e fitttle % lq )o hlty, b e of every principle of justice . ti o ie r tt se tt ,. tir e , slut they positively interclictea . l i k t t :ltts,_ I' s , ? the 'United Kingdom from growing ki ,th:oolteli'lwo centuries they had had . upon th A t k o t 01 41 England which provided that if any tobacco .t i q °l le . " den'', t tl . ,t,thd i except for gunk') purposes, i tli e t() lik e 'l e "- This applied only to England. ts_ . i Ires s the cultivation of the enp o .tul if, elan commenced i et ttg et Ali s i t .„ of. that country. At length, however, l rl kt e l ti e atsi:el,llslature took alarm at this bold and 1 1) 1 ' Ils e the Irish they immediately and positively in- It las,te?Deei„4h freemen from growing the plant. f teikl!latiL i t res ss t his was an exceedingly fair test ot 4 1 il l -"tertained by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Ill os to e m !is, -iiiti car t . t° ascertain to what degree they in if s et eall y Y their consistenc which had been so tanytheytawy s r k e° of by the Right Hon. Gentleman ohs e 'er ci ~th,° hoard of Trade. It he were to ask tiltitftrfiels%tr?ared to give this restriction up, t his 'te Is e Tre a e Right Hon. Gentleman the First F atl y ,t *side:,.lll7, and the Right Hon. Gentleman I,"'llip Y k lhe e tl n s wer, t:,,2 1 the Board of Trade, would in who'lesittnit, wools'''' 0 certainly not." And why not ? 4 we a itort injure the revenue. The tobacco lisit,rese B e th e e( ' from abroad they knew was grown :r t es to k towPeonYl.4 also that the Custom-house, st ew - 1 20 -e guii r o ' g , t e ..Y derived a duty from, this k b ts is _ 4 by p °l Per e u , s „ e ; ° 600 L per cent., and in some "t 1 l) 9 t s"Rli h - '"‘• If, however, this tobacco were * fh s 1 14, ,it to to M oen or Irishmen it would lead to the 1 1 s er e t'sst, the 1 0 41 a rid for this reason they would not tio e ,er e r t,he ittoiltiothe revenue; and for this reason also i t te kt s tt ,';h, if ti ,P ., ° l .Y in tobacco to slave-owners. If to o or e "emelt this were the moral obligation which ‘li s e°4 l4 (lnit aer e i °J)Posite thought paramount to all tv ti les lt d• Jhere sa' considerations, what feasible objcc fo ob e Ue t( ) t i, b lee ,aud these si ll , ..e Proposal made by his Hon. Osltlit's,4l4 still thing s g ilt be . said, and he admitted . it, tt '' 04, 1 II if ~6 existi n g when they came into 0 11 0 4 4 11°04t t° b:"Y maintained consistency, these 1,, ss i ,, Dou rtthi put down. But !his could not be th, ? 11,1eraa e ° bieet . bhp s gh so th e -,,.• ion, for what was the Right t 4 .3 , y, h e ~r.eirst Lord of the Treasury about tsi, \ this upon v ° Posed to take awa completely kitts'i it eutt°°•N did he k w 44 ,t this 0 14 °i l i s , • ow, not no asas 8 ? 1 1 . 1 he siTh e g e °wo by slaves ?—(Hear, ilg st at it was . out a case of consistency L o pe' h Islo e Cotton said that cotton was not quite so i 4itss°ois w as less destructive to life than t Y ‘qt 4 mi s ery °n the f a 4 4 th e 44 5 y in COL of the earth produced 4i 1 1 t si nt ef 4 4 . 4. r, .lavery than the republic of the t 4 „,ct We t 1104. B ar one` r d the produce of that cow - 4 , 4 ts as th aot the proposed to admit free of ti, at Ott 000 h% afkirs P‘Fevince of Members of Parliament me a.. 4. eos. a e otts °! other nations, nor could they ex oty siititoees"e Could have any salutary effect; . ww Ar il . e Y mi. eti s 044 e 3 t h to t silk why they should . ta . ke ti in preference to Brazilian THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, FEBRUAR Y 27 1845. sugar. The paper makers, the soap makers, conti lbw eel largely to swell the income-tax, and th e y naturally askd why they were to be exempted from having their share in the benefit to be derived frim a surplus revenue. The answer was, Brazil 'maintains the slave trade. He (Mr. Macaulay) said that in the United States the slave trade was more odious and de moralising than the traffic which was going on between Africa and Brazil. In America there were two classes of slavery. There were the breeding States, where human beings were reared up and supported until they were able to bear the fatigues of labour. Then there were the sugar and cotton States, where the slave was sent to end his days in toil. In the census of 1830 and 1840 they would see the fluctuation of human beings which took place in these two descriptions of States. In North Carolina and Virginia they would find an enor mous increase in the number of human beings. What became of them ? If they looked to another par tof the census they a ould ascertain. In Louisiana and Alabama they would find a proportionate decrease in the same period. Now, any Englishman who had travelled in the United States must be aware of the humid state of the climate of the places he had just named. Was any description of slavery more horrifying than the traffic which was carried on between Africa and the Brazils, where they saw human beings driven, in bands of three and four hundred, from one State to another, in the same vs ay that the': drove oxen in this country to Smithfield. God forbid that heshould say one word in c x:enuation of any form of slavery, but this, he must say, was more horrible than the other. How a Christian could brit g up 500 or 600 human beings till the age of maturity, and then send them to labour, which generally terminates their existence in fi,e or six years, was to him most surprising. There was something in it that surpassed the same trade on the coast of Africa. Brazil had given them the power to exercise the right of search, but the Republic of the United States stood out against the right and threw every obstacle in the way to prevent a sup pression of the slave trade. The United States, re fusing to submit to this right, had virtually taken it away; but not content with refusing to submit to the right, they held themselves out to other countries as the fosterers and apostles of slavery. Could they wonder, then, that any nation entertaining notions of national freedom and national pride, should say, " We do not know why ate should submit—other persons have re fused to do so, and why should we do so?" It was all vet y well for Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite to talk about maintaining the right of search, but under their present system it was impossible they could carry it out. They would even have Spain asking to be released. The reason the right of search could not be maintained was in ccmsequence of the conduct of the United States of America, and for the slave trade going on between Congo and Brazil, the United States were more answer able than any other power. America seemed to glory in being the evil genius of this traffic, and they openly avowed their determination to encourage this state of so ciety. He thought he had made out a case that the re public of the United States had acted, and were acting, in a manner most culpable, and to them ought to ascribed the evil arising out of the African slave trade. On those grounds. then, he would say he thought he had made out clearly this fact, that of all the countries in which the slave trade was carried on, the United States stood alone as most determined to resist the right of search, and as preser ting every manner of facility for the continuance of the slave trade to a much greater extent than that between Brazil and the Coast of Africa.— (Hear, hear.) But was it because the United States had this facility in the slave trade that they would treat slaves more leniently ? or was it to be supposed that this was a reason why those jobbers in black flesh would not become more numerous than ever r—(Hear, hear ) It had been said that this right of search would be a great boon, and one which all who detested the slave trade should applaud ; but he would confess be was utterly at a loss to understand how the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite could reconcile it with his conscience to encou rage slavery in one part of the world, and lend his aid to a partial suppression of it in another, and he would in deed be very curious to learn how he could do so.— (Hear, hear.) There certainly was something like a want of consistency here, for while in the Budget it was stated that the object which,above all others, the Govern ment were anxious to effect, namely, the suppression of the slave trade—they in the same breath said, that under existing circumstances they could not interfere with that trade in the United States.—(Hear, hear.) It would be rather precipitate in him (Mr. Macaulay) to have anticipated such a course by the Right lion. Gentleman ; but as he had adopted it he (Mr. Macau lay) felt bound to state his reasons for the vote he should give in favour of his Noble Friend's motion.—(Hear, hear.) In the abstract he fully admitted and recognised the power and authority that moral obligation ought to exercise; and if an opportunity offered for doing a bene volent and kind act, to neglect that opportunity would be highly blameable. There were some in the com munity who would attempt to justify such a course ; but at the same time people were not bound to look after the affairs of others to the prejudice of the interests of their own families. If they did act in this manner they would producs more misery than happiness where they intended the latter—(Hear, hear)—and therefore he would conter d for it, on the same principle, that a Prime Minister should not injure the interests of his own country in order to benefit those of others. He would then say to the Right Ilon. Baronet, it would be better to attempt the amelioration or removal; of a grievance that affected the interests of this country, than to attempt to deal with that which did not. He would 11,1 s Hon. Gentlemen to look at the factory system, and he would ask, would it not be ab surd for the Prime Minister to propose that he should undertake to supply a measure for the emanci pation of the serfs of Russia, and call upon the Emperor of that vast country to undertake the correction of the English factory abuses?—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Now in taking this view of the subject, he begged to assure the House he did not mean to deal in diffuse argument or sophistry; on the contrary, he conceived that this was a common sense view of the question, and he had adopted it in order to vindicate his principles and state his reasons for the vote he should give.— (Hear, hear.) When he first came into Parliament he found the slave trade going on in unmitigated force, and he gave every aid in his power to bring about its sup pression ; and the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary, knew very well that he (Mr. Macaulay) resigned his office into the hands of Earl Spencer when he felt himself bound to differ from him on the slave apprenticeship project ; and that, too, at a time when office was as much acceptable to him as it could be to any man.—(Hear. hear.) His resigna tion was not accepted ; but in the meantime the slave trade had been very much mitigated, and lie was happy to be able to say he lent his aid to removing the stigma from England that the continuation of that traffic in human flesh placed upon it. He now came to the ques tion of the slave trade in Louisiana, and his opinion was that it did stand in the same position as those of the West Indies ; for the former were obliged to work from sunrise to sunset for the commonest necessaries of life. They, too, had a right to be relieved, for all nations were entitled to enjoy a state of comparative freedom ; and he would be as anxious to lend his aid for the amelioration of those grievances which Ireland had to complain of, as for those of the slaves ; but at the same time he should confess, that when he took up a New York paper, and read the Speech of the Presi dent's son against the Government of this country, he felt half inclined to retrace his steps.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The next point of the Right lion. Baronet's policy upon this question, to which he would call atten tion, was in reference to the refining of sugar. But here he would take the liberty of endeavouring to illus trate the course of the Right Hon. Baronet, by relating an anecdote which he had read in a Spanish novel, called Gil Blas." There was a character in that that put him forcibly in mind of the Right Hon. Baronet's public course. The character was an old silversmith, who affected great piety, and the most scrupulous and austere observance of all the forms of his religion. He went to mass every morning, and never missed a day, while he was remarked as being continually counting over his beads. —(Laughter.) This old man made it a habit to tell his apprentice that of all human crimes there was not one of which he had so great a horror as the robbery of a church, and that no inducement could be sufficiently strong to make him become a purchaser of any articles stolen from a church.—(Hear, and laughter.) In a very few days after having indulged in one of those sermons to his apprentice, a very suspicious, ill-looking fellow came into the shop and offered a silver crucifix and other articles of church plate fur sale. The silver smith recoiled with horror, and said he would not buy them. " Not buy them," said the man, " Well, then, will you melt them down for me?" " Oh, that is quite another thing," said the old man—(Great laughter)—so lie took the precious relics between the points of a tongs and melted them down; and then,turning to his apprentice, he asked him did he not observe how carefully he had avoided touching the relics—(Renewed laughter.) Now, he contended, that this was precisely the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet, in reference to the slave-trade ; and he would contend for it that nothing could have a more immoral tendency than such quibbling with so vital a question.—(Hear.) He would ask, why seem to admire the doctrines of Mr. Fowel Buxton, or Dr. Lushington, and not practice them ? He did not mean to accuse the Right Hon. Baronet of hypocrisy, but he would say, he could not but regret the influence his course would have on the public mind,—(Hear, hear.) When he remembered the strnggle that had been made in that house for the emancipation of the slaves, he was indeed astonished how any of the Hon. Members oppo site could lend the weight of their influence and abilities to favour the present system.—(Hear, hear.) When the Bill was brought in for the emancipation of the slaves, the Right Hon. Baronet said he could not take any part in it, and begged to be absolved from any share in the responsibility of it. And in the year 1833, the late Vice-President of the Board of Trade said that the reason such a cry had been raised about the differ ence between the amount of labour necessary for pro ducing coffee and tobacco, as compared to that of sugar, arose from the peculiar properties of the different soils, and contended that the grinding labour in this country was much worse. Mr. GLAI)STONE was understood to deny that he ever had said any such thing. Mr. MACAULAY—He could refer the Hon. Member to the report of his speech, and he would find he had quoted him correctly. But, speaking of the horrors of the slave trade, he could not help expressing his surprise at observing the manner in which Hen. Members oppo site moved from side to side, instead of sticking to the West India question.—(Hear, hear.) Having now stated his reasons for the vote he should give, he would con clude by declaring it would surprise him much if Hon. Gentlemen opposite could reconcile their conduct with their professions.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. GLADSTONE said that the Right Hon Gentle. man had brought a .evere charge against him—namely, that he had used conflicting arguments at one time or another, as they might happen to promote the West Indian interest. During the whole of these discussions he (Mr. Gladstone) had never, to his knowledge, said one t,ord upon t he ',attire of tl e sugar cultivation. being in itself destructive of life. In the year 1833 there was an extremely exaggerated notion abroad on this subject. He had stated so then, and he believed so still; but in all the speeches with which he had troubled the House in the discussions within the last four years, he had never said a single syllable as to the effect upon human life of the sugar cultivation of Brazil and Cuba. He therefore begged to observe that the exceedingly severe charge which the Eight Hon. Gentleman had made was totally groundless and incapable of being sub stantiated. Sir J. GRAHAM, in rising to address the House, disclaimed any desire of placing himself in competition with the Right Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down. It would be disadvantageous for almost any Gentleman in that House to t follow a speech so able and so brilliant as that which had just been delivered by the Right Hon. Gentleman. — (Cheers.) And he could assure the House that it was from a sense of duty alone that he rose to address them on the present occasion. He felt more particularly im pelled to do so by the personal appeal which the Right Hon. Gentleman had made to him. That appeal re lat. d to a circumstance which redounded to the honour of that Right Hon. Gentleman, and he (Sir James Gra ham) willingly- bore his testimony as to the strict accu racy of the statement which he had made. It referred to the period when that gr. at question of emancipatio❑ of slaves in our West India colonies was under discussion, during the administration of Earl Grey, of which he (Sir James Graham) was a member, a hen the question respecting apprenticeship arose, and the Right Hon. Genth man, then ho7ding a place in the Govern ment of Earl Grey, differed in opinion from the executive Government on a material point, affecting, as he thought, the interests of the slave, and he was anxious, by his vote, to support a particular arrangement for the ad vancement of that interest. The Right Hon. Gentleman on that occasion, r. garilless of all personal interests, and from a sense of duty, did place at the disposal of the Go vernment the office which he then held, in order that he might support that principle to which lie was attached. He (Sir James Graham) had taken a part in public af fairs with reference to slavery and the slave trade, as he believed a consistent one. He was a member of the administration in which the Right Hon. Gentleman retired. He was a colleague, and an intimate colleague, of his Noble Friend the present Secretary for the Colonies, whose duty it was to bring forward that particular mea sure ; and to the best of his belief, he had given that measure his cordial and sincere support, and ever since he had had a seat in Parliament, he did not think he had omitted an opportunity of recording his vote in favour of the emancipation of the slaves, To the best of his belief he had given his uniform and constant support to the measures of emancipation, which, in his judgment, he thought conducive to the interests of the black population of our colonies. He must be permitted to observe on the able speech which they had just heard, that, brilliant as that speech was, connected with one portion of the subject then under discussion, yet he could not regard it as taking a comprehensive view of the nature of the subject then under discussion. The Right Hon. Gentleman commenced his speech by observing that he would not deal with this as a commer cial or a financial question, that he would rather treat it as a subject touching upon political morality. Now he (Sir J. Graham) thought that such a great question as that under discussion could not be considered in such a light, for this question could not rightly he regarded abstractedly as a question purely of political morality, discarding financial and commercial conside rations. On the contrary, he was bound to treat this question as one involving not only a question of political morality, but also a question of finance and commerce of the highest moment. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that when he considered this question of slavery, he took a very different view of it. With respect to the slavery of the West Indies, in regard to political mo rality, and that of the slaves in the territories of other countries not immediately connected with our domestic legislature, it was not for him (Sir J. Graham), occupy ing the station which he did, to follow the Right Hon. Gentleman into a discussion on the social institutions of a great country with which her Majesty entertained amicable relations. At the same time, from mauy of the private feelings entertained on this subject—he was bound to say individually—that he could not express, with honesty, any great difference of opinion. He was bound to say, as a Minister of the Crown, that this ques tion must be looked on as a question of finance and com merce. He thought an abundant supply of sugar might be obtained at a lower price, with very great advantage to the consumer, by a reduction in the duty on sugar imported from the British colonies and British posses sions. —(Hear, bear.) He could not altogether dis card from his consideration the present position of the West India colonies. He thought the Noble Lord who had opened this discuscion did discard that con sideration. Although the West India planters had been compensated by a liberal pecuniary grant, yet the means by which their property was cultivated was almost de stroyed. Considerations of humanity had induced them to impose restrictions on their obtaining free-labour as a substitute for slave-labour. Under these circumstances, he conceived that it was the duty of the British Govern ment to supply the British consumers from that market. He could not discard from his consideration the fact, that in the East there was a population of 100 millions, who were ready to consume our manufactures to an almost unlimited extent. But they had not the means of paying with their produce, and making remittances. It should be remembered that there were places under this Government whose native manufac tures had been entirely destroyed. They had a soil peculiarly well adapted to the growth fof sugar. An Honourable East India Director (Mr. Hogg), had said that the valley of the Ganges, pro perly cultivated, was capable of producing a sufficient supply of sugar for the whole of Europe, in dependent of all other sources. Now under these cir cumstances, the question was not one purely of a moral, but of a mixed consideration—of commerce and finance. Would the House permit him shortly to address them upon what had been urged with respect to the dis tinction between free-labour and slave-grown sugar? The Hon. Member for Dumfries was the first in that House to trace that distinction. In 1840 the ques tion was first raised by that Hon. Member. On that occasion the Honourable Member said that it was his wish to propose that the reduction of the duty should be made in favour of free-labour sugar, only—that he was anxious to confine the benefit of the reduction to the manufacture of sugar not made by slaves. On that oc casion the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton resisted the motion of the Hon. Member for Dumfries. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton, and the Noble:Lord and his colleagues opposed that motion. On that occasion, the Hon Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward) presented a petition from Sheffield, praying that sugar, the produce of free labour, should be ad mitted under such advantages as to exclude all sugar the produce of slave labour. The Hon. Member fur Sheffield, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton, expressed the opinion that this petition was indicative of the feelings of the people of this country. In the debate which took place on that occa sion reference was made to cotton and tobacco, which wt re the products of slave labour, being admitted into the British market. How did the Right Hon. Gentle man the Member for Taunton meet that case ? Why, exactly as they (the Government) did now. In the first place, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton contended that cotton and tobacco did not enter into competition with similar articles raised by free labour in our own colonies.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He thought, if he was not mistaken, that the expres sion of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton was, that he was not prepared to open a flood gate to the supply of sugar which would inundate the British market, if the proposition of the Hon. Member for Dumfries were carried. What was the language used by Dr. Lushington on that occasion? He said that the admission of slave-labour sugar was, in his opinion, an abandonment of the whole of their anti slavery policy, and that if it was their object to main tain that policy, it would be impossible to admit foreign free-labour and foreign slave-labour sugar on the same terms. That was not only the opinion of Sir S. Lush ington, but of many other persons who were distin guished advocates of the Emancipation Act, and who admitted that the measure proposed, if carried, would be a departure from the established policy with regard to the slave trade, :and that it would be a national disgrace, for the sake of a paltry gain, to depart from a policy to which the faith of the nation was pledged. He had voted on that occasion with the ma jority. He had, in 1841, adhered to the same course which he adopted in 1831, and from that line of policy he had not receded. The Noble Lord who brought for ward the present proposition had made one or two ad missions in the course of his speech, which seemed to him (Sir J. G raham) to be almost conclusive with regard to the vote to which he hoped the House would arrive that night. He admitted that the West Indian proprietors were entitled to some protection, and that that must be given in the shape of a discriminating duty of Bs. or 103. He( Sir J. Graham) would not follow .his Right Hon. Friend the Member fur Newark into the calculations he made with regard to the effect this would have upon the revenue. He believed that that could not be effected without considerable loss to the re venue. It was not contended by her Majesty's Government that it was possible to give a protective duty to the colonies ( which they did not mean to deny was their object) without some loss to the revenue. But it was enough that the Go vernment had benefited the consumer by reducing the price of sugar by Id. or 11/ 2 d. per lb. Nothing was so easy as to say, when you enunciate some general principle, that those who did yet at once put it into practice were dishonest, but, on the other hand, those who would do so without considering all the bearings of such a course might be called absurd. Nothing was so dan gerous, when one was dealing with a great question, as to con sider it without reference to the circumstances which might surround it. He was of opinion that the measure brought for ward by her Majesty's Government would effect great objects, would give to the British consumer a considerable reduction in the price of sugar, which was an article of first necessity. Com bined with that reduction of price it would give to the British colonist great relief from the difficulties of his position. It would give great encouragement in the East Indies to the growth of that particular product for which the soil was best suited, and all this would be effected without stimulating the slave trade, against which the faith and honour of the country was pledged. He thought it would be a difficult matter to re concile their professions of desiring to put down the slave trade if they opened the British markets to the consumption of slave-la bour sugar. To make no distinctionbetween free-labour and slave labour sugar, would be to give a great stimulus to the slave trade. And to make such a distinction would in his opinion be a great discouragement to it. Any such result fostered by the Legislature, sanctioned last year by a large majority, would be consistent with the course they had heretofore pur sued, and to which the faith of Parliament was plighted. He had, therefore, no apprehension that a measure which lowered the price of sugar to the consumer, without departing from the anti-slave trade policy hitherto adopted. would not receive the sanction of the British community, and he could not hesitate to give the present motion his most decided opposition. Mr. C. WOOD said he did not feel surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, had not at all adverted to the brilliant speech of his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Macau lay.) He did not attempt any reply to a speech, one the most brilliant in language and most unanswerable in argument which he had ever heard.—( Hear, hear.) The complaint of the Right Hon. Baronet was, that his Right Hon, Friend bad only dealt with the political and mural view of the question, omitting altogether any notice of _ the com mercial and financial view of it. But it was admitted, that in tint view of it the Government were out of court.— ( Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend took the political and moral view of it because the financial and commercial one was entirely given up.—( Hear, hear.) And his Right Hon. Friend had not left the Government a leg to stand on, as far as the we ral aspect of the question went ; and the Right Hon. Baronet must have felt thi s strong l y, f or h did not even attempt a reply. In answer to the argument of his Noble Friend, that the Government measure would encourage slave.grown, sugar, bemuse the free-grown sugar, which now supplied the markets of the world, would be attracted to this country, and its place would be supplied with slave-grown sugar, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member fir Newark said that the whole quan tity of free-labour sugar would not be supplied by slave-labour sugar, though he admitted the measure had that tendency. Now he (Mr. Wood) thought that was mere quibbling.— (Hear, hear.) How could he doubt but that the measures of the Government would have that effect ? ( Hear, hear. ) With regard to the calculation of the Right Hon Baronet (Sir R. Peel) he said that 280,000 tons of sugar would be con sumed in consequence of th e re d uction of id. or lid. per lb. Admitting that his calculation was right, it would not give a large consumption, after all, for it would only be 201 b. per head in a mutation of 2 8,000,000 rople. That amount was consumed in 1831. There was aothing extravagant, there fore, in the calculation, supposing the price was lowered. But would the price be brought down ? Ile did not think that there would be any reduction of price equal to the amount which the Government reckoned upon. He considered that there would be no adequate benefit given to the commercial interest by the course that was to be pursued. It was almost impossible to say to what particular species of sugar the duty would apply. He believed that there was the greatest difficulty in discovering the difference between white and cloyed sugar. Three •fourtha of the description of sugar upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman relied for procuring duty was sugar of the higher price. The Right Hon. Gentle man had almost relieved him from the necessity of saying any thing on this subject. by st a ti, that the supply from colonial sources would be larger than he had calculated. Of course, in tint case, a less amount of foreign sugar would come in, arid thus the loss to the revenue would also be greater than had been anticipated. He believed that, in spite of the course now pursued by the Government, they would in the end deal with sugar exactly as they had done with coffee. After re sistingtt hh ee my esev le t v h ne e tsu r ;a t l a ti l yt u ce wastai m o r e i htoi to the fit d hr i me ffi r e e o o n u n t s House l e a t d n t o d u a t proposedietsh that in tt the yt chwaasoteu refol d d p c um r o e ff t s e i ou e ne , the same course with respect to sugar. Notwithstanding all that was said on the subject of slavery, the question, stripped of appearances, resolved itself into this—whether a heavy tax should be imposed on the people of this country, for the bene fit of the West India colonies? He thought the Government were to blame for not seizing the opportunity now afforded to them of admitting all foreign sugar. They would, in his opinion, have acted with more wisdom had they pursued that course: He did not believe that the benefit to the consumer mentioned by the Hon. Alember for Newark would be adequate to the loss he would feel from the differential duty. He was sorry, also, to hear that the income-tax was clearly settled onthcm for three years, and that there was no indistinct prospect of their having it imposed on them for a st:11 longer period. Sir R. PEEL said, one complaint that had been made by the Noble Lord opposite was certainly unreasonable and unjust. The Noble Lord said that the Government had not, on this occasion, entered into any detailed explanation of their reso lutions respecting the sugar duties. Why, the wish of the Government was to have an opportunity of entering upon that detailed explanation.—( Hear, hear.) They had that day given notice for moving the Committee of Ways and Means. His Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was particularly anxious that the Govern ment should have an opportunity, in that Committee of Ways and Means, of supplying that explanation which he ( Sir R. Peel), in the general statement he had made, had omitted to give. His Right Hon. Friend was interrupted in that inten tion by the Noble Lord bringing forward a motion, perfectly fairly he ad m itt e d, b ut w hi c h a t an y rate prevented his Right Hon. Friend from of availing himself the opportunity he sought. The Noble Lord, in bringing forward his motion, raised quite a different issue from that which would be raised in the discussion of the details of the resolutions of the Govern ment ; and the Noble Lord contended that before they entered into the Committee of Ways and Means, before they discussed the resolutions of the Government in detail, they should join in a discussion of that question, which had been more than once discussed, namely, whether or not it was poli tic to exclude 'slave-labour sugar from competition with the produce of their own colonies. The Noble Lord avoided en tering on all the details of the subject, confining himself parti cularly to the subject—a great and important subject—to which his own motion referred. He said nothing about the establishment of a discriminating duty on sugar, he said nothing of th e d e t a il s o f the resolutio n ; h e (Sir R. Peel) thought that the Noble Lord invited them to enter into the great question whether or not there ought to be any discrimi nating duty on sugar the produce of slave labour. They had followed his example, and endeavoured to imitate him. He thought, therefore, that with respect to the complaint of the Noble Lord that the Government had not given a detailed statement of their intentions, that complaint was quite without foundation.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord had referred them to the income-tax. Now, he ( Sir R. Peel) was cer tainly surprised at observing that while the Noble Lord con stantly attacked the income-tax, and denounced the policy of continuing it, he yet expressed ;his determination to vote in favour of it.—( Cheers and laughter.) Why, if Hon. Gentle men opposite disliked and disapproved of the income-tax, why did not they vote against it ?—(Cheers.) If it was such an inquisitorial and oppressive tax, why did they concur with him (Sir R. Peel) in the propocal for continuing it for a longer .—( period • 2 Cheers. ) And observe, it was stated that the Government gave no sufficient guarantee that the income tax would cease at the end of three years. They said themselves that they saw every probability of its continuance beyond that period. Why, how could they reconcile this declaration with their vehement objections to that tax—( Hear, hear)—while they were so passively content to go on with him in its fa vour?—( Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman opposite said that he (Sir E. Peel) had convinced him that there would not ac tually be a su. plus —nay, that at the end of two years frem the present time there would be a small deficiency, and therefore he voted for the income-tax ' • he voted for it to supply that de ficiency. But the Honr Gentleman contemplated rally a small deficiency of some 500,0001. or 600,0001., and if it was no more than that amount, surely their financial.ingenuity might supply that without recourse to the income-tax. Why, he (Sir Robert Peel) asked him to vote for a tax producing 5,200,000/ a-year ! and yet the Honourable Gentleman said he was content to continue the present tax.—( Hear, hear.) He said that at the end of one or two years there would be a small deficiency—and, therefore, the Hon. Gen tleman came to the conclusion, not that a small tax producing some 500,0001. or 600,0001. should be imposed, but that a tax producing the large sum of 5,200,000/. a• year should be continued in operation.---( Hear, hear.) And this, not for three years only, for the Hon. Gentleman said himself that he believed it would be imposed for six. But at the end of three years it was very possible that the Hon. Gentleman might be reminded elsewhere of his support of this tax, and therefore at the beginning of 1845 he thought it prudent to leave it on record, as it might be convenient to him at the end of 1848, that he had in debate disapproved of this tax. The fact was that Hon. Gentlemen opposite decidedly approved of the proposition of her Majesty's Government.—( Cheers, and laughter.) It was not because they saw a probability of a small deficiency that they voted for this tax, but because they saw that this was the proper time to try a great, and, he would call it, a bold experiment with respect to the taxation of the country !—(Loud cheers.) But Hon. Gentlemen opposite said, also, that the attempt to make commercial treaties with other countries had failed. Had he ever denied it?—( Hear, hear.) And her Majesty's Government proposed this—that as other countries would not enter into those treaties, at least as far as the negotiations with respect to those treaties were protracted for a very long time, so that the relations of com merce were thereby disturbed in the meantime, while in the end the negotiations did not come to a satisfactory termination —they proposed measures, not stipulating for any reciprocal advantages from other countries; but believing the reductions they proposed to make to be intrinsically good, and calculated to promote their own interests, they were ready to make those reductions, trusting that the e ffi cacy of this example would ulti mately tell other countries. It her Alajesty's Government had been wrong in their attempts to make these commercial treaties, at all events it wa s an error into which other Govern ments had also fallen. Up to the present period, every Ministry had attempted to make commercial treaties, and if other countries w4uld enter into them, it would doubtless secure a double advantage. It would secure the great advan tage of carrying on a traffic with many of those countries; it would also be a great advantage if they induced those foreign nations to make reductions in their duties on the produce of this country. But the question was, should they propose a great benefit to themselves, in the hope of, in time, prevailing on those other countries to give them the benefit of reciprocal treaties? The Noble Lord approved of the proposition of the Government.—(Cheers.) Then, he also approved of the income-tax. If he did not, would the Noble Lord ask them to remove three millions of taxation without that tax? It was impossible that Hon. Gentlemen opposite could, in the face of the country, reconcile the votes they were giving, with their speeches, under any other impression that would be favourable to them,except that they approved in their hearts of the proposition of her Majesty's Government.—( Cheers.) Now, he must own, after reading the resolution of the Noble Lord, after having listened to a great part of the speech of the Noble Lord, he could not understand why the Noble Lord did not, the other evening, vote for the motion of the lion. Member for Man chester (Mr. 111. Gibson).—( Cheers.) A great part of the speech of the Noble Lord was occupied in showing that they were putting money in the pockets of the West Indians, by establishing in their favour a discriminating duty ; that that was a great loss to the consumer in this country; that the State did not get the whole benefit of it; that the difference was not divided le tvveen the consumer and the producer, and that a large share of the reduction went into the pockets of the producers.—( Hear, hear.) Why, if he ( Sir R. Peel) had not read the resolution of the Noble Lord, and had only listened to a portion of his speech, he should have taken it for granted, that the Noble Lerd was one of the Gentlemen who would have given their cordial support to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Manchester. The Noble Lord appeared to be oscillating between these benches and the benches opposite.—(Laughter and cheers ) For the Noble Lord had made that excellent speech in faveur of the motion of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and then said, " on account of the position of the West Indian colonies, con sidering the great experiment they made respecting slavery— considering that sufficient time had not elapsed to test that ex periment, he was exactly of his (Sir R. Peel's) opinion, that the West Indies had a good right to protection." The lion. Member for Stockport, assuming all the airs of an injured fair one—(Laughter)—said, on a former evening, that he (Sir Robert Peel) had jilted him.—( Great laughter.) He ( Sir Robert Peel) felt very grateful to the Honourable Member for the support to which he had referred as having given him, on another occasion, on the proposition of the Honourable Member for Bristol (Mr. Miles) when he ( Sir R. Peel) had the good fortune to vote with the Hon. Gentleman, on the only occasion on which he had ever voted with him in his life. The proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol was, that the duty on colonial sugar should be re duced to 205., and that there should be a discriminating duty on sugar produced by free labour, which was not sugar of British production. 'I hat was the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol. He ( Sir R. Peel) said he thought the reduction of duty on West India sugar to 20s. would be of very I ttle benefit to the general consumer, and that he thought it was infinitely better, when they made a reduction, that it should be such a reduction as would be felt ; arid he had held this language that unless a discriminating duty was established as to the pro• duce of British plantations, they should not attempt to impose a duty o n su ga r the produce of free labour. If the House would not sanction the imposition of a discriminating duty on sugar the produce of British plantations, they ought not on sugar the produce of free labour. He thought Hen. Gentlemen might with justice accuse the Noble Lord of "flirtation." The Noble Lord, at the beginning of the present " session, said that " p r ote c tion" was the bane of agriculture." That phrase sounded remarkably well; but if the question were put to the Noble Noble Lord that all protection to agriculture be removed, it would be found that the Noble Lord would record his vote for the continuance of this bane on agriculture. —(Laughter, and c r ie s of " Hear, hear.") The N o bl e L or d laid down the general principle that protection was the bane of agriculture. Lord JOHN RUSSELL made an observation which was inaudible in the gallery. Sir ROBERT PEEL-oh, but the Noble Lord said, at the close of last session, that he thought agriculture was fairly entitled to protection.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches.) He said he thought so, on account of the local charges to which agriculture was subjected, as well as on account of the malt-tax—(Renewed cries of " Hear, hear,")—and the Noble Lord did disturb the agricultural mind dur ng the recess, by holding out strong expectations that he should propose some measure for removing or diminishing the malt-tax.—( Cheers, and cries of "Hear, hear.") His agricultural friends—( Laughter )—were in expectation of some proposition of this sort.—( Hear, hear.) But the Noble Lord would content himself with voting for his proposition for re moving the duty on cotton, and the Noble Lord would vote with him if the question should be introduced, notwithstanding his previous calculations against any reduction of the malt-tax. —(Laughter and cheers.) The Hon. Member should not say that he ( Sir Robert Peel) had jilted him. It was the Noble Lord who had jilted him--( Renewed laughter)—with those fine promises ; and when the Hon. Gentleman came to the Noble Lord, asking him to fulfil his decla-ations, the Noble Lord turned round and voted with him ( Sir Robert Peel.)—( Cries of Hear, hear," in which Mr. Cobden and other leading Members in the Opposition joined.) He thought it was better not to enter into all the details of the resolution. He would confine himself to the question whether or not it was right that sugar, the produce of slave labour, should be admitted into competition with sugar, the produce of f ree l a b our . H e was glad that thi s matt er had been discussed in the tone and temper in which it had been. It was a question involving great financial considerations. Although they had been charged with hy pocrisy, he believed it was their duty as Ministers of the Crown to bear with those imputations. Every Ho nourable Gentleman who had used them had disclaimed any intention of giving offence ; but the Right Hon. Gentle man had certainly charged them with dissimulation in no very courteous language. But the Right Hon. Gentleman added that though he disliked the proposition of the Government, nothing was further from his mind than to charge them with hypocrisy, " Although," he said, " you have recorded a reso lution recognising this principle, if it were not for that resolu tion and a mistaken idea of consistency, I am convinced you would have taken a different course, and one more in accord. ance with your own convictions." In short that they, the Go vernment, would not have excluded slave-labour sugar from competition with sugar the produce of free-labour. Now, he must say, that having considered and reccossidered the subject, even if this resolution had not existed, he should not have been prepared to admit sugar the produce of slave labour into competition with sugar the produce of free labour. Notwithstanding the very able speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he did not thinkit would Ise just towards our colonies, or at all consistent with the principles which they had avowed in the face of the world, to admit sugar, the pro duce of slave- labour, at the same discriminating duty into competition with free-labour produce. First of all, concerning the question of policy. So far as this country was concerned, if we regarded commerce and fiaance alone, he was bound at once to say that he could not defend this duty.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) He thought, upon mere ab stract reference either to finance or commercial considera tions, they ought not to make distinctions between free and slave-labour sugar. But it was impossible to dis regard the condition of the West Indian colonies.— (Hear.) He admitted that Parliament had behaved with great liberality so far as individuals were concerned, and that a great pecuniary sacrifice had been made ; but he did not think that pecuniary sacrifice, however onerous to the people of this country—however complete as a compensation in in dividual cases—arid he doubted that it was complete—but he did not think, he repeated, that that relieved them from the necessity of considering in what relation we were to these co lonies, nor would it justify them in admitting slave-grown sugar into competition with theirs. Now, first as regarded the slave-trade and slavery. You would tell them in that case, to enter into competition with Brazil and Cuba, countries where not only slavery existed, but where the slave-trade was carried on to a great extent, and in violation of public engagements. No doubt but after some time the colonists, with free !about, might be ultimately able to compete with slave labour. It might be gainful to the commerce of this country to admit sugar, the produce of slave-labour, and to the consumer as well, but it would so disturb the relations between this country and foreign countries, so materially interrupt progress towards an improved condition, and so disable the colonists from bear ing the burdens to which they were subjected, that he doubted whether, ultimately, if we maintained existing colonial rela tions, the sacrifice we would be obliged to make for their inte rest would not countervail any immediate advantages from sacrificing the produce of these colonies. The Right Hon. Gentleman asked how it was possible for them, with any re gard to consistency, to make the proposition they had made, looking at what they had done in respect to the admission of other articles the produce of slave-labour. How was it possible (continued the Right Hon. Gentleman) to make a proposition regarding particular articles, the produce of slave-labour, which they would not extend to other articles likewise the produce of slave-labour. And he referred in particular to articles the produce of the United States. The Right Hon. Gentleman spoke with the greatest indignation at the state of society there, in relation to slavery. He had not only ani madverted on the state of the law and usages of society there, but adverted to the declarations made by public men and the acts sanctioned by the constitutional organs of public opinion. The Right Hon. Gentleman said, that if there was any country against which the indignation of the civilised world should be directed it was the United States of Aiuerica—that the United States continued slavery in its most aggravated form—that there were some States which bred slaves for the purpose of labour—that the United States was the Power which had pre vented the extension of the right of search, which if universally adopted would be effectual. '1 he Right Hon. Gentleman said that the present state of public opinion in France would not have existed if the United States had not resisted the right of search. All that might be true. But the United States had a right to continue this condition of slavery —they had a right to refuse being parties to the right of search. They might have been very unwise to take either one course or the other, but being an independent Power they had a per fect right to use that discretion. The Right Hon. Gentleman esid that we admitted their cotton, and why thould we exclude their sugar? The Noble Lord did not think that it would be wise to interfere with the proceedings in this matter of the United States. He did not think that it would be either right or wite to interfere with the slaves passing from one slave State to another. He seemed, indeed, as he had said, to en tertain great doubts whether, by such interference, if he did in terfere, he would be in any way serving the interests of hu manity. But what, notwithstanding all this, did he say ? He charged the Government with hypocrisy, in refusing to admit sugar the produce of slave labour, while at the same time, by the repeal of the duty, they had given free admission to cotton, which was the produce of stave labour also. But what was the cr se ? There was a material difference between the two articles—there was a material difference between the production of the sugar of Cuba and Brazil, and the cotton of the United States. The labour necessary for the production of cotton was far less than that necessary for the production of sugar. Again, there was a material difference also in the healthiness of the cotton plantations and the healthiness of the sugar plantations. But he (Sir R. Peel) did not mean to rely on that; but he did rely on this—that the two countries which would enter into competition with the sugar of our colonial possessions-- Cuba and Brazil—were placed under very different circumstances from those colonies, and it was necessary to consider this, in the imposition of the duties on sugar. The Noble Lord had said that he recognised certain duties which he had to fulfil to his own country and his family. The slaves, he acknowledged, were so situated in relation to him as to give them a claim on his humane interference. But he said, at the same time, that he doubted whether his inter ference would do them any good. Now he (Sir R. Peel) did beiieve that the importation of slave-grown sugar into this country inflicted such an injury on the lowest and most help less of all human beings, and such indeed as to give them a claim on our sympathy and interference. He said this claim was the greater from the injury being inflicted on the most helpless of human beings—he meant the negro population. What was our position with respect to the slave trade? They had put themselves into a position to interfere with those countries which deal in slaves. We had resolved to do all in our power to put down the slave trade wherever it might exist.—( Hear, hear.) For what purpose, he would ask the Noble Lord, was it, if not for this, that this country had constituted its cruisers the ge neral police of the world? The Noble Lord thought that we were unwise in this respect, and that might be, but we had used our utmost exertions to put down the slave trade. Other countries had engaged to co-operate with us in this great object. Many persons say that we are unwise in having entered into this undertaking. He did riot argue with them, he argued with that House ; and he did say, that having entered into that undertaking, it was their duty to carry it out. In 1837, the Hon. Me m b er f or O x f or d h a d said that those countries would zealeusy co-operate with us in the suppression of the slave trade. They had accordingly entered into treaties with Spain and Portugal for this object, and the Governments of those countries would do their utmost to suppress that abominable traffic. From various circumstances, the effect of this traffie was removed from us. We did not carry on the slave trade ourselves, and, therefore, its horrors were not brought before us. But he did believe that those horrors were in no way de creased, and he had a firm conviction that, if the sugar, the produce of slave-labour, were to be introduced into this coun try, it would give a very great stimulus to the slave trade, and increase those horrors which we had been at so much pains and expense to prevent. It was thought, and said by some, the anti-slave trade feeling was extinct in this country, but he believed that such was not the case, and that if the exertions which had of late years been made by the country to suppress the slave trade had rendered that feeling dormant, it had not by any means been extinguished. He did believe that, though dormant now, the feeling would immediately revive if any measures were to be taken which were likely in any way to re vive the horrors which that feeling protected. What were these horrors? In a space where the decks were only from two to two-and-a-half feet apart, between 600 and 700 human beings were crowded and transferred in that state from the coast of Africa to Cuba and Brasil. Only conceive the hor rors of from 600 to 700 human beings being crowded into such a space, and enduring through the whole of the Middle Pas sage in a confinement of two feet-and-a-half. On their arrival in Brazil, their limbs were so paralysed that they were unfit for the business for which they had been conveyed there. The two countries which carry on the slave-trade are those countries whose produce the Noble Lord was desirous to in troduce without discriminating duties. Beside the advantage which those countries possessed in the cheapness of slave labour, there was also another. In Brazil there was more fresh land, virgin land, than in any other from which sugar was introduced into this country. Now, the opening of the markets for the importation of Brazilian sugar, without any differential duty, would be greatly instrumental in promoting slavery. The effect of the efforts of this country showed the full advantage derived in the suppression of the slave trade. Last ,year the number of vessels captured and condemned was thirty-seven or forty-seven vessels. In 1844, as compared with 1843, it appeared that the vessels condemned by the Commission Courts—he did not allude to the Admiralty Courts—was in 1843 fifteen, while in 1844 they were thirty five. 'I his, it might be said, was an imperfect test, and he was bound to allow it, for he believed that as many slaves were now landed on the coast of Brazil as there ever were. They did not diminish, but this was no fault of the arrangements with that country, but the fact was the authorities neglected their duty in this matter. In Cuba, when General Valdez (who was appointed to the office by Espartero) was Governor, to his honour be it spoken, he had honestly and earnestly exerted himself to suppress the slave trade. During his government the efforts to that end were eminently successful, and the number of slaves intro duced into Cuba declined from 13,800 to 12,000, to 10,000, and in 1842 to 3,1 00. And he ( Sir R. Peel) believed, that if General Valdez had remained, the slave trade in Cuba would have been altogether suppressed. In Brazil, he be lieved the authorities were equally sincere, but private inte terest had proved too powerful for public duty, and the slave trade had revived, and, without the concurrence of the au thorities, he believed it would revive. Would it be consis tent to have a naval armament upon the coast of Africa, for the ostensible purpose of preventing the slave trade, and, at the same time, to have vessels laden with sugar, the produce and the support of that trade, sailing from Cuba and Brasil to our ports ?—( Cheers.) Those countries had entered into ut engagements with us for prohibiting the trade,slave_ear they had not fulfilled those engagements.—(B ,h He must admit that there seemed to be some inconsistency in allowing the importation of slave-grown cotton, and pro hibiting sugar.—( Hear.) He owned it was difficult to take any course on those subjects that would not be liable to the imputation of inconsistency. But he did not think that any one on the opposite side of the House would prohibit the importation of cotton which was the production of slave labour. --(Hear, hear.) But the question was, whether the importa tion of sugar from Brazil and Cuba, which was the great curse of the negro race, was to be permitted or not ? The growth of sugar in those countries was the greatest aggravation of all the horrors of the slave trade.—( Hear, hear.) The question was not whether we were inconsistent or not, but what was the course which we should pursue, all things considered, for promoting the great interests of humanity. We bad entered into engagements with other Governments, who joined with us in establishing a sort of naval police on the coast of Africa. Now, they might depend upon it, that if this country were to take measures for receiving an un limited quantity of sugar from Cuba and Brazil, we could not expect the co-operation of the Governments who aided us in our efforts for the suppression of the slave-trade, whilst we encouraged it with one hand, and thwarted it feebly with the other. He believed that the Governments of Europe were alive to the real state of this question. They felt that after the measures we had taken it I was not safe for them to continue slavery in their own posses sions in its present state.—( Hear, hear.) The King of Sweden had very recently taken measures for its modification in his possessions ; and the question of abolition in the Danish colonies was under discussion in the States of Denmark. A petition, most numerously signed, had been presented to the States, pra)ing slavery to cease.—(Cheers.) In France the question was under serious consideration whether slavery should be continued or not. And Portugal was making honourable ef forts to fulfil her engagements with this country. Even in the United States, where there were peculiar obstac'es—where there had been a resolution of Congress that no petition fur the ab,dition of slavery should be received ; public feeling was un dergoing a change—the resolution was rescinded, and now it was competent for every Member to present such a petition.— ( Cheers.) He might venture to say that, notwithstanding the state of public feeling in the United States, it would be very difficult to maintain slavery there on its present footing. It was not for him to offer any opinion upon the internal po licy of the United States—( Hear, hear)—but, speaking of Europe. he believed that there prevailed through Ger many, France, Sweden, and Denmark, a strong opinion that the time had arrived when they ought to follow the example of England—(Cheers)—that the time had arrived when an end should be put to the state of slavery.—(Cheers.) He hoped that the House would not come to any decision which would interrupt that course into which the current of public opinion throughout Europe had turned.—( Hear, hear.) England was now admitted to be the only power that took effective measures for the suppression of slavery--which made vigorous, deter mined efforts to put down the slave trade on the coast of Africa. —( Hear, hear.) There might be an inconsistency in ad mitting cotton the produce of slave countries; but that inconsistency did not affect the moral position which England held in the eyes of Europe on this question. The efihrts which we had made were acknowledged as most generous, and even splendid. But if we departed from that course—if we unintentionally, but practically and certainly, encouraged the slave trade, by admitting the sugar of Cuba and Brasil, it would be an admission that their efforts had failed, and it would appear to justify the assertion of Mr. Colquhoun, that we were reviving the slave trade on the coast of Africa under the name of apprenticeship. Whatever imputa tion might base been cast upon him (Sir R. Peel) for the course which he had taken upon the resolutions in 1841, he assured the House that if he now stood unfettered, he would vote against the proposition of the Noble Lord—that sugar, the pro duce of slave labour, should be admitted into the markets of Great Britain.—( Cheers.) Lord PALMERSTON said that, whatever might be the re sult of the debate, nothing could be more satisfactory to him than the discussion.—( Cheers and a laugh.) 'I he Right Hon. Baronet had made no attempt to answer the arguments which had been urged in favour of his Noble Friend's proposition.-- ( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet, as was usual with expert debaters, began his speech with topics in no way relavant to the question. The Right Hon. Baronet began with the income-tax, and taunted the Opposition with inconsistency in supporting that tax, and complaining that use had not been made of the surplus, so as to enable the Government to dispense with it at the end of three years.— (Hear, hear.) It was perfectly consistent for men to think that protection was the bane of the interests which it was meant to prosper, and at the same time that it was not ex pedient to n ithdraw it from the interests which had been long vested upon its faith. The Right Hon. Baronet had taunted the Opposition with their want of success in their commercial treaties with foreign Powers. Now, the Right Hon. Baronet some years ago seemed to expect that when he came into office he would be able to settle these matters. What was the fact? Why, the Right Hon. Baronet's Government had en tirely failed.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet threw over the commercial and financial part of this question, and justified the distinction they made between free-grown sugar and slave-grown sugar, on the ground that they had under taken to do all they could to suppress the slave trade. In this respect, his ground was much narrower than the ground taken up by his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, because they took their stand upon the general prin ciple of humanity, and contended, upon that principle, that the country ought to do everything toward discouraging slavery and the slave trade. The Right Hon. Baronet renounced this advantage, and took his stand upon the arrangements existing between foreign Powers and Great Britain, on the subject of the slave trade. The Right Hon. Baronet, in reply to the un answerable argument of his Hon. Friend the Member for Edin burgh, founded upon the importation of cotton, said the United States had not entered into a negotiation with this country, and, therefore, none had been violated. The United States were free from any engagements, and of course they had, said the Right Hon. Baronet, a right to breed slaves and employ them in the production of cotton. But, with regard to Brazil, the case was different, and he made the distinction to punish them for doing that which they had undertaken not to do. The Right Honourable Baronet had thus avoided the principle of humanity, and thrown himself solely upon the rights given to this country by the treaties. Brazil and Spain had entered into treaties, by which they bound themselves not to prosecute their trade in slaves. Those treaties were broken, and, there fore, as a punishment, this Government said they were enti tled to say their slave produce should not be admitted. If this argument, however, applied to one, it was applicable to all import duties on slave produce. If this protection were given to sugar, it ought to be given to coffee. But what did the Goverdment do last year? Why, they re duced the discriminating duty on Brazilian coffee, the produce of slave-labour.— ( Hear, hear.) This they did last year, but had they done nothing this year in direct violation of their principles? The Government proposed to reduce the duty on copper ore, and where slid copper ore come from ? From Cuba. How was it got from the bowels of the earth ? By the labour of slaves.—(Hear, hear.) Thus by the tariff of last year, and by the measures proposed, the Government directly violated the principles they asked the House to sanction—( Hear, hear)s—and withheld from the population of this country comforts and indulgences which might otherwise be afforded to them. But he must say that this course was inconsistent from beginning to end. He need hardly say that he concurred in all that had fallen from the Right Honourable Baronet about the horrors of the slave trade. It was a matter upon which the people and Parliament had always been united, and however strongly Honourable Members op posite might declare that the Opposition only agravated the slave-trade by their present course, he would venture to say, that there were those out of doors, who would confirm their opinion. Instead of the evils being increased there was no doubt they had been greatly diminished. In the year 1840, 1841, and 1842, the number of slaves imported into Cuba and the Brazils had very considerably fallen off, and no one denied the assertion of the Right Honourable Ba ronet that this change had resulted from exer tions made by the Government to suppress the traffic. Now, though he should feel sorry that there was any division of opinion upon this subject, he was very glad to hear the state ment of her Majesty's Ministers, that it was their intention not to relax in their endeavours until the slave trade should be en. tirely done away with. But whatever the opinion of the Go vernment should be on this question, or whatever their argu ments might be in support of this absurd doctrine of protection, he would ask how they meant to defend the course they intended to pursue of continuing this protection? Of what value, he would ask, would it be to the country that large estimates for the naval force should be granted, in order to keep up a number of armed vessels on the slave coasts, if those vessels had not the power of the right of search ?—( Hear, hear.) What had been the object of all modern Governments of England on this question? In the year 1814 it was a great object of Lord Castlereagh, and it was with that view that he entered into a treaty with Gene, and a few years afterwards the Duke of Wellington tried to get a consent from France for the abolition of slavery, but he found it to be impossible. Again, in the year 1818, the same experiment was tried with France, but again a refusal was the result. The same experiment was tried in 1823, and again in 1827, and with a like result. Well, then, the present Government came into office, and what did they do? Why, so far from following up this subject with perseverance, they recklessly threw it over board altogether.—( Hear, hear.) Then came the letter of Lord Aberdeen, which was now on the table, and that letter recommended the trial of an experiment as a substitute for what previous Governments recommended.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he would ask, what would b e the result, if 20,009 tons of sugar were taken out of the market ; whether that were the produce of slave labour or free labour, it would create a void which should be made up, and until it was, the price of what remained would be increased.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore it would be quite absurd to make distinctions which admitted of no difference, as in the proposed plan of the Go vernment. Therefore, whatever might have been the argu ments of Honourable Members opposite, there was no real ground on which they could support them ; and when those arguments came to be read by the public, and particularly the speech of his Right Honourable Friend the Member for Edinburgh, the opinion of the public would be that the interests of the consumers had been sacri ficed without any consideration for humanity, but that it had been done merely to promote the West India interests, which in the end it would be found had not been benefitted, but pa ralysed by such legislation, and upon whom real benefit wonld be conferred if all protection were withdrawn, and a fair and Lull and free competition given to every branch of industry. Sir C. NAPIER contended that sugar would be shipped from Cuba and Brazil and sent to Florida, reshipped to this country, and admitted as free-labour sugar. As to the slave trade, he believed that sending vessels to the coast of Africa was useless, unless they also sent cruisers to the coasts of Brand and Cuba to stop the slave-traders that escaped from the coast of Africa.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had put words into the mouth of the Noble Lord the Mein for the City of London, which he (Sir C. Napier) did not think the Noble Lord had used. The Right Hon. Baronet stated that the Noble Lord had said that the slavers only con tained two feet of stowage room for the slaves. This was evidently a mistake, for two feet would not be sufficient to stow a turkey in.—(Laughter, and cries of " Divide.") Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared-- For the amendment Against it Majority against the amendment —94 The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned shortly before One o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. TUESDAY, FED. 25. a a n i n d R a C i l a way al : and T The Huddersfield Manchester South Junction an Huddersfield and Maiichester d ß Ai ai t l r w in a c 3 h , Bills, were read a first time. e ; rt r f e o p r o d rt an re d fer ß re ig d gle t s o wa ti te Line),—Petition Eastern Counties Accrington and Coke Extension Rail way,—Petition o r Bill ßai lw r reported; r te n d Blackburn, Burnley, Petition for Bill reported, and Bill ordered to brought Select Committee on Standing Orders. way,— ' Chester and Holyhead Railway,—Petition for Bill reported, 'n by Mr. Walker and Mr. Wilson Patten... and Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Owen Stanle Colonel Paget, and Mr. William C o ll et t . y, Eastern Counties Railway, (Ely and Whittlesea Devia tion),—Petition for Bill reported, and Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Eliott Yorke and Mr. Ward. Eastern Counties Railway (Cambridge and Huntingdon Line),—Petition for Bill reported, and Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Eliott Yorke and Mr. Ward. Caledonian Railway Bill,—" for making a Railway from Carlisle to Edinburgh and Glasgow, and the North of Scot land, to be called ' The Caledonian Railway,' " presented, and read a first time. Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway Bill,—" to enable the Moukland and Kirkintilloch Railway Company to improve the guage of their rails," presented, and read a first time. Cockermouth and Workington Railway Bill,—Read a second time, and committed, and referred to the Committee Qf Selection, Blackburn and Prestep Railway,—Petition for Bill ; re ferred to the Select Committee on Petition for Private Bills. Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway Bill,—" fir mak ing a RailwaY from the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway, near Kilmarnock, by Dumfries and Annan, to Carlisle, to be called, The Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway,' " presented, and read a first time. Dublin and Belfast Junction Railway, with a Branch to Bells,—Petition for Bill; referred to the Select Committee on Petitions for Private Bills. Chester and Birkenhead Railway Extension Bill,—Read second time, and committed, and referred to the Committee of :.-election. PRIVATE BUSINESS, WEDNESDAY, FEB. 26. Clydesdale Junction Railway, Newcastle and Darlington randling Junction) Railway, York and N or th Midland ( B ridlington Branch) Railway, Cambridge and Lincoln Railway, Cornwall Railway, . .. .- York and North Midland (Goole Branch) Railway,. Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway. London, Worcester, and South Stafford s hi re R a il way , Glasgow Junction Railway, Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE. TUESDAY, FEB. 25. Surrey I ron R a il way Company (Dssolving),—Committee on petition, Monday, M arc h 10. Blackburn and Preston Railway,—Committee on petition Monday, March 10. Dundalk and Inniskillen Railway.—Committee on petition, Thursday, March 13. Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway,—Second read ing, Monday, March 3. TT — R. I" _AIL WA Y COMMITTEES The Sub-Cotnntittee, No. 2, met yesterday. Pre sent Sir J. Y. Buller, Mr. F. Mackenzie, Mr. Kemble, Mr. Yorke, and Mr. Walker. SIiREWSBURY AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY. The Committee was occupied the whole day in inves tigating objections to the petition: The opponents sus tained a great number of objections, arising out of omis sions and :nisdescriptions on the plans. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till Friday, when they will take the objections arising upon the errors in the books of reference. MONEY and COMMERCIAL NEWS. CITY, WEDNESDAY EVENING. Consols closed at 99 3 / 4 y . i, ; New Three. and-a-Quarter per Cents. at 104 ; and Reduced Three per Cents. at 100%, being rather firmer than in the morning. Exchequer-bills were 665. to 645. premium. The Foreign market was without the slightest animation. Brazil were 89 3 / 4 ; Mexican, 35% ; and Dutch Two-and• a-Half per Cents., 63% ; Spanish Five per Cents. were 27%. The additional transactions in Railway Shares have been these :—Birmingham and Gloucester were 32%; Chester and Holyhead, 3 to 3%; Churnet Valley, 5 3 / 4 %; Eastern Counties, 24 to %; Great Southern and Western (Ireland) 6 1 4 %; Great West ern , 95 to 94 ; Ditto, Fifths, 18% Great North of Engl an d, 88 ; Ditto, New, 37; Guildfo r d and Portsmouth, 2; Hull and Gainsborough, %; Hull and Selby, 29 to 31 3 / 4 ; Birmingham, 130 ; Brighton, 10 9%; South Western, 36 5 / to 37-N ; Croydon, 41, ; Manchester and Leeds, 65 ; Midland, New, 6 ; Newark and Sheffield, 1%; North British ' 5 1 ,4 to 5 ; Northern and E as t ern, 16% ; North Kent, 1 / 8 ; Rugby and Tring, 2% % ' • Shrewsbury and Birmingham, 1 3 / 4 ; South Eastern, 71 / 2 ; Trent Valley. 18 ; West Cornwall, 2%; York and North Midland, Halt, 25 ; Ditto, Scarborough Branch, 21 to 22 ; Boulogne and Amiens, 3% to 44 ; Great Northern of France, 1%; and Orleans and Bordeaux, 4 3 / 4 premium. Midland, Birming.- ham, and D er b y h ave been 6 ; and Strasburg and Bale, 13/4 discount. Australian Bank shares were 4 1 A e • London Joint Stock, 4; and London and Westminster Bank, 7% prem. (Fron The Sun of Last Night.) The Cotton market at Liverpool yesterday .wis quieter. Sales, 2,000 to 2,500 bales, all to the trade, at previous rates. —Shares rather improved. Birmingham and Derby, 941 ; Birmingham and Gloucester, 131 ; Bristol and Gloucester, 58 ; Caledonian, 7 1 ,E ; Cambridge an d Lincoln, 595. ; Chester and. Holyhead ,8; Churnet Valley, 7% % • Eastern Counties, 17% ; Ditto, Perpetual, No. 2, 235. ; Edinburgh and Glasgow, New Quarter, 5% ; Glasgow and Dum fries, 16s. 6d. ; Glasgow and Greenock, 15% ; Kendal and Windermere, 4% ; Lancaster and Preston, Quar ters, 7 ; Liverpool and Preston, 2% 3 ; London and Birmingham, 230%; Ditto, 321. Shares, 41% ' • London and Brighton, 58; London and South-West ern , 501. Shares; 124 12%; London and York, 7%; Direct Northern, 2; Man chester and Birmingham, Quarter, 11% ' • Manchester and Leeds, Half, 60 1 / 61; Ditto, Quarter, 14 1 4 %; Midland Counties, 125 1 A •, Newcastle and Berwick, 14 13%; North Wales, 11 1 ; ; Shrewsbury and Grand Junction, 5%; South- Eastern, No. 1, 14% % ; Ditto, No. 2, 93'; Trent Valley, 19% 20; Paris and Lyons, 3; Orleans, Tours, and-Bor deaux, 6 1 / 2 3 / 4 ; Boulogne and Amie ns , 51. 121.; Northern of France, Si. lls. 3d. There are no arrivals to-day with later intelligence from any quarter. The public securities have been rather lively to-day, but the market continues unsteady. Consols for present transfer have realised 99% to 99%, and for the next account about 99 3 / 4 to 99%. Exchequer-bills have been fluctuating from 635. to 675. prem. ' • New Three-and-a-Qua r t er p er C ents. h ave realised 104% to 103% ; and the Three per Cents. 100% to 1004. Bank Stock is 212 to 213; and India Stock 281 to' 283, being rather better. The Foreign Investments are flat again; Spanish Five per Cents. at 27 3 / 4 %, and the Three per Cents. at 404 to %. Por uguese Convert e d h ave b een 60 % to 61%. Mexican Bonds have realised 354 to %, and Buenos Ayres 42. Dutch Two-and a-Half per Cents. have been 63% to 1 4. The Share Market is more buoyant to-day, with one or two exceptions, as the list subjoined will show. ONE CLOSING PRICES OF BRITISH FUNDS. O'CLOCK. PRICES. Bank Stock 3 per Cent. Reduced 3 per Cent. Consols 9 9%% 99 3 / 4 New 3 1 4 per Cents Long Annuities toexpireJan.lB6o 12 1-16 12 1-16 Ditto 30 years, Oct. 10, 11359 ll% 11% India Stock India Bonds, 1,00 W.. ...... ...... .. 72 72 Ditto under 1,000/. . ... South Sea Stock Consols for Account... ....... 99% % 99 % Exchequer Bill s , 1,000/ ., 1 % d.... 63 66 pm. 64 Ditto 500/. . pm. 64 Ditto Small ... 67 64 p m . 64 Ditto Advertised 63 65 pm. 66 ONE CLOSING PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS. O'CLOCK. PRICES. Brazilian Bonds Buenos Ayres Bonds, 6 per Cent 42 Mexican, 5 per Cent. 1837 35%4 35 % Ditto, Deferred Stock 1 6 14 16 Portuguese Bonds, 5 per Cent Ditto, Converted Ditto, Account Spanish 5 per Cent. 1840. Ditto, Passive Ditto 3 per Cent. •.. .. ...... 40 % 1 4 Venezuela Bonds, 2 p er C en t 45 44 - Ditto, Deferred Belgian Scrip, 2% per Cent Dutch, 2% per Cent Ditto, 4 per Cent., Certific 99 1% 98% PRICES OF CLOSING RAILWAY SHARES PAID. AT ONE O'CLOCK. PRICE& Birming. and Gl oucesterloo ..... 131% 132% Ditto 1/2 Shares Bristol. and Exeter. Ditto New..... ......... 2 ...... , 14 Bristol and Glouce s t er ... 30 ....., 55% 577 Caledonian Cambridge and Lin co l n 1% 2%41 A.. ... . 2% • Chester and Holyhead... 5 Churnet Valley Cornwall Direct Northern 1 Mblin and Belfast J une 2% 5 1% Dublin and Galway..... 2 1 ,( 3 Eastern Counties 141. 163....... 16 3 4 17 1 4 ..... . Eastern Union Ditto Extension Edinburgh and Glasgow 50 Ditto, Quarter Shares 12%...... 15% Great South. and West. (Ireland) 12 .. ........... • Ditto Extension Great North of England..100 Ditto New ..... .. ........ 5 Ditto New Great Western ... 80 ......1741A Ditto % Shares 5O , 99 99 Ditto Fifths Guildford, Farn'm,Ports. 2 1 ... .. Hull and Gainsborough 1% 2 14 Hull and Selby London and Birminghm (5t0ck)...228 . 230 London and Blackwell. 16/. 13s. 4d. 7% London and Brighton... 50 ... 57% 58% 3 / 4 59% 59% London and S. Western 4 1 / 6 310d 78% 79 Ditto New 2%...12 11 1 ,4% London and Croydon, 13/. 15s. 9d. 18% Ditto Guaranteed 5 per Cent. - London and York 2% 676 7% -• Manchester and Bi rm i n . 40 ..... 6 3 14 Ditto Quarters Manchester and Leeds... 73 Midland... 100 125 .. — Ditto New 2 ..... 7 3 / 4 4 $ Midland, Birm., Derby...100 Newcastle and Darling ton Junction ... 24 ..... 47p 49 .... ..... -- Newcastle and Berwick 1% ...... 13' 4; 13 ... ..... ••••• Newark and Sheffield ... 114 2 North British Ditto, New Northern and Eastern... 45 North Kent Rigby,Wor'ster,&Tring 1 Shrews., Wolverhamp., Dudley, and Birm 2 1,1 4 1,1%% 4I South Eastern & Dover 33l 2s 4d... 39 3 / 3 / /4 Ditto, No. 1 Ditto, No. 2. Ditto, No. 3 2% 7% 8.......,.. South Wales Trent Valley • Waterford and Kilkenny 1.. 2 8 ............ ... West Cornwall York and North Midland 50 * ........ ' ...... 103 102 2. . .. •• .... Ditto 1 / 2 Share 5...... Ditto Scarboro' Bran c h. 20 FREN....."""'• ...... CH RAILWAYS. Boulogne and Amiens... 2 Great North, o f F rance .. 4 ... ... 5% Orleans and Bordeaux... 2 6IA% e .. aris and Lyo ns .) .... .. ...... 3 - Paris and Orleans ..... Paris .... 20 . and Rouen ........ 20 .• 42 3 / 4 Strasbourg and Bale I_ 14 Tours and Nantes 1 JOINT STOCX BANKS, Australasia Colonial London Joi n t St oc k..... 10 - , London & West m i ns t er . 20 MANCHESTER STOCK EXCHANGE, FEB. 25.—We have had a steady market and a fair business. The quotations are and Exeter, New Shares, 6 3-16 ; Chester and Holy-. head, 7% 8% • Great North of Engl an d, 30/. Sh ares , 19% ; London and iirmingham, Quarter Shares, 29 ; Manchester: and Leeds, .Quarter Shares, 14% ; Ma nc h es ter, Bury sult . Rossendale, 10% ; Midland, 40/. Shares, 8; ShoffieT and Manchester, Quarter Shares, 13; South-Eastern, 1, lum "! Barnsley Junction, Half Shares, 2%; chester, and Cheshire Junction, 7% 8; Blackburn, D-a—rweln., E an ly dß an ol d to H ey udd l e A rsfie d ' and Sheffield Junction, 4.36; K en dal Valley, 4%; 213e3dPord; , C 1 u m ! e d ; o E n Caledonian , n w , a t 6 i N al C i e l ,C h urnet 9 7 4 i Y n; Oxford and Rugby, 3 1 4 ; London and Y or k, M I Wor cester, and Sheffield, 2,4 • and Buxton, 3%; Newark Leeds, Dewsbury, and Manchester, 3 3 / 4 ; London and Wok- Manchester Trent ' Valley, 19% % ; Union Plate Glass, 18. 27.% - 17% 11% 18' ..... 3% 13 6$ 5 6 4 104 „ I