The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-26 00:00:00

Vbirbr Xbition SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. RAILWAY COMMITTEES •-- - (THIS DAY.) The Sub-Comraittee, No. 2, met this morning. Pro sent Sir J. Y. Buller, Mr. F. Mackenzie, Mr. limbic., Mr. Y,prke, and Mr. Walker. SHIitEWSBURY AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY. The Committee was occupied the whole day in inves tigating objections to the petition. The opponents sus tamed a great number of objections arising out of omis sions and misdescriptions on the plans. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till Friday, when they will take the objections arising upon the errors in the books of reference. IMPERIA L PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. W. 11. P. CAREW took the oaths and his seat for the county of East Cornwall. INCOME-TAX. Lord JOHN MANNERS and Mr. ROEBUCK presented petitions against the continuance of the income-tax. Mr. G. HEATHCOTE presented a petition from Butlandahire against the Medical Reform Bill. Mr. TATTON EGERTON brought up the Birken head Docks Bill, which was read a first time. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY. _ _ The Eastern Counties Ifailwayßill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. Lord ARIIN 1/ELpresent«l petitions from places in Somerset and Westmoreland, against the sale of intoxi cating liquors on Sundays. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY. Mr. HOPE JOHNSTONE presented petitions from each of the Parliamentary districts of Glasgow, signed by upwards of 13,500 inhabitants, in favour of this Bill. BRIDGWATER RAILWAY. The Committee reported that the standing orders had been complied with on the Bridgewater proposed line oe railway. BARNSLEY JUNCTION LINE. The Committee on standing orders reported that the order had been complied with on this line. SHEFFIELD AND HUDDERSFIELD RAILWAY. . . talons were presented for Bills for the formation of the fluddersfield and Sh, flield Junction Railway. THAMES AND MEDWAY CANAL. ------ --- The report of the Committee on the Thames and Med way Canal Bill was brought up. The standing orders had been complied with. SUGAR DUTIES. Sir W. CLAY gave notice that, on the House going into Committee of Ways and Means, he should move an amendment, to the effect that au ad valorfint duty should be imposed upon sugar. COLONIAL ACCOUNTS. Dr. BOWRING gave notice that, on the l Ith March, he should more a series of resolutions on the system of making out the Colonial accounts:-Ist, that there should be an uniform system of accounts :for the Ex chequer receipts and payments of the several colonies; 2d, that there should be a statement of the whole amount of the receipts and expenditure as they occurred, without any distinction ; and, 3d, that the payments into her Majesty's Exchequer should appear in no other way for the future than as credits for disbursements on payment into the Exchequer. SUGAR DUTIES. Mr. WILLIAMS said the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer bad stated that this after noon he would state when the sugar duties was to come into operation. Would it be convenient to do so now ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, considering all the circumstances of the case, he did not see any ground for altering the time set down in the resolution. Mr. WILLIAMS gave notice then, that he would when the resolution was proposed, move that the re duction should begin on the Ist of April.—(Laughter.) Mr WALLACE wished to know if any allowance would be made to persons holding sugar in bound. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was understood to reply, that persons who had sugar in bond woald have to maintain it there until the duties were remitted. If it were removed in the meantime, of course the sugar would be liable to the duty. The Hon. S. WORTLEY said it became important then to know when the duty would b• taken off. He should be glad therefore to know when the resolutions were likely to be agreed to ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished it was in his power to give the Hon. Member the in formation he required. There were so many orders of the day standing on the paper, that it was quite impos sible to say when the resolutions would receive the sanc tion of the House. GLASS DUTIES. Dr. BOWRING wished to put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He wished to know whether, suppoeing the existing duties on glass were re moi'ed, it was his intention to repeal the duties on foreign glass The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if the Hen. Gentleman would look to the schedule that had been laid on the table, he would find that a cor responding alteration had been made in the duty on foreign glass. SUGAR DUTIES. Mr. VILLIERS, seeing the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his place, wished to put to him a question affecting the debate of the evening. It had been stated as one chief justification of the;high differen tial duty that those restraints which used to exist with foreign countries would still continue. It was also stated that the duty on refined sugar would still con- tinue as usual. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the resolutions on the table of the House would answer the questions of the Hon. Member. It would be seen from them that it was intended to introduce refined sugar at increased duties. MEDICAL REFORM BILL. Lord HOWICK presented a petition against the Medical Reform Bill. BISHOPRIC OF BATH AND WELLS. Mr. COLLETT rose to put the questions to the First Lord of the Treasury, of which he had given notice, with respect to the bishopric of Bath and Wells. He wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to appoint another bishop during the life of the present incumbent, and whether it was their intention to unite the diocese with that of Salisbury on the death of the piasent Bishop. 'Sir R. PEEL could not avoid expressing his astonish ment when the notice was first given by the Hon. Mem ber. To the first of his questions he could only reply that the Government had no power to make any such appointment, and, therefore, his answer was decidedly in the negative. To the second question he would defer all answer, at least for the present. Mr. COLLETT then gave notice that he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to consolidate the dioceses of Bath and Wells with that of Salisbury, on the demise of the present Bishop of Bath and Wells.—(Hear.) METROPOLITAN GRAVE-YARDS. Sir F. EGERTON wished to draw the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, to a shocking circumstance which came out in evidence before a police magistrate. It appeared that, in some of the crowded churchyards of the metropolis (one was instanced in the neighbourhood of Clerken well) it was the custom to inter the bodies pro tenspore, and shortly afterwards to burn them. He wished to know if the Right Hon. Baronet intended to adopt any measures to prevent this desecration ? Sir J. GRAHAM had, never heard of the practice referred to, but the circumstances mentioned by the Right Hon. Baronet would have his best attention. SUGAR DUTIES.—SUPPLY. On the motion that the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of Supply be read, Mr. MILNER GIBSON begged to offer a short ex planation of part of the statement he made on the sugar duties question a few nights since. As it had been sup posed that, in his estimate of the cost of producing a hundred-weight of sugar, he had not included all the expenses, he begged to say that in his estimate he had included salaries, wages, taxes, &c,—(Hear, hear.) Lerd JOHN RUSSELL then rose and said—Sir, I believe that the House is now about to enter upon the consideration of a question of very great importance, brought forward by the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is a motion of great importance, not only in a financial, but in a commercial point of view. The Right Honourable Gentleman, in this proposition, had laid down those two propositions—first, that it is desirable and necessary to renew the income-tax for a further limit ; and, secondly, that the use to be made of the surplus revenue which this tax will create, or a great portion of it. is to apply it to the relief of the country from certain other taxes, and to in crease the trade and commerce of the manufacturing districts. With regard to the first of these proposi tions, I need not dwell upon it, for the House has already, by a great majority, agreed to the renewal of the income-tax, thereby declaring that, if the other taxes about to be proposed shall appear to this House to be the best that could be proposed, the House has no objection to try the experiment proposed in this respect by the Right Honourable Baronet at the bead of her Majesty's Government. But with respect to the second proposition, that appears to me to be one of such vast importance as to require more careful and deliberate consideration, as it would materially affect certain artic les of consumption. And • the first of these a r ti c l es i s s ugar ; and it would appear to me, though such has not bee e n s tated by her m a j es ty's Government, that h Government are to make such t an yle a w lt e erat e i f on the in the duty on this article as will place the ma nufacturers of sugar i n a pos i t i on that will no t e them room to complain that th ose d ut i es h ad b eee lightly iv altered. If that be so, I think this H ouse should take cure to see that certain necessary and indispensabl e con ditions should be complied with. The first of those s to take care that no enact m ent on the subject should be of an- inconsistent or contradictory nature in itself ; and • secondly, that there should not be taken from off arti cles of commerce a greater amount of taxes than would be necessary for the purposes of the revenue, and at the same time do justice to the West India grower, by g i b i ng bim such an amount of protection as may be necessary. The first objection that I have to this proposition is, that it professes to keep up a distinction which I hold to be impracticable, betwe en the p roduce of foreign free and slave labour. That this project is illusory seems to me a proposition so plain that, if it were not that the plan of the Government contemylates a contrary course, I should hardly attempt to detain the House any length of time in arguing so obvious a proposition. But when we discussed the question last year, certain answers were offered to the proposal which I then made, that all foreign sugar should be subject to the same duty, whether it were the produce of free labour or of slave labour. I think it necessary now to take some notice of these answers. I objected that this distinction was illusory. I said there was no ob jection to take tobacco or cotton at the same duty from the countries where they were slave-grown as from the free states. It was answered that certainly the Govern- will rise to 345. Nov, Sir, what is the the consumer, while it kept up a distinction between free and slave labour. It risked the revenue, not for the sake of the Queen's revenue, or the army or navy, but for the sake her Majesty's Government in reference to the sugar of a particular class, which forms only a small portion of the population of the country. The Noble Lord concluded by moving the following resolution:—That it is the opinion of this House, that the plan proposed by duties, professes to keep up a distinction between foreign free labour and foreign slave labour sugar, which is im practicable and illusory ; and, without adequate benefit to the consumer, tends so greatly to impair the revenue as to render the removal of the income and property-tax, at the end of three years, very uncertain and improbable. The SPEAKER having put the question, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and said that when the Noble Lord who had just sat down had first given notice of his motion, he (the Chan cellor of the Exchequer) was induced to hope that it would be found the more convenient course for himself and the House to introduce this discussion after the Speaker had left the chair. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was, however, prepared, with confidence, to advocate the measure proposed by Government, and he was quite ready to meet the Noble Lord on the ground he had himself laid down. He could assure the House that he met the Noble Lord on that ground with perfect confidence, and he hoped that he should emulate the Noble Lord in the tone and temper with which he had conducted that discussion, and he considered that a question of the greatest inte rests to the consumer should be discussed as far as pos sible without any of that acrimony which was too often exhibited on the floor of that House.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord objected to the proposition of the Government, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) therefore forbore to make any comment on the peculiar terms of the resolution submitted to the House. The Noble Lords did not say one word on that objection to the proposition of Govern ment, because they attempted to draw a distinc tion between the sugars the product of slave labour, and those imported from what was termed slave holding countries. The Noble Lord dis claimed on this occasion all imputations as to the views of Government, and he (the Chancellor of the Fxchequer) would not refer to any such. The Noble Lord repeated most of the arguments used on preceding occasions, and he said that lie could see no distinction between the admission of sugar produced by slave labour, and the admission of cotton and other materials produced in the same manner. He admitted that there was one common principle involved in the admission of these articles, the produce of slave labour ; but the Noble Lord had not ad vanced any new view—he had only repeated over and over again the arguments which had been so often urged on that House, not only on the previous debates on this question during the present session, but on occasions antecedent even to those, but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) maintained that there was a very great distinction between the encourage ment given to the slave trade in the admission of that commodity and those others to which the Noble Lord had referred. It had often been announced in that House that there was a great waste of human life in the cultivation of sugar as com pared with the growing of coffee.—(Hear, hear.) The great importation of slaves from the coast of Africa to Cuba and other foreign countries was carried on, not for the purpose of the cultivation of cotton, but, of sugar, by the aid of slave labour. There could not be a stronger proof of this than the testi mony of those who were on the spot, and wit nessed: it. He had now before him the report of the Brazilian Consul on this part of the subject, and he would take the liberty of reading an extract from it. [LEFT SPEAKING.] effect of this rate of 14s. ? The rate, I am aware, is actually II s. 2d. ; but the rate being 255. 2d., and that 255. 2d. being reduced to 1 Is. 2d. there is a difference of 14s. But this will be enough to prevent any benefit to the consumer. The fact will be, that there will be in this a remission of ss. to the consumer, and Gs. to the West Indian planter. Other calculations have been made, and these give 6s. to the consumer, and ss. to the West Indian planter. But supposing all the duties equal, and these not more than Bs., the benefit given to the West Indian planters will not be less than 1,100,0001, and this tax will be imposed simply for the sake of the benefit to the West India planter and the Exchequer, for the tax will be equally divided between the West India planter and the Exchequer. It is a tax divided between the Exchequer and the Weo India colonies—one part of it going to the revenue, the other being for the benefit of the plaster. But then, Sir, it is said that you must give this great protec tion on account of the state of the West Innies, and the abolition of slavery. Sir, I could not vote kr my Honourable Friend the Member for Man chester the other night, because that the West Indies have a very considerable claim upon us owing to the recent abolition of slavery. Let us observe what is the state of the West Indies in consequence of the very great advantage given to them. The West India labourers have had the advantage of a great state of prosperity ever since the passing of the Act of emancipation. During the last year that state of prosperity has diminished, in so far as the amount raised trom labour had decreased, and the wages of the labourer had not been more thaa 7s. per week. Now, under this state of affairs, what had taken place in the West In dies has been this :—There has been a great stimulus to immigration—there has been a great number of labourers attracted to the West Indies, in order that there might be a sufficiency of labour to supply the sugar of this country. But, Sir, the way in which that scheme has operated has been this : A tax has been imposed under these circumstances, which has borne with great severity on the labourer. In proof of this, I hold in my hand a letter from a person, who is a remarkable man, during the anti-slavery agitation, and who now has a most ex traordinary influence over the n'inds of a great part of the population of Jamaica. The person to whom I :al lude is Mr. Knibb, the Baptist missionary, and this letter was written by him in 1844. Mr. Knibb says, "I do not believe there is another labouring population on the face of the earth who would so patiently have borne this reduction in their wages. It was made too, at a time when a tax was imposed upon the country which had no other effect than to increase the price of ment did not propose to interfere with the tobacco or cotton duties, or with commerce long established ; but that in all new regulations which might be in troduced, they would make the distinction be tween the produce of free labour and that of slave labour. But this is not the fact, for the proposal of this year, as well as that of last year, does make an alteration ; but the distinction between foreign free and slave labour is not observed. Take coffee for instance — last year the duty was reduced from Sd. a pound to 6d., and the same duty was imposed upon foreign slave-grown sugar as upon the produce of free labour. With respect to copper ore, it is proposed this year to admit without duty that which is the produce of slave labour. And with regard to cotton, you are going to take off the whsle duty this year, and you do not propose to make any distinction between that which is raised by the labour of slaves in our foreign possessions and that which is raised in the East Indies, and else where by free labour.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I find, ac cording to those who are the greatest opponents of slavery—philanthropists who take this view—that we ought to discourage all productions of slave labour. These persons admit that we cannot exclude alto gether the products of slave labour, yet still some of them regard with dissatisfaction the encourage ment which is given to slave-grown coffee and cotton. But, in point of fact, you cannot discourage slave labour, for although you profess to limit yourselves only to the produce of free labour, yet, if the distinction could be kept up—if your Custom-house regulations could be so maietained, that none but free labour produce should be admitted—still the free la bour sugar, kept from the market of the world for your supply, would be replaced in the market of the world by the slave grown sugar which you excluded. The reply to this was of a very refined stature, and I own I think not a very successful one. It was, that you would in fact make a difference of price in the markets of the world between free and slave labour sugar ; that the free labour sugar of Java and other countries would command a better price than slave labour sugar in consequence of your restriction. I do not think that this will be the case for supposing the whole consumption of sugar to be 670,000 tons,Jfyou take away 20,000 tons for the consumption of the continent, as there is; no difference made on the continent between free labour and slave grown sugar the probability is that the greater part of the want thus created V% ill be supplied by the sugar of Cuba and Brazil, which admits of great extension, and that this 20,000 tons additional will be the produce of slave labour. But in the next place there was this difficulty in the project you proposed, that you could not in point of fact, confine your consumption to t he free labour sugar of foreign countries. You had certain treaties with foreign powers by which you had agreed to admit their articles on the same terms as those of the most favoured nations ; therefore, you could not exclude the produce of those countries consistently with the maintenance of those treaties. There are se veral countries which come into this catalogue ; and the fact as accorded with the argument then ad vanced that you would not effectually exclude slave labour sugar, for the only sugar, and that but a small quantity, which has been imported under the Act of last 3 ear was said to be the sugar of Venezuela, and was, in fact, sugar produced by slave labour. I have heard various statements with regard to this slave-grown sugar. Some say it has been recognised as the sager of Porto Rico, others say it is the sugar of Surinam or Bra zil. But those I have seen on this subject generally agree thatit was not the sager of Venezuela, but sugar which by some fraud or other was passed as Venezuelan into this country.—(Hear.) This is but a single in stance, but it has happened very early in the course of your experiment. It has happened so early, that it has preceded any of those importations for the sake of which you altered the law. Now, if this is the case already, what may you expect from the whole of the next ten years, for instance, if you preserve this distinction ? What can you expect but this—that ingenious persons will contrive schemes by which they may more effectually evade your regulations, and that the sugars of Brazil and Cuba will be sent to the ports of Venezuela and other ports, where they may find a Consul who is not suspicious, or Custom house authorities, who are open to a bribe, and by this means constantly evade the provisions you have made for the exclusion of any sugar that is not the produce of free labour. If this be the case, then I submit that it is impracticable to keep up this distinction. You are attempting that which is contrary to the nature of things — you are attempting that which you cannot follow out in practice. I will not say that there has been any hy pocrisy in this proposal, as I do not wish to use any ar gument of that sort ; but admitting, and giving every credit for good intentions, as much as was claimed, it is not a proposal that can be carried into effect, and it is impossible that your regulations can actually exclude that slave-grown sugar which you propose to exclude. It is hardly worth arguing this question again. It is quite clear that the manufacturers of sugar in Brazil and in Cuba, so long as you send value for their sugar, and indifferent whether you yourselves consume the sugar or not. All that they ask for is, a market for their pro duce, and when they obtain that they are satisfied with the resut. Such, Sir, is one of the obvious defects of the measure, defects which I think will, from year to year become more and more obvious and striking. I proceed next to what I consider Another fault in the measure, and that is, that I con sider it rather aggravates than otherwise the protec tion given at present to the colonies. I was happy to hear, the other night, the principles of free trade admitted by all who spoke on the question, except by the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member f•ir Newark, who so lately quitted the office of President of the Board of Trade, made a most remarkable declara tion on this subject,. He admitted that the East Indies had no claim for protection—he admitted that nothing but the scarcity of labour in the West India co lonies, resulting from the Emancipation Act, could form a ground for protection respecting sugar. This is a most important admission.—(Hear, hear.) It is most im portant because it evidently admits this, that it was no reason because the produce was the produce of our colo nies, that any protection whatever should be extended. Mr. GLADSTONE—I did not say that these colo nies had no claim for protection. What I said was, that they had no claim for greater protection than 10s. per cw t. Lord J. RUSSELL—Then I misunderstood the Right Hon. Gentleman. I thought he said the colonies had no claim for protection. However, this admission of only 105. per cwt. protection narrows the question of protection very considerably, because a protection of 10s. or 10s. 6d. per cwt., according to the proposal of the Right Honourable Gentleman, is not required by justice with respect to 70,000 tons which come from the West Indies. With respect to the Mauritius, there:s is a sufficiency of labour for the Mauritius. Newspapers even tell us that the labourers cannot get sufficient employment. This demand of protection to the amount of 10s. 6d. does not apply either to Barbadoes or Antigua, because those colonies have likewise a sufficiency of labour. Then the demand of protection made on behalf of the West Indies amounts only to a claim of protection for that amount for Jamaica, Trinidad, and De merara. Now this, I must say, makes a great difference In the case ; because you are proposing an equal protection of 10s. 6d. both for those who may in justice demand it, and for a great many others who have no such claim. Now, Sir, let us examine the protection which is thus proposed. My Honourable Friend the Member for Manchester, in bringing forward his motion the other night—and I find it impossible not to refer to that debate, because it raised what was a' part of the present question—(Hear, hear)—my Hon. Friend stated on that occasion that the protection given amounted to a tax of about 2,300,000/. on the people of the United Kingdom. My Noble Friend the Member for Sunderland stated that it was a protection to that amount, acd at the same time, he said that there had been a difference of above 7s. 6d. in the price of colo nial and foreign sugar. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Newark, to whom I must again allude, said that there was an evident inconsistency in these argu ments—that if the difference was no more than that, it was impossible that the protection could be more than 14s. Now, certainly, when I heard that declaration I felt impressed with the importance of it as coming from the Right Honourable Gentleman, but at the same time I could not agree in its justice, and I will state my reasons why I think it is not correct. What the Right Hon. Gentleman proposes is, not to continue the present importation and the present duty, but a new importation and new rates of duty. If the present importation were to continue, and the differ ence of price, which was 20s. and 275., we might say that there was only that difference of price, and that with the present rate of duty there was no greater protection. But let it be observed, that the protection proposed to be given is on a consumption of 250,000 tons of sugar. What is assumed by the Right lion. Gentleman opposite is, that the consumption of sugar will increase from 207,000 to 250,000 tons ; and the consequence must be, that until this foreign sugar which is proposed to be admitted, comes into the market, the West India sugar will continue to rise in price, Therefore supposing, Sir, that the price of sugar now was 205., it appears on the admission of the Right Hon. Gentleman the imposition on the 15,000 tons of foreign sugar would make it 285., and make the price at which foreign sugar will be brought in the market not less than 48s. Now, supposing that the price of West India sugar is now, as it was a few weeks ago, 285., it will then by the addition of a 14s. duty be raised to the price of 425., and is, will not be until it has risen to 48e., that foreign sugar can be brought into the market to compete with West India sugar. If sugar be, there fore, at the price which it was a few weeks ago, the price at which it as ill be sold will give a protection of 14s. a cwt. to West India sugar. If this be the case, the measure of the Government will not give to to the consumer the benefit which will be lost to the revenue. This competition, therefore, Sir, does not s " price me ef calculationsu to gar g h iv ao e sf any benefit to the country. : Y e " r the ise n t Right i 3 g o h s t. or H Hon. .1 the e consump tion n Gentleman, snm p i - f tion will be decreased, and foreign sugar , cannot conic into the market. The_pr . i of West India sugar will, in that case, rise, and there will not then be the con sumption of 250,000 tons which has andbe o enr t r e ul 2 a s t o ed o as as the consumption of the country t on s, 15,000 tons being subject to the foreign d'ut ° 3 ° -, it will be a Rat consequence that the price provisions, and, of course, as this tax pressed more upon the articles of food which they consumed, it must have tended still further to reduce their wages." Now, Sir, this proves that the plans you propose, though they may have the effect of giving so large an amount as a million or upwards to the planters, will not have the effect of increasing the comforts or happiness of the peasantry of the West Indies. I believe that the admis sion of labourers from Africa to the West Indies, if conducted under regulations and allowed to take place in small numbers, would be for the ad vantage both of the West Indies and of Africa. I have recorded that opinion, and I still believe both that the civilisation of Africa would be promoted by persons going from Africa to the West Indies, and that the ge neral prosperity of the West Indies would be improved by that plan. In the first place I should beg the house to bolt back, and seeing the Right Honourable Gentle man the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment, with whom I acted in the Committee that preceded that Act, in his place, I would ask of him what made the Act of Emancipation so successful, as it was universally allowed to be, so far as the peace and happiness of the people of the West Indies was con cerned? Why, because, much to the credit of the masters of slaves of that day, the slaves were so far brought into a state of civilisation that when the act of emancipation took place, society fell into its natural order, and no outbreaks or riots were committed, as might have been expected from the sudden change from slavery to freedom. But be it re collected that the change had taken place nearly thirty years after the slave trade had ceased ; thereby the people of the West Indies had become to a great degree civilised, and this great revolution was made without convulsion.—(Bear, hear.) lam stating what is to the credit of the owners of the slaves in the West Indies. But if you are now to introduce vast numbers of Africans from the shores of Africa, if you were to take them from places which were still in a state of barbarism—if you were to transplant them into the West Indies and turn them at once to labour, I cannot but foresee that, in long course of time, you would have a population whom it .would be difficult to bring into that state of civilization which your present negro population of the West Indies are in. And yet that is the attempt you are now making. I hardly think it will succeed, because I think the very great cost of carrying labourers from Africa to the West Indies is very much against it. But still the attempt is making in this way, by rnakinglarge loans in Trinidad and Demerara, and taxing the people and especially taxing the admission of their food—for the pur pose of raising means to bring great num bers of :eople from Africa to the West Indies. Any law which you may pass in this country which has a great tendency to give a monopoly, as far as this country is concerned, to sugar, the produce of the West Indian colonies, will produce a disadvantageous effect upon the labourerers in the West Indies. In the first place, it will tend to the oppression and disadvantage of of the labeuring population of the West Indies. I state this upon the authority . of Mr. Knibb.— (Ironical cheers from the Ministerial Beaches, answered by counter cheering from the Opposition.) Mr. Knibb is a man who possesses great authority among the labouring population of the West Indies—a man of most remarkable talent, and of great influence and authority. in the next place I think it would endanger the future condition of the West India colonies, making it doubtful twenty years hence—when we consider the immense numerical superiority of the black population over the white—whether the colonies may not be the scene of some most frightful convulsion. And all this is done to keep up a system which is contrary to your own proposed prin ciples, and is proposed to be brought about in the most artificial manner. I am free to confess that it appears to me that this attempt to produce an artificial price of sugar in this country, as you say, for the purpose of giving an advantage to the West India Colonies, must result in producing effects which must be very dangerous, and may be quite fatal to the interests of those whom you are anxious to protect.—(Hear.) But when gentlemen speak of the additional advantage which this system of protection is to confer on the labourers in the West Indies, let them not entirely forget that there are also labourors in this country.—(Cheers.) That there are labourers employed in agriculture—(Cheers)—and that there are artizans employed in manufactures who also require some little consideration.—(Cheers.) I can readily conceive that a sudden and immediate reduction of all duties on foreign produce, as compared with the produce of the West Indies, to 14s, or to 285., might produce such an immediate disadvantage to the West India proprietor as to cause a great shock ; but, on the other hand, if you attempt to give an additional advantage to the planters you will put off to a still further period the time which we all hope to see arrive, when the principles of free trade shall be universally adopted.—(Hear, hear.) I heard the other night an Hon. Gentleman who has re cently become a member of the Government, state that the principles of free trade were true in the abstract. That principle I believe is universally admitted ; but I wish to see the practical application of these principles with regard to such great articles of consumption as that which we are now called on to consider.—(Cheers.) I now come to the results which the Right Honourable Baronet stated would ensue from his proposition, as far as the finances of the country were concerned. He stated that the result would be an increase in the consumption, from 207,000 tons, with a consequent increase to the revenue of 1,300,0004 Now it appears to me, without any injury whatever to the West Indies, you might remit the whole of that—if you were to have, for instance, 20s. or 28s. ; or it re ducing the duty very largely, you were to have a similar duty to that proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet of 10s. or 125., and of 18s. or 20s. on foreign produce—you might not make any difference in the present prices between the colonist and the foreign producer, but you might preserve a very great part of your income, and you might have the -means of making this experi ment. The Right Honourable Gentleman has pro posed this experiment with regard to sugar. He might make that experiment with regard to sugar, and he might preserve the whole of the revenue, if he would but admit all foreign sugar, and decrease the pro tection he proposes to give. Suppose the price of foreign sugar to be 20s„ if he were to add a duty of 205.,_ he cannot have a less price than 40 s. If you were to have a very much less duty, it is evident that the consumer would obtain a great benefit, and you would very much ' increase the consumption of sugar. It is very doubtful as you now stand, whether the loss of 1,300,0001. will be the total loss the revenue will sustain ? Unless consumption increase at the rate the Right Hon. Gen. tleman anticipates, the loss to the revenue will be 1,800,0001. or 1,900,0001. Now if you could but save that revenue, I think I have shown that there need be no additional price to the consumer. You need not make the consumer pay a single farthing more for sugar, and at the same time you might preserve the whole of the revenue. Now, when I consider the various duties there are which press heavily on the consumer which might be lightened if you had but that sum, you could spare as part of the surplus, I cannot think this great sacrifice to the West Indian planter at all desirable or advisable. There are various duties with regard to which the Right Honourable Gentleman has declared his disapprobation. There were duties which were mentioned when the tariff was discussed I will take a small instance, cheese and butter.—(Hear, hear.) When there duties were mentioned, it was said that the duty was thirty per cent., and in some inferior descriptions of cheese 100 per cent., and the Right Hon. Gentleman the late President of the Board of Trade said, it was impossible to look to main taining that duty. That duty was very high. But he said it was then impossible to make experimentsin the revenue. There are other duties that press heavily on silk and other things, which ought to be removed ; and if the Hon. Gentleman has a surplus of 1,300,0001., I think the experiment ought to be tried whether or not some reduction might not be made in the duties on those articles without affecting the revenue.—(Hear, hear.) When there was no surplus, of course the experiment cannot be made, but whe n the Ministry had one, it was their duty to try how far they could reduce taxation. It was proposed by the Government to impose a duty of 14s. on sugar the produce of our own colonies, while in colonies where the slave trade existed, it is pro posed to exact a duty of 28s. The consequence of that is a great burthen upon the consurner.—(Hear, hear.) It may be said that the subject is one for a Com mittee, that is, whether or not it would be wise to take away all duties in sugar, or make a gradual reduction, but, in my opinion, the plan proposed by the Government does not give adequate benefit to THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY ‘26, 1845. and I did so, hoping against hope.' I told him repeatedly I would leave him to his fate, never to return, and I did so, at how great a sacrifice let the present well foreseen (as likely to happen) apparent ruin, to which Bayley's belief of the Raja's assertions exposes me and mine, testity. Good bye, I have been very foolish, 'hoping against hope,' and misled by the Raja's promises, and at times even his sem blance of amendment. If your inquiry is to proceed in spite of my letter, it should commence with the installation of Sirfagee, in 1799, and Mr. Torins and his annuity of 1,0001. per annum ; Colonel Blackburn ditto, Fife's ditto; and, above all, to entertain the fact whether I have made any altera tion in the method left me by poor old M'Lean. No excuse, I know it and deeply feel it. It does not signify whether it is the mere bite of the apple, or eating it all. Touch not, taste not, or the act of insolvency and the choice left me. And I was foolish. " 1 am faithfully yours, " A. DOUGLAS." The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, having concluded his address, proceeded to produce his evidence, which almost entirely consisted of written testimony sent over from India. The reading of these parchments occupied the remainder of yes terday and a great part of to-day. Mr. KELLY addressed the jury for the defendant. Lord DENMAN, with regard to the letter, expressed his clear and distinct opinion that the Learned Counsel who conduced the prosecution would not have been justly dis charging their duty to the public bad they not laid that letter before the jury. In his opinion the evidence adduced was admissible for the purpose of proving the charges which had been made, and if the jury believed that evidence, the ver dict must be for the Crown. The jurors intimated their belief of the evidence, and ex pressed their readiness to pronounce the verdict. A discussion then ensued as to the counts on which the verdict should be taken, and certain counts were selected for that purpose. The verdict was then entered for the Crown. - - Lord Penman, on the application of Mr. Kelly, reserved to the defendant leave to move to enter a verdict for him, in case the Court should think that the objections taken in the course of the trial by Mr. Kelly were sustainable in law, or that the evidence was not sufficient to support the informa tion. His Lordship took the opportunity of expressing in strong terms his approbation of the conduct of Mr. Bayley, who had succeeded the defendant as resident at Tanjore, and who, notwithstanding any precedents afforded by the con duct of former Residents, had positively refused those advan tages which they had accepted, and which had been likewise offered to him. Mr. Bayley had done himself much honour iu thus preferring the performance of his duty to the gratifi cation of his interests. TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. E. Gill, tinman, Chester—first div. of 6 1 / 2 d. in the pound, Feb. 27, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. W. Whiting, landing waiter, Wallasca, Cheshire—first div, of Is. 10d. in the pound, Feb. 27, or any subsequent Thurs day, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. J. H. Shanklin, landing waiter, Wallasca, Cheshire—first div. of Is. 2d. in the pound, Feb. 27, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. J. Cuttell. clothier, Holmfirth, Yorkshire—first and final div. of 2lAd. in the pound, Feb. 25, or any subsequent Tues- day, at the office of Mr. Fearne, Leeds. A. Ellis, grocer, Mexbrough, Yorkshire—first and fine' div. of 3s. 10d. in the pound, Feb. 25, or any subsequent Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Fearne, Leeds. T. W. Wilson, linen manufacturer, Barnsley, Yorkshire — first and final div. of 2s. ld. and 7-12ths of a penny in the pound, and those who have received a former dividend may receive a third and final div. of 7-12ths of a penny in the pound, Feb. 25, or y subsequent Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Fearne, Leeds. D. Button, pawnbroker, Albion-place, Battle-bridge—se cond div. of 51 d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. J. Pledge, bricklayer, Vauxhall- street , La mbeth—second div. of 4s. ed. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. I. Isaacs, army clothier, Chatham—first div. of 9d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. 11. Miles, woollen draper, Southampton—second div. of 9d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. E. Walker, auctioneer, Newman-street, Oxford-street — first div. of 3s. Sd. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. J. Piggott, jun., cabinet maker, Richmond, Surrey—second div. of 6 1 / 2 d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mon days, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. C. B. Bayley, draper, Abingdon—second div. of Is. Id. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. N. Blake, linen draper, Ed gw are-road —second div. of 6 d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. G. Rossiter, jeweller, Bridgwater—first div. of 2s. 4d. in the pound, March 3, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Alsager, Birchin-lane. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. W. I. Welsh, attorney, Great Queen-street, Lincoln's Inn - fields, March 18, at eleven—J. Clay, draper, Dewsbury, Yorkshire, March 19, at two—W. Notman, pianoforte maker, John—street, Tottenham-court-road, March 18, at twelve. In the Country. H. Whittaker, silk throwster, Macclesfield, March 19, at the Manchester District Court—E. Thornley, scrivener, Hinckley, Leicestershire, March 11, at the Birmingham District Court —W. Cochran and J. P. Robertson, merchants, Lima, South America, March 20, at the Liverpool District Court. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the contrary, on the day herein mentioned. J Hannen, tallow melter, Little Britain, March 28—E. Brentnall, builder, North Brixton, March 18—P. J. Meugens, broker, Dunster-court, Mincing-lane, March 19—II. H. Foot head, wholesale milliner, Fore-street, Cripplegate, March 20 —W. Neiman, pianoforte maker, John-street, Tottenham court-road, March 20—J. Smith, draper, Liverpool, March 19—S. Peach, grocer, Nottingham, March 22—8. B. and B. G. Owen, tailors, Pall-mall, March 18—J. C. Petrie, miller, Bedlington, Durham, March 18—E. Hemming, needle manufacturer, Astwood-bank, Worcestershire, March 18— G. Alexander, innkeeper, Bcaminster, Dorsetshire, March 18 —T. Shillito, chemist, Leeds, March 18-3. Leybonrn, cabi net-maker, Bradford, March 18—H. Nicholl, worsted spinner ; Halifax, Yorkshire, March 18—J. Yeardley, W. Yeardley, and E. Yeardley, flax spinners, Ecclesfield-mill, Yorkshire. March 18. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. T. and B. B. Whinney, job masters, Piccadilly—M. and J. Whitehead, joiners, Sheffield—J. and F. Haysom, builders, Upper Belgrave-place—R. and J. Firth, Cleckheaton, -York shire—W. Parker and W. Houghton, builders, Birmingham —J. Hammill and W. Thompson, merchants, Liverpool—G. 11. Rollet and E. Newmarch, builders, Gainsburgh, Lincoln shire—J. Sandbach, sen., and J. Sandbach, jun., wine mer chants, Chorlton-upon-Medlock, Lancashire—J. Sharer, P. Sharer, J. Gibson, and J. Stokoe, drapers, Sunderland—J. Wilson, A. Pilling, and W. Milner, woollen manufacturers, Huddersfield (so far as regards J. Wilson)—W. Neale and IL Wright, carpenters, Leicester—S. Crispin, and E. Dow sing, tobacconists, Carlton-street, Regent-street--J. Bromley and J. Drake, window -glass cutters, Oxford-street—J. H. Brinkworth, A. Silcock, and W. Eyres, coal merchants, Chip penham—W. Eyres and A. Silcock, iron founders, Chippen ham—T. Dakeyne and S. Jones, tanners, Ave Maria-lane — T. Dakeyne, S. Jones, and G. W. Waters, tanners, St. An drew's-road, Newington (so far as regards G. W. Waters) — E. and A. Brook, grocers, Wakefield—J. Green, W. Watson, and A. H. M`Dougall, wine merchants, Pall-mall—J. Stubbs and C. Rollings, attorneys, Birmingham—W. J. and A. Bun nett, blind manufacturers, Newington-causeway—W. Rose, jun., and J. Searby, woollen drapers, Spilsby, Lincolnshire — J. Byrne and T. Anderson, silk manufacturers, Manchester — H. Mason and S. Fawcett., spinners, Great Horton, Yorkshire. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. John Davidson, baker, Currie, Edinburgh, March 3 and 24, at two, at the chambers of J. Nisbet, Edinburgh. James M‘Laren, merchant, Coupar-Angus, March 1 and 24, at one, at the chambers of W. Greig, Perth. William Jack, boot maker, Falkirk, March 4 and 25, at one, at the office of Russel and Aitkei, Falkirk. Archibald Gordon Macdonald, coach contractor, Annat, Argyllshire, March 5 and 26, at twelve, at the Banavie Inn, Kilinallie. Hugh Kennedy, grocer, Content• upon-Ayr, Feb. 28 and March 28, at twelve, at the chambers of W. Kirkland, Ayr. John Kerr, merchant, Greenock, Feb. 27 and March 20, at twelve, at the White Hart Inn, Greenock. GLASS DUTIES TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Mn. EDITOR,—You will greatly oblige me by inserting the following few lines in your valuable paper: — Being a commercial traveller in the flint-glass trade, and now on my journey, I have, since the proposed alteration on duties by Sir Robert Peel, met with great difficulties to convince my customers, and other parties, that there is any difference between the present duty ou flint and sheet glass, in consequence of Sir Robert Peel stating, in the house of Commons, that the present duty about to be taken off glass would reduce the price 300 per cent.; but the present duty on flint glass being only three farthings per pound, it is my wish that the public may be shown that the great reduction Sir Robert Peel named can only be upon sheet glass, and that it is un fortunate for the trade I am connected with, that Sir Robert Peel did not name the difference of duties between the two articles. I am, Sir, very respectfully, W. H. PARISH, Of Stourbridge, Worcestershire. Lincoln, Feb. 23, 1845. England, Scotland, and Ireland alike, for they all paid alike, and bore a great cost— no less t han 25,0001. per annum —for the pm yment of their judges. He held in his hand the Act that was passed for increasing the salaries of those judges, in order to diminish the arrears of business, and to facilitate justice. He would read another extract to the House as to the state of the Scottish law, and that return showed that in the course cf one session there were only eight eases adjudicated on. He (Mr. Wallace) had many facts in his possession, all bearing upon the question, but he would confine himself to the particular matter of his motion. He had obtained, last year, a return, showing the number of cases adjudicated on in England, as also in Wales, in Ireland, and in Scotland. The result of that return he would lay before Hon. Members, and he requested their particular attention to it. The return was for the session of 1e44, and the proportion of cases in the different countries was as followed :—To the thirteen millions of population in England there were 154 judges, thus showing one judge to every 100,000 inhabitants ; Ireland, with a population of eight millions, had 124 judges ; and Scotland, with above three millions, had 94 judges, thus showing one judge to every 27,000 persons. The people of Scotland complained most grievously of the two courts of law, and of their ever-varying judgments. The Scottish bar was now so much reduced both in the 'umber of first-rate, and other counsel, that it was perfectly impossible that persons could get their cases conducted without a very great, indeed an enormous expense.—(Hear, hear.) It appeared that in Scotland the vacations of the Courts of Session exceeded the time of the sessions themselves. One court sat 113 days, and the other only 103 days. By a re turn, which he had moved for in 1840, it appeared that for ten years there had been 813 appeals to the House of Lords. Out of these 598 came from Scotland, or nearly three-fourths of the number cf the whole kingdom. The Hon. Member then referred to several documents to show the comparative expen diture of the law courts of Ireland, Scotland, and England, and the business done in each. He contended that the busi ness in the criminal, as compared with the civil courts, was simple, easy, and disposed of with facility. He next referred to the time devoted to judicial business by the House of Lords, which, he said, did not average five hours a day. Then with respect to the Court of Quarter Sessions, he would beg leave to read a short statement upon that subject. Having done so, he then went on to scy, that the reason he had brought this question forward was, because he had hitherto entirely failed in inducing the Government to give them a better system of jurisprudence. All over Scotland criminals were brought up time after time, and for a series of slight offences might be convicted and sentenced to transportation. In England there was a frequent opportunity of trying prisoners, but in Scotland, they had the old jog-trot system of holding an assize once in six months. They had wisely legislated for England and Ireland in this respect, for prisoners were tried at periods near to the time when their offences had been committed, and they had, therefore, a great advantage over Scotland towards the repression of crime. During the sitting of the Court of Session, and then only, pri soters were tried once a week in Edinburgh. , Why was riot that system adopted over the whole of Scotland? But, in stead of this, persons were kept in prison who might be inno cent, for four or five months, and this was so because the con venience of the judges was consulted rather than the proper administration of the law. He did submit that this was a state of things which ought not to be suffered to continue. There was great inconvenience to the inhabitants of Scot land generally, under the present mode of proceeding. lie believed that nothing could be more injurious to the morals of the people of Scotland, and to their right to have justice fairly administered, than the present system. With respect te the penitentiary system, that was found to be an entire failure. it hen the criminals were discharged they returned to their old habits ; and he was satisfied that if the House adopted his recommendation, it would remedy the evils. If the proposal he had suggested met with the approbation of the House, there would be a great improvement in the general jurisdiction of the courts of Scotland. The Honourable Member con eluded by making the motion of which he had given notice :—" To bring before the House the amount of business done yearly by the Court of Session, and the nature and extent of the duties of the judges composing that Court; and to ask leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Act 1 William IV., c. 69, as provides that there shall be thir teen judges in the said court ; and to extend the jurisdiction of the stipendiary county judges, called sheriffs, by giving them the power of awarding the punishment of transportation, in the event of the judges in the Court of Session being reduced below the number of thirteen." The LORD ADVOCATE objected to the motion. The Hon. Member had not made out any case for any alteration of the constitution of any of the Scotch Courts. In 1840 the Hon. Member had made a proposition very similar to this. At that time an investigation had taken place. That investigation had been full and ample, and what was the result? It had then been decided, not that there should be a reduction of the num ber of the judges, but that the business should be so divided, that each case should obtain more of the time of each of those judges. Many of those views which the Hon. Gentleman entertained at the time that investiga tion took place, he seemed now not to have taken. One of the two inner chambers of the court—those courts of appeal which reviewed the adjudication of causes before single judges—has before it an excess of business. At the date of the Commis sion in 1840 the business of those courts was less than it had been for some years before. It continued to be much smaller than it had been up to 1842, and during that and the following year it gradually increased ; but he believed no inconvenience had arisen from this circumstance, or to affect the result of the investigation of the Committee in 1842. It should not be sup posed that because a greater quantity of business is at times performed in one court than another, that that court was inef ficient or useless. Still less should it be supposed that because a less number of cases was heard in one court than another, that Court was idle. A combination of circumstances some times threw a greater quantity of business into one court than another. In one of the divisional courts of Scotland there was at that moment a most fortunate combination of talent and legal knowledge.—( Hear, hear.) It was not wonderful, therefore, that such a number of causes were brought there. If two courts were wanting in 1840, which it was clear were required at that time, surely they could not in 1845 dispense with one of them. It frequently happened that causes of greater intricacy were brought into one of the courts—the hearing of those causes was more protracted—and occupied a greater length of time. It would, therefore, be seen that the number of causes was a most fallacious test. But even with respect to the number to which the Hon. Member had so pointedly alluded, let him, instead of considering the mere quantity, look to the description of those causes. Now, those gentlemen who reported in the law courts, reported only those cases which were in some points of view remarkable, and deserving notice. He would read for the House, from an official return, the record of those causes that had been tried in the two courts. In the first division of the court in the ear 11M2, 108 causes had been reported. In the second 158. In the first division, in 1834 (the year ending Nov. 4), there had been 98 causes tried; in the second 111. The judges of both courts were almost continually occupied between the circuits and what was done in the ordinary courts and in the chambers. The whole period intervening between the rising of one session and the sitting of another, was in this manner occupied. The Hon. Member proposed to do away with the circuits of the supreme judges, and to vest in the sheriffs the power of passing sentence of transportation. He thought that this would be an unwise and unsatisfactory measure. At present those who were sent to be tried before the circuit courts had their cases previously anxiously investigated. If they gave to sheriffs this power, what would ensue? There were thirty-one sheriffs, each of whom might arrive at a different decision. At all events, it was quite clear that with such a number there could be nothing like uniformity in the punishment, than which nothing could be more desirable. Here were thirty-one separate discretions, in addition to the judges; and, in short, he did not know of any course that would be mere likely to cast a blot upon their criminal jurisprudence. At present no man was tried subject to transportation without being defended by counsel. In the High Court of Justiciary every man was defended by counsel. If he asked for counsel, the request was at once con ceded, and he got any counsel; he chose to seek. If it were a serious charge, no counsel at the bar would refuse his assist ance, be the situation of the accused never so odious. One case of this nature, in which counsel had been asked—they must be all familiar with it—the case of Burke and Hare. The present Lords Moocrieff, Jeffreys, Robinson, and Cockburn, lent their assistance.--( Hear, hear.) After some further ob servations the Noble Lord concluded by saying that without a ease of great necessity, which the Hon. Member had not made out, his proposition could not be maintained, and he therefore felt bound to oppose it. Mr. FOX AULE said, that whatever opinion they might entertain as to the merits of the question before the House, they must all admire the ability, good temper, and moderation with which his Hon. Friend had introduced it. He felt hound to say that he did not agree with him—( Hear, hear)—and en tirely agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord that it would be unwise to give the inferior courts greater jurisdiction than they had at present. Such being the case, he could not assent to this motion. But it was possible that circumstances might arise to bring this matter under the notice of the Government, and if such circumstances did present themselves means might be devised by which the business of the Court of Session might be so regulated that parties coming to that court might be redressed. He would not say what means ; but perhaps one of the most obvious was to give parties coming to that court the power of choosing their own courts, Should this means be devised, he believed it would be sufficient for the purpose; but, if not, there was little doubt but that other means would present themselves of obviating the difficulty. 11r. WALLACE, in reply, said that he understood that the opinion of the Lord Advocate was, that young persons who had committed an offence should go on until their tendency to offence was nurtured into habit.—(" No, no," from the Treasury Benches.) Either such must be the case, or else the offences which were daily committed must be stopped. What was the course pursued ? Young persons were seldom brought before the inferior courts. They were first subjected to the jurisdiction of magistrates, then of the sheriffs, and then of the Court of Session. There was no power that could ieflict the punishment of transportation below the Court of Session. Now, it was well known that persons were frequently committed, respecting whom it was not known whether they were subject to the penalty of transportation or not, and no fitting adjudication of their case could be made. The Hon. Member for Perth had passed a Bill to remedy some of the defects of which he (Mr. Wallace) complained. But he believed that it was the opinion of all Scotland that that measure was a perfect failure, or if not a perfect failure, yet as nearly so as possible. It did not, at any rate, obviate the evil of which he (Mr. Wallace) complained. The real question was, whether prisoners liable to transportation should be tried once in six months, as was the system now followed in Scotland, er whether they should, as he desired, be brought to trial once in every ten days or a fortnight. The judges complained that their time was so occupied by reading papers that they had no sufficient oppor tunity of fulfilling their public duty. Now he (Mr. Wallace) wished that no papers should be read by the judges. If the judges were so oppressed, and had their duties to perform, he would put the Jurisdiction Act in force. He believed that the judges acted on something the same principle as the Board of Trade. They were fonder of reading those papers at home than of doing their duty in the public courts. He had been led to believe that the custom of the Board of Trade was for its several members to take the papers to their own houses, and, after considering them there, to give their decision, when they assembled at the office. Now, in his (Mr. Wallace's) opinion, it was perfectly absurd to go on to a certain position, then submit the papers to a judge, for him to put in his pocket, to consider at his leisure at home. The Lord Advo cate had said that a remedy for these defects would be to allow the people to choose their own courts. But, for his part, he believed that the true remedy would be to allow the people to choose their own judges, rather than their own courts. It was his belief that if the Lord Chief Justice Clerk, by any accident were to be removed to any other Court, he would have as little business to transact as he had now. He was aware that he was using strong language, but he believed the facts of the case would justify the use of such language ; and he hoped, at least, that the discussion of the matter in that House would do some good. In the face of the opposition which he had experienced, he felt it would not be wise to pro ceed, and therefore he should withdraw his motion ; but he believed that the admonition to the judges would be of service, and he should consequently have the less regret in withdraw ing his motion. CONDITION OF LIBERATED NEGROES. Sir R. H. INGLIS said that his object in calling the atten tion of the House to the motion of which he had given notice, was simply one of benefit to the persons whom he was de sirous to serve; and he therefore hoped that the terms were such as would avoid any hostile discussion. When negroes were deported from Africa arid taken by our vessels, it was generally supposed that they were provided for. From the time the slave trade was abolished by law it was certainly ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Carlisle, Feb. 24. The Assizes for the county of Cumberland commenced here this morning. The Criminal Court sat at ten o'clock, Mr. Justice Coltman presiding; Mr. Justice Wightman sat at twelve o'clock on the civil side. (Before Mr. Justice CourmAN.) John Gillespie was indicted for a burglary in the house of Joseph Grindal, at Wigton, on the night of the 10th of De cember last. Mr. Fawcett conducted the prosecution; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Ramshay. Mr. FAwcErr stated the case, and called the following witnesses : Joseph Grindal stated, that he is engaged in business as a draper at Wigton, and that on the night of the 10th of De cember last the house and shop were fastened up in the usual manner. The witness slept up. stairs, in the same room with his assistant, Joseph Chadwick. About two o'clock he was awakened by a noise below stairs. He listened, but the noise hail ceased. Being alarmed, however, he awoke Joseph Chadwick, and both went down stairs. On going to the door leading out of the shop, he found it open. It had been fastened the night before. Hearing a slight noise in the shop, he endeavoured to close the door, but found that the lock was broken. He then saw a light for a moment, but it was instantly extinguished, and some person came out of the shop door. The witness caught him by the breast, but was instantly knocked down. He was insensible for some seconds, and on coming to himself a little, be found some one beating him on the head and face. He struck at the man, and called for help. His assailant put his fingers into the witness's mouth, and nearly choked him. The wit ness caught the man by the ear, and the man let him go, and made off along the passage towards the back-yard. The witness pursued him, but lost sight of him, and returning along the passage, found a blue cap, with something in it he supposed to be the lining, but which proved to be a handkerchief. At the shop door, out of which the rob bers had come, were found a crowbar and a hat, and on the counter a dark lantern. A large quantity of goods had been taken from the drawers, and put up ready to be taken away, but nothing apparently had been removed. The prosecutor was severely cut on the lip and nese, appa rently with some sharp instrument. The wounds bled for several hours. Joseph Chadwick stated, that he went down with Mr. Grindal along the passage to the back door of the shop. They found it open. Mr. Grindal directed the witness to bring a light, and he went towards the kitchen for that pur pose. Looking back, however, and seeing a light in the shop, he returned, but the light was instantly extinguished, and some men rushed out. One of them passed him in the pas sage, and the witness felt he had a cloth cap. Ile ran along the passage, and witness pursued him into the yard. He got over into the yard of the Black Swan public-house ad joining, and witness followed, calling for assistance. At this moment another man came up, and told the witness if he did not hold his tongue, he would blow his brains ont, and both the men went off in the direction of a passage adjoining the Black Swan-yard, called Meeting -house-lane. It appeared that about daybreak the following morning there was found a pair of boots on a horse-stone in Meeting house-lane. These were of rather peculiar make. The right one was very much bent in the sole, and inside the heel was a piece of cork so as to raise that part of the foot about an inch. The prisoner is lame in the right foot, and wears usually a boot of a similar construction. A shoemaker was also called who had mended a pair of boots for the pri soner, and had put on the right boot a patch similar to that appearing on the boot now produced. The heal was raised in the same manner. The prisoner had been seen in Meeting house-lane about two hours before the robbery. It appeared from the testimony of a police-officer of the name of Hetherington, that he had had the prisoner in cus tody some days before the robbery ; that he then searched him, and to the best opinion of the witness the cap now pro duced was the one lie then had on. Mr. RAIUSHAT addressed the jury for the defence. His Lonpsufr• summed up. • The jury immediately found the prisoner Guilty.—Trans ported for life. THE LAMSIONBY MUIDER..-llifl LORDSHIP stated that he had examined the little girl, the principal witness in this case, and that she was in such a state of ignorance that he could not permit her to be sworn. It would probably be ne cessary to postpone the trial. Mr. TEMPLE said he was instructed for the prosecution, and that he did not think it would be proper to proceed to trial without the evidence of the girl. He had, supposing the trial to be postponed, an application to make to the Court on the subject of the custody in which she should be placed till the next assizes. She had hitherto been in the custody of the constable. He (Mr. Temple) admitted it was not desirable that she should remain in that custody, or in that of any one connec ted with the prosecution. ..At the same time, he did not think the father should be the person to whom she should be confided. He had, he (Mr. Temple) understood, sold all he was possessed of in the county, and there would be no security for the production of the child as a witness at the next assizes. Besides, the object of post poning the trial was, that the child might have an opportu nity of being instructed. It was not probable that abject would be attained by intrueting her to the person by whom she had been brought up in such utter ignorance. He would propose she should be put in the care of the gaoler, by whom she would be taken every care of, and where she would be instructed by the chaplain. Mr. Wimulis said he was not aware of any reason for de parting from the usual course, or for supposing the father would prevent her appearance. He, however, should not oppose the application. The trial was postponed accordingly: Several prisoners charged with minor offences pleaded guilty. Francis Neale was convicted of an assault, with a felonious intent, upon the person of Elicabeth Dixon, n, and sentence ford to four months' i m p r isonment. The paricu are unfit publication. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 25. (At Guildhall, before Lord DEN MAN and a Special Jury.) THE QUEEN V. DOUGLAS. This case, after lasting the whole of Monday and to-day, was brought to a conclusion this evening. It was an information against the defendant for receiving presents from the Raja of Tanjore, at whose Court he was re sident, and from the neighbouring Princes of Poodoocottah, which by Act of Parliament was a misdemeanour. According to the Solicitor-General's statement, the de fendant had received a monthly allowance of two thousand rupees from the Raja besides other large sums, under the head of "table-money, and under various pretexts. Rumours of these proceedings having reached the Indian Government, Mr. Bayley and Mr. Kindersley (since dead) were sent to investigate the matter, and the following is one of the letters from the defendant to Mr. Kindersley : " My dear Kindersley,—l have some hopes that you may be spared a duty which I am sure will be most disagreeable to you, from a letter which I have addressed to Government to the , and which I enclose you a copy. show it official ; if you think proper , to Bayley, with my regards, if he pleases to accept them, certainly with my respects. He has acted fairly and honourably to me, g I wish h accordin to the impressions which he has rec eived ; but e could have read my heart, or which would have answered the same purpose, the heart of the Raja,. the bitterly de ceived 1' No; it is I that have been bitterly deceived. I have not the least intention of denying the fact of having lent myself to a system of some forty years duration. The cruelty of Sir Fadom's measure, my deep and hopeless state of embarrassment, the refusal of the Court to grant me any redress, because I was emp lo y ed out of the regular line of my profession,' though th e y acknowledged the injus tice I had met with from the Governo4of Madras, the inat tention of Lord Elphinstone to their orders for the rmy appoint ment to Travancore, by way o f compensation, eduction of my salary at Tanjore, when I did return there, of upwards of 500/. per annum, the entire failure of my he alh, incurred for others. Oh, I could add to the list, but though I did so for ever, it would be no excuse. The best, the only palliative part of the proceeding is, that I did not deceive the Raja. lie was told I would unflinchingly perform my public duty, IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 25. COURTS OF SESSION (SCOTLAND). Mr. WALLACE said that for the convenience of members of the Government he had brought forward that motion first which he intended to bring on second. The motion of which he had given notice had reference to the Courts in Scotland, and he hoped before he sat down that he should be able to prove from facts that the time had arrived when a regulation of those Courts was not only necessary but practicable. Hon. Members should know that there were in Scotland two Courts of Review. Now in his opinion there was no necessity for two Courts of Review. The Supreme Court of Scotland might be so con ducted that the whole of the business might be confided to one Court, without any detriment to the interests of the country. It was evident that since he had agitated this question greater attention had been paid by the judges to the business of the Court. In the first division of the Court of Session, in the year 1841-42, the number of cases which had been brought before the first division of session was 204. In the year 18.43-44 it was 174, and in the year 1844.45 it was 270. In the second division of the Court of Session, in the year 1842-43, the number of causes was 216 ; in the year 1843-44, the number of causes was 145 ; and in 1844-45, it has diminished down to 82 ; therefore he had no hesitation in saying that that return proved that the people of Scot land, represented by their attorneys, had not such confidence in the legal knowledge and acquirements of the judges of the second division of the Court of Session, as they had in those of the first, inasmuch, as during the last year, while the number of causes in the first division Court amounted to 270, those of the second division Court had diminished to eighty-two. The next document to which he should refer, was a return of the number of causes in the Inner Court and Outer House. A number of causes were brought from the Outer House to the Inner House. The number of causes brought before the Outer House had considerably diminished. In the first division there had been 298 causes brought forward, in the second only 46. That was an incontestible proof that in the opinion of the in habitants of Scotland, as represented by the solicitors, the second division of the Court of Session was not an efficient court. The second division had fallen off, in which the Lord Justice Clerk presided. The difference between the Courts ' was, as he had stated, in the proportion of 270 to 82. Another return showed that only one-fifth of the business found itsway from the Outer Court to the Inner. In three-fourths of the present session there had been but nine causes in the Inner Court of Review, and at the end of the session there will scarcely have been more than twelve causes. The sub ject was one which concerned all the reople of ---__-- - the understood that their necessities should be supplied; bnt. country would be surprised to learn that when a Sparosh__,, an d Uln a Poi tuguese slaver was taken by one of our vessels, ferred to British protection, their wants were as little care N or as when on board of the vessels of their original captors. _e, was the case much improved when these unfortunate creatures' were landed at Sierra Leone. By the narrative of Mr. Pas c _ sf Hill, whom he had not the honour of knowing, but whom el'" man would honour far his kindness and humanity in accer panying a cargo of those negroes in the character of ae. m e app ed ; I terpreter—by that gentleman's statement it a iir , all the horrors of the slave trade were not exaggerlt! es and that they were such as to surpass the concep te l7 of the most fervid imagination. These h orror s were the WI: whether these unfortunate creatures were placed uneer_te: command of a British o ffi cer, or whether under that of el; officer of a foreign country, for the horrors appeare d to beo part of the system. The physical condition in which t i . 0 negroes were landed at Sierra Leone was described as 1361;1 the extreme frightful. He would not speak of the vrrete ..,, fate of those whose deaths were caused by their euffer in g:o, that he would pass over ; his business was w ith the sure i l n o Colonel Nichols had stated, that when they were landed ";01 the vessels they looked like ghosts. Those who w ere l e l t , at the Cape of Good Hope, he believed, were better in aPlal ance ; their lot was certainly preferable, but still it was ;ef t enough. He did not impute this as a charge aebig any Government, for in this matter he believed s'Ait and Tory to be equally blameless. All he wished vas , r oil her Majesty's Government would review the instructions pfh, to the Governor of Sierra Leone, and issued by him °n olo 10:h June last year. By those it appeared that negroes, t heir liberated and carried to Sierra Leone, were to exercise 'tlo t discretion whether they would remain in the colony , o r ' che s,. they would be removed to the West Indies ; but bow pre, they able to exercise any such discretion ? In th e li ter gresso, the vessel which Mr. Hill had joined " i tlis& preter, out of the whole cargo of 447 not less 10 01 230 were boys. In a dispatch from the C ,, e era tel office it was required that every able person who was I. ' „ n og at Sierra Leone should decide whether they would S til / 4 44 themselves or whether they would emigrate to the „de Indies. Now, in this direction, no distinction was made os_,:e or sex. The child of six years of age was in the Worm tion as the adult. In the case to which he had a lluded l as Governor withheld the application of this instruction goofy own responsibility, and restricted it to those children ell° o rb nine years old. Now, it was a perfect mockery to 0 01. 40 an alternative to those persons. They were landed " 0 of and destitute on the shores of our colony, ignorant R obert every every word of the language of their captors. He (Sir , I; thi s Inglis) did not think that he was a wiser man in 1 84 _ 0 09 he was in 1842, but he had yet the advantage of W e ate and he did not, therefore. feel himself bound to abide hi ee• l cision of the Committee in that year, notwithstanding f.,eostt not at that time protested against it. At page 15 of &tri t est Hon. Members would find a provision which recommeneereseli if a liberated negro was able either to maintain himself of get any relatives or friends to undertake for his enain,.7o it he was to be at liberty to remain at Sierra Leone ; ° t o ts s were without the means of maintaining himself, that too must of necessity become an emigrant to the Wes t 0 1 He was tempted to deny the right of Government thou t iok i force the departure of those slaves within such a limited eine for they must recollect that when that country took ein e es t the carrying of them to Sierra Leone, they promise d & ietre' only to protect but to provide for them. He doubted Ater orfore, fore, how far gentlemen could be said to be at liberty, rto tering into this engagement, to free themselves 01, obligation to protect and provide for that IMP ~1101 1 , The expenses of maintaining them at Sierra Leone bsTb e r e very considerable, and it was for them to consider trh. e 4 or! would be better to retain them on the coast of Af ri Adis' y remove them to where labour was more abundant. origt ting that that cost was 12,0001. a year, or, taking the 1 /o glit/ at 10,000/., whatever it might be, he (Sir IL 11 ' see r , maintained, that up to that moment there had been; r of income above the expenditure of the colonies. 411 clamation to which he had already so often referred, , re i authority of the King of England, and he held the it was not enough to say that they (the 010 4 were a burden on the local resources of the , sorb to ,!,1 They were pledged to France, to the world. an," fe sb P i c; whale negro race to maintain and protect them- s _'_;, 1 been said against the state of Sierra Leone, ou' l re House looked to the report of the Committee he h a ha rsp from, and which had before it evidence of a mixed e is A —they would find that a large proportion of person s is n colony were liberally educated, more so, indeed, than f see t i other of the dependencies of this country. 11 A ° t e d . stated, that one-fifth of the inhabitants were in - 01 education. If that were so, surely the founders thei.t porters of Sierra Leone were entitled to credit for so,/ ertions. They at least were not responsible for Ihehie 0) nagement of the affairs of the country. One o ,f p jactions to the course which Government hatosited was, that they had interfered with this 0 . 5 things.—(Hear.) In the month of July in I ,h *, eo' 1 0 a Government agent had gne throughout the and he would quote from a letter, written by so r h e detailing the effect produced by his interference. ' t he had required many of the children to emigrate to Indies, or to be put out among the cultivators of ° e tb No less than 100 boys and girls had been indueel e ses i ol l misrepresentation of the Government agent, t o He if schools of education, and to embark for JaMILICS. ,jestile not say one word which would imply the slightest 01'4;09 free ingress into the West Indies, but he most Or os! i es jetted that, in the plan proposed by Governmen t ' , eel giving the negroes a semblance of free-will, kV, 1 that they could not exercise it. They were, as •I'f. o said, throwing them out of the window, and r: -- ing them, at the same time, not to fall on tef f ,„ They were in this manner depriving st fri ile of one of the means of improving its advantages. e te l l in a letter addressed by the Governor of Sierra Leon-for Stanley, in April, 1844, that such were the facilities', : 0 0 ing the colony, that a very large number of the blacTie tion were quitting for other parts of the country' Sl i o S? always speak with respect of the labours Missions, but he must also speak of the good done bY t" tb of the Church of England. In that colony al ene ll. , • no less than ten pastors, two of whom, he (Sir ft. to esser i had the honour of knowing. Those were eircurns A t& sees!, sr . , would benefit to the utmost degree the colony sn"isfrisPf.,e sons who wore brought from the interior of _op', liberated there. He (Sir R. H. Inglis) had no wi;ol a de" emigration to the West Indies, but he certainly de_, er - s ilest i Majesty's Government should continue the sate, a t el k frrs of thl e ee; had been pursued by their predecessors, and for sir is Sl* selves. If they gave to the black population a b c , ii r the i to 4lll dom of will, and if then they chose to leave l e deter Indies or for other places, he should not desire W I at 00 . 0 When the Noble Lord at the head of the Coloni c s' p e e/ at first undertook the revision of the policy of hlsrrs a ddlo he required that the proportion of the sexes 10 t wo' that should be no less than one-third of the female to e jed i z the male population. Now, it could not be cont e rie g Pot: was impossible to preserve hat proportion, for rl e , s a ts, 00 1) few years the population in Sierra Leone aniottoj sts' .0 20,000 males and about 17,000 females. He b h i at ist / Aed the commencement of the observations which he to Piot; to that House, and it was hardly necessary for t el t bey lej it, that he bore no ill-will to the Legislature for of policy upon this subject. But he knew the s o i P - t oe,, had accrued in consequence of this act of theirs, r o ds tier pies' o not conceal from himself that it might be I. i evil consequences in their relations with ° t oe ir• i He would recommend the Government to stuoY r eal,* of their colonies in the first instance, and not t° if ee i s t r ; doing that which was right, because some of the 0%1 might think it was wrong. Yet, at the sarn e tta oee Jeri should regulate their conduct so as to give _ w e s t s e vt g e offence to other powers. They had seen with ioglA or" eye France looked upon the proceedings o f ee,ssoed, they watched the question of the right of 51 11 ;0 r fro eil thing connected with the culture of sugar, and • AM ,e lioration of the condition of that section Of the it s j who were known as slaves. In the last report rt es, Ar d them of the proceedings in the Brasilia' , e atie e s ere) distinctly stated that their right to lot t o 01 1 0 _" into America remained untouched. it yfs flrlf therefore, from what he had stated, and from 0 1 1ie tbe.or f possession, but with which he would not then 0 1 ° te etb l ioessli that there was too much reason to believe that " o s ofilr s u rly like a slave trade was peculiar to the east CO d ace I s ° t! di supplying the Mauritius. Among the correse oc e i s tise s e lo f he had moved there was an ordonnanee ist it roe 04 Mauritius, and he had no reason to suppos ° l pee 1 11 i° tot withheld by the Government. There was refer e e; so" 0 regular importation of negroes into the Maurits leog erv e sst i o Slave Trade Papers of 1843 they would find & s est, o tier s e the mode in which slaves had been taken from th e e e hst I ci ,!; 0 1 Africa to supply that colony. There was a scot, s gss e V( 0 phrase in the instructions emanating from t" - (t ee te iso o o which authorized this slave traffic. Th e)? the 0 / 41/ were to predispose and to captivate lowi e Cet e ile s the negro—they were to paint in e epes - e e f e, the landscape of that island—they were to al esit i p d the happiness and comfort which there t oa st r " 0 All the evils which took place upon the we s se se# 0 11). occurred in every part from which there so! wir d , e a ll the labourers. The kings had a property l e, if '407 and when labourers were wanted to einiera ew n 111 : , o'2 could not find a sufficient number of thei r e etl e litt:o4 dispose of, they made incursions into the I u is the . s .a tr hours, and carried off their population to stIPP . 1 7 0 einhal), It was true that this statement did not aPP I I but it s de 4 0 , 1 to which the first part of his motion referre t__ eee d e r s s o nr o si to the Mauritius, which was the object of the i s iv the is. , , he would not ask the Government to folly 08 0 1 1 7 ,40, their predecessors, but to follow their own se a !,,, a sr predecessors the Marquis of Normardl t; 0 te s iort a Russell had spoken distinctly on the subje c t the w o re caution could be taken which would precis::d infamy of the slave trade from being attae t , _heed & P r o isl to th e , i•t e o ° , emigration." His Right. Hon. Friend aelsoessterntro4 i o , vernment had expressed himself in 'lin' of r eP 7l O l 1 own part, he (Sir Robert Inglis) was _, l ,' i it „ it ie • oe'i that the experiment should not be Ineu e e rn babe e site, under circumstanoes which would afford e a. ti e in te, be or/ . cess. But they should sacrifice no prin, 'f ait h to ai t e st, t lif t i They should not keep the word of gorm t in the e ;see' d ) break it to the heart. He was sensible th e_,.• it s e ~ ,e f e riment for which England paid 20,000,0°„01 tbeLiteo it would take away from the West Indian: "_ oo eare s " t ee 0 coercion—that the bodies of the labourer. _w in wa ge! bet lsb°A , t e h f a t t he th e e e p er la e n ie t n er w s h w i o e u h ld w o u nly ta h k a e v n e avi t e ay su g o lY r.. of te e e k; was no doubt entertained of the ade a Vato-lition of " sPielf ' the West Indies to compensate for the Torlies 0a to is' believed that the climate of the W est 1 a PrePtqe At If • but sleet 0 0 4 of t bst v ir fitted to the African race , nor did he think they were boun were boon' for i e4; the interest of the West Indies agdthteebl l i be l t o 100 1 0 0 might come.—( Hear, hear . ) The y , e ~s r soes for ty .. ir, victuals a protection from the miseries from ahlsaadnme made e a aneamtionneh, exertion tef:grile:onrd twanahonisechisrs4 f_ne.rooloeslo_l,lol moving for the returns set forth . to Si c '' '. r e ' sfr relating object of this country to rescuethienirifiase dispatches and other papers or° 'ore the Mauritius. f e Orde r c i t o lir that be rose to Fr io Le s _,,,0 " Who seconds?" He said . IA Holt. the 0 1- 4 ° l 4 assured his Rig • n t.-- bit on Mr. HOPE rose, amidst loud cries 0 se a ( o f —( Laughter.) He Friends sr s P a ne tb e oo i, persons for who Inglis) that he felt an equa lly whom his Hon . 1 • t some -be 0 N test agains ~,t t ,s , awakened. But he must pro must de a i s ,.. iro il. d o 0 1 used by his Hon. Friend. enotictiec;:tbi,ate:oo'Sfi O t ment would weigh the interests h s they v s! osoe r t a the blood of the African ; " he ; -- r v ery r ev e c i of b oo ~11 ged ofep tihneterweset 1 . toil::: 04 ; w, of As e j that good might come. the o tlea T r or 4 Ol e faith with the liberated Africans, . sui_iaritie g e for vernment had been to promote their e , 1 7,„ e sstut, _ e reral..e.s course pursued by the Government, and as 1807 there was a provision enacte d 1: 1i0 , an:l f s roo , 4 o X tection of negroes liberated from sl e I time. His Hon. Friend had comma. i l eave the itrogieri..oo, 00 rations and improvements had since _ ta t t e i n e n P- t a b c e_Ps r r el i s i e ll 9 l of the Governor in such a way t " ere lan de n d s t ti eros e lii il4g , when those unfortunate persons w Pf ri de w b ' i h liettYhaer- th i e e lie" t l4 from n,ere the reti required d e- t e s h m i p a s k , , has selee!, t heir, 1 0 .) or grate to the West Indies or support s they read th e ed in 0) —( The Hon. Gentleman the e in th a e s ir ta o t p e tio d was not )ps i t e e t h e j t, n by their own labour, before had r K t :o% l : l :th° i° 10 ? contended that his Hon. Fri . . Tes, objec the s t eie di as pretation which hsshad put upon e is. but it al in scl t ip f/ til they s eere m ise so rb Government from aiding them l t o w o n k was to their only etownweaarnatiene, negroes . d n ot c o r , recover their strength before they to sustain themselves ; ape the yunwwereerealryreqsoye pl to or 1