The Sun. — London, England, 1850-03-20 00:00:00

prise th at his Hon. Frii rdhad voted Sir C. fletham in S ul ; ,p , ort of his v i ews . Why he (Mr. Lsbot i chere) would,. if ne ()t h e evidence to refer to, rest hie whole' cmht ke.t.. in app , s i t i en to t h e mo ti on of hi s H oe . Friend, to t.atinmey of Sir C. Iliithae. '1 hat /sunset officer di, wie t s ' a nefly declared that he would not coesi nt to the re ni.vo of tie Nuadron on the African coast until a sub ente te was found to prevent the traffic in slaver. No toid le t pictscl the horror of teat traffic, or the evils of the ti passage, with greaeer power, or warmer indigna r_upethen Sir C. Hotl a r,.—(hear, hear.) Then, with r :s e to the question of authority, hi , Hoc. Friend this s cl ub t? the report f a Committee of the House en ,l• ct; butsurely the report of a similar Committee Friend the fieuse ought to have its influence with his Hon. to e nd- The Commite e of the House of Lords came an opposite conelution from that arrived et by the t , a tnuaitti e o f th e H ouse o f Gm-arsons; they reported t u be ' it was not desirable to to nor,' the ~ q uadron from P ato 4f. ical coast lion. Friend ssetee 1 to antici tt at th e mem b ers o f i h- G iv error e would repu diate the q uest i on o f econom y in respect to this ques "'•lt was true that the Got e7riment was bound t.,e ;'U , ider th e question of economy, bul - , he believ d that of People of En4lancl would not, on the mere questioner, , e Pl'ornv alone, call fur the removal of the squedron rjAttiean c e_ist, and by doing so give up their the th,:d hopes and their a exious desire to put down file "d . .—(rloar, hear.) But did lion. Genilereen thi t lit that if this squadron were removed there were no tho Ps in these seas to protect our tr'ide? He rather ught that the constituents of the Hon. Gentleman h a rP'site (Mr. Cardwell), who had a large and, he was A f P r PY to say, increasing trade with the native tribes of i ef ," , , would not be very well satisfied if that trade was to unprotected; and he would here observe, that it was wi , i he extension of the trade of this country th ' e • the native tribes of Africa that he looked for T hs final extinction of the slave traie.—(llcar, hear.) " withdrawal of the squadron would restore the slave wa4l:i and give it a strength which they could not after wards obviate. Another point adverted to by the lion tLerlernan who had just sat down was, as to the influence sh it exercised in the diminution of the transport of tha t from Africa. There could be no doubt that it road the effect.—(No.) If not, how would tits) , account for w ` l 'e, increase in the price of slaves. The price of an adult Price slave in Cuba was now 1001., while in Africa the Price was not than 201. They might judge what the more risk of the transport was through the intervention of e squadron when he stated that Messrs. Hodge offered te I . ,, e ontract for the transport of emigrants from Sierra ts e_°.he . to the West Indies, paying every attention to "r comforts on the passage, at 61. Is. 101. per head, I f a d it might be assumed that the price, if the trade was C uba would not be greater to Cuba, and that the cost at 11 , 11 4 would not be more than 261. 10s. He thought vt uat the e ff ec t o f h av ing the price of slaves diminished e ?hid be to cause to be resumed the practice of what was ra tified " us i ng t h em u p," w hi c h was attended with the th eat frightful results and cruelties. In 1821, before e preventive squadron was established, the cost of S lave was 20 dollars, but in 1847 it was 500 dollars, sa d in 1848 it rose to 800 dollars. At Cuba in 1821 the Priesi;i of a slave was 100 dollars, while in 1 8 4 7 it was the dollars. He, therefore, was justified in saying that Squadron did diminish the number of slaves. He w e ts tqlld now refer to the opinion of Sir Charles Hotham, ts given before the Lords' Committee, who stated that ; 1 !) withdrawal of the squadron, without providing a sastitute, would be giving up the whole question. He Sa id further, that to withdraw the squadron would be i nitte tous to the honqur of the country; and when inter rogated whether it would be injarious to the interest of t he t country, he replied that in this case they were iden cal, and he added that cruelty to the slaves would bo It.eatly increased by the withdrawal of the squadron. Charles Hotham, by the answers he gave before lhat Committee, repudiated the use of his name. There Os another portion of the question to be considered el ect they agreed to the resolution, which was the v ect it would have upon the people of Africa. It s !l euld have the effect of stimulating war and blood • t i led among the natives, and renew those horrors uich for two hundred years they had endeavoured to Prevent. He thought, too, that this was a most inaus tLeious moment fro withdraw the squadron, when events t ere in progress calculated to imp h rove the condition of e natives. They all knew the effect which the Re- Public of Liberia was producing, under the Presidency of Mr. Roberts. He had the good fortune of meeting th at gentleman, and he could not but state that it was k 4u cist fortunate that it was under the guidance of so able elan. That republic was establishing relations with e r neighbouring states, extending its territories, and " f fusing its civilizing tendencies around it. It should . ; B '3 be noted that there was in negotiation a treaty for purchase of the Carinas, which had long been the Seat of the horrors of the slave trade, and also for the es tablishment e of commercial relations with Dahomey. T he recent purchase of the Danish forts would greatly c ontribute to diminish the slave trade. The result of t hese circumstances would be to give a line coast of 1,500 miles completely redeemed e r°ol the slave trade. He thought t hat the con nuance of the squadron would greatly promote these Ile gotiations, and that it would, therefore, be most in iUdicious at such a time to withdraw it. He had also to I ,Zu L h to the injurious effect it woul d have u p on the Bri s'sh colonies. His Hon. Friend desired that the trade s hould be open. If that was the case, and the squadron "'ithdrawn, the trade would be carried on by British ea- I]ital and British seamen. Ile was sure his Hon. Friend d id not mean to revive the slave trade; but if the trans- Dort of these people was allowed under the name of emi gration, British ships would go to Africa for the purpose i lengaging in the trade. He was surprised that the rest ation should have been seconded by a gent eman eon zilleted with the West Indies. Now what the West Indies most complained of was the want of labour , and could not ehderstand why facilities should be afforded in acquiring !laves to their competitors. He thought he saw symp es of revival in the \Vest India colonies. The export ct ‘ sugar from Jamaica was 657.000 tons, and in 1847 s od ; 1848 it was 689,000. In T r i nidad there was an in crease of 1,593 tons; and i n Anti g ua of 2,334 tons. lie would only refer to the other document, he meant. It was stated that with reduced prices the colony was tePressed, but that notwithstanding this depr e c iation he ad still hopss of improvement. Under these circum stances it would be a most inauspicious mo ment to make t ae change proposed, the result of which would be to r o ve their competitors an unlimited supply of sla ve la s or, H e was surprised at the illustration to which his 1 .5 . ° 1 1. Friend resorted, when he said that we appeared in t is case to lose sight of the principles which regulated ' 4) operations of trade—an illustration taken from silk sad tobacco, where the intervention of the smuggler cor lected the effects of extravagant duties, and consequent i gh prices. But it should be considered that this was P ot a question of silk or tobacco. It %Yes one of a diffe rent and higher character, and in which the feelings of t he people were at variance with the r e vival of t h e slave trade. On these grounds h e entreated them not to a g ree 4 4 . 10 the r eso lution. He did not, however , mean to pledge to the perpetual continuance of this force. That was another question. If any other substitute could be ! e uggested, or means devised, lot them bring forward heir plan, and they would discuss it. He had no predi l lection f ir this plan if a bet'er could be provided. He tae net give his support to this measure as a member of ' Government. If there was any policy that was not Peculiar to a particular political tran saction, or to a par ticular Government, it was the que stion of the suppres 'lutfl of the slave trade. — (He ar, hear.) He did not, m°wever wish to shelter himself und er that. The Go vernment participated in the general feeling, and were a nxious to wipe off the disgraceful blot of the slave trade. Mr. G. BERKELEY said it had been stated that ,Feat good would result from alterin g the size of the s hips employed in this squadron. He had been in com munication with a gentleman who was well ac q uainted with this trade, and he would ask the Government Whether it was not a fact that large steam-vessels were e ngaged in this trade, which were capabl e o f carr y in g f rom 1,400 to 2,000 slaves, and whichcould outstrip any sailing ships ? He had another remark to make, Which was, that this was another recommends lion to throw good money after bad , o f w hich the y cad already done enough. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the people of this country would not consent s upon mere motives of econ o my , to see the British squad :turf withdrawn from the Afric an coast. Now, what was 'oe reason why they refused to protect the free-grown Produce t f sugar, but motives of economy, and was not that the motive that led to the abandonment of the Policy of excluding slave-grown sugar? The Right l ion. Gentleman edmitted that the squadron was ineffec tive. Why, then, maintain it? When slavery was abolished in our dominions they should have seen that the treaties for its abolition by other nations were kept, Whereas the fact was, they were violating tho se treaties ueily. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that British adventurers would embark in this trade if the squadron Were withdrawn, but he doubted that. The best, the most effective, the most religious way to put down slavery, was to interdict slave-grown produce in our markets. British Guiana, and some other colonies, were tepidly returning to a state of barbarism under the new Policy. The Hon. Member for Lynn would bear him out in that statement. Ha thought that this squadron Was totally ineffective for the purposes for which it was Placed there, and as the House would do good by its re 'hovel, he most cordially supported the motion. Sir GEORGE PECHELL said he trusted the House Would not agree to our taking a position which would lower us as to the position which this nation enjoyed.— (Rear.) He had ever endeavoured to promote the effi ciency of this service. In 1819 when the Noble Lord came forward with a motion for an address to the Crown to compel foreign nations to fulfil their treaties, he never listened with greater satisfaction. Their records would allow that the squadron was not ineffective. It kieht have been more effective. As to large Steemers being employed in the slave traffic, bidding de fiance to the fleet, he thought that there was no steamer larg er than the Cyclops, which was on that station. Although their efforts had been in some measure unsuc cessful, yet they had performed a very large amount of good. He hoped, therefore, that the squadron would be Continued. The naval authorities, by sending out old vessels, had not duly supported the Noble Lord in car ? Ting out the treaties of this country. Some Hon. Gentlemen supported the motion on economical Principles, but if so, they ought to have suggested this motion upon the motion of the Honourable Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) ; not that he wished to reduce the fleet on the coast of Africa, but rather on the coast of Greece, and some other stations.—(Oh.) What did Mr. Hutton say before. the Committee of the House of Lords? Was it hot this, that the moment we withdrew our fleet from the African coast, his ships would be driven into the sea? Therefore, if on that ground our squadron were taken away, it would be no economy at all, for piracy, robbery, and every species of iniquity would arise immediately upon the disappearance of the squadron.—(Hear, hear.) Then what other means were there for putting down this traffic? Treaties with the native chiefs? But to hduee them to believe that they were sincere, they hotild show that we ottrselTes were sincere by Ireepmg our fleet there. It was said, that all the naval officers examined before the Committee of the House of Lords were rteatist the fle et being continued there. Bet were nut Sir C. Sutherland. C iptain liaison, and Ceptain Denman opposed to it? It was said ale, that it wes impossible efTe.:tually to blockade 1,300 miles of intersected by inland communication; but there were no more in reality than about 200 miles of coast. They had not withdrawn blockades in former times because they were in some measure unsuccessful, and why should they on this? He thought the fleet ought to be mote more effective, and should theref Ire oppose the motion. Mr. C. ANSTEY said that tee Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had addressed himself to the interest of the class to which he belonged, but that was not the matter more immediately in question, to which he would endeavour to bring the House back; but if like him (Sir G. Pechell) he bad turned his attention to one poit.t, and one point alone, he should vote for the motion of the Hoe. Member for Gateshead. It, wai a !aiad situation fir gallant officers to pronicee the pacification of Africa by making war on all the rest ef the world. These e admit officers had before them one or two alterna tives, either tr do nothing, or t i violate the law of na tions by endeavouring to carry out this Utopian olkct. They must sacrifice every other coesideret , on to carry into effect that particular tte a•y. Accerdiegly, the Noble Lord the For. Secreta-y, who hod distin guished himself in carrying out this treaty, had f iund it necessary to have some of his instructions revoked. The Hon. Captain Denman and other officers employed in that service, had, upon their return home, been crippled by actions iii consequence of their efforts to carry out their instructions.—(Cries of "No, no.") The Hon. Captain Denman, in his evidence be:ore the Com mittee of the House of Lords, stated that it was his duty to obey the commands given to him for the suppression of the slave trade on the coast of Africa; bu that gal lant officer was of opinion that the means employed were not efficient for that purpose, and the only means in his opinion by which this country could hope to put down the slave trade, would be by a Legislative Bill, the out line of which ho gave, and the object of which would be a thorough blockade of the coast of Africa. But what did the Legislature proceed to do on this part of the question? It proposed to pass a Bill which would give indemnity to all offenders for the past, and impose re sponsibility for the future. The Hon. and Gallant Member (Sir G. Pechell) had adverted to a treaty with the black chiefs for the suppression of the slave trade; but that experiment was tried on a former occasion, and the treaty proved abortive, and was but a mere mode of evasion of the question.—(Hear, hear.) He held in his hand the form of one of those treaties, and be found at the foot of that treaty these words:—" That in con sideration of the signature attached at the foot of this treaty, the Queen of England pledges herself to Almighty God, to give unto the chief one pair of boots, one shirt, and, of course, fire-arms, together with some other insignificant presents."—(Laughter.) Now that was one of the modes of evasion resorted to on this question. What was the course which it was now pro posed to pursue? Were they to address the Queen? No. But they were to ask other powers to concur with them in putting down this traffic. Now what was the result of all their proceedings on ;this question? Why they had found that 38,041 slaves were decimated in their efforts to put down this traffic. At 10 per cent., 38,041 slaves had actually died. He found, on the other hand, according to Mr. Cliff's evidence, the slave trade, prior to 1831, was conducted by the Brazilians with great humanity, and the mortality never exceeded 3 per cent. Notwithstanding the " head money" offered for the suppression of this traffic, a vast number of slaves had been lauded in Brazils, and their price had actually fallen in the Brazilian market. Now what was the evi dence of Lord Howden? He (Mr. Anstey) should like to know whether the Government of this country were to go on now with measures which were found to be fruitless, or whether they were to take other measures. Should they recall their squadron, seeing that it had greatly aggravated the horrors of the slave trade? An Hon. MEMBER—No. Mr. ANSTEY.—Humanity says" No," and economy says " Yes." Economy demanded it, but humanity forbade it. Be thought they could reconcile both principles, and that by the abolition of the Sugar Duties Act they would do more to suppress the traffic in slavery than by any other means which they had yet had recourse to. Sir R. INGLIS considered that the opinions given by Sir George Pechell on this subject—opinions which the Hon. Member who had just sat down had spoken lightly of —were, as those of an experienced naval officer, to be regarded as of importance by the House. He (Sir Robert Inglis) thought that the treaties with the black chiefs, if followed up, would have proved if the greatest value in the endeavours to suppress this most abhorent traffic, and of the greatest good. Last year they were told by an Hon. Member in that House who was anxious fir the withdrawal of the squadron from the coast of .Africa, that it cost this country 500,000 E a year to maintain it. Another Member made it 700,000/.; and another Hon. Member, not content with that, had increased the cost to 1,000,000/. Now, the expense of maintaining the blockading squadron in 1846-7 was not 500,0001, nor 700,0001., but only 300,0001., fled that including wear and tear of vessels, and all other matters. And, in reference to a reduction of the expense, the utmost it could be reduced to would be, according to evidence, in the proportion which twelve ships hear to twenty-four. Were they prepared, for such a saving as that, to abandon their efforts to sup press a traffic like this, which had decimated humanity? Were they prepared to pursue such a course? Since the equipments, the number of captures had been im portant. In the ten years from 1830 the number of slavers taken were not less than 6Z6, if his memory served him correctly; and of the 656 vessels taken, 450 were captured close to the coast, a fact which led an experienced naval officer to advise, as the most effectual means of suppressing the traffic, that they should keep an efficient squadron on the coasting service. They should consider this question in reference to the progress of civilisation, the feelings of humanity, and the progress and character of Christianity.— ( s Hear, hear.) He could not but advert, and he did so with much satisfaction, to a petition which had been presented to the House on this subject by the Noble Lord tat the head of her Ma jesty's Government. And here he must do the Noble Lord the justice to say that he had always raised his voice against slavery. The petition to which he (Sir R. Inglis) had alluded, as presented by the Noble Lord, was from the liberated slaves at Sierra Leone, and prayed the House not to consent to the withdrawal of the British squadron from the coast of Africa, and to adopt effectual means for the suppression of the slave trade. The petitioners went further, and prayed the House to examine some of themselves on the subject; and from the manner in which they expressed them selves in their petition, he (Sir R. Inglis) considered that the House could not have better witnesses. They stated in their petition that commerce was carried on in the settlement by native industry; and the appeal which they made ought not, in his opinion, to be disregarded by the House.—(Hear, hear.) They owed it not merely to the race of Africans, but to their own subjects, not to afford the slightest pretence for giving further encou ragement to the slave trade. In the Committee whence the report had issued favourable to the withdrawal, no less than six resolutions, proposed by different Members, were either carried or rejected by the casting vote of the chairman, Mr. Hutt, and it, therefore, not unnatu rally, was called Mr. Hutt's committee. In his heart ho believed it was inconsistent with the cause of humanity, inconsistent with the spirit of civilisation in Africa, and inconsistent with the national honour, to withdraw the spuadron from the coast of Africa, and therefore, he implored the House, and especially those friends with whom it was usually his happiness, to co-operate, to consider well the consequences of the motion before they suffered themselves to be deluded into a consent to its support. Lord 'TARRY VANE said, after considerable hesita tion he had come to the conclusion of supporting the motion. Before he proceeded to state the grounds on which he intended giving his vote to the Hon. Member for Gateshead, he felt desirous of making one or two remarks in reference to certain statements made by the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade and the Hon. Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford. Both those Hon. Gentlemen evidently desired to impress the House with the conviction that the deli• berations of the Committee were valid by the casting vote of the chairman, but in point of fact there were two other members of the Committee absent on the principal division, and as their opinions were known to coincide with those of the chairman, the resolutions were in reality carried not by one casting vote, but by three votes. It was not on the ground of economy alone that he advocated the withdrawal of the squadron, and in this respect ho differed from the Hon. Member for Gateshead. He took into consideration the long series of years this country had endeavoured to effect a suppression of the slave rade. He recollected the efforts made by various Ministers at the head of the Government with the same view, and he saw how unsuccessful those efforts had proved. Under Captain Denman the partial success in suppressing slave traffic was not attributable to the presence of the squa dron, but arose from and was coincident with the co operation of the Brazilian Government. At one time there were 40,000 slaves imported into Cuba, but there were now very few. The decrease, however, he had the authority of General Aleez for stating, arose from the co-operation of the authorities. He did not believe, nor did he contend that they could dispense with the maintenance of some portion of the squadron on the coast of Africa and Sierra Leone. If they desired to succeed in suppressing the slave trade, they should blockade the eastern and western coasts of Africa. If they were prepared to make efforts on se extensive a scale, they would then be right in continuing their squadron. It was because he believed they could not carry on a scale of sufficient magnitude, and that it was not in their power to continue effective measures for a length of time, that he thought it desirable to make the alteration suggested. The question of providing a sub stitute for the squadron was one of great difficulty, but he thought that it should not be urged as an argument against removing an expensive force, whose presence had not been productive of anticipated good results in the suppression of the slave trade. Having been a mem ber of the Committee, and feeling anxious to justify the vote he intended giving, as well as being desirous of correcting certain statements made by the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade, he had tres- passed on the time of the louse, and he concluded by expressing his intention of giving a reluctant vote in favour of the motion. Mr. CA.RDWELL regretted the course which the Noble Lord had indicated his intention of pursuing. The question they had to decide was, should they or should they not make a surrender of the policy which they had so long pursued, with a view to the suppression of the slave trade. Ho deceived himself very much if a fair analysis of the proceedings on which tho present motion should rest would not stand in favourable con trast with many of the statements in connexion with the subject recently made public, and with some of tho speeches delivered that evening. They were told that the operations of the squadron had been futile. If it was mesnt by such a statement that the squadron had been of little, if any good, then he could show, from in disputable evidence, that the, repression of the t-affia in slaves had been considerable, and it the withdrawal of the squadron were advocated, on the ground of economy. they had the authority of eminent naval officers for saying that the squadron should be maintained some where. He looked for the effective suppression of the trade more to the influence of civilisation, and to the introduction of the Christian religion into the slave-producing countries. But suppression to ac m siderable extent had already taken place. From the north of Africa to within five degrees of the equator there was not a shadow of the slave trade. Captain Dunlop's evidence went to show that the presence of the squadron had a most beneficial effect at the Ga !otos ; and he believed, from the statement of that gen tleman, that if they possessed the power of indicting chastisement on the slavestraffiAters, the repression would be still greater. The slave trade had been put down in Cuba, but if they withdrew the naval force the price of slaves would fall, and then they would have a renewal of the slave trade in Cubs. Such, at least, was the opinion of Mr. Kennedy, the Consul at Havan t ah ; and it was fully established by other authorities. The slave traffic, he acknowledged, had not been re pressed in Brazil. The native Brazilians discouraged the traffic, and tar Portuguese eapitali.tr carried it on, hei rg in communication with the colonies on the west coast of Africa. So far as the Brazils was concerned there was the testimony of a commercial ges tlernan, resident there, to the effect that were the scurtdron withdrawn from the coast of Africa great facilities would be afforded for the extension of the slave traffic; which he had no doubt would be taken ad vantage of, as in his opinion the extension of that traffic entirely depended on the withdrawal of the means at present used for the suppression. That was the testimony of a commercial gentleman resident in the Brazils, who would not be apt to be led away by what was called the sentimentality of the subject, and who must be held to know what was the nature of the facts connected with it. The effect of the present system of repression had been to raise the price of slaves both in Cuba and Brazils; but once the squadron withdrawn, additional facilities would be given to the transmission, and consequently there would be a reduction in the price of them. It was, how ever, said, that the measures which had been taken had been the means of increasing the sufferings consequent upon the slave trade; but on examining into the evidence of those best calculated to speak on that subject he found the reverse to be the case.—(Hear.) He had looked into the debates which had previously taken place on the sub jec t,but on referring to the evidence of Sir Charles Hotham, he found that the mortality under the present system only amounted to about five per cent., which was a great reduction as compared with former periods. So far from the present measures not having the desired effect. he found trom the admirals, both on the eastern and western coast of Africa, that the slave trade had been greatly put a stop to; and what was most gratifying was, that while the admirals of this country were taking steps for the suppression of slavery on that coast, the French and American admirals did their best to second their efforts. Finding all this to be the case he could not, as an honest man, come down to that House and say that the House should take on itself the responsibi lity of abolishing a system which had been attended with such beneficial effects. Much had been said about the disparity of opinion between the two Committees which had sat on the subject; but in 1848, it must be remembered, that they had not the evidence of Sir Charles Hotham, otherwise he had no doubt that Lord Courtenay would have come to a different conclusion from what he did. Sir Charles Hotham expressly said In his evidence that, were they to withdraw the squadron from the coast of Africa small speculators would spring up for the purpose of trading in slaves, and it would be impossible to calculate the consequences which would ensue. As he, therefore, was connected with a borough which was intimately connected in respect of trade with the western coast of Africa, he would ask the House whether it would be judicious to withdraw their squadron from that coast, and leave the trade carried on with it, and all other interests connected with it totally unprotected? No doubt the expense of the squadron was complained of; but, in respect of that, he must say that he could observed in the House, in respect of public expenditure, this remarkable circumstance. When any one wanted anything carried out which was conceived to be of public utility, did the Government object to it on the ground of its being too expensive, immediately there was a cry raised that they were a set of twopenny-balf penny fellows, and were not deserving of their places, because they refused what was conceived so great a boon; but then, again, when this money so expended came to appear in the estimates, notwithstanding all the clamour which had been raised for having it voted originally, those same parties turned round and accused the Go vernment of lavish and profuse expenditure.—(Hear.) Upon the whole, therefore, considering this motion to aim at a reversal of a policy which he considered sound, he would give it a decided negative.—(Hear, hear.) Captain PELHAM said that while they were told that the efforts in putting down the slave trade had failed, he was prepared to show that it would be in jurious not only to the interests of Africa, but also to the commercial interests of this country, were the pre sent motion adopted. He considered that the opinion of Sir Charles Hotham was perfectly misunderstood.— (Cries of " Divide " by gentlemen opposite.) No one could deny that there were fewer slaves imported now from the Brazils and Cuba than there formerly was, and what had led to that result was the operations of the squadron on the African coast. That of itself, then, was a sufficient reason why it ought not to be withdrawn. At one time there was no less than 94,000 slaves im ported annually into the Brazils, but now the traffic was almost put a atop to. • It was said that the force em ployed had done nothing to put down the slave t-ade, but that was contradicted by the evidence of all those who had been on the coast. There was one thousand miles of coast upon which the slave trade was almost clone away with, and that of itself showed that the ef fect of the squadron had not been altogether unsuccess ful. The Honourable and Gallant Gentleman then went on to contend that the withdrawal of the squadron from the coast of Africa at the present time would be attended with the worst consequences, but was so interrupted by cries for a division that he was but indistinctly heard in the gallery. Colonel THOMPSON said there was one point on which he was anxious to set himself right with the House—that point was, that free trade had nothing to do with this question. His Honourable Friends around him were in perfect amity with lion. Gentlemen oppo site on this occasion in that respect. The principle of free trade had always consisted in denying the policy of giving any portion of the community a monopoly, upon the ground that no class of persons should pos sess any peculiar advantage over the community in general. The measure his Hon. Friend was now advo cating was free trade in stolen pocket-handkerchiefs.— (Laughter.) That the Free-traders had never main tained. The argument which had always been super eminently urged against the traffic in slaves was its immorality, and that it was a crime—and no commercial question had any bearing upon it whatsoever. He was afraid there existed a strong desire, a heat and lusting, as it had been described, on the part of some to see the sinews and limbs of the African employed in profitable industry, not throughout the African continent only, but elsewhere English commerce, of course, taking its share.—([fear, hear.) Had they not seen an emi nent literary character once as hunger to literature de claring that the beneficent whip was the only thing for negroes and Irishmen?—(Laughter.) The principle now started against all men who had much to lose was this—that all property of right belonged to him who could make the ablest use of it. That was the principle on which the slave trade was now argued for. Let them see what the argument would come to. It would be applied at some future time to the whole commercial interests of England. Tnero was no man so pure who was not willing to slip in with this most sweeping argu ment. Fancy every one denied of ability making the best possible use of all they possessed—fancy that argn meat to be used by the men they met in the street be tween that House and Charing-cross. They might de pend upon it there was in this question that which deeply concerned them, and all who stood by honesty, and who hoped to pass through the world with a good reputa tion. Our ancestors were not so far wrong as some thought them to be when they imagined that one of the greatest glories of this country was the stern opposition it had always made against the carrying on that most monstrous iniquity, which had so long dishonoured man kind.—Cries of " Divide.") Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when Mr. GLAI)STONE rose to address the House amid loud cries of "Divide, divide," and proceeded to say he was reluctant the question should go to a division in which he should vote for the motion of his Hon. Friend without stating as briefly as he was able some of the grounds on which he rested his decision. He did not disguise from himself the serious consequences of that vote, but in his view of the case the question was not whether the squadron should or should not be removed from the coast of Africa, but whether it was not right to remove those preliminaries which were now a bar to a further discussion of their engagements, or in other words the compacts they had entered into on the sub ject with foreign countries. The proper spirit of the motion made by his Hon. Friend was to vindicate that question, for he would venture to say that matters could not be more imperfect, or more open to objection, than their present treaties for keeping a squadron on the coast of Africa. The motion only referred, in point of fact, to the treaty with France, by which each country bound itself to keep 26 cruisers on that coast, for the suppression of slavery, but after the lapse of a number of years France changed her mini, and appealed to the Bri tish Government to relieve her from her engagements. The Government acceded, unwisely in his opinion, and instead of 26 cruisers France only keeps 12 vessels on the coast to exclude her own subjects from engaging in the traffic. That was a state of things so preposterous that he though his Hon. Friend was justified in bringing forward his motion.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Glad stone) had investigated the subject with great care, and against every prepossession of his mind, against which he was required to struggle and overcome; but he be lieved the time was come when some change should be made. It was not that he thought less of the horrors of the slave trade, for he believed it by far the blackest crime that ever tainted Christian or Pagan, and it was not on that ground, therefore, he should support the motion of his lion. Friend. The peculiarities of the present case were, that those who now condemned it ad hored to it as long as they could with a tenacious fidelity; but from lessons of experience had felt compelled to change their former opinions. They were told in 1840, by Sir Thomas Buxton, that it was impossible to put an end to it in consequence of the great gains connected with the traffic. The present system was condemned by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, it was condemned by the Anti- Slavery Society, and with respect to merchants, they were told that the maintenance of legitimate commerce re quired this squadron should be kept, but all he could learn was, that that body in general were opposed to it. Then 0 to the naval profession, he believed their gene- rilE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING-, MARCH 20, 1850 ral opinion was is favour of the maintenance of a squadron, but the most rt sp , insible commanders of sta tions were againit Sir Charles Tlothara did not say that it should be withdrawn unconditionally, but he was of opinion that no force could suppress it, and that a substitute for it must be got, namely, by a treaty with Brazil, to introduce free labour into that country. lie (Mr. Gladstone) would ask, how would Sir Charles Hotham vote were he there?—(Hca , , hear.) in his opinion he would vote for his Hon. Friend's motion — (No, no)—for ho was averse to the continuance of the squadron to suppress slavery, and believed that the treaty he referred to was the only remedy—(Bear.) With regard to the speech of the Right Hon. Gent!eman the Presilent of the Board of Trade, he believed it was one which would have been made any time during the last tan years, or the next ten years to come.—(A laugh.) But the question was, were they to make the maintenance of tbar. squadron on the coast of Africa as one of the in stitution* of the country ?—(L )ud cries'of "Hear, hear.") He believed, also, that unfair observations had been made on the Committee that sat on the subjec'. It made no report, it was true, because they did not wish to elicit the opinions of the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman talked of f.uts being purchased on the coast of Africa, and of one thousand five hundred miles of cast being clear, but the evidence of Sir Charles Hotham was, that when slavery dts9peared in one portion, it 'sneered in another; SO that it was utterly impossible to suppress i t l!tog:f:th Pr.. W“11, then, what h a d th e sq uadron done ? Had it ext i nguished the trade, or was it making progress towards that object?--(Cries of " Question ") That was the question before the House, and the only one on which they were called on to decide. If he could, for his Fart, see any progress made by the continuance of the squad ron,i p f m e co r r :ac t . e ne xt rr .p o h e p e n s t ti q vh u ee a ; d .s rl but uv n et , no it trade.ddi c d ) u b n t iott he would continue it; but it was in vain to look s w s a c e s o r niaot ju t n a s t lya on restrain t b made t i e ti n st amount. But did it govern th e p r ice of slaves in Brazil ? Was that the case , or w as it not ? In 1828, according to ,the entries of purchases of slaves, entered in the books of an estate, which he had seen, he found, that while in 0841 a slave was worth 315 milreas, in 1844 he was worth from 700 to 800, in the market of Brazil. The squadron became more effective since 1844, and what was now the price of slaves ? In 1844, 700 or 800 milreas were paid, but in 1837 the price was reduced to less than one-half, and in 1848 to 350. That, be it recollected, was owing to a larger supply.— (Hear.) Now, let them look at the returns made by the Foreigtnoffice with regard to the -complaints of their cruizers. In 1840 these captures amounted to six per cent. of the entire number ; in 1841, 13 per i cent. ; in 1842, 13 per cent: ; n 1843, five per cent. ; in 1844, nine per cent. ; in 1845, 10 per cent. ; in 1846, four per cent. ; and in 1847, eight per cent. Therefore, in those papers, there was evidence of no progress, but a retrogression, and while the country was improving the squadron at a vast cost, the slavers had been at work likewise, and a larger proportion passed through their hands during the last few years than for any previous period. He did not object to the experiment made, but he believed it was not the ordination of Providence that one nation should regulate the morals of another. It was not right to depart from that rule, for they were in constant risk of quarrelling with other powers; and had totally failed in effecting their object. The Noble Lord the Foreign Se cretary was now in office nearly twenty ye ars , and, no doubt, no man could have done more than he did to ad vance the cause of humanity; he entered in 183$ into a treaty with Spain; in 1839 they got what was termed the equipment clause ; in 1840 they were enabled to capture slavers south of the line, and treaties had been entered into with France and America, but all had failed even to lessen slavery. These points had been nomi nally gained, but where were they ?—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") They bad poaitively , fatten back from the position which they held some years ago. Then it was suggested that pensions should be given to the chiefs, so as to make up for their interests in capturing slaves ; but it should be recollected that the burdens on the people of England wore already most serious.— (Hear.) He was not in the main about to find fault with the expense of 700,0001., but h . e was convinced that the continuance of the squadron did not diminish, but rather increased, human wretchedness on the coast of Africa.—(Cheers.) The miseries of men were often promoted by those who sought to relieve them, and what had already happened ought not to prevent them from acting according to the circumstances of the times in which they lived. He regretted much that he had not the work of Sir Thomas Buxton with him, but it was well known that while the mortality in the middle pas sage, during the regulation of the British slave trade many years ago, was stated by Mr. Jenkinson to be three per cent., it increased in the time of Mr. Wilberforce to 10 per cent.; it increased to 24 per cent.; and was, pre vious to 1840, 33 per cent. During the former period the average number of slaves was three slaves to every two tons; in 1847 and 1848 it increased nearly eight to two tons. Now, under such circumstances, there must be a mortality of a most dreadful description, and accordingly the increase had been over 10 per cent. What did that mean? Why this, that between 8,000 and 9,000 slaves were sacrificed on the middle passage, while they only liberated, at the highest point, some 5,000 or 6,000, thus increasing the mass of human suffering, instead of re lieving it. He recollected that when an argument was some time since advanced, that piracy was as iniquitous as the slave trade, that the reply of the Noble Lord was—as it was not looked at so by other nations, it did not become the British Government to be the first to carry such a measure into effect. Ho also thought there ought to be a right belief among all nations of our sincerity of performing whatever we pro pose to them, but he feared that such a belief did not exist. When he heard allusions made by the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. 1 - .loouchere), of the assist ance and sympathy evinced by French and American officers towards our flag. he was forced to ask, was there any grounds for an inference that that sympathy was directed towards our Government ? lie should say no, and he believed such was the general opinion of the House and of the country. And he was borne out in his opinion by the evidence t.f Sir Charles Hotham— (Hear, hear)—who states that an American .officer, who had assisted our men when in an engagement in a slave ship, had been tried by his country, and subj▪ ected to a heavy mulct, and there never afterwards was known one American officer to imitete his example. The ' Right Hon. Gentleman then alluded to the g eneral belief of all nations of the insincerity of the British Gove rn ment, on the occasion of the passing of the Sugar Duties ▪ Act, and said, that as they had not acted up to their professed and understood intention, and shou ld therefore,in justice, repeal, that Act. He should next allude to the opinions of the great weight of naval officers, in which he fully concurred, namely, that o . our squadron should be doubled on the c oast of Africa, though Sir Charles Hotham thinks the', even such au augmentation would never be sufficient to suppress that iniquitous trade, and also that it could be better effected by steam-vessels, as sailing-vessels cannot watch more than forty miles of the coast, when steam by their expeditious sailing, much more easily put the slave trade down. Next it would be necessary to obtain the right of search and of stopping, for many of the s hips of Brazil and Cuba frequently h oisted the Sar dinian and Portuguese flag , and thus carried on their iniquitous trade, without the interruption of our squad ron. There were different opinions as to the mode by which a stop could be put to it, some th ou g ht by punish. ing the whole crew , others by the death of the captan, and others by three o f the chief men; others by transi portation or imprisonment; but, he would ask, had that House any means or authority by 7hich it could interfere with ships of another na tion? He answ ered, " No," and thought that such opinions were merely chimerical. And, should engagements be entered into for this object, he asked of what use were they, when Spain and Brazil violate on the next day the treaties they entered into the day before? It had been asserted that the treaties en tered into in the year 1830 were still extant, and that the emancipation of the slaves taken since that period could be demanded . ; but, he would ask, was such a demand ever Di made d Lord Aberdeen, when in that country, and cognizant of such a fact, make such a demand ? No and it was, therefore, useless to speak of the existence of those slave treaties, for, feeble as Brazil is, it is well known that it would not be judicious or wise to go to war with her. Again, he looked upon the building of Ena . rtello towers, and the entering into treaties with black chiefs, as a mere means of blinding the people of this country. lie cer tainly should say that, while be found Lath with the present system he would not take on himself to point oat any particular system for the suppression of this trade. He apprehended that the British Government would use every exertion for the suppression of the slave trade ; but he should at the same time say, that full justice had not been done to Cuba by the allusion of hi s Honourable Friend (Mr. Cardwell), for he could not account for the magic power by which our ships seized no ships but those of Cuba, and that on the African coast. He considered that those slave ships might, for aught he knew, belong to Brazil as well as to Cuba. On the whole, he s hould say that he did not believe that our sq ua drons tended in any way to suppress this trade, but that, on the contrary, Brazil looked with an eye of national jealousy on such interference; and ho would appeal to the sense of the House whether the jealousy of England would not be roused to the highest pitch ot indignation if, sixty year! ago, when we carried on the slave trade, any foreign ship would interfere with us? He thought it a visionary idea to think of putting down the slave trade by the combination ot the Engli s h and French. He hoped, and " his wish was th e f a th e r of his thought," that Brazil would in time put down this system, and he augured this from the knowledge that there was a very influential and most numerous anti-sla- very party in that country. He knew that there was a time when many of that country required the assistance of the British Government for the suppression of this iniquitous trade, and that would be much more efficient than the energy of the people. the liberality of public money, or the valour of our officers.—(Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL —I own, Sir, that lam more anxious than I ever remember that this House, when it comes to a division upon this sabject, shall have a due sense of its importance. In importance it is quits im possible for any one to exaggerate, or even to state merely in its full extent. But to give some definite idea of it, let me state to the House that at the beginning of this century England, in all her colonies, carried on and permitted the slave trade—that the other powers of Ea rope who had colonies likewise sanctioned slavery, and wherever and whenever they could carry on the slave trade they likewise permitted and sanctioned it. In the course of the time that has elapsed from the beginning of the present century, we have seen the Parliament of England abolish the slave trade. We have seen England, in the treaty of Paris, make stipulations with till the na tions of Europe declaring their condemnation of the slave trade—we have seen slavery itself abolished by an Act of the English Parliament —we have seen the slave trade abolished practically, effectually, and entirely, both by France and the United States—and we have seen slavery itself lately abolished by France and by Denmark.—(Hear, hear.) Let me add to this that is Africa, where the strongholds of the slave trade . were erected, wo have seen that criminal traffic put an end to, and the peaceful arts, and industry, and trade, flourishing by those who were the accomplices of this horrible traffic. I should be sorry to see the end of the triumphs of humanity which I have thus shortly traced, that we should be askel to begin the course of another half century by retracing our steps—(Cheer:)—by going back from all that has hitherto been done, by proclaim ing to the world by this first step that we no longer will take those measures against the slave trade which we have hitherto taken, and that we have no substitutes to put in their place, and thereby spreading discourage ment in every part of the world among those, who, ad miring our example, feeling the truth of those Christian maxims we have professed, and wishing practically to act in the same manner, have been endeavouring each in their own country to spread the same maxims and to abolish this horrible crime.—(flear.) To speak only of that country to which thn Right Hon. Gentleman last alluded—namely, Brazil, he has stated that my Noble Friend near me gave evidence that there was a party in Brazil springing up hostile to the slave trade. Since my Noble Friend give that evidence we have had lat-r accounts from Brazil, and these later accounts, I am sorry to say, represent that the party is so utterly extinct, their lan euege being, that they fear England is about to cease from her efforts; and if England ceases to take the lead in this grand work, it will be a hopeless task for them to attempt to raise their hands against this iniquity. Now, in the beginning of the Right lion. Gentleman': speech, he gave, I think, a not very correct account of the object and effect of this measure. He stated that it was necessary, as a first step in the matter, to consider what office we were hereafter to do to relieve ourselves from the obligation of the treaty with France. Now, if we re lieve ourselves from our obligations with France as well as America, every gentleman will remember that that treaty, more from the repugnance felt by France, and in consequence of the objections made in the French popular assembly to allowing the right of search to the English cruisers, and as a substitute for that right of search the French Government agreed to keep cruisers of their own on the coast of Africa to pre vent the French flag being desecrated by that trade. By the same treaty they gave the right of search, although not what is technically called the right of search. And well, although the number of vessels has been diminished, most faithfully had that treaty been observed by France, but I will not pretend to say that either France, or the United States, or any country in the world has the same feeling that we have, not only hitherto professed, but sincerely entertain. No doubt, if you ask France to be relieved of the obligation you will be relieved.—(Hear, hear.) But, what then, will be your situation? Will you be free to act as you think proper? When you are once relieved from this, every slaver may hoist the French flag. You cannot, accord ing to your stipulations with France, presume to search those vessels whether they are pirates or bona fide the national vessels of France.- The flags of France and the United States will then be used to cover the slave trade, and Great Britain having renounced those treaties, will have no means to prevent its being carried on; there fore, it is not merely the giving ourselves the power of acting as we think fit, because it would follow as the very first step that the flags of France and the United States would be used to cover the slave trade. But it was not worth the while of the Right Hon. Gentleman to put forward this excuse, because the Hon. Gentleman who brought forward the motion, and the Hon. Gentle man who followed him, do not disguise that, although this is a preliminary motion, their object is to re store the slave trade. Sir, it is that motion that I re sist—it is that I ask the House not to sanction, and in asking that I do not prevent any consideration of any substitute which may appear to the Government or to lion. Members to secure a better suppression of the slave trade. But what Ido denounce, and what I ask the House not to consent to is, simply a reversal of all our policy—that you will not take the means to put down the slave trade by a marine force and that you will take no other means. The Right Hon. Gentleman referred to the language used by the Government; but whether that language was too strong or not, the object we had in view was to call upon the House and the country not to relinquish the means of suppressing it, but to induce the Parliament to sanction additional means. There is all the difference in the world between using an argument of this kind—between saying you must give up the task, and saying the means are not suf ficient. We heard the speech of an Hon. Gentleman on the subject of education a few nights ago. The Hon. Gentleman spoke of the increase of crime, of the number of criminals, pointed out the inefficiency of the means of repression, police, courts of criminal justice, and gaols, and said it was necessary to reinforce these means of repression by means of education as a means of preventing and checking crime. The Honourable Gentleman did not mean to say that the means were useless—he did not say that crime was going on in spite of plice, gaols, and criminal courts, and therefore that we aro to abolish these things. That is just the difference in the argu ment. He said our means of repressing crime were not sufficient—take the means of education. Now, I said in 1839, our means are not sufficient; let us endeavour by an expedition to civilize Africa, to obtain additional means of cutting off the evil at its very roots. The Right Hon. Gentleman spoke of means, which made him think that the plan of repression at present in force is not sufficient. In that respect I think the Right Hon. Gentleman has made a statement which. if I go through it carefully, would hardly be justified by the documents before the House. Sir, I have no reason to think that if we were set free, and that the trade was left to itself, the Brazilian Government would be able so to regulate the middle passage as to prevent these horrors. If we look at the evidence that bas been laid before the House with regard to the probable effects of this change, we have very little hopes that it will be satisfactory. One of the grounds on which the motion has been advocated is that of humanity—namely, that the slave squadron aggravates the evils of the passage. Sir Charles llothatn, whose opi nion is looked to with great respect, says directly the reverse. He says, if the trade is free small capitalists will enter into it, and they will not provide the neces sary means of accommodation, and therefore the horrors of the trade will be necessarily increased. Captain Matson uses the very same argument. So much for the state of the slave trade in Brazil—the natural conse quence of the exceeding cheapness of slaves. The witness went on to say that when " a smaller and a worse class of vessels for the slave trade was used the passage was longer. Formerly the vessels had three decks—the slaves were crowded in the hold, and the air was only admitted by the centre opening. Now, though the ves sels were equally crowded, there was only one deck," So that the opinions of Sir Charles Hotham and Captain Matson were in direct contradiction of the grounds of the motion, that the decrease in the mortality of the staves on the passage would be greater if we set the trade in duxes free than under the present system.— (Hear.) Another argument was the economy or saving in the expense. Bur, Sir, I think the Hon. Members who have produced this argument have failed in it completely. The Honourable Member who introduced the motion said the cost was about 700,000/. or it might he nearer 800,0001. Now if a change were to be made, Sir C. Hotham says we must still keep 10 or 12 vessels on the coast—we now keep 26; so the expense would be about half of the present expense, as nearly half of the number of vessels would be required. The Right Honourable Gentleman said he would not give up our whole means of repressing the slave trade ; for if wo found Portugal and Spain willing to suppress the slave trade, we should, if required, be ready to aid them. How are we to aid them? By our mere countenance and concurrence? That would be of very little use ; but if we gave assistance by our marines or our soldiers we must incur expense—the very object which this motion pro fesses to put an end to. It would be impossible to be lieve either that you would diminish the sufferings of the passage, or much diminish the present expenditure, un less you abandoned the African coast altogether, and gave up the protection of your commerce—a proceeding which, in all other parts of the world, you think to be necessary. That, lam persuaded, you never will do ; for if there is any commerce in the world that requires the protection of the British naval force it is the commerce that has sprung up on the coast of Africa, where the slave trade once ex isted, and where it cannot thrive unless it receives the protection of barracoons. Sir C. Hotham says if the squadron were withdrawn, the lives of British subjects would not be safe. Passion and revenge would be exhibited in consequence of the steps we had previously taken to suppress the slave trade, and he ad mits that great suffering and mischief must be the result. So, therefore, it was absolutely necessary to keep up some force on the coast for the protection of life and commerce. If, then, the main reasons for the present motion have been proved to fail, I ask the House to consider what the evils would be if the motion were adopted. I will state the opinion of Sir C. Hotham as an authority to be relied on. He says — " If you with. draw the naval force without any substitute, such a pro ceeding would not redound to the honour and dignity of the country. I should regret if it were withdrawn and nothing substituted in its place." Sir C. Hotham may be right or wrong—but I say it is a fan. question to present p laceb e s f y o s r t e em Parliam ent. anothersy system, t mayeYmo,umo more efficacious substitute in finally th is e extinguisning the slave trade — but that a totally differ ent question to the question before the House, namely. whether we shall destroy the present means of checking the slave trade without substituting place.—(Hear, hear.) The first in jurious to the honour of the country. In the next place , oabnietchtiinogn, in its is that it would be highly I think it would be impossible, without a greater force than we now keep up, to preserve from the slave trade those parts of Atrica which we have wrested from the slave dealers. In those parts where commerce is now established attempts would be made—violently made—to extend it to those places where it hiss been destroyed.—(Hear, hear.) And seeing the large profits that are to be gained by the slave trade, many African (thief's who have renounced that trade, seeing the indif ference of England on the subject, would again revive the trade, and you would have to protect those places at a considerable expense. The next objection is, that an unrestricted slave trade will destroy the civilization of Africa—it would destroy all hope of introducing civili zation and Christianity; for with the slave trade I say it will be impossible to accomplish any such objects. — (Hear, hear.) In the next place, consider what effect an immense importation of slaves into the Brazils would have. How large the importation might be may be es timated costing 5 from ool. wihnstArLriocra would dHv n sell value. If there are such gains to be made , it is ampo..- sible not to see that a number of small capitalists would enter into this trade and continue until the y reduced es f t o a r t e 2so,otohoaltslaves . in the Brazils, being a profit of 500 per cent. on th e original the profits to the ordinary profits of trade, and that i by o p uortthede Brazils? ? into the Brazils. There this means an immense number of slaves w ould be m yAou fi nd n w d ha v t ast wouldtract of bethneneeffuletcit. rated land, fit for sugar; in Trinidad especially some of the richest parts are uncultivated; those parts would immediately be cultivated for the purpose of producing sugar. Immense suffering would follow on this. The Hon. Member said he would put the question on this basis, would the mass of human misery be increased or diminished by the adoption of the motion? I say, no doubt the result must be that the mass of human misery would be immensely increased in Africa, and also in the Brazils, by the introduction of a larger number of slaves into the Brazils. What is the speculation going on at this moment in the Brazils? It is that, seeing a Com mittee has sat on this question, and that the opinion of the Committee leaned to the abandonment of all further efforts to suppress the slave trade, they believe there is a probability that they soon will be in a condition to cul tivate sugar so cheaply that no country in the world will be able to furnish sugar to this country except the Brazils. It is the opinion of all who are asked on the subject, that an immense importation of slaves int') Brazil would produce the certain result of an immense increase in the production of sugar. This brings us to another question, which the Right Honsurablo Gentleman rightly touched upon; for though connected with the question of hu manity, it is also connected with our own interests—l mean the effect which it would have on the West Indies, if this increased competition occurred. lam not now going to argue the question of the sugar duties of 1845. I will admit, by the abolition of slavery in 1833, and the abolition of the prohibitory duty of 1842, that we did place the West India Islands at great disadvan tage.—(Hear.) I am, however, happy to see the opinion stated on both occasions borne out—that they would be elite to bear those shocks, and to found their sugar cniti ration on a new and a better basis. I have not been entirely disappointed; on the contrary, I observe the produce of sugar in Jamaica, Guiana, and other islands, in 1847 and 1848, is greater than in 1845 and 1846, and the proluce of 1849, I believe, is greater than of 1848. If that is the case, it shows that the Africans in the West India Islands are induced to labour for less wages. and that successful industry is carried on in the islands at this moment. But, after the blows-4 admit they were blows—the West Indies have sustained, they would be in the utmost danger if any great advantage was given to Brasil by the admission of a great number of slaves; and if the additional produce were brought against the produce of our own islands—(Hear)—l think that would be more than the West India Islands would be able to bear—they could not stand this competition. That of itself would be a great misfortune, not only as regards our own interest, but it would be a misfortune as regards the question of slave labour.—(Hear, hear.) These, then, are three conclusive reasons against the motion proposed to the House. In the first place, there would be the increased activity of the slave trade; in the se cond the destruction of the trade on the coast of Africa; and, third, the expensive and ruinous competition of stave labour with free labour of the West India Islands. But the. Right Honourable Gentleman asks what it is we would propose to do in going on with the preseat system, and the Right Hon. Gentleman says the speech of my Right Hon. Friend would do for any other time and occasion. I contend that, by the existing system, we have made progress on the coast of Africa towards the destruction of the slave trade. That the slave trade has act been utterly suppressed by such means I readily admit; but the greater the progress we make in civilising Africa, the greater the area from which the slave trade is excluded. We have thereby a less evil to cope with, and the more manageable the evil becomes. Another argument is, that we have not sufficient means at com mand. Thr Committee object to force; they object to the destruction of the barracoons and the forced libera tion of the slaves. These means, they say, are not to be thought of as a remedy for the present evil. I think, Sir, the destruction of the barracoons, and the occu pation of forts on the coast of Africa, are the principal means of suppressing the slave trade. All the evidence of the dispatches we received prove that such is the case, and I expect the utmost advantage from those means. The Hon. Gentleman has alluded to the opinion of other nations with respect to our policy in relation to the slave trade. I have stated that great advantages were obtained at the beginning, and my opinion is if you were to address the different powers of Europe, you would find their opinion more enlightened on the subject than when we began, in 1815 to enforce our own opinions; we have seen other powers cheerfully co operate with us in suppressing the slave trade—France and the United States of America have suppressed the slave trade, and, were those great powers to join with us in using not unfriendly—but firm language to Spain and the Brazils, I am persuaded the happiest effects would be produced on tbese Governments. That they would despise the warning I 'am not ready to believe. If they took no measures for the repression of the slave trade, then you would have again to consider well the question—what progress you have made—whether the slave trade would be more repressed in the next year than in the present? What are the means that remain? That there are means I think no one will deny. That they are moans to be at once condemned none but the Members that composed the majority of the Com mittee would decide; for that Committee having been appointed on those terms—to consider the best means to adopt for the extinction of the slave trade, seemed to have no other thought than how to condemn and repro bate every means by which the slave trade could be ex tinguished, and to leave alive the only means by which it could be nourished and increased.—(Hear, hear.) But as to the last answer to the question, what, can we do for the repression of the slave trade? Sir, I for one will not despond. I believe that despondency in a great cause is of itself a main cause of failure.—(Hear, hear.) I can imagine a man saying in 1814 that for three centuries the Algerines had car ried on their plans of plunder, piracy, robbery, and captivity of the Christians, and having lasted for three centuries, no one would be wild, Utopian, or j insane enough to expect their termination; and yet the very next year saw a termination of this practice of three centuries and the system of carrying Christians into car tivity put an end to and abolished.—(Hear, he tr.) Sir, I believe if this cause is good—if it has enlisted gradually the nations of the world in its favour—if there remain only Spain, in one of her colonies, and the empire uf Brazil still carrying on this trade, I believe that the cause is anything but hopeless.—(Hear.) I believe that nothing would destroy it but the want of that moral courage which the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite dis played—l believe that nothing but being faint-hearted on that subject, and saying that we aro unequal to cope with this evil. will finally giro it a permanent sway and supremacy.—(Hear, hear.) But there are other motives which may influence this House in coming to a decision upon this question. We have been blessed with great mercies during the past year. We have more than once had to thank Almighty God for the dis pensation of those mercies. I own, Sir, it appears to me that if we are now to say that the trade in man shall be unlimited, and the cruel traffic against which England for nearly fifty years has been working, with the efforts of her greatest statesizee, and the hands of her hest and bravest sailors is now to be allowed to go free and us:- controlled, I believe that we shall no longer have a right to expect these mercies. I believe that in the high, the Christian, and moral character of the nation is to be found the main source and secret of her strength. I think that if this night you were to direct your Foreign Minister to go with his dastardly message to France—if we give up this holy work of mercy—if we are no Linger permitted to take a lead in the championship against the ' curse and crime of slavery, we can no longer venture to expect those blessings which, of God's providence, we enjoy. —(Cheers.) • Lord R. GROSVENOR wished to state the reason for the painful vote which lie intended to give. During the twenty-eight years he had the honour of a seat in that House, it was his good fortune never, until that day, to differ on any essential point of policy from his Noble Friend below him. His reason for voting . for the pre sent motion was this—that if it were carried, it would have the effect of preventing this country from continu ing to attempt the moral government of the world on principles which, according to his judgment and under standing, were condemned by the moral Governor of the Universe in every page of his works. Mr. HUTT, in reply, said that it ought not to be taken for granted that he had no substitute to propose, because he had not offered one on that occasion. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion ... 154 Against it . . ... 232 Majority twainst the m.tion ... —7B INTRAMURAL INTERMENTS. Lord DUDLEY STUART moved an address for a n.turn, stating, for each of the last ten years, the number of interments that have Liken place in each cathedral, church, chapel, churchyard, chapelyard, cemetery, or other place of interment within titteen miles of St. Paul's Cathedral; distinguishing (if practicable) whether made in faults or otherwise. After a brief discussion, the motion w•as negatived on a division. PIRATES. On the motion of:Mr. lIUME. returns were ordered of the names and tonnage of any British vessels, with the names of their respective Commanders, and of the names of any British subjects that have been either captured, attacked, plundered, or iu any way molested, by either Malay or llyak pirates, on the coast of Borneo, or elsewhere, from the 15th day of August, 1839, to the 15th day of August, 1549, inclusive; specifying date and place of each case of such capture, attack, plunder, or molestation. On the motion of Mr. WOOD, Mr. lierriea was added to the Select Committee on oaths of Members, in the place of Mr. Disraeli. The reports of the resolutions upon the Stamp Duties and Drainage Advances were brought up, and leave given to bring in Bills founded thereon. The Factories Bill was read the second time. . The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter -pest Two o'clock. Mr. Loch had an interview with Earl Granville yesterday. COTTON SEFD.—SOME little time since an impor tation took place from one Of the ports of the United States of America of a small q uantity of cotton-seed, which was noticed on account of its being a novel ar ticle of importation from abroad. A vessel, now arrived from New Orleans with a cargo of cotton and American provisions, has brought 3 t casks cf the cotton-seed, and this importation being of so much greater extent, and tending to pros , * the continuance of importations of this important description of seed, is, for wha'ever purpoEo it may be intended to serve, of more than ordinary interest. [AnvnivrtsEmENT.]--Twenty Ulcers on the Legs cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—Extract of a letter from 0. B. Knocker, dated Mount Gambia, South Australia, July 7, 12349. To Professor Holloway. Sir,—A case has just come under my observation in which the efficacy of your Ointment and Pills has been fully proved. A man of the name of Joshua Smith bad upwards of twenty ulcers on his shins, which were so difficult to cure that almost every remedy had been applied without any good effect. Your Pills and Ointment were then resorted to, and in about six weeks he was completely cured, and scarcely a mark is now to be seen.— Sold by all druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establish ment; 244, Strand, London. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of CommoeseJ TUESDAY. MARCIE 19. SLAVE TRADE. Motion made, and Question put, " That an humble Ad-. dress be presented to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty will bo pleased to direct that negotiations be forthwith entered into for the purpose of releasing this Country from all treaty engagements with Foreign States, fur maintaining armed vessels on the coast of Africa to suppress the traffic in slaves." The House divided : MINORITY —AYES, 154. Frewen, C. H. Meats, G. F. Fuller, A. E. Naas, Lord Galway, Viscount Newry, Viscount Gaskell, J. M. Ossniston, Lord Gladstone, W. E. Packe, C. W. Gooch, E. S. Palmer, Robert Gore, W. R. 0. Pilkington, James Greene, John Plowden, W. H. Grosvenor, Lord R. Portal, Melville Gwyn, Bowel Prime, Richard Hall, Sir B. Rendlesham, Lord Hallyburton, Lord Renton, J. C. Ilalsey, T. P. Hushout, Captain Hamilton, J. H. Balwey, Colonel Hutto, Alexander Sanders, George Heneage, G. H. ScholeAeld, William Henry, Alexander Seyrner, H. K. Herbert, H. A. Sibthorp, Colonel Hervey, Lord A. Simeon, John Heyworth, L. Smith, John B. Ilildyard, R. C. Smyth, J. G. Hlldyard, T. B. T. Smythe, George Hodgson, W. N. Smollett, A. llornby, John &therm. T. 11. S. Hudson, G. Stafrerd, Augustus Hume, Joseph Stephenson, Robert Jackson, William Stuart, Lord Dudley Jocelyn, Viscount Stuart, H. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Stuart, J. Seating, Robert Sturt, H. G. Ker, Richard Sullivan, Michael King, P. J. Tancred, H. W. Knight, F. W. Taylor, T. E. Knox, Colonel Thesiger, Sir F. Langston, J. H. Thickness., Ralph Lennox,;Lord A. Thompson, Alderman Lennox, Lord G. H. Trelavrny, J. S. Leslie, C. P. Trevor, G. Lockhart, W. Tyrell,:Sir Z. Lowther, Colonel Vane, Lord H. Mandeville, Viscount Verner, Sir W. Mangles, R.D. Waddington, H. S. Manners, Lord G. Walmsley, Sir 3, Manners, Lord J. Walsh, Sir J. B. March, Earl of Walter, John Masterman, John Wegg-Prosser, F. Maxwell, Hon. J. P. Wood, W. P. Meux, Sir H. Wortley, J. S. Miles, William Milner, W. M. TELLZILL Molesworth, Sir W. Hatt, William , Mowatt, Francis Bailie, H. J. 1 Mundy ► William Aglionby, H. A.: Aaldock, E. H. Archdall, Captain Bagot, William Baldwin, C. B. Bankes, George Beresford, William Berkeley, Grantley Best, John Bolder°, H. G. Bouvurie, E. P. Bramston, T. W. Bright, John Brr;adley, H. Bulkeley, Sir R. B. Buller, Sir J. Y. Burroughes, H. N. Cabbell, B. B. Carew, W. P. Castlerea ;h, Yls. Cavendish, G. H. Cayley, Edward S. Charteris, Francis Cliatterton, Colonel Childers, J. W. Christopher, R. Cobb°ld, John C. Cobden, Richard Cocks, T. S. Colebrooke, Sir T. Coles, H. R. Colvile, C. R. Darner, Colonel Deedes, W. Denison, J. E. Dick, Quintin - Ducicwjrth, Sir I. Duff, George S. Duncan, Viscount Duncan, George Duncombe, A. Duncombe, 0. Dundas, Geprge Du Pre, C. G. East, Sir J. B. Ellis, John Estcourt, J. B. B. Evelyn, W. J. Farr ,e- James • Fitzroy, Henry Fordyce, A. 1). Forester, G. C. Fox, S. L. MAJORITY—NOES, 232. Abdy. Sir T. N. Freestun, Colonel Paget, Lord A.' Acland, Sir T./D. French, F. Paget, Lord C. Adair, It. Shaft° Goddard, A. L. Paget, Lord G. 1 Adderley, C. B. Gordon, Admiral Pakington, Str J. Anderson, Arthur Grace, 0. D. Palmer. Bounden Anson, Colonel Greenell, Gilbert Palmerston. Vis. Armstrong, Sir A. Grey, Sir G. Parker, John Armstrong, R. B. Grosvenor, Earl Pechell, Sir G. Arundel, Earl of Hanmer, Sir J. Peel, Sir Robert Ashley, Lord Harcourt, G. G. Peel, Frederick Bagshaw , John Ilardcastle, J. A. Pelham, D. A Bailey, Joseph Harris, Richard Perfect, R. ltaines, M. T. Haste, Archibald Pigott, Francis Baring, H. B. Batehell, John Pinney, W. Baring, Sir F. T. Hawes, B. Plumptre, I. P. Barnard, E. G. Hayter, W. G. Power, D r. Bellew, R. M. Headlam, T. E. Power, Nicholas Berkeley, Admiral Heald, James rusty, Philip Berkeley, C. L. Heathcoat, John Rawden, Colonel Bernal, Ralph Herbert, Sidney Reid, Colonel Birch, Sir Thomas Heywood, James Repton, G. W. J. Blackall, S. W. Hobhouse, Sir John Reynolds, John Blair, Stephen Hobhouse, T. B. Ricardo, J. L. Blake, M. J. Hodges, T. L. Ricardo, Osman Blakemore, R. Hogg, Sir J. W. Rich, Henry Blandtord, Marquis Holland, Robert Robartes, T. J. Booth, Sir R. G. Hood, Sir A. Romilly, Colonel Bowles, Admiral Howard, Lord E. Romilly, Sir John Boyle,Volonel Howard, C. W. Rumbold, C. E. Brand, Thomas Howard, J. K. Russell, Lord John Brocklehurst, J.; Howard, E. G. Russell, Edward S. Brockman, E. D. Howard, P. H. Russell, F. C. H. Brotherton, J. Inglis, Sir It. Sandars, - Joseph Brown, Humphrey Jermyn, Earl Scully, Francis Browne, R. D. Jervis, Sir John Seymour, Lord Banbury, E H. Johnstone, Sir J. Shell, R. L. Buxton, Sir E. Jones, Captain Shelburne, Earl et Campbell, W. F. Keppel, G. T. Sheridan, R.B. Cardwell, Edward Kershaw, James Smith, Vernon Carter, John B. Labouchere, Henry Smith, A. J. Cavendish, C.:C. Lacy, H.C.I Somerville, Sir W. Cavendish, W. G. Lascelles, W. S. Spooner, Richard Chaplin, W. J. Lemon, Sir Charles Stanley, R. H. Chichester, Lord J. Lennard, T. B. Stanton, W. H. Christy, Samuel Lewis, Sir T. Strickland, Sir G. Clay, James Lewis, G. C. Stuart,•Lord J. Clerk Sir George Lindsay, Colonel Talbot, J. H. Cole, H. 'A. Littleton, E. R. Tennent, R. J. Collins, W. Loch, James Thompson, Colonel Corry, H. Lygou, General Thomely, Thomas Cowan, Charles Mackie. John Towneley, John Cowper, W. F. Mackinnon, W. Townley, R. G. Craig, Sir W. G. • 31•Nagaten, Sir E. Towushend, Capt. Currie, Henry M'Cullagh, W. T. Tufnell, H. Dawson, T. V. M'Gregor, John Turner, George D'Eyncourt, T. Mahon, O'Gorman Verney, Sir H. Dodd, George Marshall, J. G. Toney, T. Douglas, Sir C. Marshall, William Villiers, Charle4 Duff, James Martin, J. Wall, C. B. Duke, Sir J. Martin, C. W. Walpole, Spencer Duncuft, John Matheson, Colonel Watkins, Colonel Dundas, Admiral Maule, Fox Wawn, J. T. Dundas, Sir David Melgund, Viscount Wellesley, Lord C. Dunne, Colonel Miles, Philip W.'.5. Westhead, J. P. Ebrington, Viscount Mines, R. M. Willcox, Brodie Edwards, H. Milton, Viscount Williams, John Ellice, Edward Mitchell, T. A. Wil!yams, H. Elliot, John E. Moffatt, George Williamson, Sir H. Enfield, Lord Moore, George H. Wilson, James Evans, Sir De Lacy Morison, Sir:W. Wilson, Matthew Evans, J. Morris, David Wodehouso, E. Evans, William Mostyn, E. M. Wood, Sir Charles Fagan, William Mulgrave, Earl Wyld, James Fergus, Jehn Norreys, Lord Wyvill, Marmadake Ferguson, Colonel O'Connell, Maurice !Miner, Sir E. O'Connell, M. J. •Titzwilliam, G. W. Ogle, S. C. Forster, M. Ord, W. Fertescue, Chichester Owen, Sir J. TILLEILL Hill, Lord Marcus ey, R. W. TO THE SECRETARY OF THZ BRADFORD REFORM ASSOCIATION. Sir,—On Monday the 18th, the Chancellor of the Exchequer took a step into the right, by admitting the principle of ad valorem taxation, or something as near to it as convenient, into the levying of the Stamp Duties. The value of an admission of this nature is much greater than the mere present amount of the changes induced. In the course of the evening an amusing scene was presented, by the zealous agreement of all parties of Irishmen, in representing the utter inutility and undesirableness of giving anybody (for to that length it seemed to go) the suffrage in Ireland. It was stated nemine coniradicente, that a voter in Ireland was so beset by the landlords on one side and the priests on the other,—by those who, as Mr. Sheil naively expressed it, threatened him with loss of substance in this world or pro mised him reward in the next,—that the Member for Youghal rounded off the whole into a declaration that the only remedy would be the disfranchisement of Ireland. This was being sorely delivered into the hands of those who saw an intermediate remedy in the Ballot. And notice was consequently taken of the facts, for the purpose of being used again on Mr. Maurice O'Connell's promised motion for the intro duction of the ballot in Ireland, in the Committee on Elections (Ireland) Bill. At a late hour the Member for Sunderland asked the Government what their intentions were on the subject of returning the duty on bricks to those who have lately paid it; and made something very like a spocch on the occasion, though contrary to the regu lations of the House. The Member for Sunderland is no great authority in political economy, and will probably find the Government hold out against his demand. It is not at all for the interest of the re ducers of taxation, to hold out that the Chancellor of the Exchequer shall not be allowed to reduce a tax, unless he can also make up his mind to refund the receipts of six months previous. The real fact all the time being, that when a tax is taken off, the amount ii not deducted from the price by the holders of the article, till they have sold their stocks on hand ; and in the same manner when a tax is laid on, the price is not instantly raised, but waits till the holders of the articles have disposed of the quantity which was previously in their warehouses un taxed. Scarcely anybody but must have heard the assertion, that when a tax was taken off, for inst ance , leather, here was no reduction in the price of shoes; that is to say, there was nut the instantaneous reduc tion they expected to the amount of the tax. Whence wiseacres were found inferring that there was no use in taking off taxes at all ; there existing a decree of nature, by which the consumer was doomed to pay always the same, and consequently the tax might as well be there for the be nefit of the ,tax-eaters as not. On all Which kind of subjects, the Corn-law agitation has happily made us wiser than our forefathers ; though the Wen• tical fallacy described still holds its ground as a stock argument on the Protectionist benches, where the belief is as firm as with their grandsires, that there is no use in taking off tax on Corn or Tea, because a greedy foreigner stands by to put the amount into his pocket without let or hindrance from power human or divine. All of which is foolish enough, to cause surprise even where it is. But it serves very well to prevent the equally dark on the manufacturing side, from trying to remove the two-and-a-half per cent. duty on foreign corn, which they pay as quietly as they would buy a pennyworth of gingerbread for their child that asked for it. On Tuesday the motion of Mr. Hutt for removing the African squadron was negatived by 232 against 154, after a debate conducted with great spirit on both sides. One of the most effective advocates against the motion, was the Member for Livcrpoor a curious evidence of the change of times. The Prime Minister put forth the strength which he keeps for occasions that demand it. Sir Robert Peel did not speak ; but voted with the Government. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, AN OLD REFORMER. London, 20th March, 1850. TEIE MARINE SOCIETY.—This society, established f,r the equipment, maintenance, and instruction of dis tressed boys for the Royal Navy, the Indian Navy, and merchant service, held its anniversary last evening at the London Tavern. The Earl of Romney presided. The sixty-fire boys educated by the society were introduced in the course of the evening, and the best compliment that can be paid them is to observe that we have seldom seen sixty-fiv e y ou ths whom the enem i es of their country would less choose to meet. After it had been stated that the Admiralty had, during the past year, taken twenty boys frcm the society, the result of the festival w as an . nounced to be a contribution of 500/. The musical sr ' rangements of the evening were under the direction of Mr. Gauge, assisted by Master . Smith, Mr. C. K enny , Mr. Turner, and Mr. F. Smith. Mr, Higgs vise an Efficient toaelimoter