The Sun. — London, England, 1847-02-10 00:00:00

a 1 1 1 8 a.cilW 16? 1 ). o %Di obr ang L& 0 14 'a r eef -at Stt O. ou) -et fee t ' .511 ~ o u rt IL o at , ;-ci Feb' IL , a 0 044 :(5, ra ja, ,Orir Os * Oat' 19► • ,111, sod N, liller' tins"ot „or ha , a tO g s e b. 2° ' .1; ett D , D . er la ana 23s ,ort. czo Old sts and d su lbw eri 4Z 04 ootso,fisce ale ° to d IWAe— rds. G' o ) lif d. • 3 i s cent ,eta in c;Dr of 31. ~; sti ~~, 2d ' an ral 35. in Ca C(l4* shit e " .. at ale " f Old O 'l3ra; . 1 3 , a: eleve n street' mood d the Is DPW with those eir did" should iswer, Coats- Brats,' npanr , - near of the. llowed lov;b4 alb be an P 4 r Janl o loot woe V ' rena e , rn o f to ft 'I es - of, $. hi 15 0 0 ei ' D • tit I Sic , ti N 114 iec° 00 4, • C a pPC sat ' t. Dr sbl n ititli' lIVI PE R A M ENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 9. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool sack at Five o'clock. The Earl of STRADBROKE presented several pea tiOres against the Poor Removal Bill. CHELSEA PENSIONER'S BILL. This Bill went through Committee. PAROCHIAL FUNDS. Lord STANLEY said, he wished to r esent to their Lordships a petition of a somewhat novel character, though it was of no sma ll i mportance, particularly as affecting the spiritual interests of the country, but more especially that part of it which constituted the great and important town of Manchester. It was the petition of the churchwardens of the parish of Manchester, who were elected annually by the whole of the parishioners, numbering upwards of 400,000 persons. The petitioners complained that the parochial funds, amountii to upwards of 5,0001. a year, were received by the dean, and warrens of the Collegiate Church of Manchester, although these functionaries did not perform the duties of rectors of the parish, or had in any way the care of the souls of the parish, and w ere in point of fact non-residents of the district. It wt-, a case which, to use the language of the peti tione,re, was likely to reflect great discredit and scandal tipe n the Church. The towli of Manchester was origi naley a rectory, foundeil in the year 1251, of the ar,nual value of 531. Bd. It continued so until the 3'ear 1451. when a collegiate church was founded, the parish ha - .ing grown to so large an ex • tent, and t.) - ,e) funds of the existing rectory were appropriateei by the church of the parishioners to the 'rapport of the new collegiate church, and by a charter granted in the 9th year of the reign of Henry V. e'et that period the funds amounted to 250 marksa year. F,ven at that time great complaints were made of the ap propriation of the funds by non-resident rectors; the same cause of complaint remained unchecked for many years. After the foundation of the college, and during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, another charter was passed for the regulation and the enforcement of rectoral residences. In the reign of Charles I. a third charter was passed for the same object, which charter remained in force at the present period. It was expressly provided in die charter that the rectors receiving the funds of the college should be perpetua residere et victitare, the peti tioners in their petition had set forth the words of the charter as perpetua residere et visitant—their Lordships would see that the original words had even more force than the words used by the petitioners. Under such a charter, therefore, it would be easily seen how well founded were the complaints of the petitioners. At the time when the charter was granted the salary for the warder:, was 751. per year, and of each of the fellows 35/, wtile at present the revenues amounted to 6,0001. Now, with all respect to the Dean and Chapter of Manchester. he could not understand how, in the face of the prov;.sions of the original charter, any body of men, with coresciencious feelings and religious convictions, and he. believed the Dean and Chapter were so influenced that they could satisfy their consciences to receive 6 , 1 j00/., the amount of the rectorial revenues of that Parish. and leave the population, consisting of 400,000 individuals, without spiritual provision, except what was afforded by the district churches. When this provision was originally made the popu lation of Manchester was not more than 20,000 per sons, and it was now 400,000. Then, besides the col legiate church, there were nine otherchapels of ease where service was performed; at present there were forty-nine district churches, besides separate endowments, and the clergy of these churches were paid by fees, one portion of which went to the district churches, and the other to the mother church. The rectorial tithes then were received by the Dean and Chapter, and he.thought it a matter of surprise that while the revenues were claimed the cor responding duties of visitation and care of souls were not discharged, and that exemption was sought from residence, and the other duties connected with the spiritual care of the people. One point appeared to him st range—that while discretion was given to the dean and fellows to augment the salary of the rector, 1. 71. 10s. was the only salary allowed him out of the rectorial revenues, although the whole duty, which was so much increased, had devolved upon him. The Dean an'f l Chapter contend that under the statute they are exempt from the rates; that they have no cure of souls; that they fulfil the obligation of the duties by being mulct ls. 4d. a day in the case of their absence, and th' At they are not bound to perform any other spiritual dutie`4. He thought their Lordships would concur with him that such a course of procedure was unwarranted in lay e, and that the case was one which deserved their Ki4ost serious attention. He could not understand why the dean and canons, whilst they performed the colle giate services in the collegiate church, and received the usual remuneration, forgot that that church was the parochial one ; and why they were tio make use of their corporate character to deprive the population of the spiritual ad 'rantage to which they considered they were entitled, in 'consequence of the 5,0001. paid to them for that purpose. 'They prayed their Lordships, before the establishment of the see, to ascertain that there was ample security for Ithe application of the whole rectoral income to the efficient ecclesiastical superintendence of the parish of Manchester. Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble Lord had stated a very ordinary case. The right to receive the funds, of course, depended upon the legal construction of the charter, and ttle evil complained of could only be re medied by 11.,bme legislative enactment. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would not offer any opiiiiion further upon the construction or the in tentio•J of the charter, but the petition having become kuo'fin in Manchester, the Dean and Chapter had for w'srded to him a letter upon the subject, which the 'bean wished to have read to the House. (The Noble Marquis then read the letter.) It stated that the writer simply enjoyed the rights possessed by his predecessors, but still he had never made any claim to them. It was decided by the legal tribunals that the privileges were attached to his office. Neither he nor the canons had any authority to visit in the parish. The canons had even, exceeded their duty in their endeavours to improve the moral and spiritual education of the people. He could only say, with reference to the writer of that letter, that no person had contributed more than he had to the advance of the great cause of education. He regretted the absence of the reverend prelate or the diocese, who, in consequence of indisposi. Con, was unable to attend, or to afford any information to their 7 .:Aordships upon the subject. Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred in the opinion express , id by the Noble Marquis upon the talents and abilities of the writer of that letter, his respected and reverend friend, Rev. W. Herbert. Lord COTTENHAM would not enter into the ques tion whet her the duties enjoined by the charter were performed or not, because there was no information on that sub :Jed. The statemeats made with regard to this had beent very contradictory. The charter said that peculiar duties were to be discharged ; but if these du ties were performed, there did not appear to be constant residence enjoined. If they omitted to do their duty, there was in this respect, he apprehended no distinction between them and the other large corporations of this country. In Henry the Eighth's time, when monaste ries and religious houses were dissolved, the rectories which formed a part of them fell to the ground, and be came the . property of private individuals. Others of them r emained ecclesiastical corporations, and were in appropriate recwries to the present time. In the neigh bourhood where he lived there were four contiguous parishe,, the duties of which were discharged by a Dean and Chapter. The revenues of each of these parishes amountet I to na less than 8001. a year, while the salary of the clt irgyman, who did the spiritual duty, was only 401. He was not able to say what was the amount of the rever flies of the other parishes ; but they were, no doubt, ir► the same proportion. The law gave the Dean and Chr.pter that discretion, for it presumed they would be so di: ;posed to superintend the spiritual instruction of the IN mph. as to ron 'er any cognizance of the law un necessar y. They had the law on their side, and from the best judgment he could form on the matter they were as. 'well entitled to the tithes and rectorial revenues as their Lordships were to their estates. Lord CAMPBELL wished to make a single observa tion. 'l'here was a difference between what was called appropri ate tithes which were held, as lawyers called it, in lay fes!, and ecclesiastical property to which duties were ani lexed. lie differed with his Noble Friend with regard to' the point of residence. These duties as: en joined b:, the old charters made residence necessary, and there was a penalty annexed if the duty so enjoined was not observed. Now, that penalty supposed a duty to be performed, the non-observance of which was visited with the penalt). Now, it appeared to him from the lucid statement of the Noble Lord who introduced the subject„ that a duty was imposed and that it should be performed. No blame, however, should be attached he believed to the parties involved in the petition, to whom the cause of religion and education was so much indebted. Lord COTTENHAM disclaimed expressing any opinion as to whether the duties were performed or not. lie expret:sly avoided making any reference to that. His observations were confined to the property in a legal point; of view. Lord S NLEY would not presume to deal with the legal question, but he could not, help urging upon their Lordships that 3 and 4 Will. IV., c. 113, rated pro perty, like that in question, as rectorial property. What he wished to urge upon their Lordships was, whether the requirements of the charter were satisfied, and whether they acted the part of good citizens, by the way in which they performed their duties. It was for their Lordships and the country to consider whether this was a state of the law which ought to be considered incapable of a remedy. Were the inhabitants of Man chester, and other populous places, who had levied upon therm 5,0001. or 6,0001. a year for the purposes of spiritual instruction, to be deprived of that spiritual in.F.truct"ion, and to see the funds placed in the hands of persons who did not recognise any corresponding claim upon them, but to expand th, m as they thought proper, and where th, y thought proper, without fu filling the du ties for which the funds were raised, and to see them liable, in addition, to have them taken up by ecclesiastical commissioners, and diverted from rectorial to chapter purposes. They were anxious to see the matt , er properly arranged before the final establishment of the see. They said the funds were rectorial funds, and that they were improperly applied He was sur prised that th e y s h ou l d avail themselves of a technicality ;it the , hart-..r to evade the proper perfirmance of their duties. Lord BROUGHAM said that he had seen in the blue book two letters, Which co m pl a i ned that Captain Wynne, one o f t h e superintendents of the relief rate, had im posed upon its funds two persons who were in the clear receipt of 60L a•year each, as well as several other per s4., wim , 1 - ere in easy circumstances. He had heard from private sources, from persons who were interested nettlicr oat.: Way or tile otht - . - . in tLe matt er , laud who only know Captain Wynne. In his public c a p ac i ty, the highest testimonies to his private. character. That THE SUN, LOND'ON, WEDNESDAY IVORNING., FEBRUARY 10, 1847 I rank, and Ile, belonging to the Rc ,yal Marines, who from the Ist day of January, 1844, tc the 31st day of De cember, 1846, have suffered cc rporal punishment or imprisonment on shore, showing the nature of offences, in classes, for which such p unishment has been awarded, and the number in ea oh class, and showing the greatest and the smallest nun iber of lashes inflicted; also, the longest and shortest period of confinement awarded as punishment to each ierson, and the average period of confinement for each crass of offence, and the average number flogged; stating the total number of rank and file, and also the nuts iber of commissioned and non-commissioned officers on, shore in each year Of the tot:il number of soldiers. belonging to the Royal Artillery and Ordnance corps. in Great Britain and Ireland, who, between the Ist. day of January, 1844, and the 31st day of December,. 1846, have suffered cor poral punishment or imprisonraent ; showing the nature of the offences, in classes, for which such corporal punish ment or imprisonment had been a,waellt d, and the num ber in each class ; and showing also the greatest and the smallest number of lashes ; a lso ' the longest and shortest period of confinement awarded as punishment, the average number flogged, and the average pericd of confinement for each class of offer ces; distinguishing also the total number of rank and file liable to be flo gge d, and also the total number; of commissioned and non commissioned officers in the United Kingdom, in each of those years. Also, returns, of the same tenor, of the Royal Artillery and Ordnance corps serving abroad; the total number of soldiers, belonging to regiments and depots in Groat Britain and Ireland, wile, from the Ist day January, 1844, to the 31st day of December, 1846, have suffered either corporal punish. ment or imprisonment ; and whenever either corporal pun4inment or imprisonment has been inflicted on the same person more than once, specifying how often it has been so inflicted ; with abstract of the totd number of soldiers belonging to regiments in tl.e colonies and possessions of Great Britain, who in each year, from the first day of January, 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846, have suffered corporal punish ments or imprisonments ; showing the nature of the offences. in classes, for which such corporal punish. ment or imprisonment has been awarded, and the num ber in each class ; stating also the greatest number and the lowest number of lashes inflicted on any person in each year ; also the longest 'and shortest period of con finement awarded as punishment, the average num ber flogged, and the average period of confinement for each class in each year ; also distinguishing the total number of rank and file, and also the number of com missioned and nen commissioned officers in each year. Of the number of soldiers who, from the Ist day of Ja nuary, 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846, have suffered corporal punishment or imprisonment, and whether either corporal punishment or imprisonment has been inflicted on the same person more than once, specifying how often it has been so inflicted; and distinguishing the num bers in regiments in the colonies in possession of her Majesty from regiments in depots in Great Britain and Ireland ; distinguishing also the total number of rank and file, and also the number of commissioned and non-commissioned officers in each year ; also stating the number or name of the regiment or corps, with the names of the commanding officers, in which no corporal punishment has been inflicted in any of these years (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 308, of ses sion 1845).—Agreed to. RATE-PAYING CLAUSES OF THE REFORM BILL. might be all very true ; but they had only to deal with that Gallant Officer as a public man, and it was neces sary that the country should have some certain know ledge of the way in which this money was s , plied. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE perfectly agreed in the supposition that there ought to be every care for the proper application of the money under the Labour rate Act, but this much he could say that. no set of men could have discharged their duties better than the superintendents under the Labour rate Act, and he could affirm, from the information trans such an inquiry. It was obvious to every one that, for every ton of shipping which they drove from their shores they deprived the home merchant of the opportunity of disposing of an equal quantity of goods. The more they obstru c t e d t h e merchant from pursuing his avocations either by fixing him to any particular place, or imposing restrictions upon him, they circumscribe his means of profit. As an instance, he would give the fact that an American ship brought hides to Marseilles, and the French consignee sent them to Rotterdam, where, not meeting with a ready sale, the French merchant, con sidering them sufficiently naturalised by the transaction, sent them to Liverpool. They were their seized by the Custom-house officers, and were relieved on petition, and on condition that they should be sent back to New York. They were accordingly sent, after being re-salted. It was what was called the triangular trade that was considered profitable, and why should they attempt to interfere with it ? If the direct trade was more &Ivan- . tageous, they would find all the capital of their mer chants embarked. They would never find that human laws would work so well as the natural laws that regu lated commerce ; and say attempt to interfere with these natural laws would be sure to be followed by wi.lste and extravatzance. Why, corn was ni:inttfaetureti into flour, and flax into linen, and bah these were Enr-pean manufactures, and all the impositions upon Pe•itish ma, nufectures amounted to a protection of British owners. Now, look at the co sequences if th.y only put a protection of ten zthilliuzs a ton on 13riii,sh ping. In 1943 there , tere 7,181,796 tens Brit sh shipping entered inwards a:4l outiwuitls. and if t!;22; only impose!: a protection ~f ten shilling. a too, it act as a tax to that extent for the Broisil ship , .wner, would be a tax of 3,590.0001 'loon the people t f •his country. In 1845, there were 8,526,090 tons of British shipping entered inwards and outwards and the raising the freights to ten s'nillin..;s a to ik”p , s,d a tlx of 4.273,045/. upon the manufacturers of 13rrain. He did not mean to say that the profits would be raised to that extent; but, if they raised freights at all, it acted as a tax to that amount ; and, if they did nut raise freights, it acted as no protection ; and, at any rate, the people of this country had been taxed to upwards of four mil lions sterling. When the propositions of Mr. fluskisson were made known to Mr. Marriott that gentleman had given his opinion very strongly. It was stated by Mr. Marriott, a staunch friend to pro tection, that if the navigation laws were repealed, the monopoly with the West Indies would be at an end. I'he system operated most injuriously for the colonies, and they had good reason to complain. It was a bad system to disintegrate the colonies from the rest of the country for the advantage of the mother country, as was done by the operation of the navigation laws. It was through the operation of such laws as these that Portugal lost Brazils, this country the United States, Portugal Java, and S' Cubt milted to her Majesty's Government, that Cap tain Wynne had discharged his duties with great diligence, fiklity, and discretion. That of ficer had evinced the greatest courage in the discharge of his duties, and far from being instrumental in imposing persons on the rate who were not entitled to it, he had absolutely removed more than eleven hundred persona from the rate whom he thought ineligible fur the relief. Lard MONTEAGLE could bear ample testimony to the ability and zeal with which the superintendants had discharged their difficult, arduous, and trying duties. He could, from his own knowledge speak as to the way in which a great number of gentlemen had endeavoured to carry out the wishes of their superiors. and if they had in any one instance been mistaken in their judgment, they were not to be blamed. It might be that Captain Wynne had been mistaken in his views, but even if that were so, yet, unless he had been guilty of wilful negli gence, in imposing persons on the rate, without ascer taining from his personal knowledge whether they were entitled or not to the relief; he ought to be exonerated fora all blame. Lord BROUGHAM thought the evidence ought to be produced upon which the report was made. Probably Captain Wynne was right after all. The subject then dropped, The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from the distillers of Scotland, against the reduction of the duty on rum. By the Bill now before Parliament, ruin could be introduced into this country at $ less duty than Scotch spirits. The Earl of CLARENDON said the petitioners had waited upon him, and his Right Hon. Friend the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, and he must confess that they did not make out any case why they should have addi tional protection. Lord MONTEAGLE said he had a petition from Ire land of precisely the same effect as the one which had just been presented. The case of Ireland, however, was harder than that of Scotland, for Ireland had no draw. back, where Scotland had. After a few words from Lord STANLEY and Earl GREY, the subject dropped. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 9. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. REGENT'S CANAL COMPANY (PADDINGTON AND LIMEHOUSE RAILWAY AND BRANCH). Sir WILLIAM CLAY moved the second reading of this Bill. Mr. WARBURTON said the present Bill was under the consideration of the Woods and Forests, and he thought the opponents of the Bill were entitled to ask, before it was read a second time, what was the decision of the Commissioners upon it—was it to be sanctioned by the Crown, or must the opponents come up and resist the Bill at an enormous expense ? If the Crown refused to sanction the measure there would be no necessity to oppose the Bill ; and he should, there fore, be glad to hear from the Noble Lord at the head of the Wcods and Forests what he intended to do in _pain is and her other extensive colonies. Under the circumstances he might again ask, whether there were any political or natural advantages that justified their maintenance in future. He expected that Adam Smith would be qu 'fed by the other side against him, but on this question he had departed from his usual g eod course by failing to give the arguments on which he based his opinion. He was quite willing to give Hon. Gentlemen the pro position, if they would give him the argument. All he asked was, that if they quoted the opinion of Adam Smith, they would read the sentence to an end, and not t k h e e ep back detee any siv. , ea P v c ; lti w o a n s o t f he it. safcTuwar, d it of w t h a s e st ß ated h t o h t n a pire. Perhaps he might then make some admissions which would simplify his arguments ; first of all he ad mitted that the defensive navy was of the first impor tance to the country; but they, on that side, also ad mitted that the m e rcant il e navy was the nucleus from which the def ens i ve navy was supplied, inasmuch as it fur nished the elements for its maintenance. He would ad mit that at once; but he denied that they were encourag ing the commercial navy by throwing protection around them, or restricting them in their commercial intercourse with other nations. These Were the drags which cramped all their efforts. Restriction and protection rendered them inferior to the navies of other countries. When an English merchant wrote to an American and ordered goods from him, he gave particular instructions to ship them, if possible, by an American ship L. fact they had only a home trade, because no other natio ? , although obliged to use foreign vessels, would ship their merchandise on board ot British vessels. Tli• American navy was the second navy in the world, for their tonnage amp unted to two and a half millions. It was said that America had a great advantage over England in its timber. For his p a rt h e was nut at a ll c l ear about it. As far as regarded oak and teeth, they were in as good a condition as the Americans were. 'I hen, with relyet to wages, the wages of shipwri ; ,;hts in Siriderlatid, and the other out ports, averaked li-cm 3s. 6d. to 4s. Well, what are wages in the,United States ? Soy. n shillings a day. One shilling higher than the wages .1 this country. Then they came to iron; it could not be cheaper than in this country. Carriage was certai n ly c h eaper in I , ,ngland. What then was the me.ini:)g of this err—that they could not protect themselves ? They would find that the cost era vessel built in Loudon was 5/ or 6/ oler that of one built. in Sunderland or Prisfo!. There was another thing asserted, as emitling the British shipowners to some protection, namely, that they could not navigate their ships as cheaply from this c•antre as from 'oreign ones. It was stated that the Swedes and Danes had less wages, and that they lived on biscuits and oil, and that it would be a great convenience to be enabled to tak- them. If that was the case, how was it that the Ameri cans manned their navy principally with British sea men? how was it that they paid them higher wa- _ 'russian vessels, with a tonnage of 22,688 tons. He would now ask why they were told of the benefits and advan tages of free and unrestricted competition with the world. It could surely not be evidenced by those returns. He hoped the House would not be misled by clamour on this subject, and would not take any steps that would be injurious to British commerce, to the wealth of England, and the varied interests supported by this protection. The Hon. Member then referred to Mr. Hetchinson's returns of the shipping of the United Kingdom during 1816 and 1826, which showed that there had been an increase in the number of vessels. An argument might be drawn from this, that if they could maintain si large an amount of shipping, that they had not suffered much from the competition to which they were subjected; but it must be remembered that there had' been an immense increase in the exports and imports. In the article of cotton there had been, in 1816, sixty millions of pounds imported, while in 1826 there had been one hundred and fifty millions, and in 1843, six hundred and seventy three millions. In wood, wine, tobacco, tea, wool, coffee, dry stuffs, alkali, and manures of all kinds, who could fail to perceive that there had been the most incredible traffic, which must necessarily have given great employment to the shipping interest of this country, had it not been for the competition in the carrying trade, which they had experienced ?—that competition, which was now sought to be made more severe by the removal of the protection which it possessed. He purp ,rely abstained from going into further details. it was stated that if the Committee sat upon these laws, certain evidence might be given which would show that the shipping i terest were fettered with restrictions which would not be known without that investigation. But if that wer'• the object of the Hon. Gentleman, why did he not state that as a reason for his motion? Why did he confine himself to the alleged injury which he said these laws did to the com merce of the country, and make statements of the most un founded nature with reference to this subject—assuming that they imposed an addition on freight of 10s, per ton, and were a taxation on the commerce of the country to the amount of four and a half millions. Mr. RICARDO begged to correct the Hon. Gentleman. He only put an hypothetical case. Mr. LIDDELL said that that was the reason why he objected to the statements of the Hon. Member.--( Hear. hear.) Passing over that, however. he would say, if the Government would fully take the question up, and appoint a committee, he would have no objection to their doing so, pro vided they gave him an assurance that before they removed protection they uou!d remove restriction.—( Hear, hear. ) That, however, was so much better stated the Shipownet- Society that he would take the liberty of reading their senti ments on the subject. The Hon. Member here read extract- from a report of that siciety to the effect " that the shipowners idvanced no claim to exclusive protection, hut if for the purposes of the State, and for questions of puhle prudence burdens had been imposed upon them, then did not think they should be placed on the %sm . footing with these who were free from them. " Upon his honour and conscience, be considered, if they re moved that protection which the British shipping enjoyed at present, that these important interests would decline, and they should appear in the eyes of foreign nations in a ridiculous light, if they carried out the principles of free trade with re spect to shipping to the extent proposed. They wanted to 'aka hi . . Mr. DUNCOMBE gave notice, that on the 18th inst. (that day fortnight), he should move for leave to bring in a Bill for the repeal of the rate-paying clauses in the Reform Bill. RESOLUTIONS OF THE RAILWAY BOARD. Mr. EDWARD ELLICE said that, as he understood that the Right Hon. Gentleman at, the head of the rail way board intended that night to state what were the intentions of the Government with respect to railway business, he (Mr. Ellice) should defer the question of which he bad given notice until the House should have heard that exposition. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted that the Hon. and Learned Member for Bolton would defer the resolutions standing on the paper with respect to the House of Keys, in order to give his Right Hon. Friend an opportunity of laying his statement before the Howe. Dr. BOW RING would have great pleasure in con curring in the opinion of his Right Hon. Friend, and would postpne hie motion until the 18th inst. IMPORTATION OF SALT INTO INDIA. An Hon. BARONET, who stood so closely under the chair t.ha►t he could not be seen, asked a question of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Board of Control, the purport of which was to inquire whether a regula tion had been sent out respecting the importation of salt into India. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said that the Home authori ties found oa inquiry that the complaints of the im porters of salt were well founded, and they had accord ingly sent out instructions to repeal the regulations of the Indian Government, and to give the importers of salt the advantages of the bonding system of 1836. RAILROADS IN INDIA. Lord MAHON inquired whether the Right Hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control had re ceived auy report on railways in In lie, and, if so, whether he had any objection to lay it on the table of the House? Sir J. HOBHOUSE said that the report of the Com missioners sent out to India in June. 1845, had been male, which was received on July 4th, 1846. That report had never been ma -e public, and he did not know whether the Noble Lord had seen it. He had not the slightest objection to present the report if it was desired. He had also received a communication from the Go vernor-General respecting the lands to be taken for the railroads, which 'might accompany the report. Mr. HUME wished to ask, whether the Right Hon. Baronet had any objections to lay any papers or dis patches also that accompa tied the report c n the table. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE had no objection to produce the papers which were necessary to show the terms of the engagements. the matter. The Crown had conceded certain rights to Mr. Greenhaugh, who had built a villa in the Regent's park, at an expense of 20,0001., under the pro tection of the Government, who covenanted that this property should not be interfered with, without his consent, and theref ore if the Crown sanctioned this scheme it would cola mit a direct breach of good faith.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. Greenhaugh's villa would be within thirty feet of the railway, and as that gentleman had invested his money, relying on the honour of the Crown, he should propose that the second reading of the Rill should be postponed until such time as the Woods and Forests came to a decision upon the subject. Lord MORPETH said a matter of good faith between a subject and the Crown ought not to be trifled with. He had received many deputations, both of the sup porters and the opponents of the Bill, and although he might not have said anything upon the second reading, he certainly should have asked for a postponement of the committal of the Bill till the Government had had an opportunity of consulting their engineers and law advisers on the subject. Sir B. HALL moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months, Colonel SIBTHORP supported the motion of the Hon. Member for Ilarylebotie. This was another at tempted inroad up an private property by speculators, and he would oppi use it to the utmost. It was his duty, and he hoped he should always fearlessly perform his duty, to raise hi a bumble voice against all aggression upon private property. He would always oppose what he considered (In unjust interference with the rights of British subjectts. It was all very well to say thet it was for the public good—no such thing. It was nothing mon, than aggrandisement that was sought by a gang of specu lators, to encourage the grossest kind of gambling. This country was once called " the land of freedom, but if the Government went on in this manner, encouraging these speculators, tine country would be nothing more nor less than a land of oppression and lyranny. Sir W. CLAY thought the better course would be to allow the Bill to be read a second time, and reserve any future proceedings upon th e Bill until the Government had had the opport unity of consulting with the authori ties and their legal advisers upon the subject of the rela tions existing betwe en the Crown and the tenants. . this Committee wer e granted, he would u nderta ke to show that the British shipowners needed no protection In the year 1814, at the close of the war, when the Eng lish ports were not very acceptable, and when they were still under the Navigation Laws of Charles 11., in that year there were 8,975 British ships in port, representing a tonnage of 1,248,000 tons, and 5,286 foreign ships, re. presenting 699,287 tons. In the year 1824 there were ships representing 1,797,320 tons, and foreign ships re presenting 759,541 tons. In 1845, when no less than twenty-seven treaties had been carried into effect, there were ships representing 4,310,639 tons in port, and fo reign ships representing 1,735,000 tons, showing a con siderably greater proportion of British and foreign ships. lie had made a calculation of the protected and unpro tected tonnage of this country since 1826. The protected tonnage were the ships belonging to Canada and this country ; and those unprotected tonnage belonging to foreign countries, who traded with Great Britain. In 1826, the protected tonnage was 778,879 ; in 1844, it was 3,012,133 ; showing an increase of 1.233,224 tons, or 69 per cent In 1826, the unprotected tonnage was 1,905,176 ; in 1824 it was 4,447,152. Showing an increase of 2,578,976, or 135 per cent. These facts he thought proved satisfactorily, that protection had not operated beneficially for the navy. They ought, therefore, to look to some other means of encouraging that branch of the service than the navigation laws. Hon. Members may depend upon it that the extension of factories in the towns would ensure the extension of the navy, and if they look e d to the effects of the relaxat i ons whi ch had been made by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, it was extraordinary to see how these relaxation s had work e d f or the better. In proof of this, he would just refer to the article of timber. In 1843, the year before the restriction of the duty o timber, there were in that trade 1,841 ships, represent ingethe a tonnage of 689.731. In 1845, the year a l t _ r , ifil. reduction of the duty, there were employed in th e ' ber trade 2,608 ships, representing 964,276 showing an increase in the course of one year• of nine months ending the 10th Oct., than two thirds. Let them now !sic' tl'e q uan tityin the ships employed in the Foreign and British tra de of more i n the cog 1844, Ba4n6. t u ns ; Now, they responding nine months endieg 10th Oct., all knew that there were great relaxationl months ending s between these months ending in 1846, periods. They found, then, that. in the ninean din the nine in 1844, there were employed 4,352,821; loved 5,153,631 2,111 ships, tons; showing an increase in the last year th er e were emP , 0 . in t' at time for the five years ending 1839 ; the inereasz for the five represented 1,503,673 ton, and the increase These were years ending 1845 was 2,055,600 tons' and above 800,000 tens, Let them take the colon ial trade If he had ill facts awl figures which spoke volum es.od of any iion. the slightest degree made out to the Gentleman that this law -how that —if he had made out the lightensi,,re ~ f ticaeious than relaxed duties as a principlit w35 / 1 . they botind to g r ant protection or restriction, thenTwhee were b . und to refute the inquiry which he asked. hire to. substantiate them how 11, n 3 ()" his facts ar.d figures or a hi - „of Coan nons i n before a Committee of the ow k d the H, • Umber thAn e , Ise for thi‘ conclusion the Hon. :‘ • had listened to ;lira throughout i attention with which they his address.—(Cheers.) wa,,,hitsnuislietFvornlitnldicha,t),is soraitttioend Mr. M. GIBSON said that interest, • f mach and i n to the House a motion of .. , the origin . doing so he operation of which, he proposed t the Hon . of those laws, into the Th Hen. Member had an inquiry sheuld take ? - lac the policy of these laws ,and prefaced had called the attention of the nouse totne engin and history his motion by questioning ofpointed • anomalies in the workingoutnotany M these laws. Hon. ember to any course of conduct propos ed Member , for the If the settlement of the question. Government . gave their The present motion appointment of the Committee, they would consent to the le wi th th r be "n by . . :e this country one large wor kshop; but if their design were carried out, he would ask, where would they recruit their army and navy ? Not from the inhabitants of the crowded cities, or from the ranks of factory labourers, but from those engaged in maritime and in agricultural pursuits. They ought not to fritter away those great defences, the welfare of which had been committed to their charge. Mr. HUME was not surprised that the Hon. Gentleman objected to an inquiry, seeing that it could not fail to afford the House an opportunity of ascertaining how injurious the navigation laws had proved. Undoubtedly the Hon. Gentle- man, as a protectionist, was bound to maintain the principle of protection to the last ; but he could not blame the Govern- ment for having carried out the principles of free trade, because they had simply yielded to the wishes of the people. The shipping interest was the only one that now looked for protec tion ; this was the more remarkable since treaties of recipro city had been entered into with other countries which offered them advantages ; and by not availing themselves of them they had committed a great mistake; but now that the House and the Government had admitted that protection was unjust t o th e commun i ty, and advantageous only to the few, he was surprised th a t th e H on. Gentleman c ould call upon t he House to support him in maintaining the last remnant of protection th a t rema i ne d .—( Hear, hear.) He had referred so far back as 1816 to show that protection mu m no t to be removed; but, a f ter a great change had taken place -'' in the opinions of the people and of th at House, and no 'Government could now long continue which did not carry out the principles of free trade t o t h e utmost, for himself he would say, Do not stop with s hi pping; do not stop any where."—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman had talked of the disadvantages under which Englishmen would labour if this protection was removed ; but he (Mr. Hume) could not understand why they could not compete with the people of other countries if they gave them the means of doing so by freeing their labour from injurious restrictions. He had never concealed his opinion that the shipowners carried on their business under great disadvantages, but the fault rested with those who favoured protection, as food had been kept at a high price, and their expenses had been proportionably high. They had a fleet of six hundred South Sea whalers, but pro tection had allowed the United States to construct seven hundred ships for a similar purpose. (An Hon. Member opposite called the Hon. Gentleman's attention to a Com mittee which had sat on the subject of the navigation laws. ) The object of that Committee was to obtain a greater degree of protection than heretofore, but the evidence in favour of it broke down, still he admitted that whenever taxes bad been imposed that the shipowners had more than their share of them. The duties on timber were exceedingly heavy, on foreign fir it was as much as 250/. per cent., but if these restrictions had been removed, no doubt the shipping would have increased. ( Hear, hear.) But who was to blame? In 1833, when the Government wished to remove the taxes upon timber, the protectionists joined the corn protectors, if he might so speak, and threw out the measure ; so that if the shipping in'erests had improved, they had improved under great disadvantage ; but he apprea hended that the time was not far distant when those who now; supported this protection would be anxious to have it icenoteek because he was of opinion that the interests of the 43ritiih shipowner depended up:in perfect freedom, twit so lotig,Se this Navigation Laws remained, his exertions a:44ld be eled and no doubt it would be incontestably proved; if the Committle were appointed, that those laws were not out,' injurioukto•tte shipping interests at home, but in the coloniet, With rapect reciprocity, he might tell the Hon. Gentleman (114r.ldell) that Mr. Fluskisson found it necesbiry either A) .ado itt that principle or to h ave our s hi ps shut out entirelF from the natiots on the Continent, and he adopted the prinesii: le wisely.. +Bs (Mr. Hume's) opinion was, that every man_ who was in favoir of Protection carried in his mind a principle of injustice.-?-- ( Ironical cheers.) That was his interpretation of the meaning of protection.—(Hear.) But one material thing to be ascer tained by such a Committee was, how far the navigation laws had been modified; for he was correct in stating that modifi cations had taken place which might, on investigation, be found to have destroyed those advantages which the Hon. Gentleman was so desirous to have maintained. The colonies had a right to he placed on an equal footing with this country in respect to those laws, as he was at a loss to understand why they should not participate in those reductions which had been made in favour of similar interests at home. The Hon. Gen leman then read a paper to show that the navigation laws Mr. H nit tho , ight the House should be decided by the speech of the Woble Lord connected with the Woods and Forests. He apprehended the railroad could not be legally made through the park, and he hoped that ample time would be given for the further consideration of the Bill. Mr. WILLIAMS said that the parties opposed to the Bill were the ground tenants and the public at large. These tenants apprehended that they were justly entitled to the quiet possession of the park, and that they were entitled to the protection of the Crows ; for it this were not afforded the greatest apprehension would be ex cited among all Crown tenants. The company was a pure speculative reffair, and the House should not coun tenance it in inflic ting an injury on the tenant of the Crown. The Reqent's Park was one of the principal lungs of the metropolis • but if they made a railway on the banks of the canal ;he most favourite parts would be deserted. That part of the park was now frequented by carriages, and ladies and gentlemen on horse back, but they could not then frequent it, owing to the danger to which their lives would be exposed, in con sequence of the horses taking fright at the noise of the engines. HOLYHEAD HARBOUR. Mr. W. COLLETT said that he did not think that the Government were making that progress with the Holyhead Harbour which they ought to have made, and he would accordingly ask of the Secretary of the Admi rrealstpyenwt i h n a g t s t t h e e p s n n h n e s r t r u M n t a i j n e n s t n y f ' s H Government a h r a b v n e n r t , a a k n e d n whether any additional powers are required for obtain ing possession of the lands adjoining th e R e f uge Har bour ; and if s o , w h et h er the Government are prepared with Mr.a R fo rt r th s a a t id pu t r h p a o t se it ? was at first supposed that the common consent of the parties interested would have prevented the necessity of an application to Par liament, but as that supposition had proved fallacious, an Act of Parliament was in preparation, and he could assure the Hon. Member that not a day should be lost. As to the harbour itself, the works were proceeding under private contract. Lord CASTLEREAGH desired to know, whether, in consequence of the statements which had been made in that House the Government intended to call upon Captain Wynne for an explanation of his report. Mr. WARD said that measures had been taken to put the matter fairly before the House.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. AGLIONBY gave notice, that on Thursday the 18th instant, he should move for a return of all the en franchisements effected, or in progress of being effected, under the Copyhold Commission Act. Also the esti mates made of all manors, and an explanation of what was meant by fines arbitrary, and on what event these fines became payable. Sir C. NAPIER said the Hon. Gentleman had stated the objections to the Bill so fully and so ably, that it would be unnecessary for him to say anything on that subject. He had had the honour that day to be a member of a deputation which had waited upon the First Commissioner of the Woods and Forests upon the subject. The Noble Lord showed them a plan of the railway, which he (Sir C. Napier) admitted was certainly very beautifully drawn, but it struck him very forcibly that the canal was to be sunk considerably, • and the parts round it considerably raised, and that the towing path was only to be raised one foot above the canal, whereas, in the original plan, the height of the path was to be six feet above the canal. The gentleman mentioned was not the only one who had complained. He wanted to know how long it would take to train all the high-spirited horses to the noise of the engines? But the greatest objection of all was this. By a map which he held in his hand it appeared that the railway would run between the north and south banks, where there were no less than forty houses, many of which were double, the gardens attached to which sloped down to the banks of the canal, and in fact looked out upon a very pretty river. 'rho towing path was not large enough ft r a railway, so that additional ground wuukl have to be taken by which the carriages would be brought touch neare r th e w i n d ows of thehou. es. If the line was made in the way proposed what a pleasant accompaniment the carriages nod the engines, snorting and whizzing along, would be to a lady play ing.ra a piano forte in one of the houses.—(Laughter.) He thoutht the parties ought to come towards Eustore-square by some other route. No doubt, if the Government would state that they would compel the parties not to injure those houses, that the amendment would be with drawn.—(Hear.) Sir 11, H. INGLIS commented upon the proceedings which had taken place with respect to the Bill, and sug gested that the original motion and the amendment should be withdrawn, and the Bill postponed until the Government could make the necessary inquiries. Lord MORPETH said that his Hon. Friend stated that he gave his consent to the second reading of the Bill. Now he did not wish that he should be mistaken. What he said was this, that until answers to certain inquiries were made he did not feel himself authorised to prevent the progress of the Bill. He would not vote himself tor the second reading, but until he received the answer to which he alluded he would not oppose it.--(Hear, hear.) Mr. STRUTT said that he had no sufficient answer at present to make to the observations of his Hon. Friend. He considered that the question ought to be postponed for a limited time. Sir B. HALL then withdrew his amendment, that the Bill be read that day six months. Sir W. CLAY immediately withdrew the motion that the Bill be read a second time that night, on the under standing that it was to stand over until some communi cation was received from the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. u REGENT'S CANAL R A I LWAY. Mr. T S. DUN COMBE g r r a l v l e !: S borough a from f the Regent' s Canal Railw ay, o Mr. HUMD.Er nOotNiceCtOhaPtPEtoßlnorOßr., he should move fee a copy of all me • • • mortals and petitions praying fee the repeal of the duty on copper ore. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT. Mr. HUME also moved for a copy of the returns of corporal and other punishments on board each or her Majesty's ships in the royal navy, in each year from the lit of January, 1844, to the 31st of December, 1846, statinc the name, rating, nature of the offerce, date of punishment,the number of l as h es , an d remarks of Com- mender in-Chief ..r senior of as t o -Illy excess of punishments or ocher wise, acc or di ng to t h e schedules published and ordered in the Admiralty instructions, dated the Ist day of January, 1844, for the government of her Majesty's naval service; stating also the number of seamen and marines employed in each year, and the average number flogged ; distinguishing the num ber of commissioned and warrant and pert} officer. ; also, speeifying the names of her Majesty's ships and vessels, and the names of the commtiedere, in which no corporal punishments hare been inflicted in any of these I years. Address for abstracts of the total number of men, Mr. RICARDO presented a petition from the ship owners of South Shields, signed by 150 persons, and representing above 400 proprietors, expressing their con currence in the present suspension of the Navigation Laws, but praying that what little protection did remain to them might be continued. NAVIGATION LAWS. Mr. HUDSON presented a petition from 200 ship owners of Sunderland against any alteration in the Navigation Laws; also, a petition from the seamen of Sunderland to the same effect. Mr. lIIIME presented a similar petition from the shipowners of Montrose, though he could not concur in Mr. M RICARDO then proceeded, in pursuance of the notice he hid given, to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the Navigation Laws. He begged to as.ure the Hun, Member for Sunderland, that he did not seek to abrogate these laws at present, but simply wished to have an inquiry. In 1651, the Act was first pa-sed, which passed under the name. of the nav altered nedlau7 to a 1822, dth2e2r when a n , drib laws h n a n db i ee „ ntr i .: . mt Time to time modifies. tion took place. In that year Mr. Wallace introduced five separate Acts, to alter, explain, and amend the law as it then stood. Shortly after this, the Reci procity Act of Mr. Huskisson was passed, which tbtp.ohel footing c tnpi e r: d sgee sv t ee h t nhr e taa In s m h o i i p tt ipohinnagd amendments. was , neno f reign nrsorhane,r e eh o apa u ned n da countries since lorre of the atdh o l i t t a a e wre be ahs t t observed, ai'idrt t furnished thoseto_hr efficiency e st r i enm s d t existed, doa, thef btru that toi oppositer m mt po motion bohe f n o ni ern expressedhha ens he e inquiry ; a course whi c h theffi i.,Hriienlyseo:f_th“eysioauvrigcatoimonmihad woasugni would some just os t tn o b tr i s n e an d l f B t 4 : 4 oe . laws.tte pr N o o c w eed th ed is C to om in m v i e t s t t e i e . gate the subject submitted to their consideration, but is consequence of the late period of the session at which they were appointed, they found that it e was • not possible ta come to a satisfactory conclu sion. sion. They would, th ere f ore, lay before the house the necessity of their beikg re-appointed at an early period in the next session." At an early period of the next session the C omm i ttee was reap pointed, and they reported again, " Your Com mittee have been prevented by unavoidable cir cumstances from making that inquiry which he importance of the subject demands, and they beg to recommend that they be re-appointed at an ear l y per i od next session.—(Laughter.) They were not appointed at an early period of the next session, he could not tell why, but as they acknowledged the importanceof the inquiry, fairdoubt th ofa that the h efficiency y o . f sh t o h n e l d n navigation g t a a tki taken a i n t off; wni but t he f h r e ecini should red be l a a h a d • s , e x i t p r w e a s son eed ch d u e p ni w ed here the they inv h e a s d tig l a ef t t io thought he would be enabled to show so much t o n !' the e e ni v i a l n n e fa ff n e t c n t r s e rs a nd and • tice and oppression towards mischiefisbeip h p ie in f g ° o f f t t h h e e coluanw try ; so much of trips their colonial fellow-subjects, that he would have a right to demand that inquiry from the justice of the House which was denied by their courtesy. The Hon Member then read from the evidence of Mr. Somes before the Committee, to show that, in the opi nion of that eminent shipowner, the laws, as then exist ing, were mischievous and absurd, whether as they re gard the interests of the shipawner3 or the manufacturers Mr. Somes, in his evidence, further stated that many sacrifices were made by the home merchant and mana iacturer tar c.e parpoae of eocoui agnag luarittiKt , C , merce ; an 1 he con , ,idered that some --tcriiizte sh ou ld be made for the general security of the country ; but the question had never been put in such a light as to raise • to principles which allowed h - appointed • • tee to ain the year 1845, the Comratt inquiry was the same as that . sought by the the object of whose • The report of that committee was, that they present motion. to conclude their . inquiry, and they recommended were enable t of Chad committee, with a viewof • • continuing the re-appointmeo e d i ' and that the same hi e h they --oramenec . st must have occurred the inquiry w most Hon. Members that • to the minds of . . in consequence of t he navigation laws, commercial changes which had taken place in this the great comm few years, that a country within these necessity would arise acting in strict accordance reasons existing for the. continuance. of the navigation laws, considerable modifications would be required. He was quite sure that the opirtion expressed by the Hon. the Committee should be impartial, would be Member, that Member assented to by every Hon. present. On the part of h e wished to see the appointment of an of the Government, for an inquiry into impartial Committee, selected of such persons whose position and talent would enti'le the report of the Committee to the attention of the it,;use. He wouLl not nowt enter into the merits of the case, h e would reserve that. until the report of the Committee had been received, and the House knew whether the Committee would recommen I legislative interf retice with those laws. The Committee which his Hon. Friend had moved for should be ect•erted to by the Government. Mr. LIDDELL regretted that I,e could not agree with the motion of his Hon. Friend, and he hoped the House would bear with him for a short time, whil e he stated the grounds of his opposition to the motion to the House- —( Hear hear.) He looked with suspicion to the quarter from whence , th mo tion ori g i n ated, notwithstandin g t h e disclaimer e of the Hon. Mover that he did not intend to abolish the • • navigationlaws. The whale object of his speech was not so much to show the necessity of any inquiry into the subject, but rather to point out the hardships endured by the shipowners of this country. Adam Smith had said that the na • vigation laws were the most essential bulwarks to the extended commerce of the country, The object of the Committee, appointed in 1845, was totally m different from that sought by the Hen Member t in his present otion. Twenty yt ars li g h t h ?tad . e movud for a Committee operated injuriously in ibis respect, particularly in reference to the conveyance of grain between Montreal, New York, and this country. The time was come when they could no longer delay such an inquiry as was demanded. If, in that inquiry, it could not be proved that the removal of these re strictions would tend to the advantage of the country, if it could not be proved that they would promote an increase of their seamen, be should not be the person to urge their abandonment. He was glad that his Hon. Friend had brought forward the motion. He would say more, that the Hon. Gentleman was not more anxious to forward the shipping interest of the country, than he was. If they would allow the importation of timber and materials into the country, without duty, their ports would not be overburdened with colonial shipping. They would establish England as the work shop of ships; and he knew no reason why they should not manufacture ships much better and much cheaper than in any other country—it was the natural manufacture of the country —whilst the Irishmen objected to the sea, the Scotehman and the Englishmen had an affection for it, they had stopped the natural bent of their inclinations by their course of legislation. He would conclude by seconding the motion. Sir WALTER JAMES said he had paid the strictest at tention to the speech of the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent, of which he could not speak too highly, and which was well deserving of the name he hor n e s . He must say, that it appeared to him, no fair groundv had been made to resist inquiry, and that when such an inr m ir a.oded d been conceded by the Government, and had been demanded a'ssump by the parties themselves—it was a piece of gr atuitous could see tion on the part of some gentlemen to resist it i was a sort of no reason why they should do s t o — of those gentlemen high-flying patriotism on the P° it n ; sibility to say, "this shall not but inquiry and investi gation. Why, what was asked? Nothing had something to conceal, and It looked as t e he w ir ill n e o vr t n perm re it 6 s of the debility of their case. The that they were conscious dto him to bear a most remarkable analogy to come forward, and o u t po b n e l L ar w motion appeare • law upon t'+e • - t o one made by Mr. Cobden, for an. inquiry into the said that theft Were sonde hardships under the operation of the nivigition lift, still these laws were known to all the world, and the shipowners of the world had only to act in conformity with those laws 1n order to prevent the recurrence of those Lordships. The Hon. Member had said that the navigation laws did not foster the commerce and shipping of the country, and quoted as a proof the d.flbrent prices paid for labour con nected with the shipping trade in various parts of the world. Mr. Huskisson had said that the navigation laws were twofold, first, to maintain a great commercial marine for the purpose of national defence, and, secondly, to prevent any other nation from engrossing too much of the navigation of the world. The coasting and fishing trade were also materially affected by the operation of those laws. Mr. Huskisson also said that the altered condition of the world, referring to the period at the close of the long war, when the British navy had swept all hos tile fleets from the face of the earth, demanded the existence of thew navigation laws, and that, so far as exclusion of oth r nations was c..neerned, it was right to grant a perfect mono poly of the carrying trade to the shipping of England, not for the purpose of affording advantages to the shipowners, but be cause the merchant service was always to be looked upon as the nursery for the British navy. He (Mr. Liddell) little thought that when the shipowners were willing to give their sanction to a temporary suspension of the navigation Liws a short time since, that that would be made use of as a peg upon which to hang the present Committee. The present Parliament must be dissul:ed to a few in tithe, wi t ; he thought it was not wise on the part of the Government to commence an inquiry of so complicated a nature as the present would be. He was sure the No)le Lord had plenty of other work to attend to than entutni.oice so protracted and lengthened an inquiry, as an inquiry into the navigation laws would prove. The wages of a shipwright in London was 6s. per day. bile at Toulon it was only one franc and a half per day. There eats no more certain indication of s prosperous country than that wages Hon.aienigesanartidh ivieen t m he yb rie h ,rcs i e g . high prices of food.—( Che ers an d t c H o r o f o u dn h n i.c t i f tue r h d,.a eheers ) H e s h ou l d b e glad to hear that fact con aeidfedthetyo were read abreletutrons of Britishdoso.The enormously rif t s , . 3 d ß:rin f i o to r li e suBh i s4 g l2yv n , ships that and h il a i d lB p a4s4s,e which the showed Sound thein I proportion o l r ti ti ri o 6 n , ei:ns,erheatsoedberrcaorepwarhaiteivhelhyaodnspthrueedgecurpeahsee.mulsrt, say that there would hove been ample means to give e nployrnent to British shipping, bad it not been for the very great and the unequal competition to which they were exposed. He would now take those countries,!in both of which the shipping interest had to contend to show the effect in 1844 of that competition. He would take Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Prussia, to show the propor tion of ships belonging to those countries that entered the port of Hull, as compared with British shipping. He would first of all compare with Sweden. There were of 'British ships 30, with a tonnage of 5,387 tons, and of Swedish ships 120, with a tonnage of 1,400 tons. Of Norwegian vessels there were 29, with a tonnage of 3,043 tons; while of British vessels there were only 2, with a tonnage of 160 tons. With Denmark the proportion was still more unfavourable. The British ships were 37, while of Danish ships there were 492, with a tonnage of 34,445 tons. The proportion with Prussia was 80 British ships, with a tonnage of 10,812 tons. and 222 P the most oppo s it e b'eliefs. The Hon. Member f o r Stoke said that the navigation laws were only fair-weather laws, and would not suit the country in times of difficulty and danger. The Hon. Member for Westmoreland said that the Committee appointed in 1844. was not a Committee to inquire into the navigation laws. He (Mr. Bright) thought that it was not, upon the reference ; but he appealed to any Member, on that Committee, whether the principal bearing of the evidence, brought forward on behalf of the shipowners, was not to show that the depress-ca existing in the shipping trade, was to be attributed to the navigation laws, under the Reciprocity Act ; and if the Honourable Member had read further into the examination of Mr. G. F. Young, he would have found that that gentleman stated that a relaxation of the navigation laws caused the misfortune of the fall in the shipping interest. As an instance, he would state that a gentleman some time since purchased cotton in Havre when the prices were rising in England, with a view of bringing it into market, but the navigation laws prevented any American cotton whatever being brought to this country, and the parties were obliged to send it back to the United States, and then bring it over into this country, thus leaving the market unsupplied, and inflicting a serious evil on the merchants. Another instance was in the know ledge of the Hoe. Member for South Lancashire. A ship arrived in Liverpool from the United States to take in a cargo of British manufactures for Hong Kong. An objection was raised by the collector, and after some discussion, it was decided that the vessel could not go to Hong Kong, and a cargo worth 20,000/. or 30,0001. was obliged to be sent on to Canton ; and, in these circumstances, he for one should vote for the inquiry p ro p ose d. , Lord SANDON said, that if a question of such moment was to be brought forward at all, it ought to be brought for ward by the Government, instead of by a siitgli. Member of the House. He thought that an inquiry was necessary to be made from time to time, to see how the laws were o orating and to see if it was necessary to change their principle. He did think it was not right of the Government to leave a ques tion of this magnitude without guidance or responsibility in the hands of a private Member of the Howie. He thought that some inquiry was absolutely necessary, for the purpose of protecting the shipowners in their present helpless state, and he should therefore support t to motion. Mr. L 4.130UC HERE thought it very unust, to ski that ttlis question ought to be in the hauls of a private Member of that House He differed very much from his Noble Friend, for he thought this a very fit goestion for the House to deter_ mine. These laws should be the subject of cautious, deliberate, nd earefte ronsideratien, to see how far any modification of t hem should extend. H s Hon. Friend showed it was alto :,ether w - rottg to leave the q mention to be brought on in the House of Commons. When be retro nbered what subject had been brought on in that Ht use. he hoped he never should see he time when any Government of this country should assume such a control in the House of Commons, as to reply to any lewb -r bringing forward a motion, that it was not a fit subject for a Committee -f the House to consider. lie could appeal to the recollection of that House, whether the gravest and met important questions had not been dealt w ith under all Governments in this manner ; gin stions affecting the shipping interest, the timber duties, an other matters involv mg the greatest considerations had been IT ;ht fi roug forward on the motion of the independent members, and referred to Com mittees. There had been questions involving colonial interests recently investigated by Select Committees. Undoubtedly it was• impossible to deny, that inquiries of this sort, might in a certain degree, be thrown in doubt in the minds of persons connected with the interests to which they referred. He confessed he saw no objection whatever to the motion, nor could he agree with the Noble Lord as to the course the Go•- vernment ought to have pursued. He did not think the Go vernment or the House ought to interfere with independent Members bringing forward motions of this kind, nor did he con sider the Government would be committing themselves to any opinion on the navigation laws, by assenting to the appointment of the Committee. There was no difficulty whatever in the course. The Government and the House, he was persuaded, in the altered circumstances of the country, the change which had taken place in commercial policy, and in consideration of the respect which was due to their great colonial interests, whose prosperity was so materially affected, should consent to the question being scrutinised. A Select Committee was the best place for that inquiry to take place, as he believed the repre sentatives of the colonial interests would be then duly consi dered and reported. The colonial interests in the recent changes which had taken place had complained that they had been badly used, and if such a Committee were appointed they would have an opportunity of fairly stating their case. In the petitions which the representatives of those interests had preferred to this House they asked an opportunity of doing so; if so, there could be no better or fairer means than a Committee fairly selected by the House.—(Hear, hear.) He must protect against the doctrine laid down by the Noble Lord, that it was the duty of the Government to preclude independent Members from bringing forward such motions as this. As a member of the Government, he would never shrink from a fair degree of responsibility for the measures submitted by them to the House, but on the other hand, he would never question the right of independent Members to bring before the House any question which they considered to require investigation. He did not think the House should refuse to accede to the present motion, because it was not brought forward by a Minister of the Crown. If the Committee were appointed and submitted their re port, then it would be for the Government to con sider whether they should take its recommendations in whole or in part, and act upon them. He did not think, therefore, he would be acting right in opposing the appointment of the present Select Committee.—( Hear. ) Lord G. BENTINCK differed altogether from the Right Hon. Gentleman, and concurred with the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool. He did no, because he thought on the present question, affecting so greatly their national policy, her Majesty's Government should net permit it to be sent up stairs to a Select Committee, especially when the proposer and seconder of the motion had compared the large and important commercial interests of the country to pedlars with packhorses, and that trade in shipping should be as free as trace in shoes. —( Hear, hear.) If that wa. the spirit in which a great in quiry was to be conducted, it must be clear to the Govern ment, to the House, and the shipping interest of the country. that the animus of ta u s inquiry could be d ff..rent to th t which actuated the Committee of 1e44. That Committer did not inquire into the operation or policy of the navigation laws, but merely the state of the commercial marine of the country, with the view as to the best measures to encourage the shipping interests. The object of the Hon. Member for the Potteries, on the other hand, was to weaken the shipping interests of the country—to gr'nd down the ship wrights of London from 6s. a•day to 3s. 6th. And in doing so he would lead them to believe that 'the effect of repealing the corn-laws would be something in effect, to the resolution of the Irish soldier, who spent 2a. 6d. out of 61 a day. They were old that the effect would be to dimirosn the rate of freights. 10s. a ton; whereas they were only 7.. 6d. at the present time.—( Hear, hear.) These were the view, which the Honourable Member for the Potteries brought to the inquiry. They had also been told th .t through the operation of the navigation laws this c untry had lost the British colonies. To that he (Lord Geo. tientiock) would answer, that history was mistaken if that event had not arisen from the imposition of a tax on tea by the Parliament of this country.—( Hear, hear.) They had likewise been informed that Portugal had lost the Brazils through the operation of the navigation laws. Mr. RICARDO—No, no, I did not say so. After a few words from Sir W. JAMES, Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that It was his intention to give his support to the proposition of the Hon. Member. The ques tion was, whether there should not be an inquiry into the ope ration of the Navigation Laws, and whether there should not be an opportunity given of ascertaining whether the maintenance of them as they at present existed, would really be for the interest of commerce and manufactures, and also whether or not the maintenance of these laws were necessary for the purpose of securing the maritime defence of the country. The Government, he considered, might consent to this inquiry, without pledging themselves as supporting or assenting to the views of any Hon. Member. The inquiry was proposed by an individual Member of Parliament, and be (Sir R. Peel) apprehended that those who assented to the inquiry were not in any respect bound by the sentiments of that Hon. Member. The Committee were not bound to give effect to any preconceived opinions, but simply to examine and inquire into all the various bearings of this question. It had been re marked in the course of the debate, that the navigation laws had existed for two hundred years, and that they had their origin in the time of the Protectorate. He (Sir R. Peel) ap prehended that they had lasted much longer; he apprehended that the navigation laws were simultaneous with maritime enterprises. But he would not stop to examine into the their antiquity. They had been compelled already to relax these laws, not on theoretical principles, bat because they felt it necessary for positive reasons to do so. In 1815 the naviga tion laws had been relaxed, not OR any speculative notions, but because America was determined to introduce the principle of this country, and to levy a duty not only on their ships, but also upon their manufactured goods. In point of fact, the only point in (nestion was, whether they would give a prefer en-e to this amount in the American market, or whether they would relax these laws for the purpose of extending their centi me teal relations with the United States? It was a simple question between the exclusion of that commerce from the American markets er the re l axat i on of t h e nav i gation laws. A4ain, when Mr. Huskisson modified these laws in 1824, it was not from any theoretical principle he acted, but hesause Prussia was imitating the example of the United States. Ttiey would find, in the speech of Mr. Huskissou on that oca cision, a full mil .na•itin on the subject of the treaty with Prussia. Prussia coinplaaed fria. her vessels .ere subjected r to et tn al ;y e b d y is. s t , : l v b;e t, e t t a i g .ng. e.. in British p .r ts , an d s h e was about to British vessels to the same disadvan tages in the ports of Prussia, and she was determined not to stop there ; she would go still further, for she would also sub ject British goods to higher rates. It was from fear of the operation of those laws on British commerce that Mr: Hus ks'oh felt it his duty to admit Prussian vessels to great e r pri viesees in ti , e fort of Great Britain ; and these privileges were afterwards extended to Norway and Sweden and other countries. It would be Mr the Committee to inquire whether the recent changes in their commercial policy would not render other changes in these laws necessary. He did hope that this H ouse wou ld ta k e care t h at t h e Committee was so constitut“d that in any conclusion it might come to, it would by its d e lib erate and dispassionate investigations, secute for itself the respect of Parliament, and the confidence of the country. Mr. HUDSON said that it was his intention to give his as, vote against the inquiry. He believed that any alteration in these laws would be injurious alike to the commercial and maritime interes's of the country. He belie's, d that it would be particularly inj ur i ous t o t h e seamen , an d . b,lieving' t hi s , he was averse to any agitation of the question. He should, therefore, vote against any inquiry. Mr. HUTT said it had never been the practice of this Hon ;e to con fi de an inquiry of thi s description to. Aie flo'yernment. He could not conceive that her • Majesty's Ministers Would op pose the proposition, for he remembered that he hi a former session was permitted to have a Corrimittee to inquire into one of the most important laws of the cointrp—to have an inquiry into the Act of Settlt;ment ,itself._ :Now, he might quote the opinion of Mr. ;Burke_, and" that had been given in favou r o f t hi s i nqu i ry. donsider that this was a subject on which the interests el, the 'conntry were to be sacrificed, or that the whole of its propertylWas depen dent on the navigation laws. He •di'd• hot think that the pro perty of this country depended on the 7th and gth of Victorie s chapter 38. He did net think that.this House would interfere to prevent an inquiry into the navigation-lawi.. He did think that the effect, if his inquiry were refused, would be to pre.. vent the progress of civilisation, and that it would therefore be wiser to institute the inquiry. --(Divide, divide.) Mr. DISRAELI was anxious, before the House came to a division, that the House should rightly understand what was the feeling of the gentlemen on his side of the House with regard to this inquiry. He believed that there was no feeling on this side of the House to prevent the inquiry on the other side of the House. The question before them was not whether the House should make any permanent alteration in the navi gation laws, and there was nothing in the feeling on that side of the House to prevent that inquiry. The feeling was not against any necessity to go into inquiry, but whether in the present position of affairs it was advisable or. not. The gentleman en his side of the House was not indisposed to go into this inquiry —(Loud laughter)—but the real question before the House was whether this should be a_per manent or only a temporary measure. The Right Hon. Member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel) had made a very plau sible statement, and grounded upon it an equally plausible scheme.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) thought that this was a very proper reason why an investigation should be instituted by the House of Commons, and he did think that the time had come when this investigation should be made, and he thought that the doctrine which had been propounded was a very dangerous doctrine. The reply which he would make to that doctrine was, that it would be unwise to institute this Committee, unless it was to investigate the whole of the circumstances, and how far their results would affect the whole of the commercial interests of the country, especially when they proposed to make such treat changes. The real question or as whether they should make this change only tor temporary pu poses, or for permanent pur, oses ; and this was nut only a commercial but also a constitutional question. The measures proposed by Mr. Haskissen were not only speculativ measures, but were intended to be of a permanent chat racier. The question before them, therefore, was not so much whether the investiga ion should take place or whe• riser it should riot, hut whet: er :hes sheia,d be bound by this tiecnion to a petunowni measui e ? It should be recollected that this was no new subject—tile- this was tint an occasion'on which they needed interdiation, or of the native of which they were illsinf.mined; and be was surprised that it had not been taken in.o cnsideration by the Government before, and that - it had not Ueen trequeotly made the subject of consideration in the Cabinet G.uricil. It. was not a . question whether this 'or that Ministry should remain in riwer, and lie thought that it was The duty to . ;tie Government to make the investiga tion sought tor. He would ask the House whether ibis was a question, the alteration of which was to be permanent, or whet her this was only to be a temporary , auspens on of the navig ation !awl? and he did not think, that e t the beginning of suil a question as this should be proposed. but under the cirininstaoces, +hey had this consolatiJo, that howl-ver it w , a concluded, it could not affect the state of the country. But the p, qu-stion was nor as to the state Of the navigation laws, but whether they should be only tempi rartly altered, or whether there should be a permanent &ill , - boo, and he contended that this was not so muchdapar I ques tion as one for the Prime Minister of State, ae . e d He would Government under him. He (Mr. Disrati) id make this observation before the ss Senses matter of inquiry for oet anxiousor the to again repeat that this was not so muc h the House as rhe Ministry ef the Lord GEO. BENTINCK—There was no doubt that the Hon. Member at all events attributed the loss of the Brazils to the colonial system, by which she had not been allowed to trade with other countries than Portugal. That was a position to which he (Lord George Bentinck) could not accede. For these reasons, he would take the same course as the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, and resist the inquiry. Lord SANDON said he did not intend to oppose the motion. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said, then he must have mistaken the intention of the Noble Lord, for be believed he had intimated that he would resist the motion altogether. The 0 p re sent n i o d tedooufb histt inquiry.thba t back that Hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Hutt) had endeavouredhetowocuistee the members on this (the Protectionists) e re supported opp sea the to Committee m i t r t , :e t . • in, but he (Lord George Bentincl.) hithertoang o a n i ns G t entui opposing ersmu oe nd . had d e e yiaittotrioen wouldt. i resist se T i so h tr e t every boat he had sailed could trust those friends by whom he was surrounded, and had laws.they opposed This seemed e(i present to be motion th epo b n e l: no doub., that acting on the principles of consistency they had q o e w estion was one which only Mr. MITCHELL said, it appeared the Noble Lord who r h a e e nother turne d on of 1844, because they had agreed to it, and it proceeded from could b.! settled by an inquiry, and the present time was had just rodponwsenr, and d d could do so with perfect safety. A deal of e when they great had been said about freights, but his opinion was that they materially affected by a repeal of the reason,cethiapuel themselves, the• fl• hvees Now,wnavigationhi thele n would not be principal benefit would be to check iii , navigaticn laws. The was a great demand for shipping 01 freights when there hear.) While on this subject that the reason why our he must remark, fully compete with those of ships could not success inefficiency of the captains.foreign countri S, V 4, the He had seen letters from He had repeated proofs of this. abroad about charting ships, and ex pressing a desire to have any ships but French or English. The fault was not •in the ships of th;. country, which were as .‘d as thoso ~i sheicsonderw friend s a private member of ie Crown. It was not a subject 013 on. It was an old su bp. wh ich t"onethe w hHouseeh had required been con_ sidered d he thought that the gentle sidered for two hundr e d years, an o n his side of the House had only to assume the p os i t i on t ran o e i astif ytheir conduct, and they might have the argument o f - the on ourable Gentleman who proposed this com m i t t ee. This w a s a matter which, of all others, was of a constitutional character, and one which, of all others, ought to be out of the power of the Government, and one, at least, on which they ought to have the opinion of the Government. He did not think that this was the moment for discussing the question of the navigation laws, but they ought to take the question on its merits. Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the Hon. Gentleman had stated the case very fairly to the House, and had declared that the question was not whether the House would agree to an alter ation of the navigation laws whether permanent or tem porary, but whether they would consent to inquiry. That was the question before the House. The Hon. Gentleman, and those who acted with him, were not indisposed to inquiry, but they were indisposed to permanent alteration. They agreed with him that an alteration was now necessary, and all that his Hon. Friend desired was, that the consent of the House should be given to that inquiry. The Hon. Gentleman agreed that those laws should be inquired into, that they were not a fixed part of the constitution, and yet he seemed disinclined to consent to an alteration of these laws. He had referred to the opinion of Mr. Huskisson, and for years that statesman had consented to make an alteration of these laws, and the Hors. Gentleman himself stated, he proposed no alteration of the laws, and he (Lord J. Russell) felt assured that there was no serious intention to oppose the Bill, and he himself thought that no better occasion could be taken for a general revision of these laws, nor could the subject be taken up under better cir cumstances than the present. Mr. DISRAELI did not ehict to the alteration of the law, but only to the constitutional alteration. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—True, it was a constitutional question, and this inquiry might add to an amendment of 'I I , constitutional law ; could any time be better than the of inquiry into the sitbject, but il l . ~g rteulturat eta , , * . e.l) 11'12 the nit.titi , Pti,m. or The repeal of wh' •'. A Committee was obtained in the a 'awl" had iwen Tliat inquiry ► was tienie.., a.;. I.Le pecit, it C., , orge ,as so e g a g.eat inar,s of important bu ear 1814, which sat during found that the agricultural interest su ff ered materially I moured, because of the defective character of the captains. sineis t o bring before Parliament, he thought this was the best the whole of that session. The inquiry was not comple ted, f rom its refusal. The Noble Member for Newark went He believed great injury had been done to the colonies and ( time to introduce a modification of those laws. He thought and in the session of 1845 it was re. •t d It might be r re-appointe d. e . • -ifectF of the Corn., - out into the same l o bb y w i th Mr. Cobden ; he hopel that he the navigation laws, and an inquiry into th eir operatio n wou ld would, upon th a t occas i on, follow his own example. Since the . elicit many important facts.—{H ear , h ear . alteration in th e navigat ; en laws by Mr. Huskisson, the Baltic ' Cap tain HARRIS was of opinion th a t those on his sid e o f trade had grea tl y i ncreased. Where. formerly ' there were ' the House were strong enough to have the Committee so con thirty Swedish ships, there were now one hundred and twenty ; stituted as to have a fair inquiry if it were thought necessary and where there had been eighty Prussian ships, there for the welfare of the country. But bef ore th ey consented to were now tw o h un d red, and twentyd-two. There wa s ne ad- ' such a committee they must have good re ason g i ven for its a ditional ad van t age i n free trade that is, one nation does necessity; not such illustrations as had been g i ven b y the pro not exclu s i ve l y a d vance its own int erest by it but has the satis• poser of the motion, about pedlars an d f ree trade. faction of see i ng t h e whole European co mmunity munity prosper. The cost of building ships in the Thames was some 131. or 14/. That portion of the British shipping from which restriction had a ton, while in Dantzic it amounted only to 51. 7s. 6d. It been removed had flourished in a much greater proportion than could not, therefore, be expected that they could cope with the other. them unless their co was in some degree protected. It Mr. Alderma n THOMPSO N said th at atthe gentl emen w h o : would not be necessary to merce remind the House, that these laws u sought the inquiry had a l rea d y made th eir minds to an al- I were instituted by a Republican' Government ; th e y were teration, or, at l eas t, a mo difi cation o f the hi n s avigation laws. ' establi s h e d by C romwe ll, sanc ti one d b y th e R ump P ar li ament, The Hon. Member for M ontrose expressed fully, as he always did. He had told them that e h P e in wanted n nte nr n n o - 'and ropr c o o c n it s y olit A la c te t d pa b! sm Ch t a h r e les leg th is e lat s n ec re o v rid t . hey I w n ere lB m l6 odifi t e h d e inquiry whatever; that his mind was made u• a s t n o their h in. in 1824, and consolidated in 1833. There was one point eon expediency. H iamented friend, Mr. Som '' es deuce, stated that in the last twenty years British' niannrigise evi- in a n t e t e e t n e t cl io w n it h of th t i i s re su ii hj o ec o t s . o ti; which he vi t i h s e he g d o t o o . c ti a o l n l th of e particular sopplying creased 42i per cent., while foreign tonnag e as m a crea f sed , men for the service of the country. It_had been put forward 272 per cent (Hear, hear.) Now that protection. , with great justice by the shipowners, that if they did which proved the absolute necessity of withwith the eresntaryxigtiaotniosn which fettered The Hon. Member had said that the average amouut of Britis e h . i away awayftehtteeyredmethstema;laethdeye tonnage entered during the course of last year amounted to must ineot do of away with the restrictions on the employ mf,,iiiihreiti.g:ini e nn rs. po.e 7d s. T ; they ia„ s must 11.. n fo t r ake „r a y w h a n y eight millions of tons; that of course including steam ships engaged in the coasting trade. He hail raised an hypothesi s revrierior hundred te form an er g ument upon), that there muo he A I, a a t th , ton.; t, - e ' merchates and commerce of this country of toe par t on ee e n , li, T Y l , t th ' ' 4"l` ,rat': ' P ' ' '"P , " 0 it they did so, they t r i t u t o;! r, ~. + h ,, ,.. your g men who wished to be- What was the fact? If they took the average rate of toe inn their career roe - tenant service. Perhaps he might freight of all the coasting trade of the United Kingdom, it did he allowed to q uote the example of a man tp whom they were not amount to Ina. per ton. The country could not, therefore, attaineomed to look to th e as a thorough seaman and a sacrifice four millions per annum in its shipping. The Hon. patriot—he referred" immortal Nelson. When he Member for Durham knew very well that on bringing, noels was on the West Ind ia of his in command of a from Newcastle to London the freight was only 7s. 61. per ship, he disobeyed the order s he c hi. superior, and that was no ton, and that was an advance upon the old rate of freight. joke in the naval service; 1 , , w a , u n d that the Americans had The Han. Member for Montrose said that the sv seen of the menoneleed the tin& .; .. i. h :t i Indies. _and although he navigation laws was injunous to the whole shipping interest, had the lawyers agaia s , a nn. 5 h e , . res. nation with him, and and he in vain atten pted to prove that assertion Fits Hon. by the enforcement of these la v and cone Frieed was quite aware that in Canada, New Brunswick, Neva ferred the supe i‘trity on the Britt:h am" ' his poi" Scotia, and Prince Edward Island a vast amount. of tonnage serve and extend this trail,. that thy should reta in It ' was tol"- et h a a i d n these laws. was built every year, and every one of the ships so built was en- { The Dutch. in the rime of the Protectorate, a monopoly titled to the benefit of these laws, and he conceived that a great 1 of the carrying trade upon the high seas, and it was for the injustice would be done to the already much injured colonies ! purpose of competing with them that these laws were first en. in North America, if they attempted to destroy the effect of I acted. The Hon. Me tn b e r f or S to k e-upon Trent had in . the laws. The same argument applied to the East Indies; formed the House, that by the o p erat i on o f t h ese laws t h ey acrd the only colony which he was aware of that had a right to had lost the Canadas. He need not tell the Hon. Member complain of these laws were the West India Islands, but they that if the: Canadas were lost to this country, it was only carried on a beneficial trade with America, and took all their in consequence of the laws affecting their produce, which had timber in exchange for their sugar. With regard to the Corn- passed the Legislature last session. For these reasons he could mittee of 1844, a gentleman, whose name had been men- not support the motion for inquiry. tinned by the Hon. Member for:Stoke (Mr. G. F. Young), who Mr. WA WN felt that it would be for the interest of the when he was asked as to the state of navigation in this coun- country to grant the inquiry. There was one question con try, said that since the year 1810, British shipping had fallen nected with it, which the Government ought to take upon its 25 per cent. ; and that was in consequence of an efficient sys- own responsibility, and that was the case of the British sailor. tern not having been carried out., If the Government was of If their trade should decrease, and the British seamen should opinion that any alteration in the navigation laws was neces- he forced into the service of other countries, he should like to vary, why did they not come forward boldly at once, and not know where they were to find men to ma n the navy in a tiffie keep this vast interest in a state of suspense. of war. He would support the motion for inquiry, as no harm facts of the case placed Mr. BRIGHT sa id th a t grea t di ff erence o f op i n i on seemed wou ld accrue from having the real be to exist on this subject, many Gentlemen confidently holdire fore them. at th e LeeM , .rn left -roAC I, -Saint tsbire, wit to