The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-03-09 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMIION.--V-EsTFaDAy

Mr.' KINC LA.KE, ilk, tOPly, to an appeal from Lord J.
Russell, consented to postpone his motion respecting
Savoy till Monday week. . •
T'ae CHINCELLOROf the Excntatnit stated that he
should, to-morrow (this day), introdiet a till on the
subject of the wine lit ensa:
j lei reply to t-;triotis questions,
liennEurr said that it appeared from various
experiments that the Whitworth rifle could only be used
with the )Y,laitwortla metal, ,whie.h would raise the cost
to £lO for each; even with the ordinary metal it woclid
Still be dearer than other 'rifles—
'Mr: SCCLLY tasked the First Lord'of the Treasury
whether,- leer Majesty's. Ministers being all.tirotestant,
while a l'arge proportion of th Qaeon's subjects, are '
Catholic, it is the intention of the present Government
I to observe faithfully the principle Of absohite
vention, so far, at least, as ‘regArrls the tonitoties and
sovaeignty.ef his Iloliness the Pope?
Lord P.w.IP.IL,ToN assured the hon. member that the
policy of the Government was not influenced by the
religion of the members of the Cabinet, but by higher
motives. The policy of the Government le represented
was to have Italy to arrange her own affairs according
to her oWn:notions; tirat4 Ad that alone, Was' their
policy, and if, other ngionS
.adopted the same course he
felt stare that Italy would in the end place herself in a
a position of
,hapPiness and Proiperity.,
Mr. LOGFIELD asked the Chief Secretary, for Ireland
whether his ,attention .had been called to. statements in
local newspapers that two of the teVesentative peers
of itelivid voted fof a' candidate at the recent election
ter the.,,county .of Cork, and whether such statements
are true or not ? •

Mr. CARDWELL said that he had received no inform-
ation of the Matter. , .
Mr. GAVE havieg been vainly appealed- to by the
Government to postpone. his. :Motion to that: of Mr.
BYag, "Moved an :address for copies of correspondence
between her Majesty's GovernMent and the goierrinient
of France, in respect to legalising the exportation Of
natives of British, India as indentured labourers to French
colonies. lie said that emigration from the Indian coast
could not be voluntary. If we allowed France to take
out subjects in this may, we must allow other nations
to do. the same. He blamed the treaty as .bindiaz
France to do nothing beyond 'what she was already
bouad to do. Were wo to enforce the fulfilment •by
France of the conditions under which she engaged the
Coolies, the _ treati was fraught with danger to our
future .understanding 'with Franco, and he called en the.
Houtsa:to resist this ill-advised Ineasnr6. '
Sir M. FARQAIIIAR 'SEColilea 'the Motion, pointing
oliciTz-e-Juany restrictions id favour of flip, emigrants when
tirkenitO the Brittsh ;West Indies,. none of which existed
in the case of France. • They must extend to the 'Dutch
and the Spaniards the privilege now 'granted to -France.
He trusted that before the treaty was, signed,adistinit
Understanding Would be introduced, pledging ,Frandt
not tOearry,ol the exportation of negrons Afrita.
Lord J. RDS3ELL admitted that there Was much cause:
fOr hesitation with respect to this treaty—it arose out of
the representations made to France against her exporta-
tion of negroesond the counter representation of France.
They 'ended in 'Vie agreeing to allow France the same
privileges in the eiportatimi of coolies as those,posS6-7secl
by ourselveS. It was found that, the Coolies in the
Mauritius had greatly improved in every way—the.
exportation differed essentially from the slaVe ttale=r-
-7.-hen one nation..made war on another to otaifi. staves.
Ile had, therefore, seeing the advantage this nation had
obtained, agreed to aLost to France the privilege of the
exportatiell, of CoOlies. At the same time, he adinitted
that there were many disadvantages, as compared With
this exportation to our own Colonies, where they were
subject to British control. Their Chief object in agree-
ing,o the treaty Alas to, put an end to the o oritral:,t lino
which the French Government had catered for the supply
of labourers front the African coast. •Ile had no objec-
tion to. prodace the PaperS demanded by the motion.
After some remarks from Mr. Kiunaird, the motion
,was agreed te.7

DYNG than, amid the cheers of the party,, rose to
move that an humble address be prosented her
,Majesty, to assure her Majesty that, having considered
' the Treaty of Conimerce concluded between. her Majesty
and the Emperor of the French, this it ()Aso begs leave
to-approach- her-Majegtrwith their sincere aiid grateful
acknONiledgMents tot, this' rieW phof of lies Majesty's
desire to prOmote the welfare and happiness of her
subjects; to assure her Majesty that we shall proceed to
take such ;steps as may be, necessary for giving a systent
which, we trust, will promote a ben6llolot intercourse
between Great Britain. and Prance, tend to the expansion
of trade and manufacture, and giVe 4ditional security for
the'continaance of,theblessings.of, peace. After quoting
previous instances to sheWthat he was Pursuing an admitted
precedent, he observed that it was impossible.te separate,
the polit;cal and Commereial,bearings or the treaty. He
praised, theloreign policy of the Government as at once
temperate, conciliatory, and firm ; while warmly approv-
ing the policy of non-intervention, it did not, he said,
interfere with, the extension of our commercial relations
With other countries. Questions of Scvpy had been
mixed .up with the treaty', and on this head he declared
his opinion that the interesti of the OOnetry were in Oaf&
and trustworthy, hands. Ite approved the- treaty,
because on our side it was another step ht, the. direction
of 6ee-trade and the simplification of our tariff. He
denied that 'the negotiation for the treaty had been
entered into in the spirit of barter or ba.r,gaiti. It was
not strictly a treaty, of reciprocity, but it was one never-
theless for the benefit of other nations. The very fact
that the treaty' was not received with enthusiasm on either
side of the Channel, was to his mind, a proof. of the
impartiality.. He replied to the objections to the coal
article of the yeaty,.observing that Vallee could get
coal, ;if necessary, from other countries, and that the
,fears-ttf--th(f failure of- the were like those of the .
--r r
people bit La:Pinta,' who Were in constant terror lest the
rays of, the sun, ~she uld 1- fa if, them. He passed a warm
eulogium.on the-eouseqUence 'of the treaty to ntantifil,
and on the patriotism, and saerifices of Mr. Coblen in
negotiating it; 'lle asked the Muse not to let 'individual
discrepancies of opinion interfere with the united:expres-
.
Sion of approval of so gretit,and useful a measure uniting
two great nations in a common bond of retiprtitai
interests. . , „, ;

Mr. E. BArrins steonded the motion: He declared
that all the great branches of industry in the north and
midland counties' warmly approved the treaty, and
showed that our exports to France, and the amount of
our intercourse, was initheasurcably bele* what was
intended by nature, and what it might be for the mutual
benefit of both nations., The present • treaty was the
sloe of forty years of commercial reform, from which.
the country had benefitted so largely. The. experience of
those years was such as to show that they might take
'the final, step with perfect safety.

. . -
' Mr. LlNDsxy said that reference, in support of th 6
treaty, had often been made to the treaty of IMI, which
nevertheless was a stronger treaty than the present, and'
was. in foaryearS followed by a war. ..lle felt bound to
give his best support to carrying through the treaty,'
though short of what he should have desired, as placing'
the people' of this country in a better position. But he
•
must call attention to the third article, and the differen-
,tial duties it contained, which 'he said, was unfair to
. British shipping,. and -unfair to'France herself. While
the trade of France ,had greatly increased of late years,
her shipping 'had declined, owing to her narrow-minded
poliey., If the ,treaty-was carried out,.a4 he trusted it
,would be, it vriis absolutely necessary that a change
should be Made in the French navigation laws, in con-
sequence of the increased
.communication between the:
two countries, as a greater reciprocity should he obtained.•
But he would' not,' as' he had originally intended„ move
an amendment embodying his views, because if carried'
it minlit affect the treaty, and it 'not it might inftire the
object he had in view. He should therefore accept' the
offer some time since made by the Government, to use
their best.efibrts,to have the matter put to rilits.
11ix. P,EAcocx. opposed the address, ~not thinking that
commercial intercourse should be made the subject of
treaties, believed that the negotiator's of the treaty
had thrownbackthe course of free-trade in Francs, mid
its results would_ cause great disceatentin that country.
1, Mr. QUAY approved the courseadopted by Mr Lindsay,'
I as the most likely to further the object he had in view.
Mr. B. Cocun,n opposed the address, .thinking it.
lighlyinvolitieto bind ourselves for ten. years.'
Afi-r'ogw.i.iiT pointed out the. social and commercial.
:advantages 'of the introduction, of. French wines.
11Ir. MAGi-thE gaie his cordial support both to the
treaty and the budget. It was a step not only towards

the increase of commerce and the consolidation of peace,
not by armament, volunteers,
,or doubled dtiniates,ibilt
synieithie.z; add irit6ic3ti a. the freacii. 13edple.
supported the address.
Lord ADOLPHUS VANE TEMPEST would be' en
but not.on affectionate, terms with France._ ye moved
n aniendment to the effs;et tliAflie Adds° to'
trive, dri trio tied), till the intentions of the.
Preach E,nperor, with regard to Savoy, were made'

I known. •
Mr. BovILL seconded the amendment.
Mr. SLANEY considered that great advantage would'
be gained by our increased intercourse: .
Sir H. C.tiu.ss would not oppose the addesFl as he
nit Wish to-- dvierthici‘i thettleaty; but lie mud not
consider the treaty either `wall drawn or properly con-
ccived.. . Ile could not admit that there was no bargain
tavolvcd in the treaty.
~, If there was rie bargain, what
\VA§ the Use, of the treaty? His 'objection Was not thdt
,there: Was a bargain_, thdt it Was to tis,a .I:3ad batgain.
..•
ery_impprtatit interests had becn_overlook4,;...lar.one,
the shipping interest would be seriously injured, and no
effort was made by the Ministry to aboligh the obnoxious
and exclusive privileges of the French shipping. Again,
the treaty was uiffair as regards the duties on the staple
of Irish manufactured linens and lingn yarns. The
mantrfactinets considered a ditty of JO 'dt 'den 23
per eget, altog4liet prohibitory. France I was tile
greatest consumer of linen in the world, and Spain the
next, and our coinmere.e With Sprite
interfe,red•With by the tient,V.. He Hither fthind fault
ilio .6.-di:ehnnent for not stipulating for the free
admission of this important raw material. He com-
plained that the Government had not made any explicit
statement with regard to the coal article. That article,
alter the consent of France.to m difx it,.atia the reft.isal
of her Majesty's become 'a domestic
ctuesiiou ; and he trusted that the House would reject
it, as limiting .the future action of Parliament. He
ended"byeharacterising the treaty as one:sided;
_ imper-
fect, and faulty,' against which many ,of the most impor-
tant interests of the country had urged such manifold
objections: Still he admitted that more injury would
be. done by refusing than by passing the treaty, and
he, for one, would not take the responsibility df the
former'etothe,

Mr. M. GIBSON said that lie *odld not argtie Whether
,twe had gained till the good We &Mid; *e had gained
enoigh to be of niuttill adf-aritage td Both 'e °liar 1.4
ConiirleiiziaitvedtGes )\rotitd be inipossibie if they were to
,go' minutely into the particular duties of each indillual
article. As to the coal,queStion, all that was done.by the
treaty was to engage 'that the export should not be pro-
hibited in. a cominercial sense. With regard to the
navigation restrictions of France, more importance had
been attached to it than it deservod, It was. urged that
under the tredtr tlig trade Of 'rrattue
ola lies mast ,be ,carried • trench, - ships. Now the
chtire trade of France with our colonies was
.only lOO,OOO tons, While the whole British was
ten million If therefore; we had the whole of ,
the colOnial trade, with. Franee the addition would be
altogether Tlitis was urged suiall oVjedtiOns
td si gf:eat And comprehensive measure. With regard to
the importation of raw material,' it was impossible to
-Make export duties dependent upon the retention or the
removal of prohibition. They should look on the treaty
as a great principle, many of the • details of which had
yet to le arranged.
Sir S. NOICIIICOTR admitted • that -the question of
Savoy ought to be separated from the treaty; but claimed
the full privilee of 6ritidlitlg dbtitilti tit the latter
insthtnent. fte used this: privilege by adverting to
many points in the treaty 'which, in his opinion, 'were

deserVing of censure. . .
Mr. IVALpoLE.thonght that the word treaty should be
substitu'ed for 4stem in the a 'dress.
Lcrd Palnierston agreed.; and Lord A. Vane TemPest
having withdrawn his amerviment, the debate was
adjourned on the motion of Mr. Itorsnum.
The Loin 'Anvoi7Arrn obtained tear-0 to introduce
bills to amend the Titles to tait(l (Scotland) Acti 1858;
a bill In amend certain provisions in the Bankruptcy
Law of Seotland.t a hill to atnetid the iai-eldtiVe to
the.Seotti§h Tiql•ingl k
Ah'etiet.
he Spirits (treland).Act Amendment. Bill was read
a third time, and passed.
The ;Howe adjourned atten minutes past twelve.

THE DAILN-IniES, FRIDAY, MARCH 9, IFeb: