The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-30 00:00:00

He would coneude in the flowing words of Curran :—" No
matter in what language the doom of slavery may have been
pronounced ; no matter in what disastrous conflict his liberty
may have been cloven down; no matter what complexion,
incompatible with the notion of freedom, he may wear ; no
matter whether Indian or African emu have burnt his brow;
the time is fast approaching when his soul shall walk abroad
in all its native majesty, when his body shall swell beyond
the measure of the chains blaming from around him, and
he shall stand forth redeemed, regenerate, and disenthralled,
by the irresistible genius of universal emancipation."
Mr. URQUHART moved.the adjournment of the debate
amid loud cries for a division.
Mr. ANSTEY seconded the amendment.
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the house would come to a di-
vision before they again separated. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. URQUHART, called upon the house, by assenting
to the amendment of the hon. baronet to save our West
India colonies from the destruction so imminently threaten-

ing them.
The Marquis of ORANBY denied that the distress of the
West India planters arose from the recent cem.uercial de
pension. It so, how was it that the sam • Caine hail not ope-
rated upon the importations to this country ot Bra r liana Cuba
sugars ? It by pursuing the ceursepoiuted out by the right hon. '
baronet the wages of the labourer were to be reduced, would
the planters be enabled to take advantage of that reduction ?
lie at once said no; the only male of benching the
planters was by giving them protection, and encouraging
immigration of labourers.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the subject before the house
was one well worthy of its most serious consideration. Aftt r
hearing all the arguments that had been urged during the
debate, he had come to the same conclusion that had
already been stated in the course of the discussion—
namely, that the jmotion of the hon.- baronet had only
embarrassed the question without atforoing the house
the means of coming to a correct conclusion as to the
real subjects at been. If the hon. baron, t had moved an
amendment on the propositions of the governm. nt to the
effect that no adequate relief could be afforded to the West
Indians save by the adoption of the recommendations of the
West India committee, be (Lord J. Russell) was ready to
admit that the house would then be on the road towards
coming to some conclusion on the question before them. But
the hon. baronet's amendment merely went the length of
condemning the propositions made by her Majesty's govern-
ment. It he had even allowed it to be supposed tnat the
present was a party movement for the purpose of
unseating the government, he (Lord J. Beech) could
have understood the proceeding. But it had been clearly
shown that whilst there were many who were disposed to
vote for his amendment, they comprised no inconsidei able
• number of hon. members who altogether disapproved of the
view- entertained by the bon. baronet; and therefore,
• although he might succeed in done> Mg the government,
he would not make any progress tow, ads giving relief to the
I West Indians. If the hon. baronet's amendment was
affirmed, he would find the right hm. gentk.m.in the mem-
ber fee Oxford University and the right hon. gentleman the
mo tuber for Cambridge University both alike ready
to oppose his 10s. protection duty, and to declare
it to be more than the house could consent to ; and one of
those right hon. gentlemen would inform him that the re-
duction of the 14s. duty to 10e. would be dangerous to thr
revenue. How, thin, would the question stand in the event
of the amendment being carried ? The govt rnment woo d
thereby have a negative put upon their prop.aitio-e, and the
hon. baronet's proposal would meet with a similar reception,
mad then the right hon. gentleman the member fur Oat rd
University would be ready to bring forward his views, which
it might be advantageous to discuss, but which could not then
be entered upon. The only result which the hon. baronet would
arrive at would teeth A the propositions, of the e overn ment being
rejected, and none others having been adopted in their stead,
the Wont Indians would find themselves, aft, r on many
nights' discussion, landed at the scale of duties which would
come into operation on the sth et July. Was that the lion.
baronet's mode of coming to their assistance and relief?
Hiving add this much with respect to the probable results
of the affirmation of the amendment, he should take that '
opportunity of making a further statement respecting the
vices entertained by the government on the subject and r
consideration. The great changes which had taken place in
the West Indian colonies—first, in the emancipation
of the threes; subsequently, in the admission of
foreign free labour, and then of slims-labour sugars
into the home market—bad made an immense change
in the condition of the planters and proprietors of those
islands. Those changes—more especi illy the first—called for
correspondent legislative measures on the part of the govern-
ment. Those measures had been projected and brought for
ward, but the y met with every species of obstruction and delay,
by which means they were prevented from proving so bene-
ficial an they ought to have been to the \Vest Indian colonists.
He would first allude to the Vagrancy Am, and the mete+
proposed for regulating the employment of labourers
in those islands. Having been for 60010 time
Chief Secretary for the Celonics he was enabled
to state tram his own knowledge that the difiLailtice which
hail been put in the way of passing the se laws chit fiy re.
terred to the fears that an infringement of the Emancipation
Act was contemplsted. That certainly had the effect
of preventing the free course 01 legislation, and the speedy
passing of the vagrancy and employment act; and the constant
reports sent home by the stipendiary mat istrates respecting
the treatment of the labourers in the West 'urban islands
created and maintained a great degree of irritation He only
referred to those topics in order to show that the Emancipa-
tion Act could not be considered complete unless it was
aeoompanied by other lawn, regulating the state of freedom
fa which the negro population were to exist. Another and
a more important question came to be confider.' at the
same time with the preceding one. The West Indies were
in a condi.ion, awing to the large amount of capital
poured out upon them, to compete with Celia
in point of production, notwithstanding the advan-
tages which the latter island possessed over the Bri-
tish West Indian planters. But the great want experienced
by the latter was that of continuous lahour. Great ebjt canna
had been raised to the impartation of any labourers from
Africa, as that, it was feared, would endanger the liberty of
the negroes. He had tried to promote immigration into the
West Indies from Sierra Leone of liberated air free Africans,
but few went. European immigration was next resorted to,
and failed. The coolie immigration also tailed. The vvint
of continuous labour had existed for uper aids of ten rely, •
and yet that want had hardly hull ifs full effect,
and under this belief he thought it tit that the
legislature should enable the colonists to ir crease
their st :els of labourers a measure that would
be highly beneficial, as • small number of imported
Labourers thrown into the market would stimulate
others to work. The right hon. baronet the member for
Tamworth had not estimated very Uglily the utility of the
proposed advance of 500,0001. fur the purpose of immigra
Gun, and he had asked whether a portion of that sum could
not be applied to other purposes. It he (Lord .1. Russell)
were to assent to this proposition he should be leading the
house to thick that the government was prepared to advance
money on loans ta the West Indian plar.ters upon a plan similar
to that by which landowners in Great Britain and Ireland
obtained loans fur the purpose of draining, and such a course
with respect to the colonies was almost impossible to follow.
As they advanced money to Canada for public works, so, if
there were any works in the Went Indies, such es those to
which the right. hon. gentleman had alluded—the making
of canals and tramways and great works et drainage which
would he likely to increase the produce of those colonies—he
would have no objection to extend the appropriation of the
500 0001. to such works. (II ar, how.) The right hon.
gentleman the member for the University of Cambridge
. attributed the whole of the distress in the West Indies to
the act of 1846. It did net appear to him that the act of
1846 was the principal, though it might be one,
cause of that distress. In stating the probable sffecw
of that bill at the time he introduced it, he
stated that 240,000 toes might be introduced from the
British possessions, 20,000 tons, the produce of free labour,
and 20,000 of other foreign sugar, making altogether
2b0,000 tons. lie did not expect that the produce of their
own possessions would have been increariel, but it happened
that their produce last year reached 280,000 tons, and this,
together with 48,000 tons, the produce of other countries,
I caused a very great depression of prices. The
increase of their West Indian colonies alone, as appeared by
the returns moitel for by the hon. member for Leennioster was
from 2,000,000 cwt. to 2,200,000, '2.500,000 ewt., .2,800,000
ewt., and last year it was 3,202,775 cwt. That showed an
enormous increase of production, though he admitted to the
right boo. gentleman (Mr. Goulburn) that this increase was
not to be attributed to the act of 1846. But it showed an
immense increase of production; and if that had been con-
comitant with the high prices which prevailed in the time of
monopoly, he believed it would have caused as much distress
as prevailed at the present time. The right hon. gentleman
the member for the University of Oxford did not concur in
the proposal of a 10e. duty, neither was he in favour of
the plan of a 75. duty as proposed by the government. lie
must therefore suppose that the right hon. gentleman was
in favour of some intermediate scale between 7s. and 10s.
That would only make a difference of Is. 6d. or 2s. at the
utmost, and he owned that it might be fairly t ken into
consideration in committee. Another hon. gentleman was
in favour of the 10s. duty, but for three years only, be-
cause if the 10s. dutf,were to exist for a longer period—
for 10 years—it would raise the rate of labour. If the
hon.
would,gntleman was right as to the effect such a measure
have on the rate of labour, he (Lord J. Russell)
did not see why it should not have the same effect, though
the duty was to continue but for two or three years. He be-
lieved that such • proposition would give rise to fresh specu-
lation and competition, and that at the end of the three
years the West Indians would come to them with the same
complaints that they did now. In the midst of the various
schemes proposed, that of the government seemed to him to
combine every advantage. He did not think, in the
face of the distress of the West radians, that it would be
right to allow the act of 1848 to come into further operation.
What they proposed, therefore, was to give immediate pro-
tection to the planters by increasing that protection for a
time, and to increase that advantage still more, and at the
same time to benefit the consumer by lowering the duty.
He expected that the consumption would be greatly increased
by this plan, and he believed the only chance of the planters
consisted in that great consumption. The recommendation
of the committee held out the same advantage, but at •
sacrifice to the revenue of 960,0001. 11e would
not then go into the question of the probable
increase of consumption, but it was calculated that the re-
venue would not sufier to the extent of more than 30,0001. or
40,0001., and ultimately it would not be less than it was at
present. 'Acre remained the (objection that the measure
would encourage the slave trade. If it were now a question
proposed ter the first time that no sugar, the prodwoof
slave labour, should be admitted, he would admit that
fair ground of objection. But the proposition the house
had to deal with was not that of admitting slave labour pro-
duce for the tint time. It was a question of increased pro-
tection in favour of their own colonies. It the hon. baronet
(Sir R. Inglis) would repeal the act of 1846 altogether,
and totally prohibit slave grown sugar, be could then admit
his argument against the plaint plan i but his hon. friend