The Express.
London, England, 1850-02-23 00:00:00

plotioram. aid directness than is hie wont, gave the
sigma and led the way. Had his followers been few
in number, or were they capable of being described as
personal friends, it would be a fact of less signifi-
cance. Bat it cannot fail to strike the most cursory
seder of the division list that among the Peeletee,
who have publicly renousesd the leadership and
guidance of the late premier, are the most active and
ambitious of that now dissolved and scattered ova-
tion. It was so power of sophistry on the part of
Mr. GLADSTONE that led Lords MAHON and CASTLE-
'S/AM', Mr. CSARTRitie, or Mr. Mosinee, to support
Mr. DISILILILI, against the warnings and remon-
strates.. et the ono. persuasive and paramount mess- I
ben far Tamworth and Ripon.
Mr. GLADSTONE most completely turned his back
upon the acre and principles of his political life, u far
as taxation and trade ere concerned. What hops.
will be excited by thie defection of the first lieutenant
of Use PEEL party P What an example does it offer P
Waist pre/spent does it point to P If Mr. GLADSTONE
had been poring over the political chess board, and
calculating by what aeries of moves, completely cone
cealing his design, he could drive even liberal mini.-
ters into the corner of a fixed duty on corn, he
could not have devised a move more ingeniou
than the carrying of Mr. DiestAßm's motion. Let the
surplus be disposed of, by way of indemnity, amongst
the landlords before even the surplus is ensured. And
where will the landed majority send the CHANCELLOR
of the Exeuecieut to look for a supply ? To taxes
for protection, no doubt, under the plea that there
are taxes for revenue. It is the American dodge that
is sought to be re-enacted here.
If we consider the tone and the arguments of the
chief impugner. of Mr. DISRAELI'S proposal, we are
by no means thereby assured of the staunchness of
resistance to protection. Even Sir JAMES GRAHAM,
who took a most liberal and enlightened view of the
two kinds of taxation, that which was paid be the
rich and that which was wrung from the poor—
even he held out to the landed interest that
they might indemnify themselves by a redistribution
of the iucome tax. Sir ROBERT PEEL dwelt at exor-
bitant length on the immense advantage likely to
accrue to the landed interest from the repeal of the
ditty on bricks. Although he omitted the chief con-
sideration, the impulse it would give to the immedi-
ate increase of that one great kind of real property
which had of late years moat relieved the land of its
quota of rates.
Even Lord lons RUSSELL dwelt on the in-
tended boon of lightening the stamp duties, and other
charges on the transfer of landed property, forgetting
that what the landed interest lent likes to contemplate
is this very facility of transfer.
All these bribes were evidently regarded with dis-
dain by the country party. No small boon will
conter.t them, unless, indeed, it be the commeccement
of reaction, a small instalment of great changes and
I indemnities to come. The d• • • n showed this, as it
proves they can count upon Irish suffering or caprice,
upon Whig defection, and upon the final disruption
of what once was the PEEL party.
Hence it is manifest that it the cause of free
trade is to be saved, this must depend more on the
country than on parliament. All is false and insecure
within the walls of Westminster. There is there nc-
thing bat a hollow mass ot speciousness and treachery.
And however staunch the more eminent leaderr, how-
ever true the conviction and attachment to free trade
may be, of the PEELS, the RUSSELLS, and the GRA-
HAMS, there are smaller fry around them all very
ready to hurry back to protection, shculd it mos
conceal its cause under new cames and ingenious
pretexts.
It is for the country not to sleep. The question,
the great question, which is now about to influence
all to be said and done about taxation, power,
trade, reform, is, are the industry and intelligence ot
the country to be dominated and fleeced by its
hereditary stupidity and rapaciousness ? That is the
question for electoral as well as financial reformers to
ask themselves. And the debates et this week are
proof sufficient, how identical and inseparable are the
two movements. Without a lairer distribution ot
electoral power, the people of this country will
never obtain or keep a fair distribution of &cal
b-rdecs.

VIE cultivation of Cuba and Brazil has latterly been
directed to one staple—sugar._ The eastern supplies of

coffee are now sa great that British possessiOngs, em-
ploying free labour only, are forcing slave labour
coffee out of our market. It is, therefore, enough

for our present purpose to examine what indueemere.
the cultivation of cugar has offered in the pet, and
will present in the future, to the iniport of shaves.
Aad as Cubs is of the two slave importing countries
the one in which the production of sugar has most
rapidly increased, wa shall confine our case to it. But
the conclusions must, it will be obvious, apply with
still greater Lorca to the less happily situated Brazil.
The West Indian committee of 1818 received very
detailed information on the ccst of sugar culture in
Cuba. The statements of Mn. PETEtt HOUTIIWicE,
of Mr. HARDOTTLE, and of Mr. Ilieutes, accord
very nearly on the main facts ; and these are : 1.
That the prime cost of the slaves in a sugar planta-
tion is from one third to one half the capital ex-
pended on the land, in bringing the soil into cultiva-
tion, in buildings, in cattle, and in m ichinery. 2.
That the annual charge of interest, including what
must be ailed wear and tear, is 12 per cent. on
the cost of the slaves, and 6 per cent. o e that of the
laud, &c. 3. That the yearly keep of a slave is 51. a
head. 4. That the cost for superintendence and
skilled labour is as much as the total keep of the
slaves. And, Isstly, that the other charges come to
es much as the two last mentioned items.
It will have been already felt by those who have
followed these statements, that the annual charge for
the prime cost of the Mayes is sinking to something
much less on the cost of the sugar produced, than
they expected to have found. In the case of the
Saratoga E-tate (the account current of which cceu-
pits nearly three pages of Mr. IlleGiss' testimony),
the result is this :—The slaves coot at first 100,000
dollars; the land and plant, 200,000 dollars; the
annual outgoings of all kinds about 30,0011 dollen,.
Interest on the cost of the slaves at 12 per cent. is
12,000 dollars; on the cost of the estate, &c., at Fix
per cent., also 12,000. The whole annual cost of the
crop of sugar is thus about 54,000 dollars ; of which
the prime cost of the alive. figures for 12.000 only ;
or not ems fourth. This estate appears to produce
4,000 boxes of sugar ; they, therefore, cos' about 1'2..
a cwt.; and the share of the prime cost of the slaves
therein, is about 2s. 6d. a cwt.
Without wearying our readers with other figures
in the evidence taken by the committee, all of which
we have carefully examined, we may state that
it appears that in Cuba the fist cost of the
slaves never ccnstitutes a greater charge than 3F. a
cit. or 31. a ton on the oust of sugar. Now, as the
annual prcduction of sugar by a slave is at least two
tons, so we can prove (as the arithmeticians say) our
calculations, by rememberii.g that the annual return
to the planter is thus more than 61. a head, and that
return is more than 12 per cent. on the selling price of
slaves in Cuba °flats years,just what it should be if our,
or, rather, if Mr. Mutates', calculations be correct.
And we may, parenthe.ically, observe that these state-
ments accord, most remarkably, with those in YOUNG
and EDWARD 4, of estates in Jamaica towards the end
of the last and the beginning of the pre sent century,
as to the proportions of capital employed in land &c.
and in slaves; though, by inferiority of management.
the Jamaica planters then only ebtaitied one-third of
the sugar a Cuban planter now gets from an equal
expenditure. No wonder, therefore, that the British
West Indies were always a lEstrets,d Interest!
It need hardly be stated how complete a solution
these facts and figures give to the qua scone—why the
past slave trade has been sufficient for Cuba (and
consequently for Brazil), and why, if unres•rieted, it
could hardly be greater. From them it appears that
for every slave imported, a further sum equal to
or double his cost—another 501. or 1001.—must be
invested by the planter. 'faking, then, the slave
trade at the very Itw rate of 30,000 1 ear, at least
5,000,0001. mist thus be sunk by Brazil and Cuba
annually.
Can these countries afford more?
,500 ob,
ine mported
heeler slaves
de inAt
oCnbudrbr.nwgahnaddto
wl
weevill
nr a a lt h
e.
How
manypeiceto
There atrheemnoor
re must
planter 2
they cost those countries ?
By the depreciation of one-third, the planter would,
ait has boa shown, save Is. a cwt. in the cost of
sugar. But what would be his increased expenses in
other matters; from increased population, increased
demands for food, increased demand for land, for
anp:rintendence, for machinery, for skilled labour,
and for other materiel of increased production?