The Sun.
London, England, 1854-04-07 00:00:00

SUGAR.—To-day there was a reluctance to operate in
British plantation sugar for home trade purposes, and
rates in some cases are 6d per cwt under last Tuesday.
Demerara sold at 33s to 34s for fine brown an ord yellow.
Jamaica, low to mid yellow 34s to iss, mid to fine brown
32s 6tl to 33s 6d per cwt. Sales to day were 260, making
1,086 hhds &c. for the week.
REFINED--To-day purchases were limited" in refined
sugar for home purposes ; brown lumps were to be
obtained at 43s to 43s 6d, and low to fine grocery 43s 6d
to 47s per cwt.

MAURITIUS.—To-day for Mauritius sugar, and rather
lower rates were taken, making a decline for the week of
6d, and in some cases is. per cwt. for better qualities.
COFFEE.—Private operations are 6000 bags, chiefly for
home consumption. Today few purchases were made pri-
vately in Native Ceylon, still holders are firm, and obtain
45s to 45s 6d for good ord.
TEA.—To-day there were increased operations in tea,
and low to good common congou realised i 1 d to is per
lb. The market closes with a firm aspect.
TALLOW.—The demand for Russian has further de-
creased for speculative and consumptive purposes ; there
is more desire to sell, and prices have given way is 6d
to 2s per cwt since last Friday. Purchases have been
limited, and the latest rates taken were 67s 3d to 67's 6d.
Home melted is not much required, and can be obtained
at 65 6d cash, supply being rather more plentiful. For
other sorts of tallow there is a decline of is to 2s per
cwt., a limited business having been concluded ; Aus-
tralian mutton, mid to fine 63s to 68s, beef 62s to 645,
South American 63s to 675, and French town melted 63s
to 65s per cwt. At auction this afternoon the qua ttity
offered was GOO pkgs. Stock of tallow is larger than last
season ; deliveries are 2,000 casks less, and rates rule 20s
to 228 per cwt above.
OlLS.—Prices have much declined for linseed oil this
week, and sales are limited ; on the spot 40a 6d to 41s is
accepted, and 42.8 to 4is for delivery. Rape oil a slow
sale, Banca at 43s to 43s 6d, and pale 45s to 45s 6d.
decrease in purchases in cocoa not together with a re.
duction.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
SCOTTISH GRIEVANCES.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a numerously-
signed petition from the National Association for
the Vindication of Scottish Rights ; and , moved that
a humble address be presented to her Majesty, pray-
ing for the appointment of a, Secretary of State for
Scotland ; that an additional number of members
of Parliament be allotted to that country ; and that
the ancient palace of Holyrood might be restored.
The noble earl commenced by eulogising the moderation
of the prayer in this petition denying that there was the
slightest idea of advocating a dissolution of the Union,
or of asserting any heraldic grievance. At the same
time he asserted that the spirit and letter of the Act
of Union had been infringed in several important re-
spects. He contended further, that Scotland hart not
been treated upon a footing of equality with England
in respect to the expenditure of public money. While
1,500,0001. had been spent upon parks and palaces in
England in less than fifteen years, only 16,0001. had
been spent in Scotland; 2,000,0001. had been spent
on harbours of refuge in England, but not a single
sixpence in Scotland ; and nearly 2,000,0001. on the
Ordnance survey for Ergland, but only 65,0001. on
that of Scotland ; whilst the scale upon which it
should be made had not yet been settled. Referring
to the first prayer of the petition, he urged a num-
ber of considerations to show that the Lord-Advo-
cate could not, from the nature of his engagements,
properly attend to Scottish business, and that it
was absolutely necessary to appoint a Secretary of
State. On the second point, he contended that Scotland
had a right to a considerable increase in the number of
its representatives, whether tested by population or
taxation. According to population, she ought to have
72 members ; according to taxation, 79 ; and according
to the two combined, 75 members. Lastl I, he con-
tended that considerations of justice ought to dictate
the duty of keeping up the ancient palace of Holyrood,
which at present was not in a condition fit to receive
the descendant of the Scottish monarchs. In conclu-
sion, he entreated their lordships to respect the national
feelings of Scotland on these subjects.
The Earl of ABERDEEN, in reply, said a great deal
had been heard in the course of last year on the subject
of Scottish grievances, but it appeared now that they
were reduced to the modest number of three. None of
these three were, in his Opinion, entitled to the character
of national grievances ; and he was further of opinion
that the English people believed that the Scottish people
had the full advantage of the constitution. Great im-
provement had taken place in the feelings with which the
people of England fdrmerly regarded Scotchmen. They
now regarded them with with more kindness, affection,
and good will than they, were accustomed to do some
years ago. He was in his own person an instance of
this change of opinion. • His Scotch predecessor, in the
office he had the honour to hold, committed no other
crime, in the popular view, than that of being a Scotch-
man ; but he, though he had met with every species of
abuse and outrage from the organs of the noble earl
opposite (the Earl of Derby), had not yet been accused
of being a Scotchinan. Adverting to the three prayers
contained in the petition, he admitted with respect to
the first that the duties of the Lord Advocate were in
some degree anomalous, but he contended that there
was not the slightest necessity for the appointment of a
Secretary of State, and that no practical advantage
would result from it. As to the second, the House
of Commons was already sufficiently numerous, and
Scotland could receive no accession of members,
except they were taken from English constituencies,
which he hardly thought could be , seriously pro-
posed. Besides, the relative position of England
and Scotland in this respect was pretty much the same
as it stood at the time of the Union. With regard to
the third—the restoration of Holyrood—this could
scarcely be an object to be brought under Parliamentary
consideration as a national grievance. The palace was
not adapted for the Sovereign's residence, though the
Queen occasionally passed a day or two there. He
should, however, be glad to see the chapel restored.
Altogether, he repeated, that the subjects brought under
their lordships' notice could not be considered in the light
of national grievances ; and, having this conviction, he
could not assent to the motion.
The Duke of MONTROSE vindicated the petition,
particularly on the ground of the anomalous duties of the
Lord-Advocate. '
The Duke of ARGYLL contended that every change
made since the Act of Union had been attended with
benefit to Scotland, and that the grievances comi lained
of were imaginary. He observed that by the terms pro-
posed in the Address, which asked for a number of mem-
bers for Scotland in proportion to its great increase in
social, commercial, and national prosperity, Scotland
would have 150 members. It was impossible that such
a number could be obtained without an amount of dis-
franchisement of English boroughs, such as no person
would venture seriously to propose.
Lord PANMURE expressed his satisfaction that the
subject of heraldic grievances had not been put forward.
But there were some points which certainly deserved
the attention of Government. One was the endowment
of chairs in the universities ; and another had reference
to the diplomas of medical men, which ought to have
the same effect in the two countries. On the whole,
Scotsmen had nothing to complain of, considering the
benefits they were deriving from the union with England.
Lord CAMPBELL said Scotland had no grievances
which required a national agitation ; and that in every
point in which the Act of Union bad been departed
from, the change had been attended with benefit to Scot-
land. At the same time, the 'duties of the Lord Advo-
cate were somewhat anomalous ; but there was no neces-
sity for a Secretary of State.
The Earl of EGLINTON then replied, and the mo-
tion was withdrawn.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
THE CASE OF MR. STONOR.
Mr. MOORE moved that a select committee be ap-
pointed to take into consideration the case of the ap-
pointment of Henry Stoner to the office of a judge in
the colony of Victoria, the said Henry Stonor having
been reported by a committee of this house to have
been guilty of bribery at the election for the borough
of Sligo in 1853. (Hear, hear.) The honourable
member read extracts from the evidence before
the select committee on the Sligo election, imputing if
not bribery to Mr. Stonor, at least an indiscretion the
most extraordinary. He said it bad been proved by Mr.
Stonor's own evidence that he offered a large sum of
money (1,5001.) to induce the withdrawal of a petition
against the return for Sligo, and that afterwards he did
actually give that sum for the purpose specified. He
was sure that he would be confirmed by the house, in the
opinion that to send such a man clothed with the British
ermine to preside on the bench in the colonies
was an outrage on public opinion and the good
feeling of the country. He (Mr. Moore) had
asked two questions of the Government, first, whether
they were aware that Mr. -Stonor had been reported
against for bribery by a committee of this house ? and,
secondly, whether they were prepared to rescind the
appointment. But their answer was in effect this—
that before such appointments, "ignbr,ance was bliss,"
and, when such appointments were once made, it was
`•folly to be wise., ' (Laughter.) It was utterly im-
mpossible that the Government could have (as was al-
leged) appointed Mr. Stonor as a judge on his own
written application—(hear, hear, hear)--his sus-
picionsmight be unjust, but the statement of the
Government on this point was impossible ; and he main-
tained that the appointment was such as would disgrace
the appointment of a counting-house clerk or a
parish beadle. On those grounds he now moved for
the appointment of the select committee of which he
had given notice. (Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, after
a severe rebuke to Mr. Moore for the inflammatory mat-
ter, inconsistent argument, and affected sympathy of
his speech, said that the party really before the house
was the Colonial Secretary, who was most anxious that
the committee should be appointed. He admitted that,
if Mr. Moore could make out his case, he would convict
a great public offender ; but if not, such a charge would
recoil upon himself. As yet, he had not' adduced a
shadow of proof. Condemning the extraordinary license
Mr. Moore had taken, and describing his conduct as
unbecoming and improper, Mr. Gladstone, refusing to
notice Mr. Moore's extraneous details, begged, on the
part of the Duke of Newcastle, to meet the unsupported
allegations of Mr. Moore with the unqualified denial of
an English gentleman, .whose word had never been ques-
tioned. The appointment of Mr. Stonor had been made
by the duke in entire ignorance of the connection of the
former with Sligo, nor had it been made at the desire of
Mr. Sadleir. He therefore asked for the committee,
and, that it might be of a judicial and not a political
character, he begged that it might be nominated by the
general committee of elections.
Mr. DRUMMOND hoped that the house would re-
ject the motion and the request of Government. This
was an attempt to bring into the body of the house the
scenes of corruption displayed upstairs, and to engage
the power of the house against a helpless individual.
Remarking that the Irish were always abusing the Go-
vernment because Irishmen were not appointed to situa-
tions, and the moment one was appointed they began to
vilify him, he characterised the conduct of the Colonial-
office as mean and shabby. Having made the appoint.
ment, they should have stood by it.
Mr. BOWYER condemned the malignant tone of
Mr. Moore, who, he said, had damaged himself more
than Mr. Stonor.
Mr. HINDLEY examined evidence with a view to
Mr. Stonor's vindication, and thought that the sooner
the house got rid of the subject the better.
Mr. H. HERBERT thought the appointment of Mr.
Stonor objectionable ; but as th it had been rescinded,
he did not see, after such an admission, what more the
house had to do with it. The only other question was,
whether the Duke of Newcastle had spoken the truth,
of which the duke's unblemished character permitted no
doubt, and he thought the proposed inquiry very un-
seemly.
Mr. JOHN FITZGERALD was in favour of the in-
quiry from motives of sympathy for Mr. Stonor, to
whom, he thought, some opportunity would be afforded
of regaining his position. He regretted the course Go-
vernment had taken in rescinding the appointment, and
while supporting the motion, he described Mr. Moore's
speech as damaging to himself and degrading to the
house. At some length, and in terms of severe reprt-
!nand to Mr. Moore, he addressed himself to the refu-
tation of the- oroaker's -claargEs. Be Dloyed,

Mr. ISAAC BUTT moved a resolution to the effect
that the Colonial Lands Emigration Commissioners
should have a depot at one of the Irish ports for emigra-
tion to Australia.
Mr. F. PEEL assented, and after some discussion
the resolution was agreed to.
THE REGULATION OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC.
Mr. CARDWELL moved for leave to bring in a
bill for better regulations of the traffic upon railways
and canals. In illustration of the magnitude of the
railway interest, he adduced statistics, and men-
tioned that there had been 232 railway companies,
that the number of miles of rail authorized to be
opened was 12,700, of which 7,686 had been opened,
that 356 millions of capital was represented by the
railways, and that 264 millions had actually been
raised. There was no need to dwell upon the social
advantages which had been giined by railway system,
and he admitted the ability.witb which it had been ad-.
ministered, and disclaimed any idea of a bill of indict-
ment against the railway companies. But so many se-
parate managements required the attention of the house.
He then stated the results of the investigation of the
committees on the subject, and the difficulty of dealing
with it, and he gave instances of the obstacles thrown ni
the way of travelling and of commerce by the present
incongruous arrangements. A somewhat similar system
operated in regard to canals. The opinion of the com-
mittee was, that Parliament should break down the
barriers between one railway kingdom and another, and
thus provide for continuous travelling and transit. He
then explained that the bill he proposed to introduce, in
the first place, contained a distinct statutory enactment
as to the duty of railway companies. Next, it gave to
railway companies powers which they did not already
possess for entering into combinations and agreements
with each other to bring the system of railways into har-
mony. It provided for arbitrations between companies,
under the direction of the Board of Trade. Where that
which was laid down iu the bill was not carried into
effect, an appeal was given to the superior courts, and
thus the matter was brought under the jurisdiction of
the regular tribunals of the land. This, he thought,
was not an unreasonable thing to ask of these great in-
terests. His object was, while protecting the public, not
to forget the interest of those who had embarked their
capital in such undertakings. There was no idea of
altering, by enactment, the charges on railways as re-
gards the public, but an arbitration was to have liberty
to consider special circumstances, where one railway was
required by another to carry on the traffic ofhfie latter.
He then entered into an argument to show that the in-
terests of the shareholders would be promoted, and not
injured, by the proposed system of harmony. The grand
object of the bill was to do away with alliances offensive
and defensive, and to make the railways the Queen's
highway.
Mr. JAMES MACGREGOR did not rise to oppose the
bill of the right hon. gentleman. On the contrary, he
should feel great pleasure in assisting him to the best of
his ability. He wished to remind the right hon. gen-
tleman, however, that in his (Mr. Macgregor's) evidence
before the committee he had said that railway pro-
perty had been so disturbed, that the railway interest
would regard with favour any plan which would place
that property on a stable and satisfactory basis. One
great source of evil was the expense to which railways
were put before committees. With regard to the value
of railway property at the present moment, taking the
capital embarked in the 40 principal railways, the sum
expended amounted to one hundred and twelve millions,
and the value at the present day was less than seventy-
five millions, while across the Channel the value had
been raised 50 per cent. He trusted that for the future

the house would avoid hap-hazard legislation with regard
to railways and would place that description of property
on a sound and stable footing.
Mr. WILKINSON supported the bill, and stated
his belief that the greatest misfortune under which rail-
ways had had to labour, was, that they were taught to
believe they had alnonopoly.
Mr. LOCKE said that the declaration of the right
hon. gentleman with regard to his intention to deal with
existing tolls, had diminished much of the apprehension
he had previously entertained with regard to legislatinc,
on this subject. There were other questions besides the
interchange of traffic to be dealt with, but the great de-
sideratum to be kept in view was uniformity of gauge.
It was almost a satire upon legislation to be discussing
such a question in the year 1854, atter all the discussion
and litigation which had taken place on the subject ' • and
he thought the right hon. gentleman would have done
himself more credit if he bad attempted to settle that
question first of all. It was a disgrace to us that this
should be the only country which had not adopted uni-
formity of gauge. There ought also to be a definition of
districts, which railways should not be allowed to over-
step.

Mr. MA.LINS said the statement had been made to
the general satisfaction of the house, and he congratu-
lated the right hon. gentleman for adopting the sugges-
tion from that side of the- house to bring in a general
measure, and not to attempt to do that by particular
clauses, which could only be accomplished in the way
proposed by the right hon. gentleman. With regard to
the general question, he would say that be had been
professionally engaged with the Solicitor-General in
fighting the battle of the gauges, and his impression was,
that by these contests railway companies were destroy-
ing each other, and that a great benefit would be con-
ferred on the public and the railway interest by putting
an end to these unseemly contests. It must hare very
much surprised the house to hear that the 112 millions
spent on 40 of the leading lines were not worth more
in the market than 75 millions. The fault was not in
the paucity of the traffic, for the traffic was abundant
beyond expectation, but in the defect of the system.
And he feared Government was answerable for much of
the mischief that existed. He could point to the con-
dect of the London and North-Western Railway with
the Shrewsbury lines, where that company runs trains
at losing fares in order to impede the traffic of the other
company. These things ought to be put an end to, and
Government ought to take effectual steps to protect
railway companies from themselves, and the mode of
carrying on competition with each other. '
Mr. HUDSON said, in reference to the committee of
1844, had the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, who was chairman, been able to give the
railways security against competition, they woul have
been able to enter into a compact with him. But as
the right hon. gentleman could not give railways secu-
rity against competition
.satisfactory arrangements could
not be entered into at the time. With regard to the
spread of the railway system, he would just ask that, at
a time when there was a premium of 30,000,000 on the
subscribed capital who could say that particular districts
would not have a railway? This led to competing lines
and to unprofitable branches which had sapped the profits
of the trunk lines. It was impossible for Parliament to
say, then, that a particular district should not have
railways ; and as capitalists were ready to come for-
ward, the lines were freely, and in some cases unwisely.
granted. With respect to. foreign railways, they had
been constructed mainly with English capital, and they
also had the advantage of government guarantee with-
out the disadvantage of unlimited competition, which
might be considered the basis of the English system.
With reference to the gauge, no one who had travelled
upon an Irish railway, which was constructed on the in-
termediate guage, could doubt but that guage was the
best guage to adopt ; but it was too late now to apply
the intermediate guage to the English railway system,
for the expense would be too enormous, and the diffi-
culties to overcome too serious for the present depressed
period of the railway interest. Railway undertakings
were in their nature of a speculative character, and it
was impossible in many cases to guard shareholders
against loss. But the enormous parliamentary expenses
was one great grievance of the system, and till they were
moderated no effectual good could be attained. He be-
lieved that few railway bills bad passed without having
produced benefit to the public.
Mr. B. DENISON believed that the right hon. gentle-
man's bill, if put into shape, would very much benefit
railway property, and induce the public to have greater
confidence in railways as an investment for money. He
believed, also, that the provisions of the bill would do
much good to the railway interest. No doubt it was
intended in granting competing railways that the public
should have a clear and an unobstructed run from end
to end, no matter how many companies owned the lines;
and he was of opinion, if the bill was framed in a fair
spirit, that the right hon. gentleman might rely on the
co-operation of the railway companies. •
Mr. WADDINGTON wished to know if a rival rail-
way proposed to reduce tolls the other company must
also reduce ? If so the bill would be an abortion.
Mr. CARDWELL did not think the bill would be an
abortion, because care would be taken that the public
were not charged one toll by one company and another
toll by another railway company.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
The Conventual Establishments Bill was postporisd I
till Thursday, the 27th inst.
Th hoarse sajoursid st half-Ast ficlinit.