The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-23 00:00:00

it were not repealed ?—(Hear.) Then came the paper
duty, upon which he had heard it said that the regula-
tions of the Excise were a far greater burden upon the
manufacturers of paper than the mere amount of money
raised by duty.—(Hear.) The recent change in the
Postage charges had caused the manufacture ef envelopes
to become a very extensive and important branch of in-
dustry. Now, would it be believed, that by the regula-
tions of the Excise a paper manufacturer might cot out
the envelopes, but he could not have them folded upon
the premises ? These impediments to business were
much more ex'remely felt in modern days than when
these taxes were first levied, because the velocity of
business was now so much greeter than among our fore-
fathers. These Excise duties were as inconsistent with
the sprit of the age as if they were to set up toll bars
upon rail-roads.—(Hear.) The Chancellor of the Ex
chequer must make up his mind to expect an increasing
pressure irom the removal of those obnoxious and ab-
surd taxes. But how could he repeal them save by re-
duction of our largo expenditure, or else by an increase
of direct taxation ? One of these things would cer-
tainly have to be resorted to. At the beginning or the
present session he had named a number of articles the
duty upon which he contended ought to be
abolished, and all these articles had been brought before
the House tonight. The duty upon tea was one of
these. The Liverpool gentlemen hed tried to effect the
reduction of the duty on tea, but finding that they could
not succeed they changed the agitation to an agitation
for financial reform. But they were still as desirous as
ever for the repeal of the tea duty. Then there was the
duty upon timber, which clearly ought to be abolished
now that they had repealed the navigation-laws.—
(Hear, hear.) There would be a pressure for the repeal
of this tax, and how could the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman expect to meet it, except by one of the two
methods he had pointed out ?—(Hear, hear.) He did
not think the country would be satisfied with the budget
of the Right Honourable Gentleman ; he had, it was
true, made both ends meet, and he had calculated upon
surplus of some 150,0001., but he feared that with so
small a margin there would be, as was the case last year,
an excess in extraordinary expenditure in the army
and navy, which would convert the surplus into a defi-
ciency. With an expenditure of about 52,000,0001. a-
sear, it was not desirable to draw the line so closely as
to leave a margin of only 150,0001, because the conse-
quence almost always was that they had a deficiency in-
stead of a surplus.—(Lear, hear.) The Right Hon.
*Gentleman was still spending too much money, and if
he compared his present budget with that of the
-Duke of Wellington's Government in 1830, he found
that the present Government proposed to spend more
next year by 5,500,000/., than the Duke of Wellington
during the last year of boroughmongering. They all
recollected that the Duke of Wellington's Administra-
tion was upset by the Whigs upon the motion of Sir H.
Parnell, on account of their extravagance. Well, they
had the Reform Bill, and they were now spending
b,500,000/. more than before ref orm. —( Hear.) He
belieeed that the Reform Bill had done much good, but
it was quite certain that it had not insured them as much
economy and retrenchment as they had a right to ex-
pect.—(Hear.) He predicted there would be more pres-
sure than ever upon the Right Hon. Gentleman for a
reduction of expenditure, and he did not despair of see-
ing county Members next session all voting with the
'lon. Member for Montrose and himself for greater
economy and retrenchment. The Right Hon. Gentleman
must be prepared to meet this feeling next year to a
greater extent, or he would not satisfy the expectations
,of the country, or at all events of the constituency which
ne had the honour to represent.---(Cheers.)
Mr. HEYWORTH believed that a change in the
mode of levying the taxation would do more good than
any measure to which the House could give its assent.
lie did not see why the lauded interest should regard
manufactures with jealousy. Let them remember the
vast increase which had taken place in the value of
landed property in Lancashire. If all England possessed
the same advantages the value of landed property would
be increased, as in Lancashire, by some thousands p
cent. He coincided in the opinion that the system of
Excise duties was injurious to the country, and must be
Changed.
Mr. SANDARS could corroborate the statement of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the effect of the
blockade in the north of Europe had been unfavourably
?felt in the manufacturing interests of the north. He
doubted whether the Government were not to blame for
allowing the present state of things to continue, and he
hall given notice of a motion in which he should be able
in prove that this blockade was not an effective one, and
was not conducted according to the law of nations,
because a preference was given by the Danes to the ships
or other nations over those of this country. He had
received such information from nearly all the Baltic
Ports that he felt warranted in contending that this
blockade ought not to be observed by our vessels, and that
;russiat3 ought to insist upon our ships entering there granted
ports of
, and demand the same facilities as we
Chancellor
the Dutch, Americans, and Russians. He told the
of the Exchequer last year that he would
,
LOOO,OOOl. of duties upon corn, at which the Right
"aon. Gentleman seemed rather incredulous, and said he
Wished he might have it. Now, why should the Right
goo, Gentleman give up that source of reven
caue,and
instead of receiving a shilling duty, which he lculate
i
Would bring in a revenue of 250,0001., why should he not
receive a duty of 4s. or ss. a quarter, upon which he
,alight receive a revenue of 1,000,0001. or 1,200,0001. not
levied for the sake of protection, but for revenue? From
his own experience of the corn trade he could say that
not one penny per year of a 4s. or se. duty would come
out of the pockets of the consumers of this country.
Mr. COBDEN doubted whether the Hon. Member
flied been sent to that House from Wakefield to advocate
a toe upon food, and thought he was not authorised to
make such a proposition. He was perfectly astonished
to hear the lion. Gentleman say that if they levied a
tax of ss. per quarter upon foreign corn the foreigner
Would pay it. Now, the lion. Gentleman dealt in corn;
and let him (Mr. Cobden) suppose that the Hon. Mem-
ber had 1,000 quarters of wheat afloat in a vossel from
balife:c. Would he sell that corn at the same price
before it was landed as after it had gone ashore and paid
the duty of 55.?—(Hear, hear.) How could the Hon.
member assert that the duty laid upon the importation
of foreign articles was paid by the foreigner, and not by
consumers in this country?
Mr. SANDARS came into that House as independent
Its the Hon. Member for the West Riding—(Hear)—and
considered himself perfectly justified in the suggestion
he had made. He cared not for any censure that he
119ight receive from the lion. Member (Mr. Cobden) or
party. He would give free trade a fair trial, but he
had himself seen that when the duty had fallen in this
Country the price of corn had fallen abroad. Last year,
When the duty was reduced from 9s. to Is., a correspond-
ing
reduction took place in the price of corn abroad.
hen the duty was taken off here a reduction took place
'"1 the price of corn at home, and the price abroad a
dot must
fall to meet that reduced rate.—(A laugh.) If y
of Bs, in this country were taken off the price would fall
here, and the price abroad must also fall in order to
entrirete with the price in this country. In declaring
the opinions he had expressed to-night he had not re-
pudiated a single statement that he had made to his
constituents.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARRIS was understood to speak from personal
observation of the improved condition of the population
of the town which he represented (Leicester). He was
happy to be able to state that since the year 1833 trade
had not been in a better condition than it was duringthe
Present season, and he was further rejoiced to add, that
the borough which he had the honour to represent con-
tained a contented and thriving population.
Mr. pLUNIPTRE was very glad to learn that the con-
stituents of the Hon. Memb r who last addressed the
'louse were happy, contended, and prosperous. It was
Well for him then to be able to make such a statement;
but it was very much to be apprehended that some time
hence he could offer to the House no such pleasing pic-
ture of the condition of the people whom he represented
As regarded agriculture, he feared that matters wore
very had, and that they were likely to become much
worse. Not very long since a large number of able-
bodied men came to him at his residence in the country,
stating that they were without employment and without
bread for their families; and there could be no doubt
that they and the country generally attributed such an
intense degree of distress to the operation of free-trade
principles, to which the Hon. Member for the West Riding
noputed such marvellous good effects. If, as the Hon.
Member boasted, he gave cheap bread to many per-
sons, it should be remembered that he put many persons
out of bread, and amongst that number were those who
came to his (Mr. Plumptre's) house lately, stating their
unhappy case. They were from 60 to 70 in number,
and being fathers of families might be said to represent
a large population, all of whom were in the utmost dis-
tress; and in the midst of that state of things the Hon.
Member for the West Riding talked as if he alone knew
What was right and fitting for the Government and the
Legislature to do—always using towards them the lan-
guage of dictation—" You must do this and you shall
do the other;" and he went on as if he intended to "lead
them all by the nose." Now he should take the liberty
of telling the Hon. Gentleman that he would not be led
by the nose, nor did he believe that the country would
submit to any such language; such a style of address
was wholly unbecoming a free and independent assembly.
The opinions of the Hon. Member were not the opinions
of the House; and though that gentleman might think
that "wisdom would die with him," yet that was not
the opinion either of the House or the country.—(Hear.)
Mr, HUME rose to observe that his Hon. Friend the
Member for the West Riding had never shown any dis-
position to dictate to the House or to any individual
Member. The Member for the West Riding did not ob-
ject to the Member for Wakefield expressing any opinion
which he might happen to entertain, but merely ex-
pressed a difference of opinion from him, at the same
time expressing some sure rise that a gentleman who
represented a populous borough should utter a word in
favour of a ss. duty on corn.
The resolution was then agreed to, the House re-
sumed, and the report was ordered to be received on
Monday.
TRANSPORTATOIN FOR TREASON (IRELAND)
BILL.
On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. MOORE said that as this Bill had not been fairly
argued, he was anxious to say a few words upon it.
Was it fair or just, that after they had consented to give
compensation to the rebels in Canada, they should now
proceed to inflict punishment upon the Irish State pri-
soners which the law did not empower them to inflict.
The House was bound to assume that the power did not
exist, for it was in that view of the case that they were
called on to pass the Bill. He called on the House to
east aside the illogical arguments with which Hon.
and Learned Members had endeavoured to prop up
the question, and to consider whether they should
subject Mr. Smith O'Brien and his associates to the
pecalties of au ex post facto law. Under all the cir-
cums'ance of the case it was impossible that the extreme
sentence of the law could now be carried into effect.—
(Hear, hear.) The sense of the country was against it
—(Hear, hear)—the sense of both Houses of Par-
* 44111ent Against bettr)--tho 110116 Q Qf the

whole civilized world was against it—(Hear, hear)—and
it was impos6ible that the extreme sentence of the law
could now be carried out. That being the case, the
Crown could only impose the punishment of fire and im-
prisonment. The words of the preamble were altogether
in error when it was stated that doubts had arisen as to
the power of the Crown to inflict the punishment of
transportation in the present case. It was also an error
to say that the object of the Bill was to lessen the seve-
rity of the punishment. In the first place no doubt could
exist on the subject, for it was clear that the Crown had
no power to commute the sentence of death to transporta-
tion, without the consent of the prisoners. There was,
therefore, no doubt at all, as the preamble stated, and the
sentence being commuted the Crown had the power to
inflict the punishment of imprisonment for life. So far,
therefore, from the Bill lessening the punishment, as had
been alleged, it was, in fact, increasing it. He could not
conceive how the House could feel itself justified in passing
an ex post facto Bill of so severe a character, after the way
in which they had succumbed to the men who had been
engaged in the Canadian rebellion. If the Government,
however, persevered in an endeavour to inflict so severe
a punishment on Mr. Smith O'Brien and the other Irish
State prisoners, after having dealt so leniently with the
rebels of Canada, they would prove to the Canadians
that they were secure, not under the Union Jack, but
under the shelter of the Amerit as stars and stripes; and
that while the Government submitted to the most auda-
cious acts on the other side of the Atlantic, and even
gave compensation for losses that had been sustained,
they were at the same time leaning with as heavy a
hand as it was possible for them to do upon the State
prisoners in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
The House then resolved itself into Committee on the

Bill.
Mr. BERNAL put the question on the first clause,
the consideration of the preamble having been post-
poned.
Mr. ANSTEY said he had intended to have offered
every obstruction to the passing of the Bill, but on con-
dition that he received proper support from the majority
of the Irish members. He found, however, that
he could not reckon on that support from
what had already taken place ; and he must
say that not only on that, but on former occasions,
Irish members had shown the moat culpable indif-
ference to the passing of measures affecting the inte-
rests of Ireland in the most serious point of view.
they had in fact exhibited, to use a common phrase, a
want of pluck—(Lqughter)—and under the circumstances
he had stated, he did not think he should bewarranted its
sacrificing the position he held in that House, by perse-
vering in that opposition which he had intended to offer
to the passing of that Bill.—(Hear, hear.) He should,
therefore, content himself with proposing such amend-
ments in Committee as he thought should be introduced.
It was his intention at present to move—as the conside-
ration of the preamble had been postponed—it was his
intention now to move that after the word " it" in the
third line of the first clause the omission of the words
" declared and." He altogether objected to the Bill
being put forward as a mere declaratory Bill. The ob•
ject of that Bill was to enable the Government to inflict
a punishment which the parties declared they would
consider to be worse than the punishment of death—
(Hear, hear)—and they were now endeavouring to in-
flict that punishment on men who had been horn and
bred, and who were convicted of treason in Ireland.

--, --
Would they have ventured upon the introduction of that
Bill had those parties been Englishmen ? Ministers,
however, were hoping to get out of the dilemma, by say-
ing that the present Bill was merely a declaratory Act,
and under that pretext they trusted they would induce
the House to give their assent to the Bill. Now it was
certain that a declaratory Act had sometimes been re-
sorted to when doubts had arisen as to the state of the
law, and when the judges of the higher tribunals dif-
fered in opinion. In such cases Parliament was justified
in settling what the law was by means of a declaratory
enactment; but in the present case no such difficulty had
arisen. Tnere was no doubt about what the law was.—
(Hear) In fact, by the present Bill the House was not
asked to remove doubts; but it was asked to prevent the
tribunals in Ireland acting on the law as it stood—
(Hear)—and iu the event of the prisoners being brought
before the judges of the Queen's Bench in Ireland, upon
a writ of habeas corpus, public rumour said that the
judges would do their duty. The doctrine of expediency
might warrant the transportation of Mr. O'Brien, but it
that gentleman had held a course different to that which
he independently and determinedly pursued when in the
House of Commons, there would be less of bitterness ex-
hibited towards him now by Ministers, and those who
rejoiced in styling themselves sincere ministerialists. It
was absurd to say that a commutation of the sentence of
death to transportation was au extension of mercy, when
it was well known that the horrors suffered by those de-
ported to penal colonies led directly either to death or
lunacy. He called upon the Committee to strike out
the portion of the preamble which rendered the Act
declaratory, and to deprive it of an ex post facto effect.
In conclusion the Honourable and Learned Gentleman
moved, that in the first clause the words "declared and"
be omitted.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said the question sub-
mitted by the Honourable and Learned Gentleman who
proposed the amendment was simply whether by
omitting the words " declared and" they should not
convert the Act from being declaratory into a mere
enactment. He would not then say one word on the
general principle of the Bill, as that subject had been
already discussed. He denied that the Bill had been
pressed with indecent haste upon the attention of the
House, and he showed that it was brought forward in
compliance with the special re quest of Mr. O'Brien him-
self. He believed there was no lawyer who entertained
any d.aibt as to the poser of the Crown to commute
sentence of death into transportation; but a doubt hav-
ing arisen, the present Bill was brought forward. He
believed that it was a mistake to say that the Irish judges
had any doubt on this subject, and he bad no doubt
whatever himself, and was fortified in that opinion by the
first legal gentlemen in Westminster-hall; and he would
add that the first legal opinion in the country had sup-
ported this Bill in another place. In reply to the ques-
tion respecting Coffey and others, he did not think that
he was bound to give any answer as to their being guilty
of treason. The object for introducing this Bill was to
avoid those doubts which were entertained in another
place. Ho thought that there could be no objection to
those words " declared and," as it was for the purpose of
avoiding raising any discussion in Ireland.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said that he thought that
this Bill had a very strange character in it, and he was
led to that opinion principally from the speech of the
Attorney-General. He looked upon this Bill rather as
of a prospective than of a retrospective character. He did
not by any means agree with the late proceeding of Mr.
S. O'Brien, but he opposed the Bill because he thought
it to be unconstitutional. He considered that if the Bill
should be passed that the indignation of the people
of Ireland would ba excited to a degree that the Go-
vernment would have to regret.
Mr. MUNTZ said that he regretted that be had not
been present on the second reading, for he should have
opposed it. and would therefore support the amendment.
Mr. MOORE wished to knew from the Attorney-
General where those doubts existed?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—In Ireland.
Mr. MOORE wished to know with whom those doubts
arose.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he was not
prepared to inform him, as the communication was
private.
Mr. FRENCH said that be was in favour of the
amendment, because the Bill was altogether unconsti-
tutional, as being an ex post facto Bill.
Sir G. GREY said that the commutation of the sen-
tence was an act of mercy on the part of the Lord-
Lieutenant, and he totally disagreed with the Hon Gen-
tleman (Mr. Anstey) when he stated that this was a
penal en ictment against Ireland.
Mr. ANSTEY explained.
Mr. E. B. ROCHE also opposed the Bill, as being un•
constitutional, and hoped that every possible opposition
would be given to it.
Colonel DUNNE said that be had no sympathy for
the conduct of those unfortunate gentlemen, because he
was there ready to meet them in the field, and should he
have capeured them, he would have tried them by court-
martial and shot them; but, as this Bill was an infrac-
tion on the constitution, he should oppose it.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
Ayes
Noes
Majority .--124
Mr. REYNOLDS next moved that, after the word
" offenders," in the ninth line of the first page, there be
inserted the words " who may be hereafter convicted.
and." This was the fourth Bill of pains and penalties
which they had passed within twelve months in reference
to Ireland; and he asked the House, then, could they
look back upon their legislation as regarded Ireland with
anything like satisfaction? Far from excusing the ac-
tions of those men, be took especial pains to put down
their system, and incurred great censure from their
partisans; but what ho contended now was that Go-
vernment had done enough, and that they should now
stop short in their career of vengeance. The object
of his amendment was to free the Bill of its
restrictive character. He was not a lawyer, and he
thanked God he was not, for it was, in his opinion, a
sort of science for covering over with doubt what was
plain and palpable.—(Hear, hear.) The Lard protect
him from the law.—(Laughter.) In this whole affair
they were only magnifying a mountain into a mole-hill.
—(Much laughter.) He was glad that lie had put the
cart before the horse, and given them a laugh, but were
they not magnifying a molehill into a mountain when
they magnified this row with the police in a cabbage-
garden in Ireland into a rebellion.—(Hear, hear.)
Major BLACKALL supported the measure. If be
considered it as an ex post facto law he would have op-
posed it, but he considered it merely a declaratory Bill to
remove certain doubts which had arisen in Ireland. Ho
would have thought it wrong to have argued this ques-
tion again in the courts of in Ireland, for such a
course would have again stirred up those bad feelings
which had been so prevalent in Ireland during the pre-
vious discussions of the subject.
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said the Government had
confessed that the measure was for enacting an ex post
facto law, and he could not see how the Hon. and Gal-
taut Gentleman could vote in favour of it.
Mr. ANSTEY did not know whether the Honourable
Member tor Salford would move the adjournment of the
1-I"'e, as the present was a Ministerial measure, but if
not. he should certainly do so.
Sir G. GREY hoped the lion. Gentleman would not
obstruct public business. The present measure had been
already fully discussed, and the Lion. Gentleman ought
to know that the Irish poor-law was fixed for next week.
After a few vvords in explanation from Mr. ANSTEY
and Colonel DUNNE, the Committee divided, when the
numbers were—
For the amendment

Against it
Majority —ll6
Mr. ANSTEY next mo7ed the following amend
ment:—
At line io of page 1, to omit the ward., " for

. 140