The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-10 00:00:00

objection to do so. On investigation several minor inac- I
curacies, not of a large amount, had been detected, which
would be corrected in the subsequent returns he should
be prepared to lay before the House.
THE NAVIGATION-LAWS.
In reply to Mr. GOULBURN,
Lord J. RUSSELL intimated that he proposed to
take the debate on the navigation-laws to-night, and if
concluded, he proposed to take the Committee of Supply
on Monday. If not, he should propose that the debate
be proceeded with on Monday.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION.
Mr. HORSMAN gave notice that on a future day he
intended to ask the Noble Lord what measures bein-
tended to introduce on this subject.
RATE IN AID BILL.
An HON. MEMBER inquired on what day the Noble
Lord proposed to take the second reading of the Rate
in Aid Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL replied on Monday week. If he
could not bring it on on that day, he would name when
he would do so.
NAVIGATION LAWS.

Mr. HERRIES presented a petition from Liverpool,
signed by 24,700 persona, entreating the House not to
♦ote for the repeal of the navigation-laws.—(Protec-
tionist cheers.)
The LORD MAYOR said ho esteemed it a high
honour to attend in that House to present a petition from
the merchants, manufacturers, bankers, artizans, seamen,
and ethers, of the city of London, against the repeal of
the navigation-laws. The signatures to that petition
amounted to 20,757. —(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He had carefully looked at the petition, and from
his own knowledge he could state that many of the
signatures to that petition were composed of the most
influential and respectable firma in the city of London ;
and he would venture to say there was no petition more
entitled to the respectful consideration of the House.
Mr. A. HASTIE presented a petition signed by 2,890
shipowners, artizans, merchants, manufacturers, and
seamen of Glasgow against the repeal of the navigation
laws.

Mr. F. O'CONNOR rose to ask whether the Right
lion. Member (Mr. Ferries) who had presented the
petition from Liverpool, on the subject of the naviga-
tion-lava, had taken the trouble to count the signatures
to that petition.—(" Oh, oh," and laughter.)
Mr. COBI)EN presented a petition from the inha-
bitants of Dunstable, in Kent, in favour of the repeal of
the navigation-laws.
On the motion being read that the Bill for the repeal
of the navigation-laws be read a second time,
Mr. HERRIES said he rose to oppose the further
progress of this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Ile rose to
propose, as an amendment to the motion, that the Bill
be read a second time this day six months, He under-
took to oppose the motion because of the principle of the
Bill, which they were now invited to read a second time.
If it were not conceived in the spirit in which it was
conceived, he should not have opposed it at that stage in
its progress; but he was not content, so far as his voice
would prevent it, to allow this Bill, framed on such a set of
principles, to pass this stage in its progress. It was a
sweeping abrogation ef the navigation• laws, with some
such trifling, some such insignificant reservations—
(Hear, hear)—as tended not to amend or remove the
objections to the abrogation, but to render them
in some respects absurd, and in others onerous,
without any compensation to the body of the
shipowners.—(Bear.) These reservations consisted in
punishing other nations who did not conform to our policy.
He hoped also to show that what had taken place in the
meantime between the last discussion on this subject and
the present, exhibited in a remarkable degree the absur-
dity of those reservations. The second o: those reser-
vations had reference to the coasting trade, and
went to impose on the shipowner, after exposing
him to a perfect freedom of competition with the
foreigner in every brznch of our commerce, obligations to
which his rivals were not subject.—(Hear.) To a Bill
so framed it was impossible, with the opinions he enter-
tained upon that subject, that he could allow it to pass
into another stage, and it was his intention to
cffer in this stage of its progress, if the
House would bear with him while he did so, all those
objections which he believed to be applicable to this
ill-judged measure—(Hear, hear)—and so to state them
as to enable the House, as far as he could throw any
light on the subject, to come to a decision, and as
early a decision as might be, on the merits of the
Bill. The present discussion was ver ymuch in
the nature of a resumed debate. In the last
session of Pat liament the subject was very
fully entered into and very ably discussed,
with great ability on the part of some he saw around
him, and with conspicuous ability indeed on the part of
one whom he saw no longer in that House.—(Hear.)
In that interval documents had been produced, and an
expression of opinion evinced on the part of the public,
which were highly advantageous to forming a correct
judgment and to coming to a true decision upon this
great question. They had also on the table of the
House the correspondence which had taken place with
foreign powers. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. La-
bouchere) seemed perfectly satisfied with that correspon-
dence, and he hoped he would be so when the contents
had been fully discussed. They had also petitions from
all parts of the country, which were of vast importance
by reason of the great number by whom the opinions
contained in them were expressed, by reason of the
places from which the petitions came, and b 3
reason of the classes whose interests were
represented by those parties who so expressed these
opinions. If the House would attend to the num-
ber and character of the petitions presented in opposi-
tion to the measure, it would agree with him that it
would have been unfortunate indeed if the measure had
been passed which was introduced last session. From a
list of towns which he held in his hand, it appeared
that petitions had been presented from Edinburgh, Bel-
fast, Dartmouth, Sunderland, Montrose, Portsmouth,
Portsea, Weymouth, Sunderland, and Glasgow. There
was also one from the metropolis of the great commer-
&al world, London, which was represented by the First
Minister of the Crown, signed by 27,000 people. Then
came a petition from Liverpool, the second great commer-
cial city of the empire, signed, by 24,700, the prayer
of which was, the petitioners viewed with the greatest
alarm the progress of a measure which proposed to do
away with these laws, which had been so long and so
successfully in operation, and the repeal of which would
have the effect of allowing foreigners to share in those
advantages which ought exclusively to belong to this
nation. Since last session a correspondendence had been
produced, relating partly to Canada and partly to fo-
reign states, to which he thought it right to draw the at-
tention of the House before be proceeded further to des-
cant upon the principle of the measure. He did not intend
to trouble the House with any statistics, so much detail
having been entered into last session, but would endeavour
to rest his views and arguments upon the principle of this
question itself. The Right Hon. Gentleman who intro-
duced the measure rested his arguments mainly upon
three points, or put them forward at least as the
principal inducement for the House to take this subject
into its consideration, and to accede to his proposition.
His great foundation was the case of Canada, and the
state of the West Indies. There were other topics
into which he was desirous of entering, but he
would for the present abstain, and simply before
taking up what after all was the matter mainly
for consideration, namely the principle of the measure—
(Hear, hear)—he would take up those three points
to which he had previously referred. The first of these
was Canada, and had reference to the state of public
opinion on the subject of the navigation-laws in our
North American: colonies.—(Hear, hear.) They had
an impression last session that all Canada was in favour
of the repeal of these laws, and it would seem from the
representation that had been placed before the House
by the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the
Board of Trade, that the opinion there was such
as to justify the course which ho had taken.—(Hear,
hear.) But he believed that the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman was not in possession of all the papers which
he required for a fair exposition of the matter.
Yet, with all these advantages, there never was
a more slender case made out than that of Canada. In
fact, the papers were presented evidently with a view to
make an impression to serve certain purposes.—
(Hear, hear.) He was sorry to say that the plan had
the countenance of members of the Government in high
places. There was a practice of presenting documents,
but instead of documents they had only por-
tions of documents. Such parts were laid be-
fore them as suited the position which the
Government had to serve, whilst others were
omitted. He would be one of the last to believe that the
Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Board of
Trade would willingly or knowingly follow such a
custom.—(Hear, and loud cheers.) A document was
presented to the House, respecting the Members of
the Legislative Chamber :of Canada West. Now, it
appeared that this Council consisted of 89 Members, of
whom 17 were absent from the country at the time that
document was concocted, and of those seventy-two Mem-
bers fifty-three had absolutely signed a declaration
such was not the feeling in Canada. Such was the
case
also : with regard to the Legislativerouncii Mon-
treal:
of
Another document was presented from
the Chamber of Commerce of that country.
This board consisted of 103 members, of whom thirteen
were absent from the colony. The members who refused
to sign amounted to eight, while twelve protested and
fifty-seven signed the letter, declaring that they were in
favour of protection.—(Hear.) But there had been a
document presented to-day which showed more
strongly than anything elseS the feeling of the Ca-
nadas upon this question. It was the report of a
meeting held in the colony, at which there was a
larger number of persons present than had been
known at any previous assembly of the sort. The
meeting was convened by parties favourable to the re-
peal of these laws, but upon a resolution being proposed
adopting a petition to Parliament in favour of their re-
peal, an amendment was moved and carried by a large
majority, to the effect that a repeal of the naviga-
tion-laws, so far as Canada was concerned, would
prove most disastrous to its prosperity.—(Cheers.)
The Earl'" of Elgin had -conveyed an intima-
tion -to the Home Government that the erec-
tion of Montreal into a free port would re-
move 'the difficulties under which the inhabitants
were labouring-se, proposition which was seconded by
several memorials. It was sent in the s rin of 1847,
and he asked, in fairness, why!) when they
spoke loudly of the grievances
of the people,
in respect of the navigation-laws, they did not take the
step suggested by the Governor-General of the North
American prpvinees, and
give them that relief they re-
uired.—(llear.) He put it to them why they did
o
,LEwsivspiii.., as he had pointed out. There was
0 prevent the G overnment from issuing
4-1 'n council declaring Montreal free port.
a'g‘ tei ela respect West
dispatch to the lndies where
s from the Governor-General,
.
;:e4IT4 .04.gLe '; their particular attention was called
Tct. inieelest,'" go? What had they done? They had
Intrielisesek competition with respect to slavery
-`I3Y-Aatt oducing slave grown sugar to the
14,1 areaS injury of that part of our dominions.