The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-13 00:00:00

STAMP DUTIES BILL.

Mr. WALTER said he was under the necessity of call-
ing the attention of the House to an occurrence that tool:
place yesterday. He had conic down to that House at half-
past four o'clock, the usual hour of commencing public busi-
ness, with the intention of addressing a few words to the House
noon the second reading cf the Stamp Duties Bill. He found
to his utter surprise that the Bill had been read a third
time, and many Members who, even at that early hour, had
come before himself, were utterly ignorant that the Bill had
passed. The bill stood in the middle of the Government
notices, but it was picked out first ; and though, undoubtedly,
on the preceding night it was understood that the usual forma-
lities would be dispensed with, yet it did not from thence
follow that an opportunity would not have been afforded
for offering some suggestions before the Bill should pass.
He should appeal to the justice of the House, when the
ge.os'sest personal reflections bad been cast upon a Member
of that House elsewhere, if they would stop the mouth of
that Member if he attempted to reply, or at least to
explain. He did not intend yesterday, nor did he to-day, to
taie credit for the suggestions he bad offered on the right
when the former Stamp Duty Bill passed through that House;
but he conceived, that in consequence of those suggestions, he
had been personally attacked, and much obloquy had been rapt
upon him, which he hoped that H:)use v.-ould give him an op-
portunity of repelling. From the report he had seen, the per-
son who had used those expressions appeared to have intimated
that the operation of that most unjust law which had now been
excluded from the Stamp Duty Bill, might, perhaps, have
had the effect of impeaching his (Mr. Walter's) veracity, or
;giving pain to his vanity, by the discovery that he had been con-
nected with the press. He could say with respect to such im-
peachment of his veracity, if such an insinuation bad been in-
tended, that it was in itself a falsehood.—(lle: e ) No dis-
covery could be made that could have impeached his veracity,
but, on the contrary, would have shown the utter ignorance of
him who sought to impeach it. It could not have injured his
vanity, because he had never disavowed that, at one period of
his life, he did conduct a public journal, which had been
sometimes alluded to in that House ; on the contrary,
he had felt then as he would now, proud of such an applica-
tion of those talents, be they more or less, which Providence
bad blessed him with.---( A laugh.) It had been also said
that his origin was humble. He only wished the person who
had made use of that expression bad looked hack to the
founder of his own family—a humble practitioner in the law ;
neither had any one member of his race been distin-
guished by any act, until his Mejesty, unfortunately as
he (Mr. Walter) thought, had called him to his councils.
But if the secresy of their private lives were to be invaded,
and laid before the public, he trusted that his accuser would
be found to have been the more foolish fellow of the two.—
( Great laughter, and cries of hear, hear.) He moved the
question of which he had given notice, namely, that the hour
at which business was to commence should he stated in the
public notices as well as the hour at which Mr. Speaker was
to take the chair ; but as he had merely given notice of this
in order to bring forward a matter personal to himself, he
should withdraw the motion.

Colonel SIBTHORP rose, but was interrupted by
The SPEAKER, who asked the Hon. and Gallant Mem•
ber if he intended to move any thing?

Colonel SIBTHORP replied in-the negative, and imme
liately sat down.
TRADE WITH JAVA.

Mr. P. M. STE WART had to bring before the House the
übstance of a petition of great importance to the mercantile
aterests of the country, which had been presented by him
the 27th June ; and he regretted that so important a peti-
on had been presented at so late a period of the session. It
ad been signed by all the principal manufacturers and mer-
hants of Glasgow in the course of a few hours, and it related
) the conduct of the Dutch with regard to the Colony of
tva, ceded to them by the English in 1814. The petition
t forth the particular agreement that had been entered into
ith them on that cession, and which was most favourable to
e trade of England, from the liberal 'way in which she had
,ven up the colony; but the terms of that agreement
ad been violated in such a way as to have almost destroyed
le trade of England with that colony. The petitioners con-
'eded by praying that steps would be taken to put an end to a
stem which was derogatory to the character of this country,
AI most injurious to her commercial interests. It appeared
"'flat in 1811 the island of Java had been taken from the
it being then under the same Government as the Cape
ad Hope, taken in the same war, and it was afterwards
to the Dutch, they paying a million sterling for what
.ned in domestic parlance the fixtures of the island.
ciple laid down in the Treaty was, that all goods
a Dutch ships should pay a duty of 6 per cent.
'ods coming in other ships S per cent. That arrange-
been made in 1816. In the year 1818, the Dutch
ners being jealous of the trade the English were
a, raised the per centage on goods brought by Dutch
3 per cent., and on all others, including English, to
nt. Notwithstanding that the English still kept the
'a proclamation, was issued by the Governor, taking
duty on goods imported in Dutch vessels, and leav-
aty of 16 per cent, upon English and other goods ;
r this disadvantage two-thirds of the trade remained
ands of the English, which raised the jealousy of the
.o such a pitch, that in 1824 the then notorious Gover-
proclamation, raised the duties upon English goods to
cent., while the whole was taken off Dutch goods ;
s high duty was not only imposed upon those goods
were afterwards imported, but actually on those then
In the island. Then came the treaty of March, 1824,
'ion of which was complained of by every merchant
,facturer in England. That treaty was founded upon
of free trade. It provided that the duty levied on
goods should not be more than double that imposed
.etch goods, and that where there was no duty upon
goods the English should pay no more than 6
;nt. Now the Dutch goods were free, and English
.s were burdened with a duty of 25 per cent., which
re the mode of levying it was raised to from 30 to 40
c cent. The merchants now came and prayed the House
and the Government to have that treaty faithfully acted upon.
He had read word for word of that treaty, which was, of air
treaties entered into by this country, the one that ought to be
the least misunderstood. The object of that treaty was free
trade, and he was sure his Noble Friend would give it effect. He
was sorry to say that the feeling that existed before that treaty
existed now ; in fact, the mercantile interests of the country
had been duped, which he was sure they would not be much
longer by the exertions of the Noble Lord and his Right
Honourable Friend the Secretary of the Board of Trade.
Vic question now was, whether the Dutch Treaty, which had
laid down for their own interpretation that the flag was to re-
gulate the principle and not the origin of the goods, was to be
carried into effect or not. They had interpreted the Treaty
in another manner, however; when they wished to encourage
the manufactures • of Ghent, they raised the duty on all
the articles which were manufactured in this country.
He would only ask the Noble Lord to satisfy not himself, but
the great commercial and manufacturing interests of this coun-
try, by telling them that they should have not only redress
for the future with regard to this great and growing trade,
which amounted to many millions, but also that they should
have compensation for the past, for the unjust and unfair way
in which they had been treated by the Dutch Government.
He was sure that the Noble Lord would not only insist upon
satisfaction, but that practically British interests would be vin-
dicated, and that they should hear no more of such flagrant
violations of the rights of their fellow-subjects, and of the dig-
nity of the Crown. Ile would conclude by moving as an
amendment to the Order of the Day, that the petition pre-
sented on the 27th of June be taken into consideraton.
Lord PALMERSTON said that his Hon. Friend had un-
doubtedly called the attention of the House to a very great
grievance which this country had sustained from the hands of
the Dutch Government.—( Hear, bear.) It could not be de-
nied that for a course of years the Dutch Government bad

distinctly violated the stipulations of a solemn treaty.
(Loud cheers.) As his Honourable Friend had so well
explained in what those violations consisted, he (Lord P.)
w 0,41..... not intrude upon the House, or take up their time in
recapitulating that complete and clear explanation. He had
stated most justly and truly that, whereas by the Treaty all
articles chartered by British subjects in British ships should
pay a certain duty in proportion to the duty imposed upon
articles imported in Dutch ships—in those cases the Dutch
authorities had exacted from British subjects a higher amount
of duty than by the treaty they were authorised to exact.
This subject had been matter of representation from the British
Government for a great number of years past, and therefore his
Hon. Friend was entitled to come to that House to ask some
explanation on the part of the Government to satisfy him that
there was a fair prospect that the grievances of our fellow-
subjects in this respect would be redressed, and that the time
had arrived at which this House ought to interfere to obtain
redress.—(Hear, hear.) He thought he would satisfy the
Honourable Gentleman that at present no step was required
to be taken by the House, because he believed he was
at present in a condition to state to his Honourable
Friend, that of late a disposition had been manifested by the
Dutch Government to do justice in this matter. The Dutch
Government at last having been forced to admit that the
practice which had been pursued of levying duties was not
consistent with the treaty, they wished to render the practice,
at least in one respect, conformable to the treaty, and
that a proper proportion of duties should be established.
Where our Government paid 25 per cent. the Dutch would pay
12k, and where the Dutch paid no duty at all we should only
pay 6 per cent. But there was one subject of difference
existing between the two Governments. The Dutch
Government had declared that they interpreted the treaty
as establishing a criterion of the difference of duties—
the nationality of the articles imported. He contended
on the other hand, that the criterion for the difference of duty
was not the nationality of the articles imported, but the na-
tionality of the merchants, and ships by which the articles were
imported.—( Hear.) Whether the one interpretation or the
other would be most in favour of the industry and interests of
this country he would not take upon himself to determine.
He agreed with his Hon. Friend that the English Govern-
ment, in restoring the colony of Java to the Dutch, had done
an act of splendid national generosity—( Hear, hear)—
because the Dutch would have no right to complain if
the British Government, having taken the island in a war in
which Holland was opposed to us, had retained possession of it.
His Hon. Friend was, he thought, entitled to say that the
Dutch Government had not shewn that they entertained
a proper sense of the generosity of England in systematically
and for so long a period of time depriving us of those national
advantages which had been conferred by the treaty of 1824.
It was often a reproach to the Dutch that in the conduct of
of their colonial possessions, they were actuated by a narrow
view to their own interests, which was not creditable to their
national character. Wherever they had colonies. they were
the most exclusive of all monopolists. Of that principle,

. _
which was more or less the policy of every nation, they had no
right to complain ; but they certainly had when a nation de-
parted from those engagements which she had most solemnly
pledged herself to fulfil. A negotiation had been entered
into with the Dutch Government, and he by no means
despaired that they should succeed in obtaining redress ;
and that their trade would be carried on in strict accordance
with the terms of the treaty. That being the case, he was
sure his Hon. Friend and the House would feel that it would
be not only departing from the usual practice of Parlia-
ment, but must inconvenient, if the House would inter-
fere between the Government and .a pending negotiation.
If the Government succeeded in their object, it would be
better than to have the interposition of Parliament. If they
failed, it would be their duty to lay before Parliament what
had taken place, and then ask for their opinion on the flatter.
Ile was, however, encouraged to hope, frog► the manner

in which the regociations had lately been conducted, that
Holland would act with good faith, and would do full justice
to England.
Air. HUME was very glad hi 3 Hon. Friend had brought
this matter before the House, for a grosser breach of engage-
ment had never taken place, and he thought the Government
had been very negligent in not forcing its fulfilment. In 133#,
he and Sir Charles Forbes told the Government of that day how
vilely they were deceiving themselves and the country. No
treaty had ever been executed in India by Holland, and he then
stated that it would not. In 1616, Lord i;astlereagh gave away
the most valuable possession we had in India. Java was the
only island which could support herself, and yield a revenue.
They ought to have waited the arrival of Sir Stamford Raf-
fles, who was well acquainted with the whole subject. In
place of doing so, they acted with guilty participation, and
gave up one of the most valuable of our conquests.
Six months did not go by after the passing of that treaty be-
fore it was violated ; the Government, tLerefore, must be con-
sidered to blame for allowing such things to be. He believed
.

that the Government or this country hid by their diplomatic
agents conceded more than America would have done, as he
felt convinced if the treaty had been entered into with that
country they would have insisted upon its being performed. In
his opinion, the Government ought to withdraw their diplomatic
agent.—(Cheers.) He believed, that although no country
ever paid more for diplomatic agents than this, that none had
bad their commerce so little protected. He hoped that ere
Parliament met again, there would be something decisive
done upon the subject.

Mr. 'ROBINSoN thought that the lion. Member fcr
Lancaster 'would do well to follow the advice of the
Noble Lord opposite, and not persevere in his motion.
lie trusted the Government would perform that duty which
the commercial interests of the country required of them. If
the Hon. Gentleman should again bring the subject before the
HOLM, he could assure him he would have the support of all
the commercial and manufacturing interests.
Sir J. H. REID was intimately connected with the Island
that had been alluded to, and he held in his hands letters
which confirmed the statements that had been made.

111 r. P. MAXWELL expressed his complete satisfaction
at what the Noble Lord had stated to the House, and he
knew the petitioners would be satisfied with the Noble Lord's
fair and open explanation.
CIVIL BILL COURTS (IRELAND) BILL.

Mr. LYNCH appeared at the Bar, and informed tho
Speaker that the Lords had appointed a Conference with the
Commons. to take place in Committee-room No. 5, on the
subject of the Lords' Amendments to the Civil Bill Courts
(Ireland) Bill.
Several Members then left the House for the purpose of
holding the Conference.
Mr. LYNCH, and the other Managers of the Conference,
appeared at the Bar, and reported that they had left the Bill,
and reasons for disagreement with the Lords.
STAMP DUTIES BILL.

A message from the Lords reported that their Lordships
had agreed to the Newspaper Stamp Duty Bill without any
amendment.—( Cheers and laughter.)
On the first Order of the Day being read,
Colonel SIBT HO R P rose to move that Motions and
Orders of the Day he taken on alternate days, in the order
they stood on the paper. He was one of the most regular at-
tendants in the House, and he had a motion on the books since
last session which he bad not been able to bring on—besides,
it was matter of very great inconvenience that the notices
were taken so irregularly—no one ever knew what was to be
brought on first; last night, after the first and second
order, they had skipped over to tile seventeenth, and then
to the twenty-eighth. He was not one who would
stand in the way of the Government business, but there
ought to be some time and opportunity allowed for private
Members to bring forward those motions which their consti-
tuents expected from them. He had frequently been in
the House up to twenty minutes past two o'clock in the morn-
ing, without ever having seen anything in the shape of a sand-
wich.--(A laugh.) It was very hard, in his opinion, to be
kept in such total ignorance of what was to take place, when
the Noble Lord had the opportunity of dropping from the Ist
to the 26th Order of the Day.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that with respect to motions
on Notice Days, they were always taken in regular suc-
cession; therefore, with respect to them, no motion was
required. With respect to Orders of the Day, what the
Honourable Member had proposed had never been adopted
hitherto ; there had always been an opportunity given to the
Government to move any Order of the Day they pleased.
It was not possible, in his opinion, to make any absolute
rule on the subject, because there might be an Order of the
Day on some important adjourned debate, which would of
course have to be taken first. At the same time he
must say, that he thought the Hon. and Gallant Colonel
had done all he could. He was of opinion, however, that
more notice should be given than there was. He had endea-
voured to arrange the thing as well as he could, as he had
given his notices when the House was full.
BENEFICES PLURALITIES' BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that after considering the
state of the question, and that in the end he should have
to take the way of prolonging the session to a late period,
or of running the risk of discussing this very important Bill in a
thin House, he had come to the opinion that it would be better
to postpone the consideration of the Benefices and Pluralities
Bill till next Session.

Mr. HUME did not deny that the Bill contained some very
important reforms, but he hoped that before that House as-
sembled again, a branch of Church Reform most essen-
tial, viz. the uniting and separating of benefices so as to pro-
vide an adequate congregation for every living, would be taken
into consideration by the Commissioners. Although he felt
strong objection to the progress of this Bill, he could assure
the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) that no man would more
readily assist him in carrying into effect Reform when applied
in its proper place.
Lord SAND ON regretted that the opposition of some Hon.
Members on the Ministerial side of the House had succeeded
in preventing the passing of this measure. He hoped that
those Hon. Members who had opposed this Bill would take
an opportunity of reading this Bill, and of endeavouring to
understand what it contained. He wished to know whether
the Noble Lord (Russell) intended to abandon the Bill alto-
gether?
Lord J. RUSSELL by no means intended to abandon the
Bill. On the contrary he hoped, taking the extension of
time b
give the House time for a
fuller o
and whichndjusterhe proposed, to
knowledge of subject, and arriving at a
more satisfactory arrangement for the benefit of the Church
than could be attained by a hasty enactment at the close of
the Session.
The Exchequer Bills Bill was then read a second time.
The Creditors ( Scotland) Bill was read a third time, and
passed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER postponed
the consideration of the Pensions Bill till Monday.

TITHE COMPOSITION (IRELAND) BILL.
On the Order of the Day being read for going into Com-
mittee on the Tithe Composition (Ireland) Bill,
Mr. LEADER had very strong objections to the passing
of this Bill, es it would have the effect of relinquishing alto-

gether the claim which the Government and the country had
for the repayment of the million which was advanced during
the Administration of Earl Spencer for the relief, as was sup-
posed, of the vitarving Protestant Clergy of Ireland. Now,
when that money was advanced it was distinctly stated by
Lord Althorp, not only that it was for the exclusive benefit
of the distressed Irish Clergy, but that the money must be
reclaimed, and the payment of it insisted on, when a proper
season should arrive. So far, however, from either of those
pledges having been fulfilled, the fact turned out to be that
the greater portion of the money did not go the relief of the
distressed Irish Clergy at all, but found its way into the
pockets of a number of rich individuals who were the lay im-
propriators of tithes ; and now, by the present Bill, the Go-
vernment were about to violate the other part of the pledge,
by surrendering all claim for the repayment of the money.—
(Here the Hon. Member read a long list of Noblemen, digni-
taries of the Church, and other large impropriators, who were
the recipients of large sums from the million advanced.) He
did not wish to insist on the immediate repayment of the money,
but he thought that the right to it should not be given up.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
his Hon. Friend was quite mistaken in supposing that the
present Bill went to relinquish all the right on the part of the
Government to reclaim the payment of the million that had
been advanced on the occasion alluded to. The Bill did no
such thing. It only went to suspend for the present any pro-
ceedings for the recovery of the sums advanced. He never
should be a party to relinquishing the claim of the country on
this money until the terms upon which it was lent should be
fulfilled to the letter, and that was conceding the principle of
appropriation.—( Cheers.) It was an error also of his Hon.
Friend to imagine that the money was advanced for the relief
and assistance of the distressed Protestant clergy of Ireland,
because it must have been known to every one, that the mo-
ment the Bill was passed for granting that loan, every proprie-
tor of tithe in Ireland, ldy as well as clerical, became entitled
to his share of it. The House would, he was sure, agree with
him, that in the cases of clergymen—.and there were, he was
happy to find, many such in Ireland—who were patiently wait-
ing the peaceable settlement of the tithe question, instead of
harassing the poor people by the enforcement of their tithes—
in those eases he thought it would be a great hardship to look
for the repayment of the sums lent them. A wide distinction
should be drawn between such men and those who Nv ere using
all their efforts to disturb the tranquillity of the country by the
enforcement of tithes by Exchequer processes.—( Cheers.)
Af.er a few words from Mr. HUME and Mr. G. PRICE,
Mr. LEADER was perfectly satisfied with the explanations
given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he should no
longer object to the Bill.

The Bill then went through Committee.
The Poor Law Loans Bill then went through Committee.
The Militia Pay Bill was read a third time.
On the third reading of the Corporate Property (Ireland,
Bill,

Mr. D. W. HARVEY approved of the principle of this
Bill, which provided a safeguard against the abuses of cor-
porations, but wished to know why the same provisions were
not extended to England.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this
Bill was rendered necessary in consequence of the failure of
the Municipal Reform Bill for Ireland, and the consequent
continuance of the old Corporations, which had been admit-
tedly guilty of great delinquencies. In England the Muni-
cipal Reform Bill had passed.
After a few words from the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, Mr. D.
W. HARVEY, and Lord J. RussELL,
The Bill was read a third time.
The Lords' amendments to the Grand Juries (Ireland)
Bill were then agreed to. -
The Public Works (Ireland) Bill was read a second time.
The Municipal Elections Bill and the Copyright Compen-
sations (Ireland) Bill went through Committee.
On the motion of Mr. HUME, the Coal Trade Bill was
read a third time.
JEWISH CIVIL DISABILITIES.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the
Jewish Civil Disabilities Bill.

dr. TREVOR moved as en amendment, that the Order
of the Dly be read that day three months.
Col. SIBTH R P seconded the amendment.
Mr. BORT HWICK supported the amendment.
Mr. G. PRICE likewise supported it.
The House divided—
For the original motion 42
For the Amendment
Majority

The question being put that the Speaker do leave the Chair,
Colonel SIBTHOR I' again expressed his opposition to
the Bill. The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not antici-
pate that this Bill could be successful. His object, and
that of those with whom he acted, was only to get popularity.
Mr. A. TREVOR must enter his solemn protost against
the Bill.

Mr. 13ORTHWICK opposed the Bill, not as a Christian;
but as a member of the State.

The SPEAKEI having left the Chair, the clauses were agreed
to. Report to-morrow.

PRISONERS' COUNSEL BILL.

The Order of the Day having been read for taking into
into consideration the Lords' amendments to the Prisoners'
Counsel Bill,
Mr. E WART said that the Lords' amendments to this
Mil took away the provision which in all criminal cases, gaYe
the last word to the Counsel for the prisoner. The Select
Committee which reported on the Bill gave it as their opinion
that if the last word was taken away from the prisoner, it
would leave the law worse than it was. This was the opinion
expressed by Lord Lyndhurst himself in 1826, though it was
at the suggestion of that Noble Lord that the other House
made the alteration in the Bill. He was disposed to propose
that they should disagree with the Lords in that amendment,
and insert the original clause. But in the hope that the Bill
might pass, he would now merely propose that in all cases of
felony and misdemeanour the prisoner might have the last word.
Lord J. RUSSELL had received a long letter from Lord
Denman upon the subject. The opinion of that Noble Lord
was that it would be better to pass the Bill as amended than to
have it lost. The number of speeches might be left to future
legislation, and his Noble Friend was of opinion that the Se-
lect Committee, as regarded the last word, had gone further
than seas intended. However, as he (Lord J. Russell) recom-
mended the appointment of the Select Committee, he was
ready to support the proposition of his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Ewart.) He should be sorry if the Bill was lost.
Mr. EWART'S amendment to the Lords' amendments was
agreed to, and a Conference appointed.