The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDNY, MAY 13, 1841

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 12.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock.
Mr. LINDESAY took the oaths and his seat for
Sandwich. The Hon. Member was introduced by Lord
Granville Somerset and Captain Gorden. He was re-
ceived with loud cheers from the Conservative benches.
The Report on the Southampton Trust (St. Pancras)
Paving Bill was brought up.
LEVRINGTON INCLOSURE BILL.
' On the motion that the Levrington Inclosure Bill be
brought up,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from cer-
tain poor cottagers who had brought a portion of the
common into cultivation, and who had held their pro-
perty for sixteen years. In the preamble to this Bill,, it
was stated that these persons had no right to this pro-
perty. At the last Summer Asssizes the promoters of
the Bill had tried to eject these poor persons, but had
been foiled, and had had to pay the expences of
both parties ; and now they tried to do that by
this Act which they could- not do by law. He
contended that if this Bill passed, these poor persons
were entitled to compensation, and he should propose
to introduce words for the purpose of exempting these
holdings from the operation of the Bill.
The SPEAKER said that the Hon. Member could
not move the amendment without notice.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE would then move, that the
third reading of the Bill be postponed till to-morrow, and
he would give notice that on that occasion he should move
the addition which he was now precluded from moving
by the forms of the House.
Mr. HOME DRUMMOND said that the usual course
had been pursued with regard to this Bill, and he was
satisfied that these parties had not the shadow of a
claim, as n years pcesession was required to give a legal
right, and these parties hail only had sixteen years pos-
session of these cottages.
Mr. PRYME thought that as the owners of this com-
mon had rested, quietly for sixteen
years, and as they
had been unable to prove their rights in a Court of
Law, this case was one well worthy of the con-
sideration of the House. He should support the
motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury.
It was ultimately arranged"(as we understood) that the
amendment was withdrawn on the understanding that
on Monday the Hon. Member should have an opportu-
nity of proposing the addition to the second clause.
The Kidderminster Small Tenants Bill was read a
third time and passed, after a clause had been added to
it by way of rider.
The Lords amendment to the Slough and Cohibrook-
road Bill were agreed to.
Mr. T. PARKER presented a petition from Preston,
signed by 4,000 persons, against any alteration of the
import duties.
Sir H. FLEETWOOD presented a petition from
Preston in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from
Worsley, in Lancashire, containing 2,436 signatures,
praying that the Corn-laws may be entirely abolished ;
also fourteen petitions from operatives of various trades
in Lancashire to the same effect.
Mr. LANGDALE presented a petition from Lancaster,
in the county of York, to the same effect.
Mr. W. EVANS presented petitions from Nottingham
and Derbyshire, to the same effect.
Mr. LISTER presented a petition from the labourers
of Bradford to the same effect.
Mr. JAMES presented fourteen petitions from various
places in Cumberland in favour of a repeal of the Corn-
laws.

Mr. BAINES presented five petitions from Leeds and
other places, in favour of the measure announced by her
Majesty's Ministers for altering the duty on timber
and sugar, and for an alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Hon. Member said he had also five petitions for the
repeal of the Corn-laws, principally from working men ;
and if the House would allow himhe would state shortly
what it was the petitioners alleged. They said that
they had nothing but their labour in the way
of property ; that they had laboured under
great distress for many years ; that they had
made application to that House for the redress of their
grievances, and that they had always been told, and
properly told, that Parliament could not legislate for the
purpose of increasing the rate of wages. They further
stated, that they had found that Parliament could legis-
late for the purpose of increasing the rates upon land ; and
finding that Parliament could legislate for the purpose of
increasing the rates of landlords, they thought they aught
either to legislate for the incroase of wages of
labour, or to repeal the Corn-laws. And as
they found it was impossible they could legis-
late for the increase of the rate of labour, they prayed
that Parliament would forthwith make such alterations
in the Corn-laws as would make them efficient for the
purposes of raising the revenue, and not the necessary
supply.
Mr. CORRY presented a petition from Tyrone against
patronage in the Church of Scotland.
Sir C. STYLE presented a petition from Scarborough,
signed by upwards of 1,700 of the working classes, in
favour of the plan proposed by her Majesty's Govern-
ment, with reference to the duties on sugar and corn.
Mr. BUSFIELD presented fourteen petitions from
Bradford, and other places in the neighbourhood, to the
same effect.
Mr. B. SMITH presented a petition from Norwich,
praying for an alteration of the duties on corn, sugar,
and timber.
Mr. BROCKELIIURST presented a petition against
Church Extension.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Ebenezer
Chapel, Birmingham, against Church-rates.
Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the Tower Ham-
lets, praying for the abolition of Church-rates.

.. _ ..,
CORN-LAWS.
The HoN. MEMBER presented twelve petitions from
various trades in Manchester, and several from London,
praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by Mr.
Turner, from Lancaster ; and by Mr. Hindley, from
Warrington, Ashton, and other places ; against any alte-
ration in the Corn-laws by Mr. Waddington, from
Suffolk ; and by Sir Charles Burrell, from Sussex.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Leeds,
praying for the release of all political prisoners ; and
from Leicester, stating that Mr. Feargus O'Connor
would be a proper person to represent that borough in
Parliament—(Laughter)--and praying that the House
would allow to him the liberty to address the electors
through the public press.
Mr. L. HODGES presented a petition against any
grant for Church Extension.
Col. CONOLLY:presented a petition from Armagh
against the present system of Scotch patronage.
Mr. BARNEBY presented a petition from Lincoln in
favour of Church Extension.
Mr. BROADLEY presented a petition from Beverley,
to the same effect.
Lord WORSLEY presented a petition from Lincoln
against any alteration in the Corii-laws.
Sir T. ACLAND presented a petition from Yeovin
against the grant to the College of Maynooth.
Mr. R. CLIVE presented a petition in favour of
Church Extension.
Colonel SALWEY presented a petition, praying for
the extinction of Church-rates, and the abolition of the
jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts.
Mr. MILES presented several petitions—one in favour
of Church Extension ; another in favour of the exclu-
sion of Roman Catholics from Parliament, and against the
grant to the College of Maynooth ; and another against
some parts of the Corn-law Amendment Act. .
Mr. ELLIS presented a petition in favour of the mea-
sure introduced by her Majesty's Government for the re-
duction of the duties on corn.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE presented a petition in favour
of Church Extension.
Mr. P. HOWARD presented a petition from the Me-
thodist congregation of Carlisle in favour of free trade,
and especially in favour of a revision of the Corn-laws.
. Mr..OSWALD presented a petition signed by 15,200
persons, from Glasgow, in favour of the abolition of the
: Corn-laws, and the revision of the Customs Duties.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented several petitions from
the soap-boilers and other trades in Dublin, which
were very numerously signed, in favour of a repeal
of the Legislative Union ; also three petitions
against the Registration of Voters (Ireland) Bill, and
tseveral petitions from Wigan and Bolton praying for a
Repeal of the Corn-laws ; also a petition signed by a
a very respectable constituent of his, Mr. James naugh-
ton, of Dublin, praying that the House would not permit
any trading with Brazils and Cuba, as it would only tend
to increase slavery in this country ; also a petition from
Mr. Acland, the Anti-Corn-law lecturer. The petitioner
stated that he had been inquiring, for the last ten weeks
into the state of the labourers in the county of Buck-
ingham, and that he was able to prove that the labourers
of that county do not receive above 2d. or 2d. a
day as , wages, for their subsistence, .and that
many of those poor men are actually turned out
of employment unless they signed petitions against the
repeal of the Corn-laws. The petition prayed the House
to institute an inquiry into this state of things.
The LORD ADVOC ATE presented a petition from
Leith, praying for the abolition of the Corn-laws.
Mr. LAIACUCHERE presented 19 petitions to the
same effect from Manchester and its vicinity.
Mr. HUME'presented several petitions from Castle-
'town and other places, with a similar prayer.
' The. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pre-
sented a similar petition from Portsmouth.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented several petitions
from places in Yorkshire, many of them numerously
signed-, praying for the abolition of Church-rates, and a
t elaxation of all the duties which fetter trade.
Mr. WOOD presented a petition from Kendal, pray-
, ing fur a revision of our commercial code, and in favour
:(it Ile measures of the Government;
Mr, AINSWORTH presented a petition, with a simi-
;,lar prayer, signed by-one thOusand inhabitants of the
town of liolton ; and a similar petition from an indivi-
dual in the same town, praying the House to disregard
the cry raised In favour of the negrocs. He was himself
an advocate for the abolition of slavery, but he found
. that the negroes had less to complain of than our own
population. A number of emancipated slaves had, he
. stated, lately . purchased 20,000/. worth of land in the
West Indies, and that could not be done by any number
of our labouring classes.
Mr. CHARLES WOOD presented 39 petitions from
k Halifax and other places in Yorkshire, in favour of the
Government measures for an alteration of our Commer-
cial Code.
'Mr. MARK PHILIPS presented 35 petitions from
Manchester, Rochdale, and several other places, praying
' for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. E. BULLER presented a petition from the Pot-
teries praying for a total abolition of the Corn and Pro-
vision laws.
ll
aa
rwmgi.er..!..Feae.intu lslltgOthNaVet
jRDip presented a petion frofromCamber-
'
• Mr. THORNELY presented a petition agreed on at a
, held on Monday last, pray-
ing fora; total repeal of the tax.npoti bread, .stating the
great satisfaction which ' those. present ~fek.;at, the. step
taken by Ministers for that purpose.. and .aiso stating
that the . declaration...ref. the Ministers in favour of* the
AiC p
vrvar_l s.

doctrines of free trade entitled them to support, and pray-
ing the House to give effect to those declarations. The pe-
tition was signed by Sir J. Walmesby, the late Mayor of
Liverpool, on behalf of the meeting ; also a petition from
Gadley, near Manchester, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws.

On the motion of Mr. HUTT, the Hull Flax and Cot-
ton Mill Company's Bill was read a third time and passed.

THE EARL OF CARDIGAN.

Mr. MUNTZ gave notice of an alteration he pur-
posed making in the motion of which he had
given notice for to-morrow, relative to the Earl
of Cardigan. The motion which he should
bring forward would be, that an humble address be
presented to her Majesty. beseeching her to cause an
Inquiry to be instituted into the conduct of the Earl
of Cardigan during the time he has been in
command of the 11th Hussars, with a view of ascertain-
ing how far such conduct had rendered him unfit to be
continued in her Majesty's service.

speculation. However it might answer for. amusement,
it certainly seldom answered in the way of profit.
The same system was in operation in the West
Indies, where gentlemen conducted the maria,ernent
of their estates, and the entire process of the
manufacture of sugar by agents and letters ; the process
was one requiring great skill, energy, and experience,
and he thought it could no more be conducted
properly by persons residing at a distance, than the great
manufacturers of Leeds or Manchester, could carry on
their concerns at two thousand or three thousand miles
distance. Under the new arrangements of his Noble
Friend, he was satisfied that capital would accumulate in
the colony, that proprietors would let their estates to re-
spectable tenants, and that in 'many instances the negro
population would become themselves the tenants. They
knew of some cases in which that had already taken place,
and where the negroes had associated, and purchased
estates to carry on the manufacture of sugar. The white
inhabitants of the colonies, who were employed, as book-
keepers, agents, and attorneys, instead of managing the
estates of others as deputies, would take estates on their
own account. He (Lord Howick) believed that that
process had begun to a considerable extent. The estates
of such persons would be managed with an energy which
belonged to men free from responsibility, and acting on'
their own account. He had not the smallest doubt that
when that system came into action, the cost of cultivating
sugar in our West Indian colonies would he materially
lessened. lie was persuaded that if the sugar cultivation
were carried on with intelligence, enterprise, and activity,
by free men acting for their own interest, the article
would be produced much cheaper than it could be in
Cuba and Brazil under a system of slavery. In the East
Indies there was no deficiency of labour ; what was want-
ing was British capital and intelligence, which were ra-
pidly going there, and the removal of fiscal obstructions
to enterprise and industry. One great advantage of this
measure was, that it would lead the British Parliament,
the merchants, and the capitalists to look into the state
of India, to see what it was that impeded its prosperity.
They ought also to promote the success of the competi-
tion of their own colonies with slave-grown sugar. His
Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade had
brought forward a measure for removing the restrictions
upon them. He was sure that the House would support
him in that measure. Much might also be done by in-
creased efforts to suppress the slave trade.- Papers
which had been laid on the table of the House had shown
that an officer of the name of Denman had destroyed
the slave depots ; that was a most effective blow to sla-
very. The Hon. Member for Nottingham told them the
other night that they had expended a great deal of money
in efforts to suppress the slave trade, and after all it was
carried on to a great extent. What would be the iesult of the
success of the measure of his Noble Friend. Why, if they suc-
ceeded in producing sugar cheaper than it was produced by
free labour, the first pound of sugar produced by slave-labour
which was sold at a profit, would seal the entire abolition of
slavery. He thought the measures of the Government were
well calculated to answer the purposes intended. Government
had not attempted to alter the duties upon immediate abolition
of slavery. It was now three years since that measure had been
carried, and he (Lord Howick) thought, that now, if ever was
the time to prevent another bad system from taking root. Now
was the time to prevent vested interests in monopolies. Now
was the time to excite competition. On the other
side it was urged that his Noble Friend meant to
leave the coldbies of this country without any protection,
he had done no such thing, for he bad proposed a protecting
duty of 50 per cent. The Hon. Member for Antrim would
not admit competition ; in that he (Lord Howick) thought he
was in error, for if a moderate competition was admitted, he
thought it would tend to hasten the abolition of slavery in
Cuba and the Brazils. But when a measure was proposed
for the relief of our own population, it was far those who
opposed it to prove that it would be forthe encouragement of
slavery. They had not proved it. He was convinced they
could not prove it, and unless they did so, it was the duty of
the House to adopt a measure which was clearly forthe relief
of our own population.—(Cheers.) Although attempts had
been made to prove that this measure would not be for
the relief of our own population, yet the argu-
ments advanced in support of the position were so
palpably fallacious, that he could not believe they
would at all influence the decision of the House. The
' Hon. Member for Newark had gone into an elaborate calcu-
lation, for the purpose of showing what might be the amount
of sugar which we might expect from India and the West In-
dies during the present year.. He had tried to prove that the
utmost that could be expected from the proposed reduction
of duty would be a reduction in price of Is. 6d. per cwt.—a
reduction which would not be at all felt by the consumer.
He (Lord Howick) would admit to the Hon. Gentleman that
he thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer might safely have
carried his principle further.—(Cheers.) That it would have
been more judicious to have made a reduction in the duty on
colonial surer of 7a. or es., leaving the proportion of duty
between foreign sugar and sugar the production of the British
possessions the same as that now proposed by the Government.
—(Loud cheers.) But, if the House thought proper, that al-
teration could be made in the Committee.—(Loud cheers. )
But taking the measure as recommended by the Government,
still the amount of the relief which it would afford to the con-
sumer would be great indeed. He considered the calculations
which had been made with regard to the sugar which might be
expected from the colonies, was quite beside the purpose. The
plain and simple case was this • foreign sugar was at present
subject to a prohibitory rate Of duty ; the Government pro-
posed to admit at a rate of duty amounting to 150 per cent. on
its valise in bond, and exceeding by 50 per cent. the duty le-
vied on the same production from our colonies. The result
must be the extending the source of supply. 'lt was no answer
to say that without this assistance 200,000 tons could be pro-
(Need in the present year, and that the annual consumption
of the country had never exceeded that amount, and that
there we-e no means of ascertaining to what the consumption
might reach, if a cheap supply were placed within the reach of
the community—(Cheers)—and the very determination with
which this proposition had been resisted by the West Indian
proprietors, the eagerness with which they had sought to main-
tain their present monopoly, convinced him that it was impos-
sible but what they must consider that some great advantage
must accrue to the consumer, and some great fall in price must
be the result. He would not now advert to the language of
the Hon. Gentleman opposite, who spoke so slightingly of the
advantage to be derived from the reduction of one penny a
pound in sugar ; but when he recollected the sufferings of the
untortunate population of Bolton, whose condition had been so
feelingly and so eloquently described by his Noble Friend the other
evening—when they read the authentic accounts of the low state
to which our manufacturing population was everywhere reduced,
he would say that even a reduction on sugar of 'one penny in
in the pound was not to be lightly spoken of. It,was no such
trifling boon. The Hon. Member for London had shown that
it was equal to a reduction of taxation of 1,600,0001. But
large as the amount was, that was not the source of relief to
which he looked for the improvement of the condition of the
people. He looked to the increased field which would be
opened to their industry—(Loud cheers)—to the increased
and advantageous employment both for capital and industry,
which must result from a removal of those restrictions and
monopolies which now fettered our commerce, and prevented
it from expanding.—( Cheers.) And because he knew that an
alteration of these duties must form a necessary and indis -
pen/able part of any measure for a general revision of the Im-
port Duties, therefore it was that he considered that
it would afford a great relief to our own population. Could any
man deny that, who considered the great progress which public
opinion had made, and the extended position which they then
occupied of attacking. monopolies generally, instead ot being
forced to confirm their efforts to branches only? Would any
man deny that this must form an essential part of any measure
for the improvement of our commercial system ? We were
ourselves great importers of sugar. Brazil was one
of our best customers, and it had been stated that our
future trade with Brazil would, in a great degree, depend on
the course we should take with regard to fureign sugars. This
was part of a grand plan—of a gratuattack on all monopolies—and
his Hon. Friend the Member of Lincolnshire had so treated it,
when he stated the other evening that he should vote against
any alteration in the sugar duties or the timber duties, because,
if he did not do so, he could not call upon the House to main-
tain the Corn-laws.—(Cheers.) The House and the country
perfectly understood that that was the real question at issue.—
( Cheers.) The House and the country perfectly understood
that the plea of humanity which had been so freely made use
of, was nothing more than a popular mode of disguising the
ugly and repulsive features of monopoly.—(Loud cheers. )
Alany Gentlemen, no doubt, had been actuated by a profound
and conscientious objection to the slave trade. Ne man
could doubt but that such was the nature of the objec-
tions entertained by his Right Hon. and Learned Friend.
the Member for the Tower Hamlets, who bad ever acted so
distinguished and consistent a part on that gitestion.—( Hear,
hear.) No man could doubt that such was the nature of the
objections entertained by the Hun. Baronet the Member for
Oxford, who had spoken last night but ho could look with
nothing but disgust at those petitions on the table of that
House, signedby all those names which he remembered to have
seen attached to every remonstrance against every measure
which had been adopted for the benefit of our negro popula-
tion.—( Cheers. ) When he knew what the past conduct of
those gentlemen had been, this new cloak of philanthropy
could not conceal the strong interest which they had in the ex-
isting monopoly—(Cheers)—and he couldnot regard their peti-
tions with the same respect which he paid to the conscientious ob-
jections of his Right Hon. Friend the Member for the Tower
Hamlets.--( Cheers.) He would not follow the example set him
by the Hon. Member for Newark, who had attributed the con-
duct of his Noble Friend and the Government to low and stir-
did;motives, but he must tell that Hon. Gentleman, that it
was impossible for him (Lord Howick) to forget the part which
he (Mr. Gladstone) had taken in the debates in 1833.—(Loud
cheers.) It was impossible for him to forget who was the
owner of the Branden-Hoop estate in Demerara—(Continued
cheering)—it was impossible for him to forget that it had been
clearly shown that the rates of production of sugar per head
on that estate, with the corresponding mortality among the
slaves, had been shown to be higher than had ever been knots n
even in the colony, high as the general average there was.—
( Continued cheering.) That estate, for three or four years, had
produced an enormous quantity of sugar, and during that time
this had been attended by a diminution of the slaves, of eighty-
one being one-seventh of the whole number.—( Loud cheers. )
There was an old proverb which he would recommend to the
attention ef the Hon. Gentleman, which was, that persons
living in glass-houses should not throw stones —( Cheers, and
laughter.) He had referred to these facts not because the
Hon. Member for Newark had imputed low and degraded
motives to the Goverment, but in order to show the conduct
which ho had followed on this subject. He was persuaded the
House ought not on such a plea of the encouragement of
slavery, hastily to reject a measure for the improvement of
our own populution. No one could deny that some such
measure was necessary to be observed in the intence compe-
tition which existed in every branch of labour, and the diffi-
culty experienced by every one in finding means for profitably
exercising this industry. To what could this be attri-
buted, but to the manner in which the field of
employment was narrowed by our restrictive commercial
policy.—Cheers.) The Brazils was willing to furni.h us with
their sugars if we would consent to receive them ; and no man
could doubt but that they must be paid for by the produce
of our industry, thus affording a larger field for employment.
If they refused to adopt this plain and simple means of relief,
if they refused to improve their revenue by a revision ot the
import duties, the only alteration would be the imposition of
some heavy tax upon the already overburdened population.
Any tax upon articles of consumption must fall more parti-
cularly upon the lower orders, but even if they resorted to a
property tax, or the restoration of the house tax,
it must increase the pressure upon the labouring
population, by depriving the higher orders, to a certain extent,
of the means of giving them employment. Therefore, he be-
lieved the present to be a politic measure, and one which
would be advantageous to the monopolists themselves. He
thought the landowner, the West Indian, and the. Canadian,
would be respectively compensated by getting rid of the
tax which they paid to the other monopolists, while it was im-
possible to disguise the great advantage which must accrue to
the great body of the nation. What the result might be he
knew not ; but the man who watched the signs of the times
with attention, could entertain a moment's doubt as to the re-
sult.—(Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet, the Member
for Tarnworth, might pursue die same fatal course which he
had done with regard to Catholic _Emancipation ; he might,
at the price of great suffering, and by great effort,

stave off for a time commercial reform, but that he would ulti-
mately be compelled to yield to the force of necessity must be
clear to all who had watched what was going on in the coun-
try. If he wanted a proof that such must be the case, he would
only ask them to look to the debate. He well remembered the
time when no man in the House dared to come forward boldly
as the advocate of commercial freedom. Even Mr. Huskisson
had, to a certaindegree, to adopt disguise, andtalatter the preju-
dices,-and nominally to acquiesce in the doctrines of those of
whose ignorance a was well aware—(Loud cheers)—a,.d
while the tendency of all his measures was to freedom
trade, his language was often of a different nature.—( Cheers. )
In those days the advocates of monopoly had the field to them-
selves. How different was the case now ? Even the defenders
of monopoly were ashamed of the cause they had undertaken
—(Loud cheers)—and to judge of them by their langeage
they were a House of free traders. The principle had been
conceded on all sides, and no one now attempted to uphold the
old doctrine, that an array of Custom-house officers were ne-
eepary to uphold British industry. If the doctrines of free
trade had made such advances in such a short time,
although some persons might be of opinion that the
system of monopoly was destined to endure for many
years, he was persuaded that it was not. (Cheers. )
He was persuaded it would not. Even though this measure
were rejected, the ultimate result was certain, and for this
reason he should vote in favour of the measure proposed by
her Majesty's Government.—( Cheers. )
Mr. C. WYNN said he could not agree to the measures
of her Majesty's Government, in the altered state of society
in the West Indies. 'I hose measures themselves were of the
most indefinite character, and they were adopted, like the
reduction in the postage, as an experiment, without the least
possibility of success. The First Lord of the Treasury had
last year stated that he felt the greatest objection to any al-
teration in the Corn-laws—that if any benefit could be de-
rived from it it would be ill purchased by .the agitation.
That reason was equally weighty at present; and it was evi.
d..nt, therefore, that it was brought forward for the purpose of
getting up a cry out of doors—an attempt which had entirely
failed. The Noble Lord opposite in arguing this question
with respect to slavery, had asked if they would admit no
other article the produce of slave labour. There was a
great difference between the not rejecting an article already
admitted, and proposing a measure forthe admission of a new one.
He thought the present time was not at all opportune to admit
competition with foreign countries, and that observation ap-
plied in a tenfold degree to the admission of the product of
slave labour. In conclusion, the Right Hon. Gentleman stated
that lie felt bound to oppose the proposition of her Majesty's
Government, and give his support to the amendment of the
Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, feeling convinced that
the proposition of the Government, whore it would not benefit
the people of this country would greatly aggravate the evils of
slavery.

Mr. W. EVANS supported the measure proposed by her
Majesty's Ministers relative to the duties on sugar. He did
so on the ground that the Hosse was not warranted in impos-
ing enormous taxes on the people of this country on the article
of sugar, when by the admission of a small quantity of foreign
sugar it might be prevented. With respect to the other
parts of the proposition of her Majesty's Government he need
hardly say that they had his hearty concurrence, and for his
own part he believed that for years no Ministers of the Crown
had proposed measures so calculated for the benefit of the
country as those that had been proposed by the Noble Lord
the Secretary for the Colonies. In conclusion, he would
only express a hope that, whether under the present Go-
vernment, or any other, no means would be lost to carry them
into effect.

Lord WORSLEY objected to the proposition of her Ma-
jesty's Government, believing that if the Corn-laws were
altered as proposed, there would not be that relief given to
the manufacturers which was generally supposed. He, to-
gether with two other Members for Lincoln, had some years
since joined in a vote of eonfideuee in the present Ministers ;
but believing that the farmers, both rich and poor, in Lincoln-
shire would be ruined unless iey had protection by the Corn-
laws, they had resolved to give the proposed measure
their determined opposition, and for his own part he believed
that her Majesty's Government had been misinformed as to the
expenses of bringing corn into this country. The Noble Lord
read the evidence of Mr. Saunders, a corn merchant, of thirty
years' standing, who said that a fixed duty would never answer.
When corn would be brought to this country at 3s. tid. a
quarter, a duty of Bs. would be no protection to the farmer
whatever. Had the low prices of 1833 continued for two or
three years longer, many of the small farmers must have been
ruined. They went on cultivating the land at a loss on the
faith of the present Corn-laws. He denied that the agricul-
tural interest had had any notice of the measures of the Go-
vernment respecting corn, and as the Government could not
have the remotest chance of passing such a measure, they
ought never to have brought it forward.—(Cheers.) Those
who had been agitating for a repeal of the Corn-laws would
accept the present measure only as an instalment, and when-
ever the price rose to 605., tbey would say they could no
longer pay the Bs. duty. Entertaining these opinions, how-
ever sorry he was to oppose the Government, although
his vote might transfer the powers of Government from those
hands in which he wished to see them; still, in common
honesty, he felt bound to vote against the proposition of the
Government.—( Cheers. )
Sir A. GRANT had heard the speech of the Noble Lord
with much pleasure—(Cheers)—and thought he had come to
a very sound decision, and hoped his vote would help to save
those interests, whose existence were now at stake. He had
heard, also, with much pleasure, the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Member for the Tower Hamlets, and he agreed
in all the objections he took to the measure, but more
especially in the first he took, which was the gross injus-
tice intended by the Government to the- West Indians.
The Right Hon. Baronelgthe Member for Devonport, had de-
signated the petition preanted by his Right Hon. Friend from
the West India merchants, as gross hypocrisy. He denied that
the petition warranted the application of such terms, or that
it contained anything to call down the stigmatising censure of
the Right Hon. Gentleman. The petitioners had designated
the slave trade as " atrocious," and he did not think it merited
any other term. It was a strong proof of the badness of a
cause, when parties were compelled to have recourse to such
language, and when they were driven to misrepresent the lan-
guage and sentiments of their opponents. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had been Secretary for the Colonies from 1832 to 1839,
and must have known intimately, from his communications with
the Governors of the West India colonies, the state of the
cultivation of sugar in these islands. He must have known
that in 1838 the planting of the sugar cane almost entirely
ceased throughout the West Indies, the negroes having been
that year entirely emancipated. It was clear, then, that it was
owing to the measures of the Government itself that the supply
of sugar from the West Indies had been so much diminished.
It was almost unnecessary to comment upon the futile argu-
ments that had been urged by the Noble Lord (Howick), who
had addressed the House that evening.—(lronical cheering.)
He should not be put down by the taunts and sneers of any
Hon. Members, and he trusted the House would Make some
allowance for any inadvertent intemperance in the remarks of
one whose very existence, he might say, depended upon the
issue of the present proposition.—(Hear.) It appeared to him
that if the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
were carried, and he thanked God it would be indignantly
scouted by the House and by the country—but if it were
carried, it would terminate, not in competition, as was argued
by the Right Hon. Gentleman, but in the substitution of slave-
grown sugar for that of their own colonies. He trusted the
House would not take a step the object of which was to en-
courage slavery and the slave-trade. Where, he asked, was
the consistency of the present Government, when, after ex-
pending so many millions in putting an end to slavery, they
now come forward with a measure which would go directly to
its promotion and encouragement? He thanked the House for
the patience with which it had had heard him ; for his part he
was perfectly satisfied with the argument as it stood, and how-
ever the debate might be prolonged (it might be protracted
another week for all he cared), he should seek no arguments
beyond those he had already heard, to induce him to give his
strenuous and determined opposition to the proposition of her
Majesty's Government.—(Loudcheers.)
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said that it had been stated on
the other side, that the West Indian Proprietors had a right
in the slaves they possessed. They had, indeed, a right which
was recognised by the custom of the land, but not by the law of
the land. As he had taken a part in the Anti-Slavery agita-
tion in Ireland, he felt that he owed it to some of his consti-
tuents to state the grounds on which he gave his vote on the
present question, which seemed to have connection with that
of slavery. He could not place implicit confidence in the
statement that the convictions of Hon. Gentlemen opposite,
which led them so constantly to oppose everything intended
to benefit the enslaved African, were suddenly changed with-
out some motive. Why had the Noble Lord (Sandon) so
framed his resolution, that it could bear a meaning which
would not, under, other circumstances, prevent Hon. Gentle-
men opposite coming forward with a measure precisely similar,
as far as the introduction into this country of slave-grown
commodities were concerned, to that which they now so
violently opposed. It was the doubts of the sincerity of
the Noble Lord, which his resolution so framed gave rise to,
that would induce him (Mr. J. O'Connell) to vote against him.
Great quantities of sugar were produced in Java, China, and
other eastern countries, and this year there were imported into
this country 6,000 tons of that article from the latter country.
Could not arrangements be made for the introduction of free
labour sugar from those countries, without any encourage-
ment being given to sugar the growth of slave labour. the
lion. Member for Newark (Mr. W. E. Gladstone) said that
treaties stood in the way of that. The Hon. Member ought
to have informed the House what those treaties were, and
whatever they were, they ought to be modified, when there
were such strong inducements for so doing, as the
desire to give the people of this country cheap sugar,
and to avoid at the same time all encouragement
t' slavery. The Hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. Ewart) said
it was impossible to draw a distinction between sugar the pro-
duce of free labour, and that which was the produce of slave
labour. When he (Mr. J. O'Connell) heard that statement he
said he should be obliged to vote with the Hon. Gentlemen
opposite. However, he listened to the entire of that Hon.
Member's speech, and he read the reports in the papers, and
yet he neither heard nor read the reason given by the Hon.
Gentleman to support his statement. The Hon. Gentleman
also said that the only effectual way of putting down slavery
was by commerce. Now he (Mr. J. O'Connell) could not con-
ceive how that was the case, and he thought the Hon. Gen-
tleman was bound 'to show how commerce could have that
effect. With regard to the general question before the House, '
he would not enter at any length into it. lie would only say
that as an Irish Member he might be supposed to be adverse
to the proposition for mitigating the Corn-laws.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) Now he must say that he never knew
of any good being derived f:om those laws. He was delighted
with the proposition of the Government, both with respect to
the Corn-laws and the reduction of the duties on timber.
If the question were allowed to go into Committee, he would
give his vote for the introduction into this country of foreign
tree-grown sugar.
Sir J. REID said that he was one of those who signed the
petition which was particularly alluded to by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Cambridge (Sir Alexander Grant), and whether he
was a greater hypocrite or not—( Great laughter)—it was for
the House to decide. On the subject which was at present.
under discussion, be would read a note, with the permission of
the House, from a gentleman whose opinion ought to be va-
lued. The Hon. Gentleman read a note to himself from Mr.
Horsley Palmer, disapproving of the reduction of the duties on
timber and corn, particularly in the present state of the Bank
of England. From the members of the present Go-
vernment individually, he (Sir J. Reid) received every
kindness and attention ; but that should not prevent
hi's speaking of them as a body as he thought; and 'he did
not hesitate to say that a more reckless, inconsiderate Govern-
ment he never saw or heard.—( Laughter.) He merely wished
to impress that on their minds on the last opportunity which
ho would have of addressing them (Ministers) to their respec-
tive situations. —(Much laughter.) lie did not that their
sun was setting, and setting to rise no more.-(Continued
laughter.) Ile wished, for the sake of the commercial inter-
ests of the country, that the House would decide the present
important question as soon as possible, because, pending the.
debate, trade was at a complete stand. He said that as an
old merchant—and it was impossible for one not situated as he
was to conceive the mischief caused by protracted delay.
Trade, however, was not in such a state of despondency as was
represented by the Ilrin. Member for Halifax (Mr. C. Wood).
Mr. GIS BORNE said thathe did not think he should have
troubled the House at that protracted period of the debate, if
he were not unwilling that it should close without his returning
thanks to the Hon. Member for Newark. He (Mr. Gisborne)
had often heard it said that those were the best friends who told
people of their faults. The Hon. Member for'Nee ark per-
formed that service for the gentlemen of that (the Ministerial)