The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORN

! understood that they should not come into operation until
they came aerein under the review of the Home Govern-
ment.
i Mr. HUM 7 wished to ask whether it was the inten-
tion of the Geyer. meet to pi °duct any papers relative
to the branch list?
The HOD. FOX MAULE said he had ne objection in
about ten days to do so.
NAVIGATION .LAWS.
On :he m •tioe for the order of the day,
Mr. mucHELL said hi. ewisider'd that there should
be an ext, n,ioil of lit navigation laws, anti that any
ship having proved that silo had soled On the Ist id
September. should be admitted into this country.
No vessel coming from Archangel would come into this
country unless such were the case. for under the present
circumstances no merehant from that port. would ship for
this couetry. Let tnem take ti:e other ports, and they
would find the same would he the case. Ile thotight
that the Nobl.- L •rd berore the end of she present session
would have to propose alt extension of the navigation laws.
He was eu4e convinced that neither from the Black tier
the White Sea would there be any chance of vessels sr-
riving before the Ist of September, and few would sail
to English ports, unless they had some assurance th
they would be admitted after that date. He would be
glad it- the G .verument would consider the question,
and relax the resolution to seine extent.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said that perhaps before
the Chancellor of the Excht quer answered the questions
of the Hon. Member for Bridport, he (Mr. Stafford
O'Brien) might be permitted t., put one having some re-
lation to the same subject. By the Act passed last session
the duty was to be remitted in 1849, or only a nominal
duty of is. per quarter imposed. Now he wished to
knew whether the duty was to be altogether rescinded,
and if so, whether the Government intended to take any
steps to ascertain what quantity of :corn would be im-
ported into the country ?
-The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he would answer the last question first. It was the
intention of the Government to suspend all duty on corn
after September, 1849 ; and the Government still pro-
posed to register the quantity introduced into the ports
to-morrow. With regard to the question of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Bridport, it was the intention
and effect of the Act, that ships must enter the parts of
England before the Ist of September, and this period
was fixed in order to give time to ships load•
ing at the most distant ports to arrive in this
country. Corn imported from the Black Sea,
from the mouths of the Danube and Odessa,
would require only two months to arrive in
this country, and vessels sailing therefore in June
or July would have ample time to arrive
in England before the pelod referred to in the Act.
His own impression was that a great quantity of corn
exported from the countries he mentioned would start
in the mouths of May and June to this country, and all
of which might be fairly expected to arrive in this
country before the Ist of September.
The Corn Bill was then forwarded through its re-
maining stages.
On the motion that the Navigation Bill be read a
second time,
dr. HUME said that it had been his intention to give
notice that he should move that this Bill should be
a general and immediate repeal of these laws, but,
as he understood that his Hon. Friend near him had
given notice that he should move for a Committee to in-
quire into the navigation laws, he should do so ; and
he trusted that in that Committee all matters with refer-
ence to them would be settled satisfactory.
Dr. BOWRING wished to ascertain if the Govern-
ment had consented to grant that Select Committee?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, whose reply was inaudible,
was understood to answer in the affirmative.
The Bill was then read a second time.
The House then went into Committee on the Naviga-
tion Bill.
The first clause was read and agreed to.
On the sec .nd clause being read,
Mr. MITCtIELL moved that the words "on and after
the Ist of September" should be omitted, and that
the Act should extend to all vessels which should be
proved to have embarked with their cargo on or before
the Is: of August. The amendment having been put,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that the great object
of Government in proposing the present Bill in sus-
pension of the navigation laws, was to obtain an early
supply of corn. He thought if any alteration were to
be made, it ought to be an earlier day ; be could not,
therefore, support the amendment of the Hon. Member
for Bridport.
Dr. BOWRING thought that the suggestion of the
Hon. M. mber would tend to give effect to the measures
of her Majesty's Government, rind he should therefore
support the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
wish, at the present moment, to express any general
opinion upon the navigation laws. He was not quite sure
whether it would not be better to take an earlier date.
By the next harvest they should get corn in large
quantities, but what they wanted before that
time was the greatest possible amount of grain,
and he apprehended by the Ist of September.
the day originally named, they should be enabled
to get into this country great quantities of grain.
Sir C. NAPIER said the statement of the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exehequer was all
very well, but supposing a vessel sailed from Odessa on
the Ist of July, the ordinary passage being two months,
but when it arrived at Gibraltar it encountered an east
westerly gale, and was prevented from reaching this
country till the Ist of September, what was to become
of the owner of the ship and his cargo ?
Sir W. CLAY deprecated the plan of affixing a cer-
tain date fer the completion of an uncertain operation.
The owners of vessels, although they took all
reasonable means to ensure their arrival here
within the specified period, might, from the
uncertain period occupier' in the voyage. be unable
to arrive here within the specified period. The passage
from the Black Sea occupied two months, and before the
corn produced, for instance, in the extreme parts of
Russia, during the ensuing harvest, could be conveyed
to the shores of the Black Sea for importation, the Ist of
September might have passed by. It they passed such
a provision, they would ultimately have to alter it.
Mr. FOSTER complained that the measure did not
go tar enough, and considered that the laws
relating to the importation of sugar and mo-
lasses, ought to have been suspended as well
as the laws relating to the importation of corn.
The Noble Lord had proposed the abrogation of the
penalties for using sugar and molasses in breweries, and,
therefore, the course he (Mr. Foster) proposed
seemed one which ought to have been adopted, in
order to benefit another portion of the people.
He certainly, therefore, thought that the same principles
which had induced the Government to suspend the
navigation laws with respect to corn would apply with
still,greater force to sugar, as far as it was now imported.
Mr. HOWARD DOUGLAS would certainly stre-
nuously oppose any alteration in the navigation laws,
because he thought that these laws were among the
wisest of this country, and they should not be interfered
with, but strictly preserved.
Mr. WIVI. BRO o N said the consequence would be
that, if vessels were allowed to arrive here after the
Ist of September, there ;would. be no security
against deception, and he hoped that the Government
would not censent to make laws to deprive them of the
advantages which they at present enjoyed under certain
regulations.
Mr. BARING said, gentlemen were not aware that in
all these cases there was a discretionary power vested
in the Treasury, and if it could be fairly proved to them
that to op et the ports would be an advantage, they
would cer ainly exercise that discretionary power.
Mr. WILLIAMS said that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer seemed to think that by limiting the suspen-
sion of the laws till September it would force foreign
countries to send forward their supplies. He might rest
assured, however, that all available stores would be sent
here without delay. The whole difficulty appeared to him
to be the want of shipping. lie believed that all vessels were
employed, and under these circumstances he considered
that every facility should be given that vessels might
come in with the greatest possible expedition. He was
of opinion, therefore, that this would be best secured
by a further extension of the period of suspension.
Mr. LIDDELL would offer nu opposition to the mea-
sures of ;he Government. He thought they were about
to pursue a course which was calculatsd to meet the
emergency of the times, and for that reason they should
receive his support. He would not take so discursive a
view of the question as the Honourable Member
for Liverpool had, and regard the measure
as a wedge by which it was intended to
break away the navigation laws. He would look at
it as a measure intended to meet the distress which pre-
vailed through the country, and for this reason would
give it his support. The Hon. Member for the Pot-
teries had intimated that he intended to bring the
navigation laws under the consideration of the House.
If so, he hoped that timely notice of his intention would be
given to those interested in them, fur he believed that
their shipping was the bulwark of the country, and their
commercial marine the source of their great prosperity.
He had reason to believe that the opinions of those who
occupied the chief position among the shipping interests
were quite opposed to the measure:: of the Government
for the repeal of these navigation-laws.
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS, who rose with Mr. Dun-
combe, simply wis •ed to explain that he was not op-
posed to the suspension, but only to the repeal of the
laws.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE believed that the object of
the House at present was not to consider the advi•
sability or non advisability of retaining the navi-
gation Laws, but whether they were to give effect
to the measures which Government had proposed.
The question was now whether they should maintain
these laws inviolate, or sup .ort the proposition.
which the Government had made. An Hon. Friend had
moved an amendment, and the present Chancellor of the
Exchequer and a late Chancellor of the Exchequer had
both given their opinions upon the measure. For his
own part he believed that the measure would not be
complete without the amendment of his Hon. Friend.
Some time had been propesed for the conclusion
of the suspension, but they had no authority for
supposing that it would net be opposed. The
Ist of September had been proposed as the proper time,
but, on whose authority, or for what reason, was not
stated either by the mover or seconder of the propose
tion. If eiteer of the gentlemen behind him, or those
who sat on the opposite side, gave an assurance that they
would not oppose the proposition, then the House
would utidencand the position in which it was placed.
This a .me individual advised Ministers that corn
must go down, and yet in spite of this ad-
vice it actually did go up. Now, who was that
individual? Tee Committee had heard the opinion of
two gentlemen connected with the mercantile and ship-
tan;.; interest in that House, and he was inclined
to plaee confidence in that opinion, because he had
heel d reeson founvh d in common sense or justice
acne it sheuld he objected to.—(Hear, hear.)
teed JOHN ;CUSS-LL was understood to say that
should the contemplated contingency embraced by the

amendment arise before the Ist of September, the mea-
sures would be prepared to meet it. This would show
that Ministers desired to do their best under I he circum-
stances. He could not venture to go further in his
promise.
Lord G. BENTINCK was not disposed to press the
amendment, because he was quite sure the Government
would do what was right. In his opinion it mattered
little whether the navigation laws were suspended at this
period or not. He ;bought an erroneous impression had
got abroad, that they had lost opportunities of importing
coi.siderabie quantities of corn from the United States of
America, from the existence of the navigation laws and the
4s. duty, and that in this respect France had recently
had considerably the advantage over England. Now
this impression was certainly not borne out by the im-
portation returns of the United States of America from
the Ist of Sept. last till the 22d of Dec. The returns re-
lated to the ports of New York, New Orleans and Bos •
ton. Now the importations of corn from these ports to
France during the period ho had named were 65,000
quarters of every description, while those to Great
Britain and Ireland amounted to no less than
526,000 quarters. He thought from that state-
ment the House and the country would see
that Ministers had committed no great •rime against
the people of Ireland in not having exhibited
greater haste to suspend these laws.—(Hear, hear.)
He believed neither the navigation nor the corn laws
had anything to do with the exports of grain to France and
Great Britain. Respecting the supply of corn for France
from Odessa, a very high authority among the political
economists, the Economist newspaper said great ad-
vantages had been bestowed on France through
the operation of the navigation laws ; and that no less
than fifteen ships belonging to foreign nations, princi-
pally Neapolitan and Greek, were loading there
with cargoes .of corn for Marseilles. The infor-
mation of the Economist on this subject, he
believed to be incorrect, as it appears the
names of some of the ships which were given,
were the Barbeck, the Hydriot, the Cleope, the Newton,
the Maria Theresa, and the Fire Fly ; and the last in
the list was the Dicky Sand—(Laughter)—names that
would indicate the vessels were more likely load-
iog for England than France.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.")
If he might be allowed to throw out a suggestion to the
Noble Lord, it was to extend the same principle to
British as to foreign vessels, as by this short Act British
ships would be left under a disadvantage, being
obliged to have three-fourths of their crew
British sailors. There were other restrictions that
should be removed. British shipowners complained that,
in competing with foreign shipowners, they were obliged
to take a certain number of apprentices. He would
suggest to his Noble Friend to take these matters into his
serious consideration, to place British shipowners on an
equal footing with foreign shipowners, and to suspend
all laws that operated to produce a difference as far as
it was possible for him to do so.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DUNCAN considered that it would be impos-
sible that any vessel loading in the Black Sea in June
or July could reach this country in time to avoid the
infraction of the law; and merchants and shippers,
knowing the risk, would not adventure their capital.
Mr. MOFFATT thought that no harm would result
from the following out the suggestion of the Hon.
Member for Bridport.
Mr. EWART disclaimed the doctrime propounded
by the Hon. Member for Bath, that they should leave
the matter in the hands of the Government. Some means
should be adopted to allow the entrance of ships which
had taken in their cargoes before a certain fixed period.
Mr. MITCHELL wished to say a few words in
answer to some observations which fell from the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The
Right Hon. Gentleman reckoned the voyage from
Odessa at two months, under ordinary circumstances.
He (Mr. Mitchell) was aware that it was a three-and-a.
half months voyage. He had not heard any satisfactory
argument against the course which he had proposed.
Mr. BROTHERTON thought the proposition of
the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Bridport a
very reasonable one, and the principle it involved was
a fair one as it regarded these foreign arrivals.
Mr. COLLETT—One additional reason for agreeing
to the amendment would be that vessels arriving after the
day would be liable to a duty of four shillings. '
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it • lBB
Majority -138

The remaining cliusei were then agreed to, the
House resumed, and the Bill went through its remaining
stages.

SUPPLY.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the House then resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of Supply pro forma, and a resolution was agreed
to, granting supplies for the use of her Majesty.
The report was ordered to be brought up on Monday
next.

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH.-SUGAR, MOLASSES,

the brewers to resume their consumption of malt.
If it had been admissible to use plain sugar in breweries,
considering the present high price of malt, there would
not have been any necessity to raise the price of beer, a
circumstance which was to be regretted in an
article which was so extensively used by the
labouring classes. Even in ordinary times, the
measure, he was persuaded, would prove of great
benefit to all parts of the United Kingdom. In the
present state of the country, and the high price
of malt, he believed that had the use of sugar
been allowed. the increase in the price of ber
would not have taken place. Recently the price
of malt was 84s. per quarter, it had risen to 88s., and
he was informed last night by a friend that it had risen
as high as 90s. Taking it, however, only at 84s, the
price of sugar was 475. per cwt. N 180Ibs. of sugar,
at 475. per cwt., cost 755. 6d., and will produce a quantity
of beer equal to that yielded by a quarter of malt; so by
the substitution one advantage would be gained, equal to
the extent of 6s. upon every barrel of strong beer. At
the present moment, therefore, the effect of the mea-
sure would be to have a considerable quantity of sugar to
be used in breweries and distilleries, and the tendency
would be to reduce the price of beer and to increase its
consumption by the people. It was not his be-
lies that there would be. in ordinary times, if this
measure was permanent, a competition between
sugar and malt. If they took 625. a quarter, the price
of malt in ordinary years, there could not be a successful
competition between that article and sugar, unless the
latter was 353. per cwt. lie was fully persuaded
that while the measure would have a tendency at the
present time of liberating a considerable amount of
grain for malting, cheapen an essential article
of consumption, it would exercise no injurious
influence on the growers of barley.—(Hear, hear.) It
was his intention, therefore, to introduce a proposition
that brewers should be allowed to use duty-paid sugar
in brewing. With regard to molasses, he was not pre-
pared to make the same concession as in the case of
duty-paid sugar. He found that all the Acts which had
passed upon this subject prohibited the use of molasses,
and although sugars had been permitted to be
used in the process of brewing, the duty on molasses
was at present ss. 3d., and it was generally as-
sumed that 2521b5. of molasses was equal to
a quarter of barley. Assuming, therefore, that 252 lbs.
of molasses was equal to a quarter of malt, they a ould
require to impose a duty of 9s. Bd. instead of ss. 3d.
It was very easy to say they did not know which article
ought to be allowed to the brewers, for there were
various articles which the brewers were prohibited
from having, but they allowed them to have a
certain quantity of molasses. It would be very
difficult to distinguish between that which they had
allowed to them and that which had not paid the Excise
duty. It would be indispensably necessary, in order to
protect the interest of the revenue, to establish those
minute surveys of brewers' stock which had been discon-
tinued for so long a time, but it was not necessary that
any regular survey should take place in order to prevent
this evil, as it would certainly cause a great loss to the
brewers. Therefore he did not think it would be a boon
of any great value to the West India sugar manufac-
turers. It must also be observed, that the process of
the manufacture of sugar was daily improving, and the
consequence of that improvement was a diminution in
the quantity of molasses; and also the greater quantity
of rum that was produced the less the quantity of mo-
lasses, and therefore greater facility would be given to the
West India planters by the introduction of rum and sugar.
He then came to the question of distilleries. By the
law at present sugar might be used in distilleries,
at least it was lawful for any distiller to give notice
that he intended to distil from sugar, but it was
incumbent upon him that some time should elapse
between his distillation from sugar and from grain. He
could not use them nor distil from both at the
same time. It was necessary to make this arrangement
for the sake of the revenue, as, with a due regard
to its interests, it was impossible to allow corn and sugar
to be used together in distilleries. He believed that he
should command the assent of every gentleman in that
House, when he said that spirit was an article on which
it was fair to raise the maximum amount of duty. No
one was anxious to extend-the consumption of spirits,
and the only risk in raising the duty was the
risk of incurring illicit distillation. In this country,
the present duty being 7s. 10d , illegal distillation was
barely kept down, but in Ireland it was impossible to
maintain a high duty, in consequence of the many
facilities for defrauding the revenue. Various attempts
had been made to obtain a larger amount of revenue
than that which was obtained at present; they had, how-
ever, failed, and the present result had been found, after
considerable experience, to be as high as consistent with-
out encouragieg illicit distillation. And, therefore,
considering the vast amount of money which accrued
to the revenue from the duty on distillation,
Gentlemen would see that it was of essential importance
that they should not suffer it to be diminished.—
(Hear, hear.) There were three periods in the process
of distillation, in which the spirit was raised in price
and it was in the option of the revenue to choose
which they preferred, and which would be most
favourable to the revenue. One of those tests was
entirely lost by the process of the distillation of sugar.
Thus the officers would be reduced to two tests, and it
was their opinion, as far as their experience went, that
it would not be safe, considering the interests
of the revenue, to allow both sugar and corn to be dis-
tilled together. But this was not all; it was the opinion.
of some of the most extensive distillers in this country,
that molasses and sugar could nut be profitably worked
together, or, in other words, that they should be kept
separate. Mr. Smith, in his evidence, said that he
thought that molasses or grain could not be
fermented with advantage together, as it would occa-
sion an abso-ute loss by perfect fermentation.
Other evidence to the same effect was read by the Right
Honourable Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
the purport of which was that they did not think it
would be advantageous to use corn and
molasses together. The Right Honourable Baronet
went on to say that they never did so when they had
the power, and they never would ; he did not think
therefore that any real advantage could result from a
e pro iv• -ion for the use of molasses with corn. The real !
objection to the use of molasses and sugar in distilleries '
was the large amount of duty levied upon. them
before tie y could be used. That objection he pro-
posed by the present measure to remove, and practically
tree
he proposed to allow the use of sugar duty
for distillation ; practically so, at least, except to this
extent. He would levy an amount of duty from the
spirit equivalent to that at present levied upon malt.
In England the distillation of spirits was effected
from a mixture of various sorts of grain, in these
proportions—two parts of malt, two parts of hops, and
eighteen parts of barley; or to make that appear clear to
the House he would give them these quantities, 2 quarters
of oats, 2 quarters of malt, and 18 quarters of barley ;
that would be a mixture of grain suited for the purposes
of distillation. Now, it was evident that the duty
had to be levied in two different ways—first, it was
levied upon the spirit, the produce of that distillation,
and it was also levied upon the
the spirit was produced. What he proposedmalt from which
the
do was this —that a certain rate of duty should
be levied 'upon spirits, the produce of sugar or,
molasses, equivalent to the duty at present levied
upon spirtts the produce of malt and grain. tee,
with the duty at present payable .iipsonan
d he
The mode in which he proposed to effecthtish
believed it was free from objection—was S
distiller should take his sugar t;h—ethawtatrhee.
house upon paying the duty; that he
e top aY the
purpose of distillation, and that when be
~
_wanefrom
should use it for the
spirit duty, he should have an ll°
that spirit duty equivalent to theB
en the sugar
tween the duty which he had paid difference be-
so taken from the warehouse, and that
malt. Now Now that, ac-
uPnich he would
have beee called upon to pay upon esa.••• in previous
cording to the calculation usually adopted was equiva-
Acts, is Is. 2d. per cwt. upon sugar, whichedin distilleries.
lent to the duty paid upon malt used
Consequently, he would have an allowance
• 't w sch was °r drawback
drawback
of 12s. 10d. on the quantity of spirit
lased to be produced from oue in this
of sugar. which would leave thatd P
hsundirr.ted weight
situation—that it would be relieved from all the duty
paid upon sugar, and would have paid c The
uanll dountymeatiu.ivalent
beer slid
auodn
to that which would have been. paid
distinction between the duties uPwas 1
duty
spirits was this—that the
the fact ; so that
e was
the raw material in the case of beer, but in the
brewing of beer,
case of spirits the very reverse was
the
spiritts w.as pro-
in the case of malt required o
a larger
E chequer, which, if no Imposed
amount of revenue than on.
&Iced to the
on the raw material,x would be lost. Eleven and a half
lda
bety.e dded rote
gallons of spirit were produced
wouu
from eight cwt. of sugar,
nti Thi uct s
mifghtmtahe
spirit duty payable on that q k
and, therefore, 12s.
but he trusted
explain he made
his statement perfectly
some little time to exin
clear.—(Hears hear.) The
this,
that a drawback of 12s. 10d.
result was simply If gallons. All sugars, with
would be allowed on every
the exception of Muscovado, which paid a duty of 145.,
would have paid
would enjoys so lent, as the
present low duty
a differential duty on their importation;
therefore. our colonies
continued, en advantage over
foreign possessions which produced sugar. He did
in one of the
not think it necessary to ,go into detail. The pre-
sent price of barley was stated
Price Currents to be 545., but he believed that
was
below was as high as 63s , buts
below the present rate,
and sugar
he 54s;rices and would, therefore,
at 33se he took it
which was the
presentsuccessfully ith barley if it continued
compete
at the a week ago,
ofotye3aOrss:, and
gUgai was
which it was
price at
considering
But looking back at a series.
was at a Price
that when rum
be did not think then
as low as 18s., and there would
be the slightest competition between
barley and
sugar. When there was a rise in sugar, and a
full in the price of barley, or a rise in the price of
barley, and a fall in the price of sugar; there could be
no competition.
• • He believed that the advantages of
distilling from corn was so great that it could not be
considered, that either sugar or molasses could be much
interfered with. He did not think,
therefore, that to
distil from molasses would supersede the present
system of distillation, and whatever small advantages
might appear to result, lie did not think that it was of
sufficient importance to warrant a distinct provision for
molasses. He now arumo the duty on rum ; the
duty upon Colonial last year
was 9s. 6d.
Many attempts, at any rate more than one attempt was
made to reduce the amount of that differential duty, but
they were always resisted by the distillers and
others
who considered their interests would be injured by the
reduction. Last session of Parliament he felt satisfied-
that the arrangement then made, was such as
ought to have met the wishes of
all parties.
He considered that it was such as to meet the wishes of
both parties, in this country and the West Indies. But he
found that the remission was not sue
as to give
satisfaction to the distillers of the West Indies.
These representations were made in the strongest terms,
and the remission they asked was Is. 44d, He believed