The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 11.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woo
sack at Five o'Clock.

Messengers from the House of Commons brought up
certain Bills, which were respectively read a first time.
Lord STRAFFORD presented a petition from Lon-
donderry against lay patronage in the Church of Scotland;
also a petition from a place in the same county for the
repeal of the Corn-laws.
Lord ABINGER presented a petition for the suppres-
sion of the tolls on metropolitan bridges. He could not
concur in the prayer or in the reasoning of the peti-
tion. He thought the bridges were private speculations,
which ought to be paid for by those who use them. He
did not think the public money should be applied to re-
deem those tolls.

Lord HATHERTON said that the principle laid down
by the Noble and Learned Lord, would apply to the
advance of money by Government towards the building
of London-bridge.----(Hear, hear.)
Lord BERESFORD presented a petition from Ber-
mondsey, also against the bridge tolls. He supported the
prayer, and thought it very desirable that the tolls should
be redeemed, if the money could be raised in any reason-
able and equitable manner.

Lord DUNCANNON said that the subject had been
referred to the Select Committee of the House of Com-
mons on Metropolitan Improvements, and until the Re-
port of that Committee was received, the Government
could not determine upon taking any course.
Lord lIATHERTON presented several petitions re-
lating to Sunday traffic on canals.
Lord HADDINGTON gave notice that on the second
reading of Sir Walter Scott's Monument Bill, he would
move for the insertion of a clause to facilitate the trans-
fer of tho site.

ARMS (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of
the Arms (Ireland) Bill. He said it was considered ne-
cessary to renew, for another year, this measure, which
was now about to expire. The only alteration that had
been made in it since last year was, that any person wish-
ing to register arms should give ten days' notice.
After some verbal amendments, the Bill was read a
second time.

Lord DUNCANNON then moved the second reading
of the Dublin Wide Streets Bill.

After a few words from the Earl of WICKLOW, in
approbation of the measure, the Bill was read a second
time.

SLAVES' COMPENSATION.
On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON, the Slaves'
Compensation Bill was read a second time, the object of the
Bill being to enable the Government to settle the claims
still remaining without reference to an arbitrator.
Messengers from the Commons brought up the Pol-
lee and Govan Railway Bill, and several other Bills.
The Administration of Justice (Borough's) Bill was
laid on the table by the Marquis of NORMANBY. The
Bill was ordered to be read a second time on Friday.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from Dublin, praying that Liverpool should be made the
station for the West India packets.

The Noble MARQUIS presented also several petitions
from Ireland, on the subject of Medical Reform, and the
remuneration of medical officers to workhouses, and
other public institutions.
The School Sites' Conveyance Bill then went through
Committee, in which several verbal amendments were
.agreed to, on the motion of Lord DUNCANNON.
Lord MOUNTCASHEL begged to ask, whether there
was any clause excluding Ireland from the operation of
the Bill ?

The Marquis of LANDSDOWNE said that there was
no clause to that effect, but he intended to move the
insertion of one, for that purpose, in a future stage of
the Bill ; and to bring in a separate Bill for Ireland.
The Bill was then reported and ordered to be printed
with the amendments. To be read a third time on
Thursday.
INTEREST ON PROMISSORY NOTES.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE then moved for a
Select Committee to inquire into the amount of interest
now payable by law upon promissory notes. He would
not now go into a statement of his own views upon their
operation, but he would trouble their Lordships with a few
words upon the present state of the law. In the 4th of
William IV., upon certain representations from the
Bank of England, promissory notes under six months'
date were taken out of the usury laws. In the
Ist of Victoria, the exemption was extended to all
bills under twelve months' date. That Act would
expire towards the end of 1840, but in that year an Act
was passed to continue the experiment for two or
three years. The object of the inquiry did not re-
late to the expediency of bills of exchange, or to
usury generally, but to the expediency of giving a
certain facility to the advancement of 'honey, upon cer-
tain kinds of bills, by allowing a higher rate of interest
than usual upon them in some cases.

Lord ASIIBURTON was understood to say that he
was by no means unfavourable to inquiry, as his own
ideas on the subject were quite unfixed, but he had
rather the inquiry were postponed for another year, when
there would be sufficient experience of the present law.
After a few words from the Marquis of LANDS-
-I)OWNE the motion (with a slight alteration) was
agreed to, and tho Committee was appointed.
CORN-LAWS.
The Earl of FITZWILLIAM presented petitions
from places in Staffordshire, against the present Corn-
laws.

The Earl of RADNOR postponed till to-morrow the
motion for returns respecting importation of corn, of
which he had given notice for this evening. The Noble
Lord, however, read a number of returns from the
year 1810 down to last year, in confirmation of his state-
ment last evening that Scotland had of late years been
supplied with corn and flour from Ireland to a large
amount, and that the exportation of grain from Ireland
had been gradually diminishing for eight years. This
diminution, he contended, was attributable solely to
bad seasons, but in a great measure to increased con-
sumption at home.
The Earl of HADDINGTON had not denied that
grain was imported into Scotland. What he said was
that corn was imported into this country from Scotland,
the corn received by the latter country from this being
chiefly for the purpose of seed. There was also a large
quantity of the finest flour for confectionery and the
like exported (especially from Hertfordshire) to Scot-
land. But this bore no proportion to the whole con-
sumption. •
Lord MONTEAGLE said that the argument of his
Noble Friend (Earl Radnor) was complete, and
showed from the Custom-house returns, which could
not be impeached or disputed, that Scotland had
lately become on importing country to a much
greater extent than an exporting one. In four of the
years, referred to in the returns, Scotland imported more
wheat than the rest of the united Kingdom.
The Earl of HADDINGTOS
begged to ask if the
Noble Lord (Radnor) meant to say that Scotland imported
121,000 quarters more than she exported ?
The Earl of RADNOR said that was precisely what
--
he meant.-(llear, hear.) He believed the returns wore
correct in showing the excess of
imported corn above
the exported to be of that large amount, but he was not
prepared to take his oath of it.--(A laugh.)
The Earl of GLENGALL said that the diminution of
the exportation of wheat from Ireland arose from the
same cause as the diminished excise upon distilled spirits
in that country. The people had taken to drink tea or
coffee instead of spirits • and with these beverages they
ate a great deal of bread, which was a kind of food they
never thought of before.—(Hear.)

The Earl of RADNOR was very glad to hear so satis-
factory a cause assigned for a diminution in the export.
Lord ASHBURTON deprecated those. irregular dis-
cussions of so important a question. He believed that
he was misunderstood in an observation which he made
last night, and which was to the effect that the improve-
ments in agriculture would enable our own farmers to
supply the population, with the exception of occasional
years of scarcity, for which it was the great merit and
utility of the present system of Corn-laws to provide a
relief.—(Hear, hear.) Although it was true that on one
occasion wheat did rise so high as 955. a quarter,
yet, making allowance for the vicissitudes of the seasons,
the price had maintained a most remarkable steadiness
since the establishment of the present law.—(Hear, hear.)
Before he sat down he must observe that he never ar-
gued that law prices, arising from a good harvest, were
an injury to the farmer, because the latter was indem-
nified by the abundance of his crop.—(Hear, hear.) It
was quite a different thing when the low price was occa-
sioned by the competition of the foreigner.—(Hear.)
The Earl of WICKLOW said that the figures read by
the Noble Lord (Radnor) opposite were his own figures,
and were not of equal authority with those which other
Noble Lords had read in reply from papers on the table
of the House. He deprecated the unfairness of coming
down prepared for discussions of this question by details,
without giving such notice as would enable other Noble
Lords to prepare a reply.--(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of RADNOR said that as Noble Lords
seemed to doubt the statement of figures which he made
last night from memory, he had consulted the papers
from which he had taken them a year ago, and he only
referred to them this evening to confirm what he said
last night. Those papers were contained in the blue
book at that moment in the hands of a Noble Earl (Glen-
gall) poposite—(A laugh)—whose statement confirmed
his, and gave him great satisfaction, showing that
there had been for six or seven years a rapidly in-
creasing diminution of the export of corn from Ireland,
. occasioned by the increase of home consumption.
The Duke of WELLINGTON regretted that no no-
tice had been given of the intention of bringing on a
discussion of this question. Reference had been made to
former speeches of his Noble Friend (Lord Ashbur-
ton) and others on general questions of free trade, as if
the same principle applied to this question. Why, the
very first writer who Introduced the doctrine of free trad
in this country (Adam Smith) expressly excluded corn
from the application of his principles.--(Hear, hear.)
Adam Smith emphatically laid it down that care should
be taken that the subsistence of the people should not be
left to depend on the industry or good will of other na-
tions.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Duke of Wellington) was
still of opinion that if agriculture was to be continued in
this country, the protection must be maintained, and the
present system was perfectly efficacious and just.
Earl FITZWILLIAM said, that according to his re-
collection, what Adam Smith stated on the subject of
the Corn-laws of his day was, that he found those laws
very much in favour with corn-dealers and merchants,
to whom they were profitable, but that he doubted very
much that they were of any benefit to the farmers or to
the public.—(Hear, hear.) It was, perhaps, a long time
since the Noble Duke or himself read Adam Smith, and
it might be well if they looked into the book again, to be
better prePared for the next discussion.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.)
After a few words from Lord PORTMAN the conver-
sation dropped.
MANCHESTER AND LEEDS RAILWAY.
On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the Man-
cheste- and Leeds Railway Bill was read a third time and
passed.

CHURCH-EATER
Lord MELBOURNE presented petitions from Vial-
worth and other places, against Church-rates.
FRIVOLOUS SUITS BILL.
On the motion of Lord DENMAN, the Frivolous Suits
Bill was read a second time.
Their Lordships Adjourned at twenty minutes past
Seven, to Thursday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 11.
The SPE/Mtn took the Chair at Four o'clock.
On the motion that the Report of the Committee on
the Kidderminster Small Tenements Bill be brought up,
Mr. PRYME objected to the reception of the Report,
on the ground that the effect of the Bill, as it then stood,
would be to disfranchise many municipal electors, by ra-
ting the landlords of small tenements instead of the occu-
piers. When the Bill was first introduced, it contained a
clause preserving all Parliamentary and Municipal fran-
chises to those who were at present entitled to them ; that
clause had been struck out in Committee, and consequent-
ly the Bill would have a disfranchising effect. On that
ground he should move that the Report be received that
day six months.
Mr. GODSON had wished that clause to be retained,
and if the Hon. Member would withdraw his amend-
ment, he would on the third reading bring up a clause,
which would be a re-insertion of the clause struck out
in Committee.
Mr. BERNAL, as Chairman of the Committee, had
considered it doubtful how far such a clause could le-
gally take effect, and had therefore thought it best to
strike it out.
After a short conversation, Mr. PRYME withdrew his
amendment, on the understanding that the clause should
be introduced on the third reading. The Report was
then brought up.
The Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Carlisle Railway Bill
was read a second time.
The Lords' Amendments to the Liverpool Gas Bill
were agreed to.
The Lords' Amendments to the Northern and Eastern
Railway Deviation Bill were agreed to.
The Wells and Highbridge Roads Bill, and the Rox-
burgh and Dumfries Roads Bill, were respectively read
third time and passed.
Mr. GILLON presented a petition from a place in
Forfar, in favour of the repeal of the bread-tax.
Sir E. KERRISON presented similar petitions.
Mr. WARD presented a petition from Sheffield in
favour of the abolition of Church-rates ; also a petition
from the same place, which, in the course of three hours,
had received 13,370 signatures, praying that the Corn
and Provision-laws might be repealed, and that the
whole system of the Import Duties might be revised.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented 16 petitions for the
repeal of the Corn-laws, from different parts of Lanca-
shire and Staffordshire ; also 15 petitions from the opera-
tives of different parts of these counties.
Sir JOHN NEELD presented petitions from different
parts of Northamptonshire against any alteration in the
Corn-laws.
Mr. EASTHOPE presented upwards of eighty peti-
tions from different parts of England for the abolition
of Church-rates, and the extinction of Ecclesiastical
Courts.
Mr. EVANS presented several petitions from Baptist
congregations in Leicester, to the same effect.
Mr. WALLACE
.presented a petition from the Sugar
refiners of Glasgow in favour of the Government propo-
sition for the repeal of the duty on Sugar.
Mr. LANGDALE presented two petitions from con-
gregations of Baptists in Stone, praying for the admis-
sion of Dissenting Ministers to poor-houses.
Sir W. YOUNG presented petitions from various
places in Bucks, against an alteration of the Corn-laws.
Sir R. INGLIS, on behalf of the Hon. Member for
Liverpool, presented a petition from the Town Council of
the Borough of Liverpool, praying that Liverpool may
be appointed the mail-packet station for the West Indies.
The Hon. Member presented 29 petitions in favour of
Church Extension.
Sir G. STICKLAND presented a petition from the
county of York, praying for the abolition of Church-
rates, and of the Jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts.
Colonel SALWEY presented a petition from the in-
habitants of Mirch Wenlock, in Salop, praying that the
Corn-laws may be immediately and entirely abolished.
Also petitions to the same effect from the working men
in the employ of Messrs. Macmichael and Grierson, car-
pet-manufacturers, Bridgenorth ; from the working men
in the employ of Messrs. Southwell, carpet-manufactur-
ers, 13ridgenorth ; and from the working men in the em-
ploy of Mr. Josiah Griffiths, of Quatford, in the county
of Salop.
Mr. BAINES presented a petition from the merchants,
bankers, and manufacturers of Leeds, in favour of the
measures introduced by her Majesty's Government, for
the reduction of the duties on Sugar and Timber, and
for the amelioration of the duties on Corn, from several
bodies of workmen in Leeds, in favour of a repeal of
the Corn-laws. The Hon. Member also presentedpeti lions
to the same from three places in Yorkshire ; also petitions
from the Wesleyan Methodists, Protestant Dissenters,
Baptists, and Independants of Leeds, prayingfor the aboli-
tion of Church-rates ; also a petition, signed by 25,485 of the
inhabitants of Leeds, praying for the abolition of the
Corn-laws.

Mr. TACIT presented petitions from the builders, brass-
founder3, and other trades of Manchester, against the
Corn-laws ; also a petition from Knaresborough, in
favour of the reduction of the duties on sugar, timber,
and corn.

Mr. BERKELEY presented 15 petitions from Dissent-
ing Congregations in Bristol, praying for the abolition of
Church-rates and Ecclesiastical Courts ; also a petition
from a place in Gloucestershire, to the same effect ; and
a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Bristol,
against the alteration of the duty on timber.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE presented a petition from Not-
tingham in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laws ; and
another from the medical practitioners of the same place,
praying for medical reform.

Mr. B. WOOD presented petitions from the Dissent-
ing Congregations of Shadwell, Peckham, Clerkenwell.
and other places in the Metropolis, praying for the abo-
lition of Church-rates.

Mr. THORNELY presented a petition to the same
effect from the Dissenters of South Shields.
Mr. PATTESON presented similar petitions from
Dissenting Congregations in London.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice, that on Tuesday,
the 25th of May, he should move an humble address to
her Majesty, praying that her Majesty would be gra-
ciously pleased to take measures for the liberation of all
political offenders now suffering imprisonment.
CHURCH-RATES.
Petitions praying for the abolition of Church-rates and
Ecclesiastical Courts were presented by Mr. Pryme from
Cambridge and Cottenham ; by Sir George Grey, from
Devonport ' • by Mr. Ewart, from Chorley, and other
places ; by Mr. Hume, from Leighton Buzzard, Kentish
Town, and Weymouth ; by Mr. R. Gordon, from Ports-
mouth and two other places ; by Mr. T. Duncombe, from
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Buckinghamshire, and a district of
the metropolis ; and by Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, from
Reading.
Mr. EASTHOPE then rose for leave to bring ia
to abolish Church-rates. He was quite aware or the in-
convenience that would arise from any interference with
the debate which was adjourned last night, and
he was most anxious not to offer any such in-
terference ; but after the number of petitions that
had been presented, and the excitement that pre-
vailed in the country, whatever his reluctance might be,
he thought the House would admit that it was impossible
that he could consistently ostpone his motion. He
trusted, therefore, that the douse W 9414110 him

-- to

introduce his Bill, and in such case he proposed not to
go into the subject at all on the present occasion, but to
take the debate upon the second reading. He,
therefore, moved for leave to bring in a Bill fir
abolishing Church-rates, and for making other provision
for the maintenance of churches and chapels in England
and Wales.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he understood the Hon.
Member to state that this was a Bill for abolishing
Church-rates, and making other provision for the erec-
tion of churches. If this were the case, he
should have no objection to the Bill being laid on the
table, and to see what the other provisions were. He
believed there could not be much difference of opinion
that this was a desirable object, but if the provisions were
not satisfactory, he should certainly vote against the
second reading.—(Hear, hear.)
Dr. NICHOLLS said he thought this was not a
proper moment for the introduction of a Bill of so much
importance ; the law of the land had been ascertained by
the decision of the Court of Exchequer ; and, therefore,
his Hon. Friend was not justified in introducing, without
giving any reason for it, a Bill to change the law of the
land. Should such a bill be introduced, he should be
ready to discuss it • but on the present occasion he
should move an amendment, that the Order of the Day
for resuming the adjourned debate be now read.--(Hear,
hear.)
Sir R. H. INGLIS seconded the amendment, observ-
ing that he could not agree with the Noble Lord as to
the expediency, under any circumstances, of abolishing
Church-rates.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. EASTHOPE had not expected such an opposi-
tion to his motion. He was sure that the opposition he
met with would be viewed in the country with much
dissatisfaction. He was very anxious that he should
not interfere with the expected business of the House,
but met in the way he had been, he would press the
question to a division.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—If the House had acceded
to the proposition of the Hon. Member he would have
willingly agreed, but as objections had been taken to the
motion, he trusted the Hon. Member would not stand in
the way of the House proceeding with the adjourned
debate. He could not vote for the introduction of the
Bill, because, under the circumstances in which they
were placed, the House was not prepared for the intro-
duction of such a measure.
Mr. HUME had hoped there would have been no op-
position to the introduction of the Bill, as it was almost
the same as had been before the House for the last two
sessions. However, as such objection was found with the
motion, under all the circumstances of the case, he would
advise his Hon. Friend not to divide the House upon the
question, but bring it forward at a fitter opportunity.
Therefore, although his Hon. Friend had been already
subjected to so many disappointments, he would advise
him to submit to one more disappointment on the pre-
sent occasion, and to withdraw his motion. If he saw
any probability of carrying a division, even
without discussion, he would advise his Hon. Friend to
persevere ; but as he saw no chance of carrying a division,
in the then temper of the House, he should advise his
Hon. Friend to withdraw his motion, on the under-
standing that an early day should be fixed for the dis-
cussion of the subject.
Mr. EASTHOPE trusted the House would believe
that he was exceedingly reluctant to press an mo+3ion
against the sense of the House ; but he felt thati:ie should
be neglecting his duty, and compromising. the interests
of the numerous petitioners who nad intrusted their
cause to his hands, if, in witll!...rawing his motion, he did
not entreat that an early'
aaL be might fixed for bringing
forward the question, On Tuesday next there were se-
veral notices on the paper which would take precedence
of his, but he would, in withdrawing the motion, give no-
tice that on that day fortnight he should bring it forward
again.
The motion was then withdrawn.
RETURNS.
Mr. HUME moved for an account of the amount of
the fund denominated the " suitors' fund" in Chancery
on the Ist day of January, 1833, stating how the same
was at that time invested. The amount of dividends re-
ceived, of payments made, and of surplus at the same
date in each year, up to the Ist day of January, 1841 ;
stating the payments under the heads of salaries, sur-
veyor of buildings, legal expenses, and miscellaneous.
Account, in detail, of the manner in which the sum
paid from the " suitors' fund," in Chancery, in
the year 1840 was applied ; stating the name of each
person to whom any salary or payment was made, and
the amount of such salary or payment ; also, the sums
paid for other purposes than salaries or fees, to whom
and for what purposes paid. Account, in detail, of the
manner in which the sum for Miscellaneous Ser-
vices was expended in 1840. Account of the
amount received by the Accountant-General for
brokerage, in each year, from the Ist day of
January, 1833, to the Ist day of January, 1841—Ordered.
Also for returns of the establishment of the City of Lon-
don Police Force, as it existed on the 31st day of
December, 1840 ; distinguishing the number and pay
of each class, whether officers or constables, the
names and salaries of the Commissioners, Receiver,
and other Clerks, with any incidental expenses of rent,
coals, candles, servants, or other allowances ; also, a de-
tailed Return, of the Pay and Contingencies of the rest
of the Establishments, stating the number and locality
of the stations and receiving houses, with the rent and
taxes, and other expenses for the same ; with a Summary
of the total receipt and expenditure of the entire Esta-
blishment, from the Ist day of January to the 31st day
of December 1840 (in the same form as the Metropoli-
tan Police Return, Parl. Paper, No. 172) : of the num-
ber and locality of the stations and receiving-
houses of the Metropolitan Police at this time, stating
the rent, taxes, and other expenses ; showing the total
amount at each station, under the several heads (as en-
tered in the Parliamentary Paper No. 172, of 1841) :
of the number and locality of the stations and receiving-
houses of the City of London Police at this time, stating
the rent, taxes, and other expenses ; showing the total
amount at each station, under the several heads (as en-
tered in the Parliamentary Paper No. 172, of 1841.)
Mr. HOSKINS obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
exempt lime as manure from the payment of turnpike
tolls.

On the motion of Mr. FRESHPEELD, the folhwing
Members were nominated as a Select Committee on
West India Mails :—Mr. Freshileld, Lord Dcdmeny, Lord
Viscount Ingestre, Captain Pechell, Captain Bun-
combe, Mr. Charles Wood, Sir Thomas Cochrane, Mr.
John O'Connell, Lord Viscount Sandon, Lord Worsley,
Mr. Philip Miles, Mr. Craig, Mr. De Horsey, Mr. Os-
wald, and Mr. Richard Hodgson.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for Ireland obtained
leave to bring in a Bill for the more easy recovery of
Arrears of Composition for Tithes, from persons of the
persuasion of the peopl6 called Quakers, in Ireland.
SUGAR DUTIES.
On the Order of the day for the Adjourned Debate
for the House going into Committee on Ways and Means
being read,

Mr. GROTE presented thirteen petitions, signed by a
considerable number of persons residing in the metropo-
lis, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. The Hon-
ourable Member also presented a petition from the
wholesale and retail grocers of the "metropolis,
praying the House to :adopt the measure proposed by
her Majesty's Government, relative to the Sugar Duties.
Mr. EWART presented a petition from Liverpool, in
favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. FIELDEN presented a petition from Oldham to
the same effect.

Mr. HUMS presented various petitions to the same
effect, from the fishermen of Peterhead and various parts
of Scotland.

Mr. MARK PHILLIPS presented a similar petition
from Manchester, signed by 61,629 persons.—(Cheering.)
Mr. RAIKES CURRIE presented a petition in
favour of the measure introduced by her Majesty's
Government for the reduction of the duties on Sugar,
Timber, and Corn.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Mr. MACAULAY said that, unwilling as he was to
stand in the way of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Gisborne),
who had a right to address the House, yet he ought to
feel no difficulty in presenting himself at the first oppor-
tunity to the attention of the House. It appeared that he
(Mr. Macaulay) was not in his place yesterday evening.
Had he been there, however, perhaps he might have
had some difficulty in addressing the house in the state
in which it then was. He should notwithstanding have
trusted that, during the very few moments in which he
would have felt it necessary to offer himself to the House,
he would have experienced that courtesy which, even in
the midst of the most excited political discussions,
he believed that House never refused to any
Member, be his personal feelings what they
might. He was glad, however, that ho had not been in
his place. It was not till that morning that he be-

came acquainted with some part —of the de-
bate which took place yesterday evening. The
consequence was that he now came down to the
House without any feeling of irritation. He (Mr.
Macaulay) did not believe that his Honourable Friend
—for he would still call him his Hon. Friend—the Mem-

ber for Newark had intended anything personally offen-
sive in his speech of the preceding evening, to one
from whom he never received any personal provocation,
He was satisfied that he might also add, that some
part of the expressions which he saw were
imputed to his Hon. Friend, was of a nature so gratifying
to his (Mr Macaulay's) feelings as to more than com-
pensate, what could be given to him by censures which
he was conscious he had not deserved.—(Hear.) Avoid-
ing, therefore, all irritable expressions avoiding
all recrimination or retort, he would request the
attention of the House during a very few moments.
He had not intended to take any part
in that debate, and lie would have been satisfied that
the general principle of the measures brought
forward by the Government, should have been left to
rest upon that most luminous and eloquent exposition made
of them on Friday night by his Noble Friend near him
(Lord J. Russell), to which he felt it would be diffi-
cult to add anything.—(Hear, hear). The question of
details he should have left with equal pleasure to his
Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and the President of the Board of Trade, and
other gentlemen whose intimate knowlege of
of the manufacturing interests of the country would
enable them to treat those subjects with an ability
and an authority to which he (Mr. Macaulay)
could not 'pretend. He only offered himself to the House
for the purpose of alluding to the question on which it
was now impossible for him to remain silent ; but
he would refer as soberly and as temperately as he could
to those reasons which led him conscientiously
to believe that a person who had, according to his situation
and the measure,of his abilities,made exertions and sacrifices
for the purpose of removing from our laws the stain
of slavery—that a person who was sensible that
a peculiar responsibility lay upon him, derived
from exertions and sacrifices not his own, upon
great question, might honestly and . Luta
port the measure which h." - eoperly sup-
proposed to the Hon-. Majesty's Government
for Neu"'-' His Hon. Friend the Member
.• "Ay as he (Mr. Macaulay) understood,
'ladimputed to him, and to those who

EVENING _EDITION.

took the same view of the matter Ritb
him, some dereliction of principle. Nay, he spoke. it 'L`f
understood him rightly, of a laxity of principk
a certain infatuation, and of a judicial blindness svl
appeared to guide their course. Now he (Mr. IV •);;:
utterly at a loss to know what the principle was Is-,1
;'h
.
they were accused of violating. He had liLaai-,‘,4
to speeches, he had read the newspapers, d
looked to the resolution of the Honourable;
Member for Liverpool ; but still he could not imag.ae
what were those great principles of humanity which they
were accused of deserting. He did not
com-
plain .of the resolution before the House.
mlle
ode
of not deny that it was a very fit Inu"e
of advancing party interests, but he should say it con-
tained no great moral principle, but that it was 4 on the eeai
trary skilfully contrived as a party motion, the object of
which was to displace the . present advisers of
Crown. He saw nothing in that resolution which
could prevent those who opposed it from stall
ing in the same position which they occuPtea
before. He did not understand the morality of the
resolution.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Was it intended
to be said that there was any law of morality
which should prevent them from purchasing slave-grown
productions ? Were they not already purchasing
grown cotton in the United States, slave-grown tobsee!
and slave-grown coffee ? And with regard to the
very article of sugar, was there not a very large
quantity of slave-grown sugar allowed to be intro-
duced into various possessions of the British .Empire---
into Canada and the Cape ? 'What, then, *a_4
that great moral principle, that great general lac
of humanity and justice, which permitted slave-grow:
cotton to be put upon the feet, but did 11°‘
permit slave-grown sugar to be put into the mouth--
which permitted to smoke slave-grown tobacco, but did
not permit them to taste slave-grown sugar—or, rather•
which permitted them to drink slave-grown cede°, but
did not permit them to sweeten it with shave-groan
sugar—nay, which permitted them to eP:t it at Noe
foundland or Barbadoes, but did not permit them to 101
it in Lancashire or Yorkshire ?—(Hear;hear.) He per'
fectly understood that Hon. Gentlemen opposite might
have reasons for showing why they should countenaiW
it in one case and not in the other, but he altogether de'
nied that they could show any peat general law of ITO'
rality on which the distinction rested ; and he must sal
that when he contemplated the whole of the case, 1!
seemed to him that the discussion partook much less °' moral feeling than of party interest. These con'siderations certainly weighed on his mind.
He woo'A,
suppose that some as icing should mar
clown to that House, and called upon them to exclOttke
the cotton of the United States ; he would suppose
Or,
he drew, and he was afraid he might draw wiali grea' truth, a very melancholy and frightful picture of the
physical, social, and moral effects of sl,avery in the
southern States of America ; he would, suppose that
'2
tl
asked them whether they Would receive from that
country he believed between
three and four hundred
millions of pounds of cotter. annually, every ounce o(
which was produced }';y slavery ;—if such a person
was to come fox wad with that argument, and call upon
the
either by '-rohibition or by prohibitory duties, he iv°
11°118° to PP:ss a law to interdict slave-grown cotton.
...ant that the Right Hon. Baronet the Melly
oer for Tamworth, the Hon. Member for N.awark.
'and his Right Honourable Friend the Member
for , the Tower Hamlets, would all with one
voice declare that such a proposition was inadelia"
sible.—(Hear, hear.) The reasons they should assign
he could but very imperfectly give ; but when he stated
what the reasons were which influenced his own vote'
he would leave it to the House to say whether Owl
reasons might not apply to the present case. He shoal!..
say, if such a proposition were brought in, "I 00,1'
that slavery is a great and fearful evil—l admit -bat in
all those parts of the world which lie within Ode sphere
of our power, we lie under- a moral obligKion to fib?'
lish it. I admit that no cost, however grea!' that stands in
the way of so clear a duty, should, In that case, be coo;
sidered ; but the case of slavery, uswithin the sphere 'l'
our own power, and in foreign tountries, presented case'
of distinct features, and should be treated on Per,
fectly different princir,les.--(Hear, hear, hear.) IA
was not the legislitto; of the United States, nor or
he power to say to the planters of Carolina and Georgia'i
" You must Het your slaves at liberty, and admit th'
to the exercise of equal rights with yourselves." "t,
could only operate upon them by indirect means. What'
ever might be done by those rival means by which
nation acted upon another, that they were bound to 9_l'o
Nor should they stop here. He regarded with
highest admiration those efforts which had been rot,
.for the purpose of putting down the slave trade by mean
of our cruisers, and by treatingwith other nations for
the suppression of the slave trade. But he was not pre.
pared to join in any measure for suppressing slave tat.,
by suppressing commercial intercourse. The happlv.'
of our own people was especially committed to our chirCt;
All men had some claim upon them, but not all t"
same claim. In this country there was a manufacturing
population depending entirely for daily bread o°l7
remote markets. There were one million and a half
of people who were supported by the cotton manufae:
ture. It would be frightful to contemplate the etre.,
which would be produced by suppressing the trade in
slave-made cotton. It would reduce hundreds of thou.
sands to despair and famine, and shake all the institv:l'Ars
e
of the State ; would make Germany supply the *,,lace of
England, and turn the great body of our art•,zans into
1
beggars. The question before the House w•as in a vent similar position. Ho firmly believed that the Meet
would be to deprive us of the market of Brazil, if we
persevered
to
comparein our presentwb at
wloinuledofbrtlhiceye, /1 ad at-
tempted c
upon the Brazilian slave trade.,loy the species of Pinrfldueune_ccee
which, England would be enabled to exercise with
..
Brazilian authorities
to be produced by the persistence in the
and with the effect 111‘,,e1
tive system, the degree of unhappiness among t.he
slaves which would be
removed by continuing
those restriee,ons, with the degree of unhappiness
which 'world be inflicted upon our own people, that poor
plewlkb were particularly committed to our charge, ol! for
whose happiness we were more particularly responsible
' If it was his deliberate opinion that on the whole it IT,
their duty to adopt a proposition somewhat similar to if;
one brought forward by her Majesty's Government, he
could not conceive how any Honourable Gentleman could
taunt him as-being guilty of any dereliction of prineiq
because the result of his calculations happened to be °`,,,
ferent from his (Mr Macaulay's.) He would not tle_ll,?/
that the country had voluntarily paid a sum of 20,000,0Ye0,
to be able to rid themselves of an enormous moral arlsoo
cial evil, for the existence of which we were responsible
and which, moreover, pressed upon our fellow-subjects
-;—(cheers)—but was that any reason why we should Pof'
and pay continually what he was certain would amolia,
;
to a sum much greater than 20,000,0001. for the purP°',.
of marking our aversion to the evil for the existence
of which we were not responsible, and which it was
ceedingly doubtful whether we could at all mitigate (!a
lessen by adopting such means ?—(Loud cheers.) It lomi
been said that foreign countries would feel astonishment
at our inconsistency. He believed they would feel ast.„?..
nishment, if they understood that we had no scruple
permitting articles of slave-labour produce to be con'
sumed in our colonies, and yet to retain that scruple'
when it was proposed to consume them in the United
Kingdom.—(Cheers.) And if they looked further, the/
would feel greater astonishment, when they saw that was not because the cause of slavery, or the slave trade'
was fostered by the one course more than the other, blot
simply because a great monopoly was interested in te c
i',
one case, which was not interested in the other.—(Lo,,
cheers.) They might perhaps apply to such conduce
harsh words, to which he would not give utterance"
(Loud cheers.) But if, for the purpose of carrying the
inquiry a little further out, he were to inquire
intoh
,t
history of the public lives of' those who were now to -*
vehement in their opposition to this measure--(Cheers)l
if they were to compare the division lists on the preset
occasion with the lists of divisions which had forme:l'll
taken place—(Loud cheers)—particular in the year
1833—(Continued cheering)--they would find Horne I.";
son for astonishment, when they found that tb-rise vet
/0
men were the foremost amongst those who straggled ,
most vehemently to prevent the remedying nra great so`
crying evil, for the existence of which we were resP°°
sible.--(Loud and long continued cheering.) his Weir
tion was to show, that there was no incOnsisteney.ill their
putting an end to slavery, and at the same tithe
give' g
their support to the proposition on the table of the ii°,7ll_
The Ministers had been accused of lying prOiis„it
tion on the table of the House without the least ilat!ihad
of its being carried. Now, he believed that we • s
arrived at a great commercial, as well as a great financialdifficulty at the same time—(Cheers)—in order to
make up the revenue necessary for the maintenance of
the dignity of the country, in order fully to protect tll_
trade against our rivals. The great towns fluEnglarlo
were crying out for a removal of all commercial' restric-
tions, and lie fully believed that the'Goverrunent were
fully justified in bringing-forward the proposition before
the House. The Government had it in their power t°
prop up the revenue, 'and at the same time extend the
commerce of the country. They intended
.to meet 5
great deficit, not by making the people poor, but 14
making them more comfortable in their circumstances.—
(Loud cheers.) He denied that they had thrown before
the House the proposition in any fit of despair. Vl,l
Government certainly did hope that the budget wow'
have been received better than it had beeo-
They werete question that' it
perfectly aware tthat:ictouiwdas
be car'
outbritet
td
th
eboyf b
y
didt hope,
the weight of the Government alone
up to the moment that the Noble
tLieonrddillet
then Member fo:: Liverpool gave notice of his ul°-
'I were some persons on the other side of
the Housi:.; who, from patriotic motives, would have coma
forward, and without relating their eneral osition Ott
the Government, might consider thagt the p o-propposition 0'•
the Government was a satisfactory mode of meeting the
difficulties with which they were now beset, and their
support would have enabled them to carry the main Po"
positions of the Budget. That had turned out to be 15
miscalculation, but lie would predict that the tto'
was not far distant when the reform proposed by the Government would be the law of the land. On wha,
ever side of the House he sat, those principles
alwayswould becoinntintluiee
enrdealynt,
attached.
—(Hear
rh,e would
welcome converts whose reluctant recialadntabteioeini,
It would not be the first time they
tardy, or.from whatever motives, had t eared likelf
Ye VP A
to promote the public interest.—(Cheers.) He w°3
only further thank the House for their kind attenV,on,
and relinquish the other parts of the subject to thos'o wbo
the Members leaviPe„
were better able to do it justice.—(Loud cheers:')
Sir G. CLERK, who was quite tnaudible ka the gal-f
lerY, in consequence of the r:fise arising frora several °
that he felt
great a disadvantage he' labour°
,in -* ' ..order how
le House, was und-srstood to OA*
Right Hon. Gentleman, W.
' could
rising after theG.Clerk
Ile (Sir
had just sat down.
to its fullest extent the principl
could not carry .out
few b this years y. ,countr)
the great experiment meale a
conceive that they ought to be told that, because..tehel"(
o
a supply
told that,
eetoauasbeantbdeoyn
eiotwadltognoetther.
obtain Were they
of cot-
aog-wil:ersyrB4

ti

11.0.
111(1J.J

,t

:0:

and I
oven

not si
they
quest
Mem
in th
far 14
tends
roda

•

'~ i
1,

force

8.11101
be fo

in it,
eons
solui

prig

aitb

e. if bt
,hien

1.) ,vim
which
. 'cued
d
an
,urable
nagine
h the,'

cam'