The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-11 00:00:00

, ,
TT' g- r"IsT, L0.N11.014, Tt.Tcyn kVI IMA_ i 1

did, that he could not say that the 'course adopted by the
Noble ford'was calculated to confer any `appreciable
lief, and that Aliere were no just grounds for expecting
the reSults- which he detailed, that he shoul.l vote for the.
resolution of his Noble Friend the Member for Liv'er-
pool.(Hear, hear.) •
Mr. LABOUCHERE—I confess, Sir, that if I thought
the only question before the House, and the only motives
which could influence its decision, were those stated by my
Noble Friend—namely, that being agreed at a crisis of
great commercial any) financial difficulty on the course
which was to be pursued, the only difference of opinion
between us was this—whether there were.not special cir-
cumstances connected with the sugar trade which should
exempt it from the operation of principles which we allow
to be just and necessary, as applied to other branches
of commerce and industry in this counfry:--tsTifirTeadd •
believe that was the state of the question at this moment,
I should feel, I will not say entirely indifferent, but cer-
tainly comparatively indifferent, with regard to the deci-
sion to which the House might come. But it is be-
cause from various symptoms, and especially from decla-
rations made in the course of this debate, and even
this night—it is because I have heard a Gentleman repre-
senting other great protecting interests come forward and
state that they considered this was a case which was
common to them all—that he found there was, on the
part of the manufacturing and commercial interests of
this country, a growinc, opinion now forcing itself on the
attention of the Legislature, that it was necessary without
delay to-take measures for an alteration or revision of our
commercial and financial system generally,—l say, when
I see the advocates of these important interests saying
they will admit of no compromise—that they will hear of
no concession—(Hear, hear)—that they will oppose a
relaxation in the sugar duties, not from any refined spe-
culation with regard to its effects on slavery or the slave-
trade, but because they consider that in defend-
ing the sugar duties they are defending their own
system of monopoly and exclusion,—when I see those
things, I confess that I do look with the utmost anxiety
to the course which the House may pursue upon the
present occasion. When I consider the importance of
the question, I do not desire to make it a matter for
party calculation ; nor shall I enter into those allega-
tions bandied from one side of the House to the other.
At the same time there have been accusations brought
against the party to which I belong, which I feel it my
duty to notice. We have been told that the Whigs are
always talking about free trade, but, somehow or other,
it happens that when they are in office, free trade mea-
sures are never carried ; while, on the contrary, when
the Tories are in office, if they bring forward any mea-
sures of a liberal nature with regard to commercial po-
licy, they succeed in carrying those measures, I con-
sider that they admit of a very easy solution.—(Hear.)
Sir, I have been long enough in this House to
remember Mr. Huskisson's exertions on the subject, and
I am sure that no one will deny my representation of
the state of things at that time. I remember Mr.
Huskisson as a Tory Minister bringing forward those
great views and sagacious measures, which must ever
endear his name and memory. to the whole of his
country. I remember him bringing them forward
with the sullen and reluctant acquiescence of the
great body of his own party.—(Ministeral cheering.)
I remember that he received the honest, warm,
and cordial support of his political opponents.—
(Loud cheers.) They did not raise petty cavils
upon his great measures ; they knew what a matter of
difficulty any alteration in our commercial policy is ;
they knew that on such a subject nothing could be
more unworthy than to cavil upon details; and although
there were many points on which they did not think
that he altogether carried out their principles into -full
effect, they felt that it was but just, that it was but their
duty, to that statesman who had the courage to look
into the face of those great protective interests in this
country, when he believed that the privileges they en-
joyed would bring nothing but ruin into the country,
to give him their cordial and disinterested support.—
(Cheers.) I think this difference of conduct between
the two parties may account for that which was made
matter of taunt and accusation against us.—(Cheers.)
The Hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Colquhoun) told
us to-night that we had brought no measure of improved
commercial policy of any consequence before the Housa
during the ten years we have been in office. Sir, I re-
membr, and some Hon. Gentlemen opposite must re-
member, the Noble Lord the Member for North
Lancashire (Lord Stanley) and the Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Pembroke (Sir J. Graham) must re-
member, that a great and important measure of com-
mercial policy was brought forward by the Government,
I allude of course to the Timber Duties.—(Cheers.) The
measure then brought forward closely resembled the
measure now brought forward by the Government. It is
my belief that if that measure had been carried, then
the greatest benefit would have resulted to the country.
—(Hear, and cheers.) But unfortunately that was not
the case. It was quite true that the Right Hon. Mem-
ber for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel) and the gentlemen who
then acted with him, did not on principle oppose that
measure, but they used that convenient plea which is
always employed by those who do not wish to give direct
opposition to a measure, but still wish to defeat it, that
they were not satisfied without inquiry, and because it
was not sent to a Committee up stairs, the measure was
refused.—(Cheers.) I think this refusal of the first
great measure of trade brought forward by the Whig
Government was not very encouraging to them to persist
in a similar course—(Hear, hear)—and feeling, as every
Government ought to do, that unless the case was an
urgent one, and the interests' of the country generally
were suffering from a want of 'prOper alteration, that it
was no. slight evil to bring forward a measure of this
kind unless it were brought to a successful
issue.(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) I say
that under these circumstances nothing would have justi-
fied the Government in doing so, except their common
sense of the state of the country was such, that it was
absolutely necessary that such a measure should be
passed by the Legislature, and that otherwise the most
serious consequences must ensue to the commerce of the
country. I believed that it had reached that state—
(Cheers)—and I repeat what I said before, that I am a
strong party man. I wish to see therparty with whom I
have always acted, maintained in power, but I declare
that such is my solemn conviction of the absolute neces-
sity in the present state of trade and manufactures,. and
in the public feeling of the country, that we should in-
troduce a thorough and searching reform into our com-
mercial system, that I should that I should think that
the happiest day of my life when. I saw these principles
fairly acted upon by those to whom I have always been
politically opposed, if they o:cupied the seat of pow er
and I trust that I should give them as cordial, sincere,
and .honest support as I now give to the measure of those
to whom I am both personally and politically attached.
—(Cheers.) But, perhaps, I am a little wandering from
the subject matter before the House. Sir, I will com-
mence by endeavouring to relieve the Government, and
myself in particular, from the accusations which have
been brought against us in the course of this debate by
several gentlemen, and by which it has been attempted
to raise a prejudice against the measure before the
House. It has been stated that the Government have
dealt unfairly by the great interests involved in this
question, that they have been taken by surprise,
and that our conduct had led them to assume that
no alteration would be made in the sugar duties. This.
I think, is a fair statement of the accusation against us,
and the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hogg), who is an East In-
dia Director, quoted a speech I made on the sugar duties
last year, as a proof of my inconsistency. I think I have
a right to complain of the manner in which he did so,
for a more garbled account of a speech I never heard.
The Right Hon. Gentleman,-the Member for Tamworth,
also alluded to the speech, and did me the justice to say,
that in his opinion there was nothing in the speech to
preclude me from the course I have felt it my duty to
take on the present occasion.—(Cheers.) But, Sir, I
can state other facts to show the House that at
any rate these interests have not been taken by sur-
prise. Why, the Right Hon Gentleman (Mr. Goul-
burn) whom I saw cheering these sentiments last night,
presented fifteen petitions from Jamaica and other %Vest
India colonies, in which the petitioners stated that they
were abundantly satisfied that the Government were
about to alter the sugar dutieS. It struck me as extra-
ordinary, that these petitions should have been forth-
coming on the present occasion ; but it appears they had
been lying in the drawer of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
and were brought forth to be discharged on the present
occasion: I must also say, that, in the course of the
present year, I received many intimations from gentle-
men connected with the West Indian interest, and they
almost universally. asked if I would not pledge myself
that the sugar duties should not be altered in the preL
sent Session. My answer was, that I could give no
pledge of the sort, and that the-Gtn'erninunt would- deal-
with the question as they should think necessary.
But there was one declaration made before the last two
years of so much importance, that I will venture to read
it to the House, and I will put it to any fair man whether
it is not of itself a complete exposition of the views and
sentiments of her Majesty's Government. This bveccb
wt; delivered in the House of Commons in 1839 by Mr.
Poutett Thomson, then President of the Board of
Trade. He said that " he admitted that it was a matter
of great importance, and one which would be forced on
the attention of the country in a short period. In the
Arst place, this was a matter which would force itself on
the attention of the Government, as connected with the
Treaty of Brazil. The present Treaty was of a tempo-
rary character, wad would expire in 1842 ; and if we en-
tered into fresh relations with that important State, this
was a Subject which must be considered, 'The exports to that
country were upwards of 4,000,0001., and weio the most
iffiportant, with the exception of the United States. The
produce a
Brazil was confined to sugar and coffee, and
when they came gie period at which the treaty was
about to expire, this suh366l 1/12.q force itself on the at:.
tenticn of the House. The other imaich of the subject
nr and the Legislature, if not hal
was also a matter of deep importance—namely, t 46 short
soivly a colonial sugar.- It was important to look at this
question, 119 was satisfied it must be forced on the at-
tention of the thsvesuthe wants of the people of tiii4 country at any rate by the
nt
treaty of Brazil, and he trusted it %walla i)V &Ws!' faire and
fully treated, and in a way which a matter of so Mtic
portance deserved, when it came for the cone
si4ci,-4.10 of the House."—(Loud cheers.) Sir, I think,
.with that 4,47l:jj.stent reserve it
-1-zrve on matters relating to
the Government shontsi is impor.ant
changes' in trade, it is scarcely to have given
a more full notice than members of the COvZ•insus4
(
different times have givm to the House on the present
tOkt.—(Cheers.) 'Sir, I certainly could have thought
nlyself.aistUst Fplieyed from the necessity of arguing the
propriety of a chauge, itl tie simar duties with reference
to the interests of the consimr 4itd the It
appears to me so obvious that on all gener4l ps-m(4ples
a differential duty of 50 per cent. ad valorem on such an
article as sugar is a state of things so unsound, and that
the evils which must ensue are aln ost so inevitable, that
must be wasting the time of the House m arguing
ii.:ll
a ProPetwiticat that is almost self-evident.—(Cheers.)
But, Gentlemen, tho
admitting that if they tneFel.)
took the question with' - seaa,a4 . the rev. flier
no strong case could be made out against tiia alteaatoi,
yet think they can ariive at a different conclusion on the

whole question. e have.been told
that •
t sugar is not on:
surtiog on.whielis".:tht: Consumption depends very nicely
sualhe price.; that it is rather an article of . luxury, not
onesof those necessaries on which the consumption de-
pends Mitch on the price. I observe that in the House
of Coinmons in 1829, when the question of the sugar
duties was brought before the House of Commons by
Mr. Huskisson and Sir G. Clerk, much discussion took
place on that point, and the Hon. Member for Cams'
bridge (Mr. Gisborne) mentioned sugar as not of the
Class of articles of that description. But I confess I think
the argument Mr. Huskisson then employed was a very
proper one to disprove the position of the Right Hon.
Gentleman ; and I must say, also, from subsequent expe-
rience of the consumption of sugar in this country, that
there is no article on which a reduction of price-is -more
likelyttriircithi& an iticre:tise of consumption, and conse-
quently of revenue. lam aware that details on this sub-
ject are always dry ; but, at the same time, it is difficult to
argue these matters without reference to statistics, though
I assure the House I will do so as sparingly as possible.
I hold in my hand calculations of gentlemen in the Statis-
tical Department of the Board of Trade, which they
have made on the following principle :—They have given
me the average price of sugar in the London Gazette for
a series of years, the quantity imported in those ye srs,
and the average consumption of each individual in the
United Kingdom during the same time. The quantity
will not be found to agree with the statements of the
officers of the Customs, because it is calculated on a
somewhat different principle. In the first place' the
error is avoided which affects the calculations of the
Customs in all the first years, owisrg to the erroneous
manner of calculcating the bounty on the sugar ex-
ported ; it also includes molasses converted into sugar,
and all saccharine matter introduced into this country.
I find that in 1830 the quantity of tons imported was
213,000, and that the price of sugar—(my object is to show
the House how the consumption is affected by the price)—.
was 25s,the quantity consumed per head in the United King-
dom being 19.941b5. ; that in 1831 the price was 235. ad..
average consumption per head 20.111b5. ; in 1832, price
28s. Bd. consumption 19 lbs. ; in 1833, price 295. con-
sumption 17.991b5. ; in 1834, price 295. 2:}d., consump-
tion, 18•311bs. ; in 1835 (a year which forms a re-
markable exception to the others), price 335. 94-d. con-
sumption 19.211b5. I beg the House to renp,rk the
consequence of this consumption. The year 1835 was a
year of remarkably cheap bread.—(Cheers.) I quite
allow that the price of bread in this country is
the regulating cause of every article of general consump-
tion, but I think it important, at the same time, to put
the sugar trade on a proper footing, and to put the corn
trade on a proper footing at the same time.—(Cheers.)
I would also add that.* year 1825 was a year of great
improvement and a year of great export, and
that the working classes were well off. In 1836
the price of sugar rose to 40s. 9d. and the consumption
fell to 16.58 ; in 1837 the price was 345. 5d., the con-
sumption was 18.38 ; in 1838 the price was 335. 7d., the
consumption 18.42 ; in 1839 the price was 375. 41(1., the
consumption 17.16.; in 1840 the price was higher than it
had ever been, it having risen to 48s. Vid., and the con-
sumption of sugar per head fell in the United Kingdom
to 15.28 per head.—(Cheers.) So, if we compare the
first year of the series with the last, we shall find the
consumption of sugar per head throughout the United
Kingdom had fallen nearly one-fourth.—(Cheers.) When
you come to consider that this diminished consumption
does not affect the higher classes in any considerable
degree, but falls upon the poorer classes, it is impossible
not to conceive what privations they must have under-
gone during this period of low consumption. I remember
that in the year 1829 Mr. Huskisson said, when speak-
ing of sugar as it then was, that two-thirds
of the poor consumers of coffee drank it
without any sugar at all ; yet when he made that decla-
ration, the price of sugar was lower than it is at this
moment ; therefore I apprehend that by this reduction
the provision of this class must be considerably in-
creased. I feel, really, that this is not a part of the subject
with which it is necessary to detain the House at any
length ; I think we may defer nice calculations with
regard to the degree of interest which the consumers
have in the reduction of sugar, and as to the amount of
revenue we may. depend on being derived from it.
I shall only say with regard to the amount of revenue,
that I am satisfied that if we are allowed to go into Com-
mittee on this resolution—that place where alone a sub-
ject of this description can only be discussed with advans
tape—l am sure my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor
of Exchequer, will have no difficulty in convincing
the House that his calculation, so far from being san-
guine or extravagant, is a very moderate one indeed.—
(Hear, hear.) I have consulted those persons whose
long experience enables them to give an opinion
on the subject, and on whom, not only
the present, but former Governments, have been
accustomed to rely for calculations of this de-
scription ; I have not found one of them who was not of
the opinion, as far as this question affected the revenue,
that the revenue which we anticipate may be safely
expected. I pass on without entering on the question
whether the revenue is received in the shape of a duty on
British sugar or foreign sugar. I admit the difficulty of
seeing exactly what will be the course of the sugar trade
in the next year.—(Hear.) A great deal is talked about
the prospective supply we may have from different ports
of our colonial possessions next year. I have attempted
to inform myself on that part of the subject, but I re-
ceived from the parties best able to speak upon it such
various and contradictory statements that it is clearly im-
possible to pronounce a decided opinion about it.
The first opinion I find in a petition presented to the
House by the Bight Hon. Baronet the Member for Tam-
worth, from planters, merchants, and others in London,
' interested in the British colonies. I find their state-
ment is—Stock in hand, 35,000 tons ; in the West Indies,
115,000 tons ; in the Mauritius, 35,000 tons ; and in the
East Indies, 62,000 tons. These parties are undoubtedly
competent to form an opinion ; but the other day the
Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool called on me with
a deputation from the Bengal merchants and West India
proprietors connected with the sugar trade in the town
of Liverpool, and they made a statement of the possible
expectations for the following year which I re-
quested them to put in writing, which I find varies
in a very extraordinary manner from the statement
made by the merchants and planters in London,
They agree as to the stock in hand, which is represented
by all at 35,000 tons. They agree also as to the 28,000
from the West Indies. But when they come to the
Mauritius, I find that the gentlemen from Liverpool
adopt an estimate of 10,000 higher than the London de-
putation.(Hear, hear.) They also estimate the quan-
tity to be expected from the East Indies at 70,000 tons ;
whereas the London gentlemen calculate on a supply of
only 62,000.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, when I find such va-
riance amongst those gentlemen, I must have some further
grounds before I can give full credit to either statement.
—(Hear, hear.) lam quite willing to admit this gene-
ral fact, that I have no doubt in the world that the sup-
plies coming from the East Indies may be greatly
increased.— (Cheers from the Opposition benches.)
But I beg the House to consider, in reference to this
part of the subject—that .it is f importance that we
should now revise our sugar duties, and put them upon
a staple and sound footing, upon the permanence of
which the country can trust.—(Hear, hear.) If there
were no other reason for this it would be sufficient to
induce me to that determination, when I see the manner
n which capital, attracted by the extravagant prices of
the last year, is making to the East Indies.—(Cheers.)
Sir, I am satisfied that such a state of things can only
lead to the worst results.—(Hear, hear.) I beg the
House to recollect what is the nature of the sugar slip-
ply in India.(Much noise in the House and cries of
Order, order, Bar, bar.") It should be considered, Sir,
that India is a great sugar consuming country.—
(Cries of "Hear, hear, hear,") They only send to us
what they cannot use themselves, except when
they. are :-attracted bp our high prices.—(Hear,) It is
not so with the West Indians, who first send us all they
produce.—(Hear.) India is not a source of supply upon
which we can depend except upon a calculation of high
prices.—(Heas,) Sir, if we desire to deal with this sub-
ject as a question of ti'adp we shall find that for the
benefit of the colonies and of our esstrinuiree, as well as
for that of the consumer, the best course is to put it
upon a sound footing—to give the colonies such a pro-
tection as the case may require, but not to allure
them on by a monopoly, which could never be
for the advantage of the sugar trade or any other
trade.. I do not see any reason why the prin-
ciples which are sound in respect to every other trade
should not be equally so in reference to the sugar trade.
—(Hear.) Sir, I am now excluding all considerations
of slavery and the slave-trade---(Cheers from the Oppo-
sition)—and I only urge this as a financial and commer-
cial question—and I do not think
.that any reasonable
man, -necustomed to consider these subjects, will refuse
to apply to the sugar trade the same principles which
are found to bet ttp;licable to all other trades. We should
give the colonies a fair protection fpr their sugar trade,
but not a monopoly, which could be tieithey Pod for
them nor for us.—(Cheers, and cries of " Order, order,"
" Bar, bar.") I will now, Sir, come to that which has
barn mainly relied on by Gentlemen opposite, in respect
to this proposition of her Majesty's Ministers—l mean
the question of slavery and the SlST9sstntle•—(Cheers.)
Sir, I do not stand here to make light of those objections.
My lion. and Learned Friend the Member for the
'rower Hamlets has only repeated the arguments which
him hi Use covlusions to which he has arrived, I sin-
cerely respect to,(1 apppgige his motives.—(lronical
cheers from the Tories.) But 14k iii143431f lP insider
the grounds on which the question now comes before
the
House. Sir, the more the grounds on which he draws
tb,o distinction in this case come to be considered, the less '
solid man ai-41;$tarltial they appear.—(lronical cheers from
the Opposition.) „I,gussisa potv t 9 this, that if we
admit the sugar of Brazil, we should he encouraging the a-
tivation of sugar by slaves—that we should be encouraging
the slave-trade, and especially' the importation of slaves
We export a very lay itves) livazi!;--(llear, hear.) Now, Sir, I ask the Ilous
cons!der synth is slss gffer,t, of the systeM now pursued?
to Brazil. How are those goods paid for ?—(Cheers.)
They are paid for in the only thing Brazil has got to pay-
us
in—the produce of slave-labour, and especiaby sugar.
—(E.Shevrt6 It is quite true that we do not bring it
British manuihoßres•
ge
directly to Ertglaall ho wisometl, Rut we bring it
here in large quantities to be refined as taken lA4 to
other parts of the world. Every one who knows any-
thing of the trade with Brazil, must know in what ivisy
iiihintss
the trade-is crippled.—(Hear.) It is gradually dscreas-
hlg, a 144 "41',?. system be not altered, it will rapidly
dwindle to n
.ss-(1 ea l. But we do not the less en--
tradesin'thelit&StStiiite.--(pheers and
icounter fcheers.) We do not the less, for every' 154- o
courage their slave
British goods receives payment in the produce of slave
l'!.1-"1-*--(el,fets.) This is not the first time the qttess
t fin 43.4
ieSll thus argq4 in the oR ;e of
Coons,
.1t wgs so- afglWd p 104 by 'l‘l7
Grant (now Lord Glonelg), who brought fo-Ird Commons,l ff
milar measure, with the consent of his colloagues, ira'ud-
i tl!flliortit Hon. Gentleman opposite, the Memlxi forTamworth, and the Right Bon: Meniber for CainbridL e,
who was then r itincellor of the Eichequers The iatos
irc'ntlettlallcertdittly said that he differed from his Rio.t
4114:Itie 4 of bat not upon the
4 he question

!P4l

principle of the measure.—(Cheers.) -I do not mean to'
say that the eircuat,itances are precisely the same.—
(Cheers.) I admit That ave had not than passed the
measure of emancipation(Vehement cheering from
the Tories;) There is this analogy, however, in the two
cases, that th 3 slave-trade was then rife in Cuba and in
Brazil.—(Ch:?-ers.) Did not the West Indians then
come forward to say, you are * going to expose us
to' the competition of those who have unrestricted
supplies of slaves, and you.will not allow us to import for
ourselves.—(The Right Hon. Gentleman, then read ex-
tracts from the Speeches 'of Mr. Grant and Mr. Goul-
burn on that occasion (1829), to :Show that their views
Were the same as those which he had endeavoured to en-
force.) I do not propose that we ,should. at. all relax in
4;ointexerticrns-td•put doivri the Slave trade.—(Cheers and
cries of " Oh, oh.") But the time at which this impor-
tant question of our commercial relations with Brazil
must be settled seems to me to have arrived. I heard
with great surprise, Gentlemen who are connected
with trade and manufactures, speak of our foreign trade
as unimportant, when compared with our home consump-
tion of manufactures-{Hear, hear)—whereas in the
year 1839, the date of the last returns, the amount
of our home trade was only 16,700,0001., whilst
our foreign trade amounted to 24,640,0001.—(Hear.)
Those who are concerned in our foreign trade view with
extreme alarm the expiration of our commercial treaty
with Brazil. It is true that although the Brazilians sup-
pose that the treaty will expire in 1842, we are convinced
that we are justified in insisting upon its being enforced
up to 1845. But the people of Brazil feel much irritation
with us on account of the restrictions we impose upon
their trade with this country, and considering the vast
importance of their trade to us, and the opening which it
affords for an extended trade with all the interior of the
vast and rich continent of South America, I think it most
desirable that we should take this opportunity of
conciliating 'their good feelings, and preparing to
renew the treaty upom amicable terms.—(Hear, hear.)
There is another point of view in which I should wish
the House to consider this question. If we apply this
principle to sugar, why should we not apply it to other
articles the produce of slave labour, and why should we
not apply it to coffee ? By the treaty with Brazils, we are
bound to take the produce on the same footing as we
take the produce of the most favoured nation. Sugar
is one of their most staple articles of produce, but
coffee is also one of their staple articles. Now, how
do we treat with regard to coffee, we keep to the words
of the treaty, but how do we keep it in fact ? We make
the fact of coffee having touched at the Cape of Good
Hope, a reason for lessening the duty on that article.
Java coffee can touch at the Cape with little or no incon-
venience, while coffee from Rio Janeiro and the Brazils
would have to go half round the world to touch at the
Cape of Good Hope. The consequence is, that while
keepingto the strict letter of the treaty ; we, in fact,
admit coffee, the produce of Java, at a lower duty than
coffee the produce of the Brazils and Rio Janiero, thus
keeping to the letter but eluding the spirit of that treaty.
—(Cheers.) This furnished Brazils undoubtedly with a
just cause of complaint. Now if we proposed to redress
this evil—if we proposed to allow Brazils to import her
coffee directly into this country, instead of forcing her to
introduce it in a circuitous manner, would it be fair to
refuse it on the ground that we should be thereby giving
a stimulus to slave labour, by allowing that coffee to
be brought into the English market ? Are you prepared
to say that for the purpose of putting down the slave-
trade, you will refuse to export your manufactures to any
country in which slave labour is employed, for this you
must do if you are consistent ? Can you act in this man-
lier, .restricting the commerce of this great country?—.
(Cheers.) I do not believe there can be found any man
mad enough or rash enough to support such a
proposition. There is another point of view
in which we are bound to consider this ques-
tion. I am of opinion that it is our
bounden duty to use every practicable means in our
power, and to exert every influence we possess. to at-
tempt the suppression of the slave trade.—(Cheers.)
But I would ask the House to consider if we are likely
to obtain that object by refusing to hold all commercial
intercourse with slave-holding nations ; or if we are not
more likely to obtain it by cultivating commercial rela-
tions with those countries, by encouraging Englishmen,
with English habits and English feelings, to go
out and settle among them, diffusing among them
that intelligence and that good feeling which in-
variably is the consequence of Englishmen settling among
any nations ? Are we not more likely to obtain our ob-
ject by these means than by declaring we will hold no
intercourse with them ? Her Majesty's Government
has been actuated by them on a very recent occasion,
and believing them to be just has acted on them accord-
ingly.—(Cheers.) With the republic of the Texas we
have recently concluded a commercial treaty. We
thought it right to do so. We were satisfied that it was
our duty to the country to do so. But did we, in pur-
suing that course, lose sight of the great cause which we
always have in view—the suppression of the slave trade ?
No such thing. My Noble Friend the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs expressed his willingness to
sign the commercial treaty which they wanted, but lie
said to them—" At the same time that I sign the com-
mercial treaty you must enter into another treaty by
which you bind yourselves ' to exercise that which
has always been found to be the most effectual means for
the suppression of the slave trade—the right of search."
—(Cheers.) The granting of the right of search of all
vessels suspected of carrying slaves was made the
sine qua non to the signing the commercial treaty.
—(Loud cheers) This I consider is a much more effec-
tual method of suppressing the slave trade than if we
were to cripple our commerce, by refusing all commer-
cial intercourse with slave-holding States. If this mea-
sure were to be considered by itself, Sir, if it were
proposed as an unconnected isolated measure, I could
then understand how the proposal for an alteration in
the sugar duties might lead other nations to suppose
that we did not now stand upon that high ground with
respect to the slave trade which we had hitherto used to
occupy, That is one reason which justifies the Govern-
ment in having suffered this question of the sugar duties
to remain so long. If it had not been for the purpose
of giving a breathing time to the West Indians, and of
setting other countries see that we were not to be in-
duced o relax in the great xperiment—the carrying
out of the emancipation tile Government of this country
would have been most culpable in not proposing
these alterations long before.—(Hear, hear,) But it
must be considered in a very different light, when this
proposition is only considered as part of a great
whole.—(Loud cheers.) Foreign countries must now
see that these alterations,. do not refer to sugar alone
but that, having on general grounds become convinced'
of the necessity of a reform of our commercial tariff, it
would be absurd indeed it we were to except sugar from
those alterations. That alone is a sufficient excuse for
those who last year thought that it was not right to en-
tertain the question as an isolated proposition, but now
as a part of a great whole will be perfectly justified in
voting in favour of the measure, If the Uwe were
called upon to decide this question en its evert merits
only, if there were no other questions connected with it,
I will not affect to deny that I should not feel the anxiety
on the subject which I now feel ; but it is be-
cause I cannot doubt that the decision will be
on a far greater and more important subject, that I reel
an anxiety nn the snbjeet beynr.4 what language e 4,4 ea-
press.—(Cheers.) I am not disposed to hold the lan-
guage of despondency about the future, because I appre-
ciate as highly as any man the great national advantages
which this country possesses. I know that in her situa-
tion, in her great mineral wealth, fi'l4 Aer re-
spects, she posses*s gFeat arid itopii*.ot advantages over
other countries, and I helieve tliat most of all does she
possess an item-lonia& advantage--one of more import-
ance than all the others, in the irultßit4lllo
P ~Qf
her people.—(Loud cheers.) An energy which maye
exhibited as patriotically and as honourably at the loom
or by the pippoiso Incliptey, es on The field of
battle, by SOt or by land,--(Good cheers) But I
feel it would not 1)4 wise or humane to t4N that
energy too far.—(Hear, hear, and %beers.) I am
satisfied that we are now come to one of those re-
volutions in commerce, to one of those crises in the manu-
facturing and commercial affairs of the mintry, which,
according to the cotirSa iVe Plirsltet must he prilduc-
tive of great good or of *Ocilla:111e eyil,--,-.(9heer§,) At
a former crisis of ails nature Mr, fillSkiSSon was lit ppily
for the country, In the councils of the Crown. He found
a state of things existing requiring the greatest and
most extensive alterations. He proposed them and car-
ried them, notwithstanding the opposition of rlrtjelii,lar
interests, for he sllll79rtel groat leading'
statesmen of the ounte , who felt that the interests of
the country weFe at stake, -and refusedga lend themselves
to any mere temporary party purposes. And those great
measures were carried notwithstanding the opposition
which measures of that kind always meet with from in-
terested parties. Great revolutions, commercial and
political, have taken place since that period, and I am
satisfied that another of those importantlitiA again
arrived. f am satisfied that we have no chtnceleft, ex-
cept to adopt those large alterations which have been
'propOsed, or to suffer the greatest, the most incalculable,
arid, perhaps, the most irremediable mischief's.—
(Cheers) I should be going into too wide a flofd if I
were now ts:l tcP j 1944 iH5.L414.5, hut sure
that Hon. Gentlemen will admit that some large
and extensive change is desirable, and is most
important to maintain the commerce of, our country.
Our- manufactures are leaving our shores. They are in
a state of transition—they meet with foreign rivals with
who they Ttr'every sear 1.-5 tO compete.
The necessityliarihese important .-alterations is so
s .rongly felt by the Government that if the House agrees
!o this motion it will be my duty to
,call the atten-
tion of the House to many of these important measures,
I beg the Honse to observe that it is not possible to pro-
pose any measure this kind without encOinitering.
.some protecting interest.—(Hear, hear.) I have always
'held the opinion that it is our duty to make such
changes, with due consideration to existing interests,
but, at the same time, it is quite impossihle to make
them thoLoiighly wit hoC encountering 4pposition. Per-
' .ions point to other great monopolists, other great pro-
tecting interests, and they ask, " Why are -we to be
flat.l.:! the scapegoats ?" I have often heard the Right
g9n. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth, in discuss-
ing,the Corn-hews,t!iit kinq bf. amtpilont., 4 say,
thei•eli>l4, that t( 14 to Mike any great
,!hange. without rneetin., withwhit opposition, and that we
must, in all such cases, look to what is required by the
interests of the country.—(Hear, hear.) I never re-
member a period when there existed in the mercantile
and manufacturing community of this country so general
an impression this slihject—an impression which is
not me rOy lipnglf . I).4ty illlrposeS;' or
by party Men.--,:(1-fearl. hear;) gon: gentleAlen opposite
flatter themselves With the delnsion that the measures
-brought forward by the Cloyernnlertt were, influene2d by
rolitiez!i n!*:sqtyz)--ipliym the state of Pqr•lieas Why, th,-.
'joy-einent Irlqt 10. the me arts of collecting the
Whigs and the Radicals in the largo mercantile town:4.
The *hole natare 'of the agitation, if it may be so called,
is of a totally. different character, ; 'it. 'has not been con-
ducted in the manner in Which part, interests are ob-
tained and promoted ; it has been tar more deep and
heartfelt. On former occasions, I have always observed

that the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for ,Tam-
i 1 1
wortn, always . referred to the amount_ or 91ir
.Turts.-
1 He, too, alwayS' said; "It. cannot be. true that your ma-
' nufacturea. are - so: Much distressed ; it cannot be true
that your commerce.is in such an embarrassed condition,
while yout exports continue to increase." I say, with
great regret, that that argument will fail the Right Ho.
nourable Gentleman on the present occasion. Our
exports, during the last year, have very
Icon-
siderably diminished, and if you do , not re-
' lieve - the pressure which weighs 1 upon:_ the
springs of the country there will be a yet greater' dimi-
nution. Comparing the whole of our exports, in 1840
and 1841, there has, been a falling off of abont.a million
and a half. Earthenware has fallen froin 721,000/. to
574,000/. ; hardware and cutlery from 1,800,000/. to
1,300,000/. There is one manufacture to which I cannot
help adverting for a moment, which I find considerably
increased—it is the manufacture of refined sugar.—
(Hear, hear.) Now I can understand, Gentlemen,
drawing a distinction between cotton and coffee, and
' other articles of that kind, and sugar ; but how you are
to draw a distinction between sugar consumed in this
country, and sugar which you prepare for the consump-
tion of other countries, I confess is to me quite unintel-
ligible.—(Hear, hear.) Now, the refining of sugar ap-
pears to have been one of the most flourishing branches
of our trade. It increased from 299,000/. in 1840, to
444,0001. in 1841. This leads me to a point which I
think extremely deserving the attention of the House
in considering this question. It has been saidelrea,dy,
and I believe with perfect truth, that by putting sugars
upon an equal footing, you make England an entrepot
for all the countries in the world. That was the opinion
expressed by Mr. Huskisson in 1829, an opinion to
which he attached the greatest importance. If you
keep your prices steady and fixed instead of oscillat-
ing, you will make England the great market for all the
sugars in the world. There is one point to which, before
I sit down, I am anxious for a moment to allude. I
have stated my belief that there never was a period in
which the merchants, and manufacturers of this country,
felt greater apprehensions, or expressed those apprehen-
sions more distinctly to the House. But there was one
remarkable petition addressed by the merchants of London
upon this subject to the House. I heard with some asto-
nishment the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Tamworth, the other night, in presenting a counter peti-
tion against the plan of her Majesty's Government
and especially against the proposed alteration in
the sugar and timber duties, state that. many of
the most considerable merchants who .had signed the
petition which I presented in favour of free trade had
also signed the petition which he,presented. Now, Sir,
I really feel it my duty to call the attention of the House
to what that petition was. [The Hon. Member then
read the petition first presented, which was a petition
generally in favour of free trade, and concluded by pray-
ing that the House would be pleased to make such
alterations in the differential duties as would be fair
to the consumer and promote the general welfare of the
country,] With what consistency can those who have
thus stated their opinion, oppose the measures of the
Government ?—(Hear, hear.) We petition in favour
of free trade generally, we petition for a reduction of the
import duties, but we except sugar.—(Hear.) I must
say that it does appear to me so extravagant a proposi-
tion that the House cannot for a moment entertain it.
There is only one way of accounting for it, that mer-
chants wish for free trade except in colonial produce—
that agriculturists are willing to have free trade except in
the article of corn.—(Hear, hear.) That is a very com-
mon sentiment in all classes of the corninunity,—alear.)
This is a subject with which you must deal as a whole—
it is not one which you can attempt to deal with in a
piecemeal manner. Sir, upon these grounds I hope the
Rouse will be guided by the recommendations of the
most important petitions to which I have alluded.
One word more, and I have done, Sit', I believe that
the country is in that situation that delay will be dan-
gerous.—(Cheers.) It is impossible to examine more
closely into the subject—it embraces such a variety of
subject; that I will not now attempt to enter into them,
but I think I am - entitled to assert that the prevalent
sense of the whole manufacturing population of the
country is that this must be done, and speedily if the
country is to prosper. There is still one light in which
we must look at this question, viz,, qs A onestien of
finance.—(Cheers.) The necessity, of meeting the expen-
diture of the eonntry is now pressing, and to meet it with
a prudent alteration of the commercial system is, in my
opinion, absolutely necessary. The Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Tamworth said, a short time ago, that
nothing could be more unworthy of a Government, or more
fatal to the country, than in time of peace to add to the
permanent debt of the country. In that I perfectly agiee ;
but if you will not take that course, then will you have
recourse to direct taxation. Sir, I cannot but think that
that would be a most serious course to take Consider-
ing as I have done that money is wanted, and 1140411 g it
can be raised, not by adding to the burdens a the people
but by relieving them from taxation, I trust that the lions,
will agree to the proposition now made. I have that
confidence in the integrity and spirit of the people of
England that I am sure they would never refuse to subt
mit to any taxation if it was shown to be necessary to
maintain the institutions or the character of the conntry ;
but of this I am certain that if it can be shown that the
money can be raised by other means they will not sub-
mit cheerfully to it, and the means we propose will not
only not press upon them but rclieve them fom taxa-
tion, Sir, this question is not now confined to political
economists—there is now a spirit of inquiry abroad that
will not be satisfied. Come to what decision the
House may upon this sulAjeet, depend upon it
the 'people will not let the matter rest.
For myself, I shall only say that I feel that it is
the duty of the Government, placed as they are with the
necessity of providing additional finfieces, and finding
those views entertained by the great commercial classes
of the country, they at once adopted them. Completely
satisfied that these opinions are founded in justice and
reason, I think the Government would - have been Wain.
ing in their duty to the House and tlia country, had
they not brought thella f01,W414,--,-,-(Oheers.) I' see the
Hon, IlarclueqSif J. Graham) smiling. He is one of
the staunchest friends of protection generally, and of
protection to the agricultural interest in particular, but
I will venture to predict that if he should shortly become
a Minhiter, he Mil 1100 to make his choice either to
concede measures fnunded upon the principle of these
measures, or . see a degree of dissatisfaction prevail
throughout the country that will be dangerous. Ido
feel SO deeply the importance of the question, that I
could not help, connected as I am with the commerce of
the country, setting forth in the strongest language I
could my hope that the House will come to a right
deci-
sion upon this sub(iect.
1-44. Mr, ODST NE said he did not stand up to dis-
cuss the principle of trade.—(Cheers.) The question
before the House was, Were we to go into Committee to
consider an alteration in the sugar duties ? and an
amendment had been proposed that the auger duties
were not a At 51.4.13194 fat' alteration. That amendment
11'44 no' 4.11.111(194 upon the grounds of trade, but upon
higher considerations. In the principles laid down by
the Right Hon. Gentleman he found little that was
liable to objection.—(Cheers.) He agreed irt nearly all
that fell from him,—(Chears,) The Honourable
Gentlemen oppoalie might find it answer their
pups til aim-113e to the Gentlemen behind
him that they were the upholders of mono-
poly and restriction, but it was net fcamtried upon
truth.—(Cheers.) The propmitlau before the House
called upon their} ie\ ithandbn a great principle—(Cries of
il OA, Ohli)—anti. all for what—for ls. 6d. per cwt., even
according to the calculations of the Noble Lord. Was
there no period at which sugar was enjoyed as a luxury
by British people eit it ehoaper rate than that which
Milliqe*lptAllmied to give ? If they looked back to the
period of alaiery, they would find that sugar was had
cheap enough. The average price of sugar during the
seven years, from 1828 to 18344 was only 275. 11d. per
cwt., hut the advantages derivable from slavery were not
considertcl sufficient to atone for the evils that
existed under it. The nation rose as a man to
abolish slavery. Was it not known by every
man of common sense th 4 the firs; etibet of the
emancipation of Ole ShstVem roust necessarily be to reduce
the 1-41'.441114ti0i1l and thereby enhance the price of sugar ?
Yet the people persevered in their noble effort. The
abolition of slavery was a great experiment, and did the
Noble Lord suppose `that 'the people ox this country
would consent to the abandonment ti that experiment—
that they would nnwobii to forego the high character
they tql earned 'in the eyes of the world, and adopt the
proposition of the Noble Lord ? It wes said that
coffee and cotton should also be excluded as being the
produce of slave labour, Those articles were generally
prepared foe use by fbmale hands, and could be prOdueed
without slave labour : but the cultivation 'of *agar
mainly depended on slave labour. It was that which tempted
men to go to Africa to steal their. follow-men.---(Cheers.)
He contended_ that .here was in the measure of the
(10,.ernment an abandonment of a great principle, which
had been hitherto observed at so mighty a ccAtim this
country. But he should have complai.i.hai more w s"mly
still of that plan as it was tkm weve,sed, The Right
Hon. Gentletnan the 011mtcellor-of the Exchequer had
tlio eliqtActer 4 being' a plain man, and a man of busi-
ness ; and yet on the Friday he proposed a plan for an
alteration of the duty in which they had nothing
of the scale which he afterwards introduced,--(Hear,
hear.) The effect of the Right Hon. gentleman's plan,
as he had first introduced it, would. not only have the
effect of adrnittlag Slave-gown sugar, but that the en-
efaitagcnieitt given to the introduction of foreign' sugar
would have been of a nature to exclude every other, And
here was a difference of 50 per cent, in the vain& of foreig,n
sugar—and it unfortunately htTp,tiviki that the superior
sugar was that grown ill the slave countries. Cuba and
the 1tiV41.5 were the great sources of that last article
and . Siam, Cochin China, and Manilla were the
only ' countries where sugar could he said to
be the produce of free latinnt‘--(itear, hear.) But
the sugar of CnbA was 50 per cent. more
valvialllc, than that of Manilla. Now, if the Right
Iron Gentleman had intended to introduce the two
articles upon equal terms into the Britia iaarket, it re-
quired no lengthened demonstrotion to conclude that he
ought to lay upon 014 inoro valuable article, a' duty of
fifty par mt, higher then that laid upon the other, that
wag to, 5411 y, If he laid a duty of 365. per cwt. on Manilla
sugar, he Might to lay a duty of 545. on the sugar
of Cuba. The Right Honourable Gentlemen, however,
proposed on the contrary to lay a duty of 365. per cwt.
on Manilla sugar, and the same duty upon the sugar
o! Cuba. That would lead to the total exclusion of
the cheaper article. The Right Hop, gentle:4nm, how-
ever, had altered his 110 ilk' a meaner which he (Mr.
Gladstooe)llioilihi the House ought to discountenance. ,
—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman ought in !,
the first instance to have submitted that tireposal which
he meant for dischsSierl, arid not the other which he
had ado2ted on the, very
morning of the day on which
the discussion was to take place. But the Right Hon.
Gentleman had not unfortunately altered his plan enough.
Let the House mark the effect of the 12s. duty as pro-
posed by thrs Right Hon. Gentleman. Under that duty '
sagars differing considerably in quality would b,. intro- .
duced, and unfortunately nearly the whole of them would
while the free labour sugar
be the produce of the BrtOls,