The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-13 00:00:00

b.
e .----)-nn+

LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 1:1, 1546.

The Loan CHANCEL Lon took his seat upon the
'Woolsack at Five o'clock.

Various petitions were presented.

The Earl of ST. GERMANS moved the reconsideration
of the report on the Irish Pacification Bill.

The ' LORD CHANCELLOR then formally moved the
amendments which had been agreed to on Tuesday.
The Earl of CLANCARTY wished to know whether
witnesses who were cognizant of crimes would be com-
pelled to give evidenze or not. He put that question to
the Noble and Learned Lord opposite (CAMPBELL).
Lord CAMPBELL, who had only occupied the situation
of Chancellor of Ireland for an instant, would r:teom-
mend that the question should be put to the Noble and

Learned Lord on the Woolsack, who had been Lord
Chancellor during three reigns.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not feel bound to answer
the question.
Lord 6TOURTON urged that every person who wat
going to fetch a priest should under all circumstances be
exempt from arrest.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that no one could doubt
that a person going to fetch a priest to attend a sick man
was out on his lawful occasion, unless he was a cri-
minal, when under the existing law he was liable to be
apprehended.
The report was then ordered to be received, and the
third reading of the Bill was fixed for this day.
Earl GREY gave notice that he should, on Monday
week, move an address to her MAJESTY ost the subject
of Ireland generally.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE rnoyed the suspension of
standing orders requiring the Select Committees on
Railway Bills to take evidence as to the traffic of the
districts through which they passel—Agreed to.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

There being only thirty-four Members present at four
o'clock, the House of Commons adjourned.

The House of Commons took holiday yesterday for the
first time this session, there being, not altogether, we pre-
sume, without management, "No House" at four o'clock.
The most important business on the paper was a motion of
Mr. MORRISON's for a Committee to inquire " whether, with-
out discouraging legitimate enterprise, conditions may not be
embodied in Railway Acts better fitted than those hitherto
inserted in them to promote and secure the interests of the
public." We conclude that the untoward event of yester-
day will only have the effect of postponing Mr. Monrasox's
motion. Not that we agree by any means entirely in
Mr. MORRISON'S views, as he has explained them
in his published pamphlet; but the subject is
one of very great importance, and we anticipate much benefit
not only from the labours of a Committee, but even from
debate in the House of Commons, where 11.1 r. MORRISON'S
views will be modified and corrected for the public by other
Members of equal authority on such subjects.
Mr. MonnisoN's chidobject appears to be to procure the
intervention of the Legislature for a great reduction of rail-
way fares. Through such a reduction he hopes to administer
a great check to railway speculation ; and he seems to believe
that this, and this only, is the way to check the speculation.
Now, at first starting their seems to be a great inconsistency
in Mr. MORRISON'iI reasonings. He recommends a reduction
of railway fares to railway companies as likely to produce
even an increase of profits ; and there is no doubt that,
within limits, such would be the result of reduction. It
has been found to be so in practice : and, in the last two or
three years, there has been, on the part of almost all the
great established companies, a gradual reduction of fares
for the sake of increasing profits, and profits have been in-
creased. How then is this reduction of fares to diminish
speculation ? Mr. Moealso:4 says, by the reduction of pro-
fits. And here is his inconsistency,
Now with regard to the diminution of speculation in rail-
ways, we suspect that the time has gone by for Parliament
to trouble itself about it. Parliament might have interposed
last year with advantage : if it had then interfered judi-
ciously many of the evils of the railway excitement of last
autumn might have been prevented. But the mania was
allowed to go on unchecked, and it has, we believe, now
worked its own cure. There is an end of excessive railway
speculation. The railway share-market is now suffering
from a reaction. To diminish speculation is not now the
object for Parliament to strive at, but to mitigate the evil
consequences of speculation which has already existed
in excess, and to prevent as much of suffering as
can be prevented from the railway mania of the
last autumn. This appears to us to be the extent to which
Parliament should interfere ; and to this extent, and for this
purpose, it deeply behoves Parliament to interfere promptly
and with vigour.
We have observed, with regret, in the progress of the

Railway Committee, appointed at the instance of Sir llosEnT
PEEL at the beginning of the session, a complete departure
front the principles laid down so clearly and ably by Sir
ROBERT PEEL in moving for its appointment. We cannot
see on what principle the interference recommended by Mr.
MORRISON is to be made—on what principle the rates are to
be adjusted—except on the commercial principle; and by
that principle the companies themselves would be

guided, and that principle will not suffice for Mr.
MORELSON'S ulterior object of diminishing the inducement to
invest in railways. Interference on any other principle would
be unjust and impolitic. All direct interference with rail-
way speculation, as with any other speculation, we repudiate.
But there is a mode in which Parliament might earlier
have guided railway speculation with advantage, and may
yet materially smooth difficulties for those who have impro-
vidently embarked in the excessive speculation which has
existed, and that is, the adoption of some principles of selec-
tion in dealing with the railway schemes which are
brought forward. Notwithstanding Sir ROBERT PEEL'S
emphatic warnings as to the amount of capital already
authorised to be raised for railways in the next three years,
and the immense addition which would be required for the
schemes of the present year (allowing in all cases for only
one out of any number of competing schemes being passed),
the Railway Committee appears to have flown entirely in
the teeth of Sir ROBERT PEEL'S recommendation, and Par•
liament is about to submit all the schemes which have come
before it to separate Committees, as before, to be dealt with
in separate groups, and without any comprehensive view
taken of the various degrees in which different dis-
tricts want railway accommodation, or comparison be-
tween one group and another. Sir ROBERT PEEL'S plan
did not involve the rejection of any railways, but merely the
postponement of many. When we consider the immense
number of railway schemes now before Parliament, the im-
mense amount of capital which will be required, and the
practice of requiring in the Act the completion of the rail-
ways within three, five, or at most seven years, to one will

say that the simultaneous construction of such a large
amount of railways can be viewed without apprehension.
We look forward with interest to the discussion on Mr. Mon-
RISON'S motion, principally to ascertain whether Sir Roma
Plum's views have undergone any change, and whether the
Government will abandon their desire to limit the annual
expenditure on railways, in consequence of their having been
left in the lurch by the Committee. We have never con-
templated any close or illiberal limitation of such expendi-
ture; but a large limitation of the expenditure at present
proposed might be made, and the Government be on' the
safe side.

The returns moved fur by Sir ROBERT PEEL, and presented
to the House of Commons on Monday, relative to British
shipping, exports of manufactured goods, Customs' duties,
silk and woollen manufactures, and revenue commercial
sources, of which we gave an outline yesterday, form per-
haps the most important and satisfactory document ever laid
before Parliament. They show how much trade was ham-
pered by the old prohibitive system, and point out, in the
clearest language, the absurd principles of those statesmen
who considered that revenue could be obtained only by im-
posing high Customs and Excise duties, and that protec-
tion was the only means of encouraging domestic manu-
factures. On looking at these tables, we find that
a striking change began to take place shortly after the
period when Mr. HussassoN, after many vain attempts,
and long conviction of their nececessity, introduced
only partially free-trade measures. Since then an in-
crease has taken place in almost every department,
though the plan was still defective, and the Minister's views
were not halt' adopted, but when brought into full play, when
fir ltornurr PEEL boldly ventured on the grand experiment,
and gave the favourite principles of HUSKISSON a fair chance,
the soundness of his views was confirmed by facts, and the
very protectionists themselves stood astonished to find all
their dismal forebodings falsified. The shipping interest
'was among the loudest in its complaints. The Americans,
they said, were ruining the British trade, and in a few short
-years the strength and glory of England would be gone, her
seamen and her shipping would diminish to those of a third-
rate maritime power, and all this owing to the wild theories
and visionary schemes of a man without practical knowledge.
What has been the result ? In 1820 the number of vessels
belonging to the several ports in the British empire was
25,374, and the men and boys employed in navigating them
amounted to 174,514. For several years these numbers con-
tinued to fall off, but when the changes had time. to come
into operation a great rise took place, and in 1844 the num-
bers had increased fully one-third, for the number of vessels
had risen to 31,320, and the hands to 216,350. The tonnage
during that period had been increased also to the extent of
one million of tons. Foreign vessels carrying on trade with
this country bad increased in still greater proportions. The
slumber, for instance, of all vessels entering British har-
bours in 1832 was 14,627, and the tonnage '1,497,893,
while, in 1845, they amounted respectively to 23,859,
and 5,023,588, the tonnage thus being more than doubled.
The exports from the United Kingdom had consequently
increased
Bcrlea2s7edwinasnae6ar,sly6o,a3n76
equal proportion. The real or de-
!land value of native produce and manufactures exported
while in 1844, it had increased
to the enormous amount of 58,584,2921. According to
the protectionists, the silk trade was to be ruined
by HusiossoN's wild scheme, and the posourffSp.italfields: wea-
up iin otherad neontags quarters toh
wea-
vers for many years attributed all their
is evil
geniis:. But the trade sprung
where
the baneful influence of monopoly alighted,t, and
while, in 1826, two years after the partial alteration,
value of British silk goods exported was 168 871; the'
1845 it had risen to 764,424/., or about 450 per cent.
whenP price
the of
impulse given to the woollen trade was equally remarkable.
In 1824 the number of pounds imported both from the colo-
tniilees
bestan d
Southdown countries wasti e 2p200u6n4d,4.
In a nldB4t4he
,
import duty was abolished, the price remained still at Is. 2d.,
and next year the price of domestic wool rose to 15.4 d., though
These
not less than 76,828,1521b5. were imported. are truths
not to be disputed by any casuistry of the RICHMONDS and
BUCKINOIIAMS, and NEWCASTLES ; and it' any two facts are
snore palpable than others in the range of human knowledge,
these two are, that the price of cattle has increased (and 14
still increasing) since foreign cattle were admitted at next trV+
a nominal duty, and that since the duty on foreign
wool was abolished, British grown wool has risen
in price. But the net produce from the Customs and Ex- I
cise paid into the Exchequer is another feature of a most