The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-23 00:00:00

GREAT GRINISI3Y AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION

RAILWAY EXTENSION (No. 3).
Tile Lords' amendments on this Bill were read and agreed to.
GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION
RAILWAY AND GRIMSBY DOCKS CONSOLI-
DATION.
This Bill was read a third time, and passed.
HUDDERSFIELD AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION
RAILWAY (DARFIELD BRANCH).
On the order of the day being read for the further proceed-
ing on the third reading of this Bill.
Mr. STEWART WORTLEY said that the Bill,
if carried into effect, would cause the most serious im-
pediments to the public, and he therefore moved that
the Bill be read a third time that day six months.
Messengers came down from the Lords bringing several
Bills, which were ordered to lie on the table.
Viscount EBRINGTON considered that no line at all would
be preferable to the one under consideration, and entertaining,
as he did, the strongest opinion on the subject, he would vote
against the third reading of the Bill.
Mr. MONCKTON mILNES hoped that the House would
not swerve from its usual custom, b..t would affirm the decision
of the (jommitte.

Mr. C. WOOD said he should vote for the rejection of the this d
reading. In another session the tribunal to which the Bill will be
submitted would have a much better opportunity of arriving at
a just conclusion.
Mr. B. DENISON said he hoped that the House would
reject the third reading of the Bill. The two Bills which
had been passed ought to have been rejected by the Committee,
and those which had been rejected ought to have been passed.
Mr. ST ANSFIEL D supported the third reading.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House di-
vided, when there appeared,
For the third reading ... 50
Against it 64
Majority
SCOTTISH CENTRAL AND CALEDONIAN JUNC-

TION RAILWAY.
This Bill was read a second time.
BELFAST AND COUNTY DOWN RAILWAY.

Th's Bill was read a third time, and passed.
BUCKINGHANISHIRE RAILWAY (OXFORD AND

BLETCHLEY.JUNCTI6N).

On the question that the Lords' amendment's on this Bill be
considered,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition containing
strong allegations against the Bill, and hoped there would be
no objection to have it printed and taken into consideration
with the amendments.

The Marquis of CHANDOS objected to any postponement.
He was not aware until that moment that'any opposition would
be entered into against the line, but he would pray that the
House would not take notice of individual objections to a
great public line.
Sir GEORGE GREY also objected to the motion.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said all he wanted was to have the
petition printed, so that it might in the hands of every
Member of the House, who would not suffer a great injury
to be inflicted on a private person.
Mr. W. COLLETT said, the petitioner had no locus
standi.

The amendments on the report were then considered and
passed.
LEICESTER AND BEDFORD RAILWAY.
Mr. W. ELLIS moved the third reading of the Leicester
and Bedford Railway Bill.
Mt. V. SMITH objected to the third reading of this
Bill on account of errors which he perceived in it.
It was the recommendation of the Board of Trade, and a
standing order of the House, that the maximum rate of tolls
should be mentioned in the Bill, but of these he found no men-
tion whatever.

Sir GEORGE CLERK said that he had had his atten-
lacregesanidn the ewe!'
tiniounzinalaulmledrattoo tohfisech said that there was no
but upon looking over the Bill it wase foundcester andto
contain Bedford
su
oßhi la,
clause.
The Bill was then read a third time.
Mr. WAKLEY presented several petitions in favour of the
Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway.
NEW ZEALAND.
Mr. C. BULLER said it might be in the recollection of the
Right Hon. Baronet that about a month ago he had called
ttention to the colony of New Zealand, and the Right Hot.
Gentleman was then pleased to state that he would give notice
of the intentions of her Majesty's Government respecting the
course they would pursue there. He wished, therefore, to
know what the intention; of the Government wen: with
respect to that colony?
Sir R. PEEL said that the subject hadbeen for some time
pa,t under the consideration of the Government, and the Sec-
retary for the Colonies. There had been some difficulties
laaitejleystiynsthGa.tv
ecio.rliornnyn;t butt ihnetrwodausetelOW happy to say that the
znteth_ority of the British Crown was being re-established there.
gnz.ihoand
eldpi :eel; 1 twye int sNtaetiwngztehaaltanidt
,whasatthwehianttwenotuioldn
beo her
e
particular nature of that measure hea lewgai:lantoivtethmeenaspurreepatrheids
to say.

DEANERY OF WINDSOR.
In reply to Mr. RICH, with respect to the appointment of
a dean for Windsor.

T U S-1),A,1(

r

Sir ROBERT PEEL said that a dean could .mot hold more
than one living, but there was no disqualification whatever frem
his holding a headship of an office ; he had, therefore, recom-
mended the present Dean of Windsor to her Majesty ; but he
did not make any stipulation whatever with him as to his re-
signation of his tanner office, which, if he were not entited to
hold, there.was a law to which the Hon. Member could apply
for a remedy.

SUGAR DUTIES.
In reply to an HoN, INIxsTBEB. who inquired when the Go-
vernment proposed to .bring on the sugar duties.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was
about to rise to address the House on the subject, in order to
state some circumstances in connexion with those duties, when
the Hon. Gentleman rose. ' On Thursday last, after a full con-
sideration of the subject, he stated to the House that it was his
intention, in order that deliberate consideration might be given
to the subject, to move that the sugar duties should be renewed
fur one month only. He stated this to the House no Thurs-
day last, in order that if any Honourable Member had
any proeositi in to make on the subject he
might have an opportunity of doing so. In or.lor that
the House might be fully informed on the subject, he lead to
state that at seven o'clock last evening he receivcd a notice
from the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn (Lord George
Bentinck ) that it was his intention to move, on the Houseye-
solving itself into a Committee On those duties; that " the
House is of opinion that the renewal of the sugar duties for one
month is calculated injuriously to affect the :commercial inte-
rests of the country, and that it was the duty of her Majesty's
Ministers to have brought forward their measures on the sob-
jeer, earlier it, the session." He thought on a qtt,tion of that
importance, so much relating to commerce and affecting the
policy of Government, it would have been adsieable to have
given sufficient notice that it was intended to bring for-
ward a question of that kind. At the same . time,
he did not mean to interpose between the discussion of such a
question, always assuming, however, that the sugar duties
were levied. He had spoken to the Noble Lord, and advised
the bringing of it on after the discussion on the Coercion Bill
to-night.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He argued that the
introduction of this resolution would have the effect of inter-
fering with the first step on the Sugar Daties Bill, but the
discussion on that Bill, if the first step were interrupted, could
not be postponed till next day ; and if it were postponed till
the following Friday, there would occur an interval when no
sugar duties would be levied, which would be injurious in com-
mercial affairs. He hoped the Noble Lord would not persist in
his motion. If the Noble Lore wished the sugar duties should
continue till the sth of August, or longer, there was nothing
inconsistent with that in the Government motion ; for theeffect
of it was merely to continue the present duties till that time.
At all events, the Noble Lord must see that it was a question
on which both the Government and the House ought to have
had sufficient notice.

Lord G. BENTINCK could assure the Right lion. Gen-
tleman that not one individual of the party with which he was
connected would allow the proposed alteration in the sugar
duty to take place on the 6th of July next. If the Right lion.
Gentleman would propose a Bill for the usual period of one
year, the Hon. Gentlemen around him would support the
Bill. They blamed her Majesty's Ministers for putting the
revenue in peril by delaying to so late a period of the session so
important a measure as the sugar Bill. If it were carried,
40,000 tons of sugar would come in without paying any duty
at all. For those reasons they would not be doing their duty
to sit in silence without passing their censure on her Ma-
jesty's Ministers for their neglect. They were asked now to
pass a sugar duties' Bill for a month. Why, it was more than
probable that next week the present Right Hon. Minister
would no longer be at the head of the Government. The ob-
ject of the friends around him wss to let the public know what
they intended to do. He thought that the great interests of the
public would be best attended to if the present Sugar Duties
was renewed for a year, and not for a month. The party
by whom he was surrounded were not disposed to offer any
captious opposition to the measure, but they wished to legislate
for the best interests of the country.

Mr. HUME saw no reason why. the present Bill should be
postponed for a twelvemonth. He did hope that whatever
Government might be in power, they would be informed posi-
tively how the differential duties were to be arranged. Every
means ought to be adopted to promote the outlay of capital in
.ranufacturing sugar, as there certainty was a deficiency for
supplying the lower classes.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON preferred the proposed new duty
to the present duties. He had received a letter from a large
firm who had purchased a thousand tons of sugar. This sugar
would have to remain in bond for a month, and he thought
that it would be unfair to these parties if free labour sugar for
the ensuing month was not to be admitted at the duty of
I 9s. 10d. The Noble Lord had censured the Government for
delaying so long to bring on the Sugar Duties Bill, but he
would ask, why did he not adopt the advice of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Finsbury, and move an address to her Majesty, that
the House had no confidence its the present Ministry.—( Hear,
hear.) He felt sa'isfied that the Noble Lord would not main-
tain his character of being the poor man's friend, if he stood
up so obstinately for the maintenance of a high duty on sugar.
He really did not understand the principles on which the Noble
Lord and his friends were acting. He called upon the Noble
Lord not to interrupt the progress of public business by those
paltry amendments. Let him come forward and boldly move
an address to her Majesty of want of confidence in the
Ministry.—( Cheers. )
Mr. BANK ES did not thank the Hon. Member for his pro-
position.—(A laugh). He would tell him, however, that they
(the protectionists) still preserved the good opinion of the
British farmer. ' He concurred entirely in the statements of his
Noble Friend as to the course which they intended to pursue
on the present occasion. The Corn Bill was no excuse for
them to be told, when the revenue of the country was neg-
lected, that it had prevented the attention to public business.
Under the peculiar circumstances which were connected with
ihe Bill, when one Government were going out, and another
Government were coming in, a positive negative ought to be
put to the further progress of the Bill, which was to come into
operation only for a month.
Mr. BERNAL wished to remind the House that they were
playing with great interests—( Hear)—and in interfering they
should be careful not to inflict a material injury to promote a
temporary benefit. He saw a great many practical and tech-
nical difficulties to proceeding with the Bill, as it must come
into operation on the 6th of July.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that
he had stated before that the motion of the Noble Lord might
just as well, and as effectively, be made at a later period as at
present. He did not wish to proceed with his motion in oppo-
sition to the wishes of the House, or to infringe in the smallest
degree on the orders of the day.
Lord JOHN RUS.4ELL thought whatever case the Noble
Lord might make out, he did not think that -ttbers -were
any parties in the House who would object to the continuance
of the sugar duties for a month if they were now proceeded with.
Under the present circumstances he thought the consideration
of the measure should be proceeded with forthwith.
Mr. BARCLAY hoped that the whole question might be
fairly discussed by her Majesty's Government.
Mr. JAMES observed that the greatest injury which the
West Indian interest suffered from was the uncertainty in
which their affairs were always enveloped. Such a state of
things was the greatest possible bane to the circulation of capi-
tal. The colonies ought nut to be made the bone of conten-
ion between rival politicians for the upsetting of a Govern-
ment, to the great detriment of numerous private individuals
and families.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS rose to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether, after the
encouragement he had received, he should go on with his
motion?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if there
was to be no opposition, and it thz House were prepared by
common consent to go on with the motion, he should be very
willing to move it.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said it was not his inten-
tion to interpose any motion of the kind of which he had given
notice, but he should take some future opportunity of pressing
one of a similar nature.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Ways
and Means.

The resolutions were moved and agreed to pro forma, and
the report was ordered to be brouat uu to-morrow.
PROTECTION OF LIFE (IRELAND) BILL.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The House having resumed, the order of the day for the
'econd reading of the Protection of Life (Ireland) Bill was
proceeded with.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that the people of Ireland
wanted to secs fair play. They opposed any Bill which should
have for its object the harsh treatment of any portion of their
countrymen. He was not one of those who would oppose
measures for the repression of crime in Ireland, but he thought
that the present measure was not calculated to effect its object.
He was opposed to the tyrannical provisions in the Bill for
compelling persons to be in their houses at a certain hour, as
it would be almost impossible for the people in the proclaimed
districts to comply with the regulations. It would always ex-
pose innocent individuals to unjust accusations and annoyance,
from the powers which were placed in the hands of the magi-
strate,
and the facilities that would be afforded to the spy sys-
tem. Looking at the varied political and religious opinions of
the magistracy of Ireland, was it safe or just to put an irre-
•ponsible power in their hands? Would they place the power
of transporting men, on an information, in the hands of
English gentlemen ? No. Why, then, should they pro-
pose to invest Irish magistrates with such a power ?
Again, this Bill would have no operation or effect upon many
parties who really were a pest to Ireland, while it would inflict
great injury upon large masses of peaceful industrious people.—
(Hear, hear.) He was sure had there been no precedent for it
Government never would have proposed such a measure as the
Coercion Bill, but the House must bear in mind what the prin-
ciples of these precedents were.--(Hear, hear.) The Bill of
1831 certainly sanctioned domiciliary visits, but it was not so
severe as the present Bill. Since that Bill was passed by a
Liberal administration, the example in some way mitigated
the conduct of the present Government in bringing forward
this Bill. He must remind them, however, that it had been
repeatedly protested against as a measure, pernicious in its
effects and -unconstitutional in its principles.—( Hear, hear.)
It was a pleasing thing to live to see the change of opinion
which had taken place in that House with regard to Ireland.
It argued well for the growing sympathy that was rapidly
rising up in this country towards the sister kingdom, and he
now entertained hopes of shortly seeing the day when
the social, the moral, the intellectual and physical
sondition of the people of his unfortunate native country
would undergo an extensive change for the better.—( Hear. )
In his opinion, the great evil under which she had laboured
was the non-responsibility of her large landed proprietors for
the condition of their tenantry, and he for one was an advocate
or extending the well organised poor-law of England and
Scotland to Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) But why, let him ask,
should there be a poor-law for Scotland and none for Ireland?
He saw no reason for this, nor did he believe any existed. It
would prove as effective, nay, he would go so far as to say more
effective in Ireland than Scotland ; and he entreated the
Government to follow up the admirable measures they had just
passed, for giving work and employment to the industrious
classes of Ireland, with a Bill for applying the poor-law to that
countiy. While he said this much he was bound
to admit that an effective system of police must accompany
any
.remedial measures for Ireland, but he could not consent
to give the police force in Ireland so much power and authority
as this Bill would place in their hands.—(Hear, hear.) For
his own part, if he were asked what measures he would suggest
for the relief of Ireland, he would go back to the good old
institutions of Alfred, and propose that all disturbed districts
should be divided into so many divisions, suitable and con-
venient for the establishment of a police station ; at each
station there should be an efficient and well organised body of
police, selected from the people themselves, who should be
empowered to act with rigour, but not with extreme harshness.
If a plan like this were adopted the people would, gradually be
removed from the state of barbarism into which they
had been reduced by a long series of misrule to a
state of comparative happiness and civilisation. Besides
the police, he would establish • agricultural . and other
schools in each parish, which had, he believed, been recom-
mended by the Poor-law Commissioners. It was true there
existed a school in every parish now which was under the
control of the Board of Education; but in his opinion a
school for each parish was not safficient. There ought to be
many.—( Hear, hear.) He would call on the British Members
of the. House ti act with regard to the present Bill on the
great principle which should be the rule ..,f Christian morality,
"To do to others as we would wish to be done by. " He put
it to the English Members, would the pass such a Bili for
England? They could have had, if t' ey desired, a plea to
justify it, when the riots were going on, buts no such thing had
been ever pr posed; s-, therefore, he would call on them to do
to Ireland as they would co to England, and not to pass the
' Bill. What Ireland required were beneficial and not coercive
measures. It was not his wish to t..ke a part in this discussion,
nor did he itand there 45 a supporter of any party but from a