The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-29 00:00:00

TILE SUT N,_ LONDON, IVEDNESDAY
__EVENING, JULY 29, 1846.

contended ought to he admitted free of duty. but it was sail
they wanted revenue. Well, they could get it from
the. duty which they imposed on slave-grown sugar.
—( Hear, hear.) But if the Government would not.
abolish the duty on colonial sugar, let then at all events
considerably reduce it. Ile would reduce colonial sugar to
10s. per cwt. anti foreign sugar to 14s. ; but the Chancellor of
the Exchequer said, considerations of revenue would not let
him do it, although he admitted it to be just; while the night
Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, said the state of
parties prevented his doing justice.—( Hear, and laughter.)
What nonsense this was. Why could they not increase the
income tax, and throw the burden upon those who were able
to bear it, and not upon the hard-working and industrious
classes of the country ?—(Cheers. ) lie would not say anything
about the wickedness and immorality of encouraging the
slave trade, but there could be no doubt that the Emanci-
pation Act had proved a complete failure. (Hear, hear.)
The effect of it bad been to ruin the colonies and to increase
the price of sugar in this country ; to convert our formerly
active and industrious population into an extremely indolent
end lazy one, and to tran-fer a considerable portion of their
labour to the slave labourers of other countries. Before the
Emancipation Act was passed he took the liberty of saying,
that would be its result, but the House at the time, beirg
under the dominion of the philanthropy of the country,
would not listen to his warning —(Hear, hear.) And no
woofer that the Emancipation Act bad failed, considering
that since it had passed the Government of this country had
made no exertions to carry out the principle of the measure,
but on the contrary had rather thrown impediments in the
way of establishing a population of free labour in the colonies.
—( Hear, hear.) 'The consequence was, there had never been
a proper supply of labour for keeping the land in a state of
cultivation ; but still, if Government was determined
to admit foreign sugar into competition with colonial produce,
the least they could do was to reduce the duty, and, therefore,
he begged to give notice that he should propose in Committee
that colonial sugar should be admitted at Ios. per cwt. and
foreign sugar at 21a.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. BA lICL AY was for free trade in sugar as well as in
corn, but he blamed the Gentlemen who had been in office
since the passing, of the Emancipation Act, for shutting out the
colonies from obtaintrg a supply of labourers from the conti-
nent of Africa.—( Hear. hear.) The Emancipation Act had
succeeded morally, but it had faile t economically, and he
thought some steps ought to be taken to remedy the latter
defect.—( Hear, hear.) He considered that the mea
sure of the Government was calculated to settle
this question. He thought, therefore, that the Noble Lord at
the head of her Majesty's Government would not be doing jus-
tice to the interests of the country, if he did not take these
circumstances into consideration.—(Hear, hear.) He be-
lieved he would not he discharging his duties, if he did not
make these observations. He was no party to placing the pre-
sent Government in office, but in giving his vote against their
measures, he was not actuated by any party consideration
whatever, but solely from a desire to discharge, to the best of
his abilities, the duties with which he was entrusted.
Mr. DISRAELI said the Noble Lord who moved the
amendment to the motion that the Speaker do leave the
chair, proposed to himself to submit three points to
the consideration of the House. The first was, that
it was in the power of this country to find three
legitimate sources of that sugar that was necessary for its con-
sumption; the second, that her Majesty's Ministers, in the
calculations which they had made with respect to the revenue,
had furnished the House with very unsatisfactory prospects ;
and the third, that, in adopting the resolutions which they had
brought forward, they should be sanctioning that traffic in
slaves which the House had so often and so signally reprobated.
—(Hear, hear.) He had listened with great attention to the
speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—a member of the
Cabinet who had risen fur the purpose of giving an answer to
the speech of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn. He had
net been inattentive to any of those addresses which had fol-
lowed the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, though
there might be some of those speeches remark-
able for peculiar characteristics and particular circumstances,
not bearing any relation to the subject immediately before the
House. —( Hear, hear.) Still, looking to those speeches which
had failed to discuss the question with respect to the immediate
point before the House, following in the wake of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, he could find at that moment no feature, no
characteristic, which removed them from the description which
he thought. imposeable upon the speech of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer itself. It appeared to him that to the first pro-
position of the Noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had offered an assumption. It appeared to him that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had encountered the second pro-
position of the Noble Lord with an hypothesis; and. it
appeared to him that that Right Honourable Gentleman
had supposed that he could have vanquished the third
proposition of his (Mr. Disraeli's) Noble Friend with a
sophism.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he (Mr. Disraeli) was pre-
pared, if the House would permit him, to substantiate those
positions.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord the Member for
Lynn, in supporting his position that this country could be sup-
plied from legitimate sources with a sufficient and ample quan-
tity of sugar for its consumption— the Noble Lord had offered
his estimates which, if they conld trust his figures,
certainly proved the dogma which he laid down. Her
Majesty's Ministers had no confidence in that estimate. They
said at once that it was an assumption—the Chancellor of the
Exchequer called it an assumetion, but he entered into no
details, and offered no facts contrary to the estimate of the
Noble Lord. The assumption of the Chancellor of the Exche•
quer was that, the estimate of the Noble Lord was erroneous

but it was a remarkable instance, that in proving that the esti-
mate of the Noble Lord was erroneous, the first feature in the
demonstration was that the Noble Lord had underrated a very
important item in that estimate. Her Majesty's Ministers
had admitted that the produce of the West Indian colonies was
2.56,C03 tons. The Noble Lord had said that the produce of
those colonies was 115,000 tons. Well, therefore, as far as that
first point went, it would seem that the Noble Lord, however
erroneous ho might be in his estimates, had not been
inclined to over- estimate the produce of those different
quarters from which the aggregate could be obtained. Iltr
Majesty's Ministers, who accused the Noble Lord of over-esti-

mating-the qoantitics which we might anticipate receiving, on
this the first item offered an estimate to the House exceed-
ing that which had been suggested by the Noble Lord• That
was at least the prini4 fac;rt evidence as far as that item was
concerned. The Noble Lord had not indulged in any
very excessive calculations. If they approached the
second item of the Noble Lord— he meant with reference to
the Mauritius—he (Mr. Disraeli) believed that her Majesty's
Ministers, notwithstanding their statements, were inclined to
quarrel with the first estimate of the Noble Lord in supposing
that the Mauritius would supply this country with 50,000 tons
o 4 sugar. The Noble Lord had corrected him by saying that
the number which he had mentioned was 58,000 tons. He
(Mr. Disraeli) thought that the Noble Lord in his speech
mentioned the figure 50,000 tons. He knew the Noble Lord had

documents in his possession which would have afforded
him an opportunity of offering a correct calculation. He (Mr.
Disraeli) himself had not those returns, but he had that
morning placed in his hands a Mauritius paper, which was, he
believed, a journal of the most respectable character, and
which afforded an account of the crops of sugar which might
be expected during the present year. They said that
that crop might be counted upon as 60,000 tons.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, then, as far as the quantity that they might an-
ticipate receiving from our colonies—as far as the quantity
that they might receive from the Mauritius was concerned—
he thought that it was not in the power of her Majesty's Minis-
ters at all to substantiate their point against the Noble Lord
that he had exaggerated in his estimate. But the Chancellor
of the Exchequer said, that with regard to the third point,
that the estimate of the Noble Lord had in-
deed astonished him, and that he could not
for a moment believe that India would offer to
us the quantity which the Noble Lord had supposed that
they would yield, and for which he had given them credit in
his estimate. Now they found that in two portions of the esti-
mate, that in the one the Noble Lord had underrated the cal-
culation of the Government, and that in the other he had ex-
pected a sum less then that which he was induced to expect by
the documents in his possession, and less than that which was
confirmed by the authority to which he had referred. They
had a right to suppose tha tone so cautious in his estimate had
not at random, and without thought, and with recklessness,
offered to them any calculation which, at least, was not founded
upon data, and that he had not sought to influence the opinion
of that House by a statement on which he had not paid great
thought and research.—( Hear, hear.) Now he (Mr. Dis-
raeli) begged the Chancellor of the Exchequer
(though he expressed great incredulity on the subject
of the estimate of Indian produce) to recollect that
not a single fact, not even an argument had been offered against
the statements of the Noble Lord. He (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) hail said that it was extremely astonishing; and the
Honourable Baronet the Member for Beverley, who certainly
upon the sugar question should be a good authority—( Hear,
hear, and laughter)—and to whose opinions they always
listened with great respect—the Hon. Member for Beverley
occupied, as he tad told them, a most important position in
the home Government in India—had risen in his place to confirre
the unsupported assertion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Neither the Hun. Member the Chancellor of the Exchequer
nor the Hon. Baronet the Member for Beverley—who was the
chairman, be believed, of an association connected with the
Indian trade—notwithstanding they expressed their disbelief in
that assertion—neither of those gentlemen came forward to
offer a single argument, or adduce a single fact to
induce the House to disbelieve the estimate of the
Noble Lord.—( Hear, hear.) Now, in this case, with
regard to the production of sugar in India—from the
considerationpositionebt on.dt
theowrshegreat
which
aeaanhktdoe
which
ncpiyhofio
importance
thtdhie,
iedb,
absent
Chancellortsoohetnfebt
tetifehron oen mb.
brought
Memberot ouhufemhttti hoaentb—et Exchequer,
at momor
ent,
question—there
weeerHarni ,seot
Beverley,
fsrnoaei and
ore
uld
it was a great element in forming their opinion upon this' in-
teresting and important question. It was the nature and
quantity of the productions in India. The Noble Lord had
bi ought forward a great deal of authentic intelligence to show
the amount of British capital now invested in India, and to
show them the energy and the quantity of the British' capital
that had been distributed in the working of the es-
tates in India, and the considerable results that might
be anticipated from an encouragement of the investment of that

capital. But what he (Mr. Disraeli) wanted to bring before
the attention of the House was—for it was most important—that
the sugar in India was produced by two classes of persons.—
( tlear.) These were the British caritalists.—( Hear, hear.)
But they were told by a great authority that they needed no
protection ; there was, however, a class of capitalists
who were producing sugar, who might refuse pro-
tection.—( Hear, and loud cheers ) But if they required
protection; he would show the House that it was protection,
and that alone which would bring great results to their country
—the wealth of England, and not only commercial wealth, hut
political power.— ( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Baronet, the
Member for Beverley, told the House that the sugar producers
of India required no protection.—( Hear, hear.) Another
Honourable Baronet, who was once a Member of that. House,
called a public meeting of those interested in the sugar trade,
and they met; at his counting house—(Hear, hear )—a
meeting that was never heard of—and they passed
resolutions which nobody erer knew of.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Well, all that might be very true. It might be
very true that there might be sugar producers who were in
favour of the measures of her Majesty's Ministers. It might
be very true that, as the lion. Baronet the Member for Beverley
said, the sugar producers had not a fair competition. The
lion. Baronet the Member for Beverley told the House that
the condition of India was improved during the last five years,
although they had not a fair competition. He (Mr. Disraeli)
thought it very possible that the condition of India might have
improved ; it could not have been worse than it was in 1811.
India was then bankrupt. It required but an event—an hour
—certainly but the transition of a post—to prevent her bank-
ruptcy; and nobody will deny this that is in the least con-
versant with Indian affairs. lie could prove it from documents
which he had in his hand at that moment, written by those
whose names, if he mentioned them, would be of weight and
authority with that House. He did not wish to enter further
into the subject, but he was prepared to prove it, should th
House demand it. Well, India was improved, no doubt, but at
that time it could not have been worse. He held a letter in his
hand which was exceedingly interesting, though he would not
trouble the House by reading it, but it was written by a
gentleman in India second to none in importance, in intelli-
gence, and patriotism ;
and he observes that " such is the COll •
sequence of our commercial system there, that the country
would become too poor to govern, for
.they had reduced the
country to pauperism. It is not an
lnever
con-
spiracy that you have to fear, but you insurrectionbeable to
raise a revenue from a nation of beggars.—( ear,hear. )
Your establishment must fall, and before five years are past, you
will lose India."—(Hear, hear.) Then they were told that
the state of laths was improved. But he mkt ask the Home

what circumstance had mainly improved the condition of India?
He would prove to them that the principle circumstance which
had improved the state of India was the very alteration in the
sugar duties, the principle of which they were then called upon
to condemn—(Cries of Name, Name.") Ile did not think he
ought to do so—( Hear, licar)—Lbut he would tell the lion.
Gentleman in pirate if he chose. But if the Hon. Gen-
tleman wrote hies a letter of confidence, whirls it was probable
he might do so some day or another—(Laugieer)—he might
not like his name to be mentio: cd, but he would read a letter
itten by a firm known to be of the highest respectability; he
need only mention that of Ailwin and Company, to procure it
attention. In the circular issued by that house it was
stated that the alteration in the , respecting
sugar, bad opened to British merchants boundless markets for
the distribution of their manufactures—among the lower
classes of the flindoos, many of whom, so far from wearing, hail
never seen a piece of cotton cloth in their lives. 'The firm
further stated, that when they had formerly proposed these
alterations, and hinted at the advantages which would accrue
from them, they were treated as visionaries. and that the effect
upon Manchester would be enormous. They further show,
among the poorer classes in India, that in the years 1837 and
1838 the tots! number of pieces that were sold of cloth were
190,000, while in the years of 16-13 and 1844, years consequent
to the alteration, the number of pieces amounted to '2,500,000,
and that in the same years of 1837 and 38, among the richer
classes, the amount of scarfs and book muslins amounted to
1,000,000 of pieces, while in the years of 1643 and 44 the
increase was only 3 0,000. However, no person could he sur-
prised at the result who was acquainted with India. And this
was the result of a system which they were now rudely—
( Hear, hear)—called upon to alter at the end of the session, as
if it were only a part of a commercial tariff.—( Hear, hear. )
Nor could they be surprised, for they should hear in mind that
the cultivation of sugar was the only thing which was left un-
restricted. Everything else was the subject of a monopoly,
whether it was rice, maize, or indigo. 'the poor Hindeo was
the slave of a Zemindar. This was the only privilege which
the poor of the country enjoyed, who could produce it in bound-
less quantities, and it, was this class of cultivators which had
given to them so vast a number of tons of sugar. The English
capitalist produced about 20,000 tons of this amount, but the
surplus was the produce of a people who had no Otaheitan
cane—who had no vacliwn pan—who had no steam-engine.
These were the people who sent them the sugar, and who
offered them such a boundless market for their cotton manufac-
tures and Manchsster goods. It was their duty to support
their interest, for they offered to them a market greater
than that which they would find in any of their
colonies in the world.—(Hear, hear.) They had to
deal with one hundred or one hundred and forty
millions of people. And if every native in India would buy
a turban, it would amount to mole than all your foreign trade
put together.—( Hear, hear.) 1'.30,000,000 of ten shillings
would return you 50,0)0,0101. a year, and that from India,
which they had always so ill-treated, and which, for the first
time, they had benefited by that very alteration which they
were now called upon virtually to terminate. Well, then,
when he saw what British capital could produce in the valley
of the Ganges—when he saw that the equalisation of duties
between East and West India sugars hail produced effects which
had been never dreamed or— when he raw that consignments of
sugar had come from places which the most experienced mer-
chants had never dreamed that sugar was produced, and when
he read in letters that in the valley of the Ganges there
was an increase of thirty per cent. over a superficies
of 70,000 acres, could he doubt that the production of Bengal
should proceed at a less ratio than that from Madras? the
more especially when they remembered that there were two
classes of producers, the English capitalist and the native
ryot, stimulated by the markets which they offered to then; ;
sir could he come to any ether conclusion than that his Noble
Friend had formed his calculation in the most moderate man-
ner ? And he considered that he had a right to say that the
first position of his Noble Friend has been met only by an as-
sumption, and a sceptical assumption. And he thought that
he could show that the same was the case with regard to the
second point, and the Chancellor had not only given up his
sceptical assumption, but had takers refuge in a credulous
hypothesis. The Noble Lord showed that under no
circumstances could there be an increase above
400,000 tons. The Chancellor, more oratorical than Chan-
cellors generally are, and forgetting that the total of the
first Lord of the Treasury's estimate of free labour
sugar was 15,000 tons, made it 20,000; but what
matters it when he made the result the same?
The Noble Lord the Member for Lynn had not only shown the
House and the people of England the legitimate sources from
which this country could be supplied with sugar, and the in-
consistencies of the estimates which had been made with respect
to the amount of the supplies and of the revenue, but he
offered to the House a resolution which had been concurred in
by his friends, that if the resolutions of the Government were
adopted, a great and powerful stimulus would be given to the
slave trade. Often as the subject had been discussed in the
House of Commons, many as the years were that elapsed since
it was first brought before them, under no circumstances and at
no time was this question met and brought forward in a man-
ner so remarkably discreet. When they remembered the
Ministers who were engaged in this great question—when
they recollected the public men who were called into existence
by it, and who would never have been public men if they had
not joined in that public cry—it was remarkable the tone in
which-it was now discussed. It might be asked then, were
the Ministers of the Crown, and those who gave their sanction
to the measures brought forward by Government, the sup.
porters of slavery. Oh, no ; no one was the supporter of
slavery; but they were called upon to suppose that the
evils of the system could not he remedied, and that though
morally wrong they were fiscally inevitable. The Noble Lord
she First Minister of the Crown, had taken up a safe position
on that subject. Tho Noble Lord could not forget the party
whom he represented—he was the leader of the Whigs,
who had caused the abolition of slavery. lie had a noble spirit
and could not forget the noble heritage to which he had suc-
ceeded. The Noble Lord accordingly told them that he de-
precated the accursed traffic. The Noble Lord would say
you cannot deny that the slave trade exists; that notwith-
standing all the efforts which have been made for its suppres-
sion, it still continues with undiminished vigour ; that it has
baffled all the exertions we have made to put it down, and this
I put before yen, that notwithstanding all the efforts which
have been made, notwithstanding all the squadrons that have
been equipped, notwithstanding all the subscription lists that
have beon snellen, and all the emotions and ardent aspirations
that have been excited in the public mind, this is result, that
what you have done is neither effective nor complete."
If what England had done failed in effect and completeness,
he could not take exception to the leader of a Whig Ministry
coining down and telling them that such a result had followed
their exertions. But let them see if that position was just.
'I he Noble Lord raid that commerce had baffled all their phi-
lanthropy. and all their exertions must fall before its require-
ments. That was all the Noble Lord said to show them that
English efforts had failed to put down this system. The Noble
Lord said that the emergencies of commerce baffled their en-
deavours. He (Mr. Disraeli) remembered that a gentleman,
who was no longer a Minister, told them one time that England
had -.become a great commercial nation. That was a dis-
covcry very like what he would ' call a mare's nest.
But he would ask the Noble Lord, was there a difference now

in the character of British commerce? If there was a change
with regard to commerce, it was less adventurous, and partook
snore of a transaction now. If there was a change, it was more
adventurous 40 years ago than it was at present. A cargo had
then to roam about to different ports to find a customer, but it
was now a regular consignment in the ordinary course of trade,
from one merchant to another. If the argument, however, be
good for anything, it showed little for the foresight of the
Noble Lord, and all those who were engaged in that great ques-
tion, not to have known this result; and they had no right to
join in that public cry, and not be acquainted with the infallible
and inevitable political consequences of the measure.—( Hear,
hear.) He did not mean to impugn the motives or the inte-
grity of those who had passed that measure, but what he said
was, that it did not tell for their foresight not to have seen the

consequea cies of it, and if they did fore Wee them it was a stigma
upon their ingeniousness not to have tried to avertthem. But the
Noble Lord said that their exertions were wanting not only in
effect, but completeness. He said that the whole people of
England were consuming produce of another kind, also slave
labour, while such an outcry was made about the admission of
slave-grown sugar. He (Mr. Disraeli) asked the Noble Lord,
when Wilberforce addressed the large public assemblies in the
northern districts of England—when his burning words
touched the heart of this great nation—when the horrors of
this accursed traffic were first revealed—he asked the Noble
Lord were not the fabrics then made in the manufacturing
districts fed with cotton the produce of slave labour?
He asked what statesmen—statesmen with all the instinct of
aristocracy could do ? lie asked what did they mean to
do ? He eared not to what party they belonged, would they
address the populous assemblies of the agitated people of the
country, who expressed in their own uncultivated manner the
right convictions of an unlettered people? He asked whether
at a former time they did not smoke, and snuff, and chew, and
had done for a period of 200 years, tobacco the produce of
the slave-trade ? They knew that in the end that destroyed
their ease, but were they to believe that the people of England
were not conscious of this ? Could they believe that these
great statesmen were not conscious of all this ? Of eourse they
were—and they now owned the circumstance. They said
that they must move themselves, and put an end to that
abomination. Could they continually shut their eyes to that
abomination ? They could control the people of England, and
stop the conduct of such a system. The circumstances to
which the Noble Lord referred were the means by which he
built his arguments against any opposition. He denied the
supposition of the Noble Lord, and would tell him that if he
would not argue it abstractedly or concretely he should argue
it upon the circumstances, and he would find that because a
man was obliged to wink at certain evils he
was not obliged to commit greater ones. Whether the suppo-
sition was taken abstractedly or concretely, the Noble Lord could
not escape the inevitable result. The Noble Lord had spoken
of the opinion of the people of England. What good would it
be for the people of England to read Jeremy Taylor, and com-
pare him with Cicero, to ascertain what were the greatest
hardships of the land? If the Noble Lord could not find any
means to extricate himself from any opposition, what means
could he find to relieve himself from the consequences of this
measure. It seemed to him that the answer which was made
to his Noble Friend, on the third position of his argument,
was a fallacious and flashy sophism. It might carry with it
the majority, but it could not convince them.—( Hear,
hear.) They might give them words, which they might
report to their constituency, who might in their turn
recoil with nausea from such phrases. Such men
followed Wilberforce, and encouraged the slave-grown cotton
and tobacco. The Noble Lord would deny that their measures
gave a stimulus to the slave trade in any way which had been
adverted to. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequet had informed the House officially and authori-
tatively that in Cuba at this moment, or very recently, such
was the state of slave society that there was a general ells-
content in the place, and that they were near to an insurrecs
rection. Their answer to that was, that if there was a dis-
position in Cuba to put an end to slavery why did they resort
to a measure which not even possibly could injure the slave
trade, and excuse it on the ground of a great commercial
consideration. Before all this comateree was brought on with
the Brazils, the subject was brought under the notice of the
House of Commons. When he said the House of Commons, he
did not mean the ordinary use of the phrase referring to
that House, because he spoke of another House of Commons, of
which he had had the honour to be a member, when the
question of the Brazils trade was first brought forward.
He remembered when Gentlemen who should be now
sitting on the Treasury bench, brought forward motions
on the subject of the Brazils treaty of commerce. It
was astonishing what silence prevailed in that House when
the Hon. Gentlemen spoke of the treaty of commerce
The trade was then 5 millions; and now it was 26 it
was spoken of as a commerce of considerable consequence
Regarding commercial and financial matters, such was the
position of the Brazilian empire. Well, then, take the West
Indies, which no ene seemed to defend ; take the island which
had been so picturesquely described by the lion. Member for
Weymouth (Mr. Bernal), but which the adoption of these reso-
lutions would paralyse, and he asked them to contrast it with
the Brazils. Why the trade of that island at the present mo-
ment greatly exceeded all the trade of the former counts-3e—
( Hear, hear.) If you take an enlarged view of the colonial
capabilities and the colonial resources, who fcr a moment can
doubt but that this very island could easily double the whole of
our commercial transactions with the Brazils. What was the
trade of Brt zils or of Ceba—what all the commerce of Porto-
rico—compared with this single colony ?—(Cries of " Hear,
hear)—and they would not be acting as men of honour
—they would not be acting as men of sense—they
would not be acting as men of faith, if they allowed such a
principle as the Noble Lord, the member for the City of
London, to be establighed.—(liesr, bear.) Theyliad been told

they were hitherto moving in a vicious circle. He agreed in
that. Ile felt that the colonies and England were placed
within a vicious circle ; but he thought it would be desirable
if it were so, when a Minister of the Crown (he cared not
whether he acted from primal convicion or recent conversion—
( Hear, hear)—or on which side he sat) when a Minister of
the Crown thought it desirable to propose a law which sub-
jected many to dismay and alarm, that he should furnish some
detailed considerations why the measure should be suppsrted—
that he should condescend to give some arguments—he (Mr.
Disraeli) would say facts—why the House should adopt the
charge.— ( Hear, hear.) When they were so lately told
that they were moving in a vicious circle,
it would have been consolatory, and extremely interesting and
advantageous, if the Noble Lord had given some proofs of the
benefits that would flow from the adoption of his measure—
that he should give some idea of this perfect system of com-
merce. He should be glad to see a Minister of the Crown
who was in office, or a Minister who was not, pretend to en-
lighten them on this point.—(Hear, hear.) No one could
be insensible to the secret influences that had been in
operation to bring about the new commercial features of the
country, or that they had been brought about by unknown and '
irresponsible persons. lie would say nothing disrespectful of
one man, whom he knew amid respected—Mr. Deacon flume.
All he would say was, that before the report appeared of the
import-duty Committee, or evidence given upon it, he told
hint (Mr. Disraeli) that year after year he had, in established
and respectab'e periodicaisegiven all the evidence which had
been then adduced. But the fact was, Ministers never
read, and they had to he converted by Parliamentary
Committees. But he would refer to another of their private
influences—a respectable gentleman, and he (Mr. Disraeli)
only referred to him to show the influence of his opinions
on the Noble Lord (the First Lord of the Treasury.) The
Noble Lord had told them that uncertainty was fatal to the
inter gists of the West Indian colonies, and in support of his case
he referred to the opinions of men of experience—to Mr.
M'Culloch and others. Would it not have been better in the
Noble Lord, who he believed was incapal le of saying
anything injurious—would it not have been better
et the same time that he cited the opinion
of Mr. M•Cuiloch on the question of sugar, that he had
told the House that Mr. M'Culloch was an honest and undis-
guised advocate of slavery as an institution.—( Hear, hear. )
In the very page of the work which had been referred to by the
Noble Lord, Mr. bleCulloch laid it down that there was no
greater delusion than the objection entertained to negro slavery,
and that it was an institution that worked well in society—
that the soil of the tropics would never have been
cultivated without the application of slave labour. This the
Noble Lord had not referred to, yet those were the opinions of
a man whom the Government which had just given up office
hail recommended as a fit object of royal consideration, and to
whom a pension had been granted.—( Hear, hear.) But what
could the public think of this when they knew these to be the
sentiments of the man. The Hon. Member for Bolton, who
was learned in all languages, would know a Turkish
proverb he was about to quote ; it was " Fortunate
is the man who has a peach that is sunned on both
sides." Mr. M'Culloch was in this position, for
though he was a supporter of slavery, his phrases were dexte-
rously used by Ministers on both sides of the House.—( Hear,
hear.) The real question, therefore, was M'Culloch against
Clarkson, for, though the Noble Lord had plentifully supplied
himself with arguments from that gentleman's writing,, he
had carefully kept his anti-slavery tendency in the roar; no
one was left to suppose that he was an advocate
of the institution of slavery.—(Cries of " Hear' hear. )
There was another gentleman connected with the Board of
Trade who had favoured them with his opinion—(Hear, hear)
—a gentleman who preached peace and good-will to all men,
and that was his principal argument for the achievements of
free trade. That gentleman could listen to nothing that com-
promised principle. That was his answer to all their (the pro-
tectionists') statements—to all their reasons. There was
another individual, a pedant who put up for a philosopher, who,
at the eve of a great revolution, said, also, "Perish the
world rather than compromise a principle;" yet, ere
twelve months passed, with all his sef-complacent
glory, he committed suicide, in despair of the fate
of the human race and his own destinies.—( Hear, hear. )
In these circumstances he (Mr. Disraeli) was bound to say
that he could not agree with the Noble Lord, that those
colonies were p rt of a vicious system. He said he did not
oppose the Ministers on account of ther being antagonistic to
any previous arrangement as to slavery, but because he felt
this was an act of hostility to a fragment, if such it might be
called, of the colonial system of England.—( Hear, hear, and
cheers.) That was for the moment an old fashioned notion, but
he was of the belief that they would yet be furbished up by the
national feeling. It was a fragment of a system, though they
had been tampering with that system—though they had de-
prived it of its greatest advantages—though they had been
following an ignis fatuus, with so fatal a result,--atill it was a
fragment which he believed they would have ere long to re-
build—a structure which they had destroyed.—( Hear, hear.)
And to retrace the steps which they had heedlessly pursued.—
( Heat, and cheers.) He (Mr. Disraeli) said so for two
reasons, not merely because he believed their policy to be
wrong—though that was no sufficient reason, for all men
were liable to err; but he had learned from the
history of this country that its characteristic was
that it would retrace its steps ; not that it was less noto-
rious in injustice, but that the people being sooner sensible re-
traced their steps. The history of England was a history of re-
action. Why, he asked, what was it they had done on which
they had not retraced their steps? They had destroyed their
national church and they retraced their steps—they destroyed
their monarchy and they retraced their steps—they destroyed
the House of Lords and they were now daily taking up Bills
for their sanction. They even destroyed the House of Com-
mons, yet here they were assembled to discuss a great
question. Why, nut more than 100 years ago, when
they chose to effect one of the greatest revolutions in the
world, they were warned against the course pursued by Sir
Robert Walpole ; they were warned by the most gifted of
writers, by the most eloquent of advocates, that indirect taxa.
tion would be a bane to the people. But now, not a man rose
who did not advocate direct taxation, offering them proof
that Sir William Wyndham was right, and Lord Bolingbroke
a safe guide. Why, he contrasted what was now going on
with the abolition of slavery. The Minister of the Crown
came forward and put an end to one of the greatest
struggles on which the people had entered. Having abolished
slavery, their efforts were directed against the slave trade at in
expenditure of 50,000,0001. He asked how, when they were
on their way to the hustings, they would propose to explain
this ? Fifty millions, the people would say, and all for a fai-
lure ! England would retrace her steps towards establishing
her industry, which, if destroyed, was destroyed rashly ; but
if it was an error, this, at least, could be said that the peo-
ple bad no participation in it. They did not send them to
destroy the colonial system ; to them remained all the
glory, and they could not experience the shame. And
here he would have stopped, and would not have troubled the
House at any further length, but for a speech which hail been
delivered in the House last night. They had heard last night
a funeral oration delivered over the abolition cause by the
Noble Member for Liverpool. He thought that if the subject
was not choice, the oration was choice.—(Laughter.) When
he remembered another speech that was made by the Member
for Liverpool on the same subject, at a period not very remote,
he was the last person whom he would have expected
to make such a criticism on the motion of the
Noble Member for Lynn.—(Hear, hear.) But that motion
had not the potential parenthesis which the Noble Lord had
inserted in his speech. Ile knew nor, and he would not pre-
sume to say, which speech_that of 1841 or that of last night
—was the opinion of the Noble Member. But it was, perhaps,
an apt conclusion to the session, to see the Noble Member on
a hogshead of sugar in a white sheet, and holding the taper of
penitence in his hand, crying out " Pecconi. '—(Great
laughter.) He remembered that the Noble Lord at his elec-
tion carried a wooden bible before him—perhaps the speech of
last night was the wooden bible speech.—(Great laughter. )
No one understood the West India question better than the
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and well be
might tell them that any system of emigration would not be at-
tended with successs, unless it was accompanied with a suffi-
cient quantity of females.—(Hear, hear.) But great was the
mortification of himself and the friends around him to find
the Right Hon. Baronet's speech terminate with a resolution
that was fatal to all its arguments.—(Hear, hear.) But he
must say, that the reason which was given for that resolu-
tion was lets ingenious and more surprising than many of the
arguments which they had heard from the Right Hon.
Baronet. ( Hear, hear.) It would seem that the
Right Honourable Baronet was induced to come to
that decision upon a consideration of the question of who
should sit on the treasury bench. He said a few minutess since,
that if they went to the hustings, the people of England upon
being told that fifty millions of their treasure had been
promoting a delusion, might perchance have something to say
as to the usefulness of the Parliament of England, but when
they were told it was a question not only of fifty millions, but it
might be of five hundred millions of countless treasures—of
principles which they had prized beyond all treasure—they
might perhaps be disposed to rebel against the conviction of
the Right Hon. Baronet. When they heard that it was
for the sake of party convenience, and settling who should lie
Prime Minister of England, they might be almost
induced to say farewell to the Parliament of Eng-
land. The Right Honourable Baronet indeed told
them that he could not, under the circumstances of the
case, act otherwise than he did. He said he could not see how

anather Government Was to be formed, 1;11i 11eTili:15T;rLiij
thought of late Honourable Members had became rather inde-

cormis in always supposing that the Government of the

country was selected, not by a high authority, but by the
House itself.—(Hear, hear.) But this he could tell the Right
Hon. Baronet that, in his mind, his forte lay not so much in
forming a Government as in destroying one.— ( Hear' hear, and
laughter.) These were the views which had in-
fluenced. him and his friends around him in re-
sisting the resolution of the Government. Ho was
glad to believe that there was not a Member of the Govern-
ment, that there was not a Member of that House, who could
suppose that in the course they had taken they had been
influenced by any illegitimate or sinister feeling.—( Hear, hear.)
He candidly confessed, as regarded the Government themselves:
reconciling the circumstances under which they acceded to
office, to power, remembering himself as a Member of the
majority which placed them upon the Treasury bench, that he
ought to take upon himself some of the responsibility which
attached to them, but he could not see that there was any
other course open to them to adopt.—(Hear, hear ) But it
was a satisfaction to know that neither the Governm_nt nor
any Member of the house could suppose that they had been
did not support them
actuated by any factious or selfish motives in the course they
had taken. They had supported the West India body upon
Right Hon. Baronet
ain
principle,in the 0 uarl although unge he
need
the
and IVet:nt
tlhnedoi ad day
yohiel yojudgment.—(hear,
they
hear.) They had clung to the hope that they might still
might, for they
ed in offic
in
e
they itugh
e
le
this way. He was glad that the
hmaadi nttha
ei n
mt
me
or
rfaobr e r a pd es
missionti n,
and
f well
it
not have
sorry beent that
the member for Tam
saved
h
wa ovt retdeh ,f
otrhahte catastropheha
systemrl
another
wYear.—( Hear, hear.)
He was he
was
consummated
boon put an end to under the circumstances which at present
existed.—( Hear, hear.)
lie was glad that it had been put
of protection had
an end to by a protective Parliament, who had passed a re-
solution pledging the Commons of England to support the
colonial interest.—( Hear, hear.) But he did not see why
the opposition of the Right Hon. Baronet should have in-
duced the Noble Lord to abandon office, because the Noble Lord
d the course of the Right Hon.
might have pursue Baronet in
some few years back, under similar circumstances; indeed upon
the very subject of sugar. He might have said he was defeated
on a question
' which was not fatal, and therefore it was not ne-
cessary for him to resign.—(hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—Sir, in rising towards the
close of this debate, to address some observations to the House,
I must in the first place most willingly declare, that my Noble
Friend, whether in the motion that he has made, or in the
speech with which he accompanied it, has not said or proposed
anything which he was not perfectly justified in doing.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord, no doubt believing in th 3 truth of his
own principles, has declared himself in opposition to the plans
of the Government, and asked the House, in a preliminary
resolution, to declare its opinion with respect t o
the ce:enies ; bet, Sir, the resolution does not simply
confine itself to the principles of the Noble Lord. I think it
goes far beyond that, in fact proceeds to a condemnation of the
immediate! plan before the House. I could have understood
my Noble Fiend had he said at this late period of the session
it is impossible to alter the whole system of
our sugar duties
without considering other questions which are involved in
them, and we, therefore must vote against the adoption of the
plan before us, and we shall be ready at the commencement of
another session to take this plan, or any other plan Government
may in the mean time mature for considerrtion—( Hear,
bear.) I could well uudeotuud that course is.td it Ina tilken

taken by the Noble Lord, and it might have been supported by
the majority of the House, and Government might still have
thought themselves justified in continuing in office—(Elear,
hear)—for the course which my Noble Friend has taken is
widely different to this. It declares in the first place that the
coherence of this House was pledged to principles of
a particular commercial policy. It declares in the
next place that the plan before the House is calculated to give
a stimulus to the slave trade, and altogether condemns, upon
these two allegations, the whole plan that has been submitted
to the consideration of this House.—( Hear, hear.) Sir, I will
endeavour, in the first place, to touch upon a few of those
topics to which my Noble Friend, as well as the Honourable
and Learned Member who has just sat down, have adverted,
and I will then ask the House to consider what
may be the effect of the adoption of the resolution
of the Noble Lord. Sir, my Noble Friend commenced
with a statement as to the production of the colonies,
and went into a calculation of the sugars to be expected
this year, but lam not going at present to follow him with
regard to any calculation as to the amount of sugar that may
be introduced into this country from India during the present
year.- I cannot, however, but say that the principle upon which
my Noble Friend proceeds is, that you should endeavour to
create a necessity in India for the production of sugar, by
establishing actually high prices for that sugar than it would
otherwise obtain if you did not by law give them. Now, Sir, a
worse instance for the adoption of a protective policy
I could not well conceive. I can well understand with respect
to corn, or with respect to any production that has been long
favoured by law, that any Ministry may say, this system it is
difficult to tax, because there is a great portion of our popula-
tion whose interests are incluied in the protection of this
article.—(Protectionist cheers.) My Noble Friend the Mem-
ber for Lynn has said that we must raise up a protective
interest, and give to the sugars of India an advantage in the
market by raising the price by law, in the hope that at some
future time the price would be again reduced to meet
the exigencies and the wants of the people of
England —( Cheers.) But, except this House is ready to
revoke its former votes and decide that protection is neces-
sary for the interestsof thi ; country, and should not be inter-
fered with, I conceive it cannot give its consent to the resolu-
tions of my Noble Friend the Member for Lynn.—(Cheers.)
The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Shrewsbury has gone
into some statements with respect to the revenue; I do no, in-
tend to follow the Hon, Gentleman in that course. But he,
and the friends who act with him, seem to forget that the cal-
culations upon which we rely are, that, with diminished
prices there will be an increased consumption, and with an in-
creased consumption you will have an additional importation,
and from an additional importation you must have an increase
of revenue.—(Cheers.) With reference to the last portion of
the Noble Lord's resolution, that the proposed measure will
give a stimulus to the slave trade, I must say that the Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury was led into the moat extraordi-
nary aonfusion of ideas. He supposed, that because we do
not think that the exclusion of slave sugar from the markets
of this country could be kept up as an efficient
system that we were ready to say that the abolition of slavery
was a failure. Nothing could be more distinct than the two
propositions.— (Cheers. ) After the plan of Mr. Wilberforce
had been adopted and carried into effect, there arose another
question, which was, if you can give protection to your own
colonies against all the sugar producers of the slave colonies of
other countries. Upon that arose the question whether or not
it was defensible upon the principle of protection, or upon the
grounds of humanity, to maintain that system of protection
and exclusion.—(Cheers.) Sir, I was one of those who had
the honour of being her Majesty's advisers at the time of
the abolition of the slave trade.—( Hear. ) I stitl hold that
to be a great muasare—a wise and judicious measure—
founded upon the sound principles of justice and humanity.—
(Cheers.) I consider it, Sir, as a measure which experience
has sanctioned, and which no House of Commons will, I
venture to say, ever propose to revoke —(Loud cheers) The
question before this House is, do )ou think you can put any
check to the slave-trade by the prohibition of the single article
of slave-grown sugar, while at the same time you admit slave-
grown tobacco, rice, copper, and other things? The lion.
Member for Shrewsbury has said, that to defend the practice
upon this principle, would be to do so on the principle of a
person who might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb.
I do not admit that it is wrong to admit these articles into the
country. The adoption of such a principle would not, I think,
advance the cause of humanity in the world. It would leave
yea to declare in your tariff, and in your custom-house books,
that you would take an exact account of the means to ascer-
tain the products, where produced, and the different p'srts at
which the various articles were shipped and embarked for this
country. Will any man say, that if such had been the ease—
that if on the ground of humanity, such had been the policy
of this great commercial nation, mankind would have been in
a better situation in that case than they are at the present mo-
ment? Will any man say that the commercial intercourse
of this great and civilised country with Asia and with Africa,
has not tended to mitigate those barbarous practices?—(Hear,
hear) —to mitigate slavery while it existed in India and the
other countries, and upon the whole, reviewing the state and
condition, has it not produced a policy more civilised—a policy
more happy in relation between man and man, than would
have been the case if you had continued to sanction that exclu-
sive principle, and which was conceived to be humane, but
which would have turned out to be a barbarous and
injurious policy?—(Cheers.) Such, Sir, I think, is a fair de-
duction from the principles which the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman has put forward, and is this an opinion
solely of my own—is it an opinion, with regard to what is at
present carried on with regard to sugar, which her Majesty's
Ministers entertain ? Why, my Right Hon Friend near me
quoted the opinions of an anti-slavery society in Liverpool.—
( Hear, hear.) The opinions of that anti-slavery society, as
here stated, are that freedom of labour in the pro-
duction of sugar is promoted, not by the
exclusion of slave-grown sugar, but by its free admission.
They say, that from observation, they arc of opinion that free
labour, when brought into fair competition with slave labour,
will be more effective in the abolition of slavery, and they can-
not but regard the continuance of the protective duties as
virtually and practically promoting the continuance of the slave
trade; and they say that they believe that sugar can easily be
produced by free labour, and that the free labour colonist will be
able to compete with the slave holding colonists. Such is the
opinion of the Anti- Slavery Society. I hold in my hand a re-
port from a very different. body, the association of the West
India planters and merchants ; and what is their opinion on the
present subject? They say that it is perfectly practicable to
compete with the slave growing colonies by means of free
labour, and that the abolition of slavery can be better effected
by admitting sugar into this country free of duty, than all the
high-sounding denunciations which can be used, and which
they say will be fruitless. Thesimple plan of abolishing slavery
they say is to follow the course pointed out by the Government.
Why, Sir, those opinions are almost identical in expression,
and yet they come one from the: Anti-slavery Society, and the
other from a committee of the West India body, deeply inte-
rested in the preservation of these colonies. I say, therefore,
that no one has a right to say that the plan which we propose
has any tendency to increase the slave trade and slavery. But
let me take another part of the argument, and show you in
what manner I think that the present system does prevent
the good you labour to effect, and that argument is no other
than the well-known argument which experience has re-
peatedly shown to be well-founded, that the effect of monopoly
and protection is always to cheek exertion and diminish enter-
prise, and prevent the full and fair fruits of the capital, skill,
and labour of those who are engaged in any branch of agricul-
ture or manufacture.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) What
is the case with the West Indies? We find during
the last two or three years some evidence given
before a Committee of the Assembly of Labour by persons
who are well acquainted with the West Indies, showing that
the cost of the production of sugar is very much greater than
it need be if all the advantages of machinery, if all the specu-
lations and skill were used which moral science
and moral ingenuity would dictate. I have be-
fore me a plan proposed by the West Indian
colonists, who say that the :plan which they proposed was
generally well received. The plan which they propose to sup-
port the manufacture of sugar or the cultivation is such as, in
their opinion, would enable lithe proprietors of estates in the
colonies to produce sugar at 14e. per cwt., instead of 275., the
present price.—( Hear, hear.) I do not say that this statement
or that those particular figures are just, but that there would
be a very great economy with regard to the manufacture of
sugar, and particularly so if those colonists were expcsed to
competition.—(Hear, hear.) It is competition, and it is com-
petition only, which ever does bring out enterprise, and
economy, and skill.—( Hear. ) I have spoken of late years with
various persons engaged in the various branches of manufacture,
I have asked them what it was, in their opinion, that caused
the very great advances which had been made in machinery of
late years, and they have all uniformly answered—" It is the
great increase of competition ; it was necessity which led us to
improve our machinery and resort to every species of economy
that we could, to be able to:go into the markets of the world.
—( Hear, hear.) With the same stimulus—with the same
unlimited exertion of the West Indian colonists, I believe and
I think that you will see that they will rise and flourish
more than they have done for many years on the old system
(Hear, hear.) From an Hon. Gentleman who spoke to-night
I was very sorry to hear of persons who had resolved to culti-
vate their estates no longer. lam sorry to hear that there are
persons so dispirited, but I do believe, that if those estates
are properly worked, there will be no better in-
vestment than the West Indian estates.—(Hear, hear.)
The lion. Gentleman has alluded to some other points, to
which I should wish to draw attention before I sit down.
Now,iSir, one point is that with regard to the opinion of Mr.
M'Culloch. That gentleman has been in the habit of sending
me copies of his works, and he did send to me a copy of his
last work on taxation, but with a note saying that he hoped
that I would approve of the greater part of the work, but that
he was aware that there was one question of it regarding
slavery with which he felt sure I would not coincide, and ,
such was the fact. I look upon Mr. APCulloch as a most
able and well informed writer, though Ido differ with him
upon that point. The Honourable Gentleman with
some of the fancy, of which he possesses much,
says that I stated that the colonies were:on a vicious system.
Now, on the contrary, I said that the colonies were a great
part of the empire, and I hoped that they might flourish ; but
I did say that the ancient system, by which you refused to the
colonies permission to send its produce to other countries, was
a vicious system. Now, this is a point of considerable im-
portance, for it is said, that if you are not in favour of the
ancient system, you wish to destroy the colonies; but on the
contrary, I believe the colonies, under a better system, would
be of far more benefit to the country. The lion. Gentleman
made another charge, which I confess I was quite unprepared to
hear. That the country had ever gone back after they had
adopted a more improved: system was not the fact, nor was it
the character cf the country, Ido not refer to those times of
violence, when the throne and Parliament was scattered by the
assumption of an usurped authority, but since the accession of
the house of Stuart, there was nothing more clear than that
the character of the country was to adhere with firm determi-
nation to the conquests of reason which had been made. In
those days personal liberty was at the will of the sovereign.
The Habeas Corpus Act was passed. Had they shown a
wish to- repeal that Act? The Bill of Rights was also obtained
—had any attempt been made to repeal that Bill ?—( Hear,
hear.) The Act of Toleration was passed, but who had ever
moved that it should be suspended—( Hear.) Ido not believe
that there is any party in this House that would wish to restore
the disabilities that were formerly imposed upon the Catholics.
—( Cheers.) When a question had been ripened by discussion
and decided, the triumph of reason has ever remained permanent
and without even a wish being expressed to repeal ergo back.
Sir, my Noble Friend who began the debate, and the Hon.
Gentleman after whom I am now speaking, contemplated the
passing of this resolution, and in terms of great courtesy to
her Majesty's Ministers, contemplated that after the passing of
the amendment, we might continue with benefit to administer
the affairs of this country. I beg to thank my Noble Friend
for the manner in which he addressed us, and I have nothing to
find fault with in the terms of hisspeeeh, but the resolution itself
is:one completely subversive of the policy which wehave thought
right to recommend to this House. I had hoped that in
assuming with my colleagues the Government of this country,
I had hoped that after a period of angry contest, after a period
during which a measure was carried which had been attended
with more violent opposition than any measure ever met with
in that House, I had hoped that we should have had at least
the acquiescence of all parties till at
.length affairs
had assumed a settled course, that they would
have waited to see whether the measure we
brought forward would meet with the approbation of the coun-
try. With that expectation I did feel (what an Hon. Member
calls) the presumption—be it so—l did feel that I should
undertake the administration of the affairs of this country ; but
I do think that no Minister could conduct the domestic affairs
of this country, •or maintain its character in the face of
ibreiS Moll Wen he 1144 the respect of this Howe

and the country ; and I candidly confess that
it I consented to go on with the administration of the affairs
of this country, after the resolution was carried, and my
['obey set aside, I should be exposing my Administration to
contempt, I should be injuring the dignity oft!i e Crown, whose
servant lam ; I should be injuring the reputation of th 3 Go-
vernment, at whose head I am placed ; I ,hould be causing a
diminution of the glory of this great nation, to which we s I belong.
I can also state that, if the resolution correctly represent the
opinions of the majority of the House, and if it be a reflex
of the opinion of the country, I think her Majesty would do
well to place the administration of affairs in the hands of those
who advise that policy. That would be a constitutional pr
ceeding, and though I could not support my Noble Friend
in his views, I must admit that he would be intitled to carry
cut that policy, by assuming the position which would enable
him the more effectually to do so; but of one thing I am sure,
that to remain in power after being degraded by the passing of
the resolution of my Noble Friend, would bring a permanent
injury to the constitution of this country, and I would nut be
doing justice to my Sovereign to continue to hold otilee one
moment longer.—( The Noble Lord eat down amid lsild cries
of "Divide.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdrawn, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For Lord G. Bentincles amendment.. 135
Against it 265

Majority in favour or Ministers 130
The announcement was received with considerable cheering
from the Ministerial side of the House,
The resolution was then agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, aril the
House adjourned at half-past One o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
(From the Votes and Proreedincs of the louse of Commons.

TUESDAY, JULY 28.
STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEE.
The folllowing resolutions were reported from the above Com-
mittee:
1. That, in the case of the Metropolitan Sewage Manure Company
Petition, for additional provision, the standing orders ought to be dis-
pensed with :—That the parties be permitted to introduce their addi-
tional provision accordingly.
2. That, in the case of the All Souls College (Oxford) Estate Bill,
the standing orders ought to be dispensed with : —That the parties be
permitted to proceed wills their Bill.
3. That, iu the case of the Bishop of Norwich's (North Lyon Rec-
tory) Estate Bill, the standing orders ought to be dispensed with :
That the parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill.
Resolutions agreed to.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
"

Messengers from the Lords brought up the following 11;11s, which
.heir Lordships had agreed to:—

Newport, Abergavenny, and Hereford Railway Bill —South Staf-
fordshire Junction Railway with Branches Bill—Leeds and Bradford
Railway (Junction Line at Bradford) Bill—Blackburn, Preston, and
East Lancashire Railway Amalgamation Bill—South-Eastern Rail-
way (Greenwich to Chilham with Branches) Bill, without Amend•
anent— Edinburgh and Bathgate Railway Bill—London and Birming-
ham Railway (Birmingham Extension) Bill—Birmingham, Wolver-
hampton, and Stour Valley Railway (Birmingham, Wolverhampton,
and Dudley Lines) Bill—Shropshire Union Railway and Canal (New-
ton to Crewe with Branches) Bill—Shropshire Union Railways and
Canal (Chester and Wolverhampton Lines) Bill—Shropshire Union
Railway and Canal (Shrewsbury and Stafford Railway) MU—Rugby
and Leamington Railway Bill—Shrewsbury and Herefordshire Rail-
way Bill —Bristol and Birmingham and Midland Railway Bill, with
A mend ments —Whitehaven and Furness Railway (liirksanton Devia-
tion) Bill—Billingsgate Market. Bill, with an Amendment.