The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-11 00:00:00

POOR REMOVAL BILL.

Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the chair-
man, vice-chairman, and board of guardians of the Leicester
union, complaining of the inefficiency and injustice of this Bill.
SUGAR DUTIES CONTINUANCE BILL (Isio. 3:)

Lord CLARENDON then rose to move the fi'rst reading
of this Bill, and hoped that their Lordships would, in
accordance with the usual practice, permit the Bill
to be read a first time. It was, as their Lord-
ships were aware, customary to discourage any explana-
tion which could lead to a debate, reserving such debate
until the second reading, but after the consideration
which had been given to the measure, and that their Lordships
were prepared to discuss the measure, if he asked their
Lordships' leave to depart from that course on the present oc-
casion, he could assure their Lordships it was from no wish
to interfere with the practice of the House, or to
establish a precedent, which, he was sure their Lordships
would always continue to sanction, and still less so be-
cause he had not, on the part of the Government,
any intention to prevent a full discussion of the
question. At the present late pet iod of the session, it was
desirable that their should be no unavoidable delay. He
would refrain from any details on the subject, because
with those all their Lordships must be familiar, and
upon the principle of which they had already formed an opi-
nion. He trusted that those opinions might not be adverse
to this Bill, and that it might be allowed to pass without oppo-
sition. But even if he were certain of the votes which
they would give on this question, he felt that he should be
wanting in respect to their Lordships, and he should be
improperly discharging his duty, if he did not lay
before their Lordships the grounds upon which her Majesty's
Government asked them to grant a measure which involved
considerations as various as the principles of the measure
were interestieg to the country. He must, therefore, for
a short time trespass upon their indulgence whilst be briefly
discharged the duty which devolved upon him. The princi-
ples of the present Bill had been sanctioned by the policy of
the Government and Legislature during the last four years.
Parliament had ceased to legislate for particular interests, and
had adopted what might be considered, he thought, a principle
of national benefit; and the system of protection,or rather non-
protection, might be looked upon as settled and, he might ven-
ture to add, for ever abolished. He would, therefore, say no more
on that part of the subject, but content himself by expressing
his confidence, that as their Lordships had declared ultimately
to withdraw protection from British agriculture, that they
should not refuse to adopt the same policy towards the colonies,
and consequently not reject the principle of the corn-law
measure which a few weeks ago received the sanction of
their Lordships. He was further induced to feel this confidence
because he relied upon the consistency of that House, and
because he was fully assured that no political changes woulo
induce their Lordships to depart from the principle which,
under such circumstances, they had adopted. He also felt
this confidence, because a departure from the course he pointed
out would be injurious to the great mass of the people,
as it would prevent them from obtaining one of the first neces-
saries of life at a moderate rate. Besides the rejection of the
measure would be injurious to the revenue, and, above all, its
rejection would inflict great injury on those classes of our
fellow-countrymen with whose interests its welfare was bound
up—he meant the British consumer ; and he must
add that upon this question, to them so important,
they had exhibited the greatest moderation.—( Hear,
hear.) He included in this Colonial merchants, who call for
nothing beyond that which their countrymen here enjoyed.
From the moment when they understood that the abolition of
the corn-laws was settled here, they also understood that the time
had come when there should be no difference between sugar, the
produce of slave, and sugar the produce of free labour.—( Hear.)
But they considered that the worst thing that could happen to
them would be to leave the question in that state of uncer-
tainty which had occurred from year to year on ac-
count of the annual discussion of the subject of
the sugar duties by Parliament—a course which fre-
quently rendered their business fruitless and devoid of
profit, because it was impossible to apply their capital and ma-
chinery to the best advantage. They looked anxiously forward
for a final settlement of this question. They were induced to
look, in this state of things, to the great amount of dif•
ferential duties, together with all the sums paid for the eman-
cipati ,n of the slaves, which had imposed upon this coun-
try 42,000,0001. during the last eleven or twelve years.
He would show, with reference to sugar, that Parliament had
inflicted a constant, unnecessary, and cruel injustice. Forty
years ago, when the whole population and wealth of this coun-
try was less then than at present, the consumption of sugar was
estimated at 301bs. by some persons and by others at 221bs.
per head, and this was no exaggerated allowance, for the
humblest classes of this country atipresent were allowed 2211b5.
per head, and the consumption for the sailor in her Majesty's
navy was 341 b. 3cz. But, notwithstanding the in-
crease in the wealth and population of the country,
and in the improved mode of living, the present
average amount was little more than 161bs. per head.
But even this gave no correct estimate of the consumption
with reference to the labouring classes. The price of the
article had made no alteration in the consumption by the rich
and middling classes, the former of whom consumed 60Ibs. per
head, and the latter 371b5., while the amount left to
be divided among the poorer and labouring classes
did not amount to more than 81bs. per bead, or 18)
per cent. below the pauper and the convict, and
300 per cent. below that of the common sailor. In order to
show what was the power of consumption of this article, he
would tell their Lordships, from a return whizh he held in his
hands, that in New South Wales the annual con-
sumption of sugar amounted to 104 pounds per head. If
their Lordships referred to any of the various tables which
had been submitted, showing the wages of the labouring man,
they would find that the allowance was not more than three
or four ounces per head per week. This might be sneered at
by the philanthropist of the negro race, and they might say
this was a necessary state of things ; but he looked upon it as a
disgrace to any Parliament that they should thus deprive, by the
existing laws, the poorer and the unprotected classes
of the country of the means of procuring an article
which, with the exception of bread, was capable of
a more useful, nutritious, and extensive consump-
tion than any other articles imported into this country.
He begged to call their attention to the course to be pursued in
that respect. In 1821 the duty on colonial coffee was ls., on
East India coffee Is. 611., and on foreign coffee 10s. In 1825
the duties were 6d., 9d., and Is. 3d. In 1835 the duties on
colonial and East Indian coffees were equalised, and
the duty on the foreign coffee remained the same. In
1844 the duty on foreign coffee was reduced to
bd. The consumption in 1821 was seven millions of
pounds, in 1831 it was 22 millions, in 1841 it was 28 millions,
and in 1835 it was 34 millions, and the increase of revenue
was from 340,021/. to 718,000/. The consumption of tea in
1821 was 22 millions, in 1831 it was 29 millions, in 1841 it
was 3t; millions, and in 1845 it was 44 millions. The revenue,
in 1821, was 3,200,0001., and in 1845 it was 4,800,000/. Then
they came to the consumption of sugar. In 1821
it was 4,000,000 cwt., in 1831 it was 4,000,000 cwt.,
in 1341 it was 4,900,000 cwt., in 1844 it was 4,009,000
c3dB;lBr.t°,i n°, g:an):(ti:h let.
the
Inea s Shi
45
it was 5,000,000 cwt. The revenue
en sugar from 1823 to 1845 varied from 5,500,0001. to
that period having sugar
liodw—e stthheavdr
covaried
ti very
inogn
.ul
during
itnt
Os.lge
The price
increased
years, r
eaav e. d
Ooft
ohfs e r m
andthe •
_,
having remained nearly stationary. Under these circum-
stances, he hoped that the House .o
I'
with him that
the time had now arrived when these duties should be placed
on a more liberal and a firmer basis. That had been the
object of her Majesty's Government, with a due re-
gard to the interest of the British producers,
to the exigencies of the revenue, and the wants of the people.
He trusted that he should be able to show to the House that
such an alteration would be for the benefit of the public and the
consumer. From 1841 the duty has been reduced to 14s. 6d.
The consequence had been that there was an increased
amount in the consumption of sugar in this country, while,
under the former system, it could not be shown that any
advantages resulted to the planter himself, and that the
labourer derived no advantage from the system as it then ex- s
Wed. He did not show that there was any iwyroved manner