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

GAME-I,AWS.

Mr. COLLETT said, seeing the Member for West Gloa-
cest ershire in his ;Mace, he wished to ask him whether it was the
intention of the Hon. Gentleman to bring the subject of which
he had given notice before the House, or whether he was to
tiring forward the grounds of the allusions to him (Mr. Col-
lett)? He would certainly he present, but he wished to blow
what the lion. Mesubt..r meant to do.
Mr. G. BERKELEY said he certainly meant to bring the
subject of the game•laws b. fore the House, anti would allude
to all who had lent their aid to bring those laws into con-
tempt.— (Lenghter.)
tk-IxS a(a)l.RheEinL iNgrell BILL.
On for reading this Bill a
On the order itollt.
second

Mr. L ABOUCHERE said he wished to take the discussion
On this Bill, and the second reading of it, on Wednesday, as
several were absent. whom he thought would better be present.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE expressed his amazement at the
course proposed to be pursued by the Government. He woa.
tiered especially who those gentlemen were f.,r whom the dis.
cuss:on had been postponed.
Mr. I. AIIOUCHERE thought it would be better for all
parties that the second reading should be postponed. that all
might have due notice. and especially the Irish Members. He
was afraid also that it would be late before the House could
enter upon it ; but, if it was the wish of the House, be had no
objection to bring on the second reading to-night.
CUSTOMS Du 11ES ACT.

On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the
House went into Committe on the Customs Duties.
On the article spirits beinc read,
?Ir. MACKINNON said he beeped to press the motion
of which he bad given notice, on the equalisation of duties
on colonial spirits with British snirl's. In Ireland the duties
were 2s. Btl. ; in Scotland, 3s. 4dt. ; and in England, 93. 4d.
The consequence was, there was a differential duty between
England, Scotland, and Ireland. He asked the Government
why they should violate the principle which they had recog-
nised in the Sugar Bill? Nay, more, recognised in a late
measure, which admitted spirits made from sugar in the
Channel islands, at a lower rate than spirits from the colonies.
That only encouraged a monopoly, which discouraged the co-
lonial trade. lie should wait till he heard what the Govern-
ment would say Oct the subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Hoe.
Member was under no obliga' ion of apologising for the intro-
duction of the subject on which he had occupied the atteviet:
of the House. It was one of great importance. Weitehtwregeande
the duty imposed on colonial rum, the diffeareenehebwoueld
pro
duty imposed on it and British spirits was d
s It was quite cleft
burdens upon the two classes
on the same duty as
say whether rightly or wrongly
that colonial rum should not be admitted
when they considered that there was a duty et
British spirits, producers.
dour‘cleerr
.tmo equalise the Ilssal

the raw material of the latter—malt, which was not imposedon
the raw' material of the former. He was perfectly willing,
opal burdens and fiscal impositions considered, to place colo-
nial spirits on the same footing as British spirits; and it was
in the spirit of this proposition that the present alteration was
submitted. If this change was not a sufficient equalisation
between the two products,p he would do what he could
hereafter to make it so. With regard to the duty imposed on
Irish or Scotch spirits, when the duty was high, continual at-
tempts were made to evade the duty, and illicit distillation
prevailed to a great extent. But since the reduction of the
duty had taken place, illicit distillation had almost ceased, while
the consumption of regularly produced spirits had greatly in-
creased. The present duty, therefore, was as high in each
country as could be, without giving great encouragement to
illicit distillation. The facilities for evading the revenue in
Scotland and Ireland, from the nature of the countries, were
so great that it would be impossible safely to retain any higher
duty than the rates now imposed. In England the spirit
duty was regulated according to the circumstances of
the country, and if it was higher, smuggling
would inevitably prevail to a great extent. There
was a large amount of unprotected coast in England, especially
in the west, and to raise the duty higher, would be to offer
the greatest inducements to smuggling. He did not threw out
these observations as an answer to the objections of the Hon.
Gentleman, but rather to show that great care and considera-
tion should be observed before any change was made. Tim
Hon. Member concluded by a review of the scales of duties
imposed on British spirits, at various periods from 1802, with
the object of illustrating the course of argument he had been
pursuing with regard to the duties that should be imposed.
Mr. HUME was satisfied with the explanation cf the Right
Hon. Gentleman with regard to English spirits, but he was
not so satisfied with that relating to Scotland and Ireland. He
could not see any reason why the people of these two countries
should be obliged to pay more for colonial rum than they paid
for whisky.
Mr. GOULBURN would take the proposal of the Right
Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) as an in-
stalment of what was due to the colonies. In the year 1830 he
had occasion (being then Chancellor of the Exchequer) to re-
vise the whole subject, and proposed an additional duty of Is.
upon British spirit. Corn was then subject to a higher duty
than it was by the existing tariff, and then it would be three
years henee. Unfortunately, he was unable to carry his ar-
rangement into effect. With respect to the differential duties of
Scotland and England, he thought there were departmental
difficulties in the way of their equalisation ; bat these were not
insuperable. He considered that in consequence of the disad-
vantage under which the West Indian colonies laboured by
the recent measure, which affected their interests,
to adopt the proposed reduction on rum was an instalment of
what they were justly entitled to. He thought, therefore, the
equalisation of the duties on rum and British spirits was a
measure to which they were entitled in accordance with
every principle of justice.
Mr. P. M. STEWART told the Right Hon. Gentleman
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to proceed in the course he
had commenced. He deprecated the anomaly which existed
between the duties en Irish and Scotch spirits, and contended
that on one article, drawing a revenue of five millions yearly,
such a principle should not be applied. He hoped they would
not attempt to settle the sugar question without equalising the
duties on rum and British spirits, and regulating the supply of
labour, two measures which the West Indies were entitled to
in consequence of the measure which had lately passed for the
equalisation cf the sugar duties.
Mr. BERNAL said, if the West Indies and British Guiana
were to be considered as integral parts of the British empire,
there was no reason why their commodities should not be
allowed to come in on the principle of competition with the
same commodities the produce of the United Kingdom. He
said he would not say a word on West Indian grievances, all he
would say was, do justice to the colonies and the West Indian
interest. He remembered well that the landed interest in
this country was always made the foundation of these differ-
ential duties ; but he hoped the House would deal with the
sugar grower as they had done with the corn grower, and
equalise the duties.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to explain, and said all that
he meant was that some time was necessary for the Govern-
ment to consider this question, lest injustice might be done to
any parties. It was certainly his wish to avoid this, and he
hoped his Hon. Friend would allow the Government time to
take it into their consideration.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in answer
to a remark from Mr. Goulburn, said that the duties in the
tariff, of this year, were put down exclusive of the 5 per cent.
Mr. GOULBURN said when rum was put in tit. schedule
reduced to Bs. led , he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer
was aware there was a 4d. additional to the nine shillings of the
former tariff. He wished to know whether the Chancellor of
the Exchequer was aware that he might only be reducing the
duties on that account by merely 2d.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
understood the suggestion, and would see that his intention was
attained. -
Mr. MACKINNON then withdrew his motion.
The several articles were then gone through and agreel to.
The report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
The House then resumed.
ARMS (IRELAND) BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill
being read,
Mr. LA BOUCHERE said it was with extreme reluctance
that he rose to move the second reading of this Bill ; but that
feeling, he said, did not arise from the Bill as a whole, for the
Government, and he agreed with it, was of opinion that this
Bill was necessary for the well-being of Ireland. He did not
agree with all the provisions of this Bill, and had he been con-
sulted en it, he could never have been a a party to the introduc-
tion of it into the House.--( Hear, hear.) But he hoped to
show the House that it was perfectly in consistency with this
opinion that he rose to move the House to pass the measure for
so limited a period as would give the Government time to con-
sider what might be the best course to take in the Govern-
ment of Ireland. He said the House would agree with
him in this, that it would be no part of a wise
policy to have the peace and security of that country
unguarded. He said this was net a continuance Bill ; the Go-
vernment in that respect had adopted arrest novel course, for it
came into the House, iind asked it to pass this Bill only till the
first of May next, that it might have time to consider the course
of policy it should adopt. He did riot know any other course
the Government could have pursued on this question, as the
terms of the Bill made it imperative that the whole question
should be fully considered early ii the next session of Parlia-
ment. It might have been said, why not withdraw the present
Arms Bill, and introduce the Arms Bill previously in opera.
Von ? But he had objections to that Bill, greater objections
than he had to the present one, and. therefore, the best course
be thought would be to renew the Bill for the short period he
named. While he proposed this, his objections to the
present Bill, which he had stated on a former
occasion. still remained, both as regarded the registering of
arms and " branding." With regard to the former, the re-
gistrations were over, and no harm could arise from that
clause between now and next May ; and with regard to
branding that had already taken plane. No harm could there-
fore arise from the continuance of the Bill for nine months
longer. By so doing her Majesty's G .vernment would have
the,opportunity of fully considering the question. A great
deal in the meantime would depend on the way in which the
Government would carry the provisions of the Act into opera-
tion, and while he pledged himself that it would be carried out
in the least objectionable manner, he must bear his testimony
as to the forbearing way in which the late Government had
carried its provisions into effect. He would, therefore, merely
as a temporary arrangement, move that the Bill be read a
second time.
Mr. HUME said the easiest way for the Right Hon. Member
to have met the difficulty would have been to allow the Bill to
drop altogether.—(Hear, hear.) The Hight Hon. Gentleman
had not given the shadow of a reason for the continuance of
the Bill. He admitted that the Bill had been a failure, and
yet he asked the House to consent to the continuance of this
bad Bill for nine months longer. The only argument
used was, " I have confidence in her Majesty's Ministers," as
to the way the provisions of the Bill shall be carried into effect.
But he would not consent to place the question on that tenure,
and lie considered the Government would do itself great injury
if it adopted and carried out this Bill. He had a greater re-
spect for her Majesty's Ministers than they had for themselves,
and he wished to save them from attempting any further coer-
• cion. The Noble Lord at the head of the Government himself
moved that the branding clause should be expunged from the
Bill, and yet he now sought to perpetuate the measure which
he then condemned. He would advise her Majesty's Govern-
ment to drop coercion and try conciliation ; and, depend upon
it, they would find that much more advantageous for the wel-
fare and peace of Ireland. The Hon. Member concluded by
moving that the Bill he read a second time this day month.
The amendment being seconded,
Mr. SHAW denied there was any thing coercive in the Bill.
The principal clauses objected to were inoperative now—those
relating to registration and branding ; and, therefore, there
could be no objection to acceding to the request of the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland. The course pro-
posed by the Government was the most reasonable that, under
present circumstances, could be adopted.
- Mr. BICKHAM ESCOTT said if the Bill had been
found troublesome, useless, and expensive, as asserted by the
Hon. Member, who had just sat down, he weuld ask where
was the necessity for re-enacting it now ? He could not
understand the motive for bringing it forward again. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for Ireland, gave no
reason for passing this tyrannical Bill, or why the constitutional
rights of the Irish people should be handed over to the execu-
tive Government. The Right Hon. Gentleman to 'd them
three years ago, that it was the custom of the executive GO.
vernment to resort too much to their unconstitutional proceed-
ings. If that was his opinion, then, and if it was as he ealleci
it, a tyrannical measure, why did he now, when he passed over
to the ether side of the House, propose and support what he
then an violently and unhesitatirgly condemned? No man
pretending to common honesty could adopt such a course. For
Iris own part be called upon the House to reject the Bill.
Mr. MUNTZ sa'd that public men were at great discount
now, he might say that they were at Birmingham discount, 75
per cent.— (Laughter.) And he thought that the late change
which had taken place in the opinions of the met, who composed
the present Government, as compared with those which they
held when they were on the other side of the House, would not
tend toraise them in the estimation of the country. He thought
he would be degrading and disgracing himself by supporting
the present Government in this measure, though he was gene-
rally in the habit of supporting them;
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD condemned the Bill. He
thought that the branding system was very disgraceful ; and
entertaining as he did the views with which he formerly re-
garded it, he would vote against it.
Mr. REDHEAD YORKE. would reluctantly vote against
the Government; but, to be consistent with the opinions -which
be formerly expressed, be must oppose them on the present oc-
e
easion.
Mr. BELLEW would vote against the Bill. TiLeldGoovpepron
the se-
inentm were inconsistent with regard to it, d h
e would . 'm
Mr. PIGOTT supported the Bill. The Recorder f°r:Dub-
tin had truly stated that all the mischief of the Bill
The greater portion of the arms had been registered. During
the last six months very few registers had taken place. He
celled upon the House to allow the Government time to consi-
der the
whole subject, as he believed that, under all the cireurn-
5, vices, such a course would he most expedient.
Mir. HORSMAN said his regret at the introduction of this
Bill formerly was greatly increased on this occasion. The
members of the Government, when out of office, had opposed
this measure—had said that coercive measures had been a signal
failurt,, but now. when in °Zee, they not only abstained not
from such mecaesrutreisn,jybiutt tvchaesy
haduompitieidatt,nhgemto.
the Right gah't fion surely.
infatuation; a
Gentlemen to uphoid what they had previously opposed. He
said he could not give the measure his support.
Sir J. FERGUSON said he would certainly support tie
measure.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said he could not understand the dis-
tinctions which were to be drawn in this legislation between
England and Ireland ; that English people were to be allowed
to use t heir powder without restriction, and the Irish were not.
The Gogernment came in with protestations of good-will to
Ireland, and a wish to destroy distinctions between that and
this country, but here, with a measure which eat not be-
queathed to them, they contradicted their own previous pre-
tensicins. 'Xhe Bill was not bequeathed to them. The Right
Holielitibirtet (sSirjantes Graham) had said that the Bill was
;pit* a fill ore. Why, then, he asked, should the Govern-
ent;:allo'-this Bill to remain on the statute-book ?He would
giv¢ tbe- Measure his opposition.
3(r..T. D UNCOMBE thought the Noble Lord, who by
leirfemeans or Other was considered the Prime Minister in that
!Wow—. -( Laughter)—would have occasion to explain his
*et ,He htscl, a few nights ago, asked the Noble Lord on