The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-30 00:00:00

the negroes on their arrival in the West Indies. But for
the Government to undertake more than this will be for it
to undertake schemes which I fear will end in disap-
pointment. As I said, I should be very much disposed
to facilitate the enterprise of individuals whose estates
wanted labour, the Government taking every precaution
against abuse. But, do what you will, do not subject
this country to the imputation of—under any pretence—
originating and encouraging a new slave trade.—(hear,
hear.) I trust, however, that her Majesty's advisers
will not insist upon applying the 500,0001. to the pur-
poses of immigration. I believe that there are some
other modes by which temporary relief can be given to
the West Indies more effectually than by the plan pro-
posed. I have read the evidence as to the condition of
coolies upon their arrival in the West Indies, and that
evidence is conclusive as to the sufferings which they
must have endured upon the passage. But if Govern-
ment, on the other hand, Ce willing to admit the prin-
ciple of temporary pecuniary relief—and I heard the ad-
mission with great satisfaction—then I hope that they
will consider the most effectual mode of applying that
relief. Now, in some of the colonies there are great
obstacles in the way of extending drainage and irri-
gation; but in others the process would be
azy, and the benefits to be derived from it,
especially in the way of preventing the conse-
quences of drought —very great. Now, in the most
recently-taken evidence, I find that of a British Creole
—a great proprietor in Jamaica, I mean Lord Howard
de Walden; I have also the evidence of the Hon. Gen-
tleman who complained of the slumbers of the Nable
Lord the Premier—by the way I beg for a moment to
interrupt the slumbers of the Hon. Gentleman himself,
b it —" bane veniana petimusque, damusque vicissim."—
(Nluch laughter, in the midst of which Mr. Bernal who
was thus apostrophised, and who had been apparently
asleep on a Ministerial bench, awakened up and looked
about him, while Sir R. Peel resumed.) Lord Ho.vard
de Walden says:—" There is a district between Kings-
town and Spanish Town, where a great deal of the finest
land could be brought into cultivation, by making a cut
from Springhead to the river Coo. The estimated ex-
pense would be 4,oool.—three estates would be benefited
while the expense of the drain weuld be repaid in a,
year." Now why have not the planters of Jamaica been
reclaiming this magnificent district, and making a
drain themselves? The answer would of course be,
" We are so much impoverished that we cannot make
it; we rely on the British Government." But then we
say again, " Why did you not make it in the time of
your prosperity?" It was because you relied on pro-
tection.—(Cheers.) Because you relied on a factitious
stimulus, on the factitious aid of protection, you have
not made this improvement, which you would have
made if you had been subject to the wholesome influ-
ence of competition. Here is a drain which, being made,
would benefit three estates. The estimated expense is
4,0001., and the work will pay at least fifty per cent. on
the outlay. In a year or two you will be paid. Why,
we are draining in England if the operation pays us only
four or five per cent.; but in your case you have the
expense repaid in a year or two.—(Hear, hear.) Then
the lion. Member for Rochester told us of estates in Porto
Rico. He told us of an estate to which irrigation had been
applied, and what was the result? The production of the
estate was at first under 100 hogsheads. Well, the pro-
prietor wants to compete with us; he tries irrigation, and
lie raises his produce the first year 100 to 200 hogsheads,
the next year to 300, the next to 500, and in 1847 he
has his estate producing 900 hogsheads.—(Cheers.)
This is what can be done by irrigation—by pooviding
against drought. Well, if by such simple means such
great profits can be derived—if by attending to irrigation
such great results can be attained, why should not I
trust that when the West Indies recover from their pre.
sent depression, the natural result of being forced to
make a great exertion will produce a corresponding ad-
vantage?—(hear, hear.) But we have evidence of Lord
Howard de Walden, which is still more important and
striking. He says—" A great deal might be done by
draining and irrigation;" and then he goes on to state
that a " tramway of eight miles, costing 150,0001., would
benefit sixteen estates, and that there is no question hut
that the proprietors of those estates would pay the ex-
pense, but that there are difficulties in the state of the
law." Here, however, is the case of a tramway, giving
increased facilities for communication, costing only
150,0001. Well, let Government, being willing to aid
the West Indian body, apply some portion of the
500,000/., not to increase the supply of labourers, who
may become a mere population of surplus paupers; but
let them take a❑ extended view of the improvements
which might be made, and endeavour to benefit the West
India body by aiding i❑ their accomplishment. Well,
Lord Howard de Walden, as I have said, gives de-
cisive evidence as to the advantages of draining in many
parts of Jamaica. He does not approve of small drains,
which may be stopped up by. the vegetation and the
roots of plants; but large drains, running through dis-
tricts, which, he says, may be formed with great advan-

tage. Now, here is shown the necessity of -competition.
It is only under the influence of competition that you
can hope that these improvements—these drains and
modes of irrigation—will be had recourse to. Let that
competition be applied. There will then be improve-
ment, there will then be a demand for surplus labour,
the cutting of drains and the excavation of reservoirs,
salubrious labour, very different from cane planting; and
alt this being effected, as I believe it can be effected,
under the guidance, and by the advice of a paternal Go-
vernment, the foundations may be laid for great local
pro,perity. And now I come to the most important con-
sideration of all—Will I consent to give 10s. protective
duty for six years? If I consent to that proposition, I
vote for the amendment.—(Hear, hear) Yes, the reason
why I differ from my Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn,
we believe,) is this, that I cannot vote for the last amended
resolution of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for
D:oitwich without encouraging a, belief on the part of
the West India body that lam prepared to give them 108.
protective duty.—(Hear, and "Oh.") Yes, I think the
very minimum amount you could offer, after voting for
this resolution, is 10s. for six years.—(Hear.) Well, Sir,
alter a full consideration of the case, that is a proposition
to which I am not prepared to accede—(Hear, hear)—
and I will not accede to it, not only on account of the
interest of the consumers here, but from a sincere and
conscientious belief that it would not be for the benefit of
the West India body themselves.—( Hear.) Now why do
I say that my Hon. Friend's last resolution implies a
protective duty of 10s. for six years ? He is not a simple
Member of Parliament. He was on the Committee—
he was acting with others, and he voted for the• Has.
duty. Well, he has proposed three resolutions.
The first was, that no remedy could be effectual
which did not give 10s. protective duty. The next was,
that any remedy proposed which was not in conformity
with the recommendation of the Committee would be
ineffectual—that recommendation being 103. for six
years. And then, ultimately, the resolution was changed
into its present form. But I put it to the West India
body whether they would not say, " Why, the wording
of the resolution was changed for mere party considera-
tions, with a view to a division; but we consider that it
still means 10s. for six years, and if we succeed in de-
teating the Government plan, that is the amount of
protective duty which we shall expect from you."—
(Hear, hear.) Now, I cannot consent to that amount of
protective duty, and for these reasons—the West India
body is distressed by want of labour. But I am there-
fore called on to give protection in favour of
cobnial produce—not the produce of the West
rndies alone, but 10s. of protective duty on that
of the East Indies and the Mauritius, in both
of which British possessions there is no want of
labour. They are, in fact, to have the same advantage
as the West Indies, without having the same grounds of
complaint.—( hear, hear.) Then, what is the necessary
consequence ? You admit, in these very resolutions,
that a very considerable time must elapse before you
have any increase in the supply of labour in the West
Indies, but the stimulus of protection to the East Indies
will be immediate, while the amount of available la-
bour there is enormous. Why, you have the valley

of the Ganges, with, it is said, 500,000 square
and labour at the rate of 2d. per day.—(oh, oh.) I am
speaking from the evidence—it is not my statement.
There is a large track, and there is no deficiency of
labour there. There is certainly some impediment on
account of the rent of land, but that can be removed ;
but yet the East Indies and the Mauritius are to re-
ceive an encouragement to compete with the West
Indies, though not labouring under the same disadvan-
tages, which competition will be as injurious to the
West Indies, in a pecuniary point of view, as foreign
competition.—(Hear.) It is admitted by this resolution,
it•hanat n
the perhapslv e
sttw
lon
dy
ieeasr sp
rsohcaul pa
rl e
thatss over before
supply
of
labourth,
btohey
ur,
but in this interval they are to be incited to competition
with other portions of the British colonies which labour
under no such want as they endure.—(Hear, hear.)
This is to expire at the end of six years, and let us con-
sider, if we grant this temporary protection, what object
it will ensure.—(Hear, hear.) The West Indians will
not enjoy it for more than three or four years, for they
will not have the supply of labour to enjoy it for a
longer period. And what will the Cubans say? Now,
I suppose that you are in earnest in this proposition,
and that when you propose " six
years," the proposition
is not made with the lurking intention of continuing it
afterwards.—(Hear, hear.) It is a proposition for pro-
tection for six years—to come to an abrupt termination
at the end of that period—and after six years there is
to be unqualified competition with the produce of the
whole world, slave labour and free.—(Hear, hear.) Will
the Cubans, do you think, relax?—(Hear, hear.) Will
they not say that they have a guarantee from the British
Parliament that at the end of six years they will have
unlimited access to the British market.—(Hear, hear.)
How would slavery be discouraged by a proposition of
that kind ? You tell them, wait for six years, and you
will recover your position ; but what will the West
Indian body be doing in the meantime ? I find an ex-
planation of it in the observation of my Hon. Friend
(Mr. Barkly), and I must say that I was not surprised
at the clearness with which he spoke on the subject.—
(htwhHei
et esnraaeeryss)sui
nli
thHaofneafsyswopgeuorrrke
ateoot
fwetaxiht
epph
reqoaruitfacilitysnopdtf throughout:which was
only
na A the
lyet
dmmeans
nas presentofpu Struggleamm
putting
no
gto
te
hnet
reduce
costin
rodu wages,ct colonies
on whatHHe He
doesaiys
sa,
whichwo fe sugararien
s et
ohne-
a sound and satisfactory basis. I think the effect of a
differential duty to that extent for so long a period,
would be at once to decide the struggle in favour of
the negro."—(Hear, hear.) Well, the last man I think
you should have any sympathy for is the negro demand.
ing extravagant wages.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") I have
a sympathy for the West Indians, but the conse-
quence of giving this temporary protection will be to
decide that struggle in favour of the negro. Tou have
decisive evidence of the consequences that will result
from this proposition. It will decide the struggle in
favour of the negro. I think he would get his own way,
and get it, probably, to the amount of the increased
price of the produce. In fact, increase of wages will
be tantamount to the increase in the price of produce,
and therefore the benefit will go into the labourers'
pocket.--(Hear, hear.) Then my Hon. Friend says

the effect of the 10s. protection would be to raise the
price of sugar 4s. a hundred weight in the market. And
who would gain by it? You would thus terminate the
struggle between the West Indian and the negro in
favour of the negro. You raise the price to the extent
of 4s. a cwt., and you get the slave-grower perhaps a
better price. If the price of sugar be raised 45., and
you tax him 35., that must he the result, and at the same
time Sou subject the West Indian to this disadvantage,
that the negro with whom he is struggling for a reduc-
tion of wages shall have the advantage over him.
And recollect he will have that advantage, because you
are paying an additional 4s. to give relief to the West
Indians.—(Hear, hear.) My Honourable Friend says,
" There would be an increase of wages tantamount to
the increased price of produce, and therefore the benefit
would go into the pocket of the labourer, for though it
were coupled with unrestricted intercourse with Africa,
it would be some time before that came into play; the
inducement to extend cultivatioir. would keep up the
iwihigoeusrebresy,ovnedultdhheaelff,e7”t wl,hiyichnotlameairmapbolertFartiioenado
further
says, says, "I have not now been in Jamaica for more than
eight years, and the accounts given to me of the island
represent it to be in a much worse condition, not only
than it was then, but than the rest of the West Indies ;
almost in a hopeless state ; therefore I do not wish to
damage their chance of obtaining additional protection
by anything I may say. I believe that it would be of
assistance to the present proprietors of Jamaica if they
got such a protection as that, but if it had the effect of
increasing the production very largely, and bringing a
large quantity of produce from India, the Mauritius, and
othr colonies, it would not permanently benefit even
the island of Jamaica; it might benefit the present pro-
prietors, who might perhaps get out of their properties
with a sacrifice." Now, with all the sympathy I have
with the present West Indian 'proprietors, the object at
which I aim is not to put some money into the pockets of
those proprietors, but to lay the foundation of national
prosperity.—(Hear, hear.) If I aim to pay him a sum
of money, ten thousand times would it be to put it into
his pocket directly, rather than do it in the way in which
you propose to do it by this proposition to raise the price
of sugar and enable the labourer to put it into his pocket.
—(Hear, hear.) It appears tome that there is an objec-
tion to this proposition for a 10s. duty for six years on
various grounds. It will end the struggle of the pro-
prietor with the labourer, and decide it against him; it
will increase the price of sugar and it will offer no dis-
couragement to slave sugar.--(Hear, hear.) On this
further ground, I cannot consent to the proposal to raise
the price of sugar 4s. in the British market to give
temporary assistance to Jamaica. It is my belief that
the way to benefit the West Indian proprietor is to
reduce the cost of cultivation, and enable him per-
manently to enter into competition with the foreign
producer; and it is because r Cannot hold out to nim
the expectation that I can fulfil the hopes to which I
would give rise by voting for the proposal of my Hon.
Friend, that I must give to that proposal a negative.—
(Hear, hear.) I say nothing now of the immediate pro-
posal of her Majesty's Government. I leave that for
further consideration; but this I say, that I have a sin-
cere desire to enter into the consideration of their plan
without reference to party considerations.—(Hear, hear.)
I am prepared to discuss she details of their measure,
and to extract from them as much benefit as we can
without loss to the revenue of the country, and with the
hope of affording relief to the West Indians.—(Hear,
hear.) Our object I think ought to be to encourage the
means of future competition, for I see many causes con-
tributing to the depression of the West Indians at the
present moment, for which, I believe, legislation could
provide no remedy.—(Hear, hear.) Of this lam con-
vinced, that if by means of protection, you give the
monopoly of the British market to your colonial pos-
sessions, you do not advance a single step towards
advancing their permanent prosperity.—(Hear, hear.)
My Honourable Friend has referred to the Committee
who sat in 1832, to inquire into the cause of the distress
that prevailed in 1830. And what was the cause of the
distress in 1830? It was over-production ; there was a
greater supply than the home market could take, and the
report of the Committee in 1832 is well worth the most
attentive perusal.—(Hear, hear.) You will find
that, for some years before 1832, there was a gradual
increase in West Indian production. There was a num-
ber of hundred weights increase, from four millions to
five millions ; and that was more than the British market
could take off when it came into competition with foreign
sugar in the European market ; and that Committee
said the only way of affording the means of effectual re-
lief was, to enable the British producer to undersell the
foreign producer in the British market. Well, they got
the monopoly of the home market ; you had not a single
hundred of foreign sugar brought in, and see the inef-
ficacy of such regulations. In like manner, your ten
shilling duty may now increase the supply, and you may
impose a protective duty that will exclude foreign
sugar, and yet do nothing to ensure per-
manent relief.—(Hear, hear.) You may increase the
supply, you may have more sugar produced than the de-
mands of this country require, and then we will begin to
have signs of depression.—(Hear.) Look, for instance,
to what took place under the corn-laws in the year 1836
and in the year 1823. Exactly the state of things I
have described took place, there having been a more
abundant supply than the market could take off.—
(Hear, hear.) In each year you have had Committees
to consider the causes of distress. The markets here
were dull, not a single cwt. of foreign corn was intro-
duced, and each of those Committees came to a conclu-.
sion that legislation was of no value. The price of
wheat was 395. in 1335; there was an abundant supply,
and a complete monopoly of the home market; there
was no competition with the foreigner, and yet com-
mercial distress prevailed. And so it will be with sugar,
if the factitious stimulus of protection is applied to
it.— (Hear, hear.) I feel it important, after what has
taken place, not to unduly burden the pur-
chaser; but, in the case of the West Indies especially,
I would not depart to the extent of one fraction from
the principle that ordinarily prevails; for I have come
to the conclusion that the protection demanded would
s
e
f
ocihvscssnslifpai
eouagsuiaattibvnnhrsit
ear.sebe)C. etolechluiffate,
HbooNhbtratrmheoi
eoh.
nrumwehikrsri
notn
ihsocsedoubarakeekeldtntestnandtHtoeio%
Ihuqfisfbo.
eluhtwcytiw'
eiolshmmsamthatrhCcaai
tpdioael:
isetlnendhetNlmai:aewt.
account
cwo,ebissbotnllththieuaeaeebwtnl
varedeLtieermet
0.
sobohn)paftlrf
that
respect
dthnnthtalahtdhtteatsiethistiwonnhelsoaedi
conditiontl
sdutehace.lesve_ldyd
foreigner,snt
toeotm tbd
hoee
lately
s a (tlpiaallratbmieeodaauoornarf:
that island, andv
emLr
saoekreders
othf Howardeafna Il
eadsaet,
aWt
ge awlsdat easnt
e,omab
age rte, recent
asked visit
tCuba,he e
Being
oeigrigo
armed? he answered, " Yes, I believe, invariably; the
overseer had a cutlass and dagger, and three bloodhounds
at his heels close by him. I understand it was the
custom of the island that no white man belonging to an
estate should go wholly unarmed. They would not go
on foot to any distance, but even on horseback they have
always their pistols at their si'es."—(Hear, hear.)
When you look to the United States, are you sure that
the status of slavery can always be maintained ? Do
you believe that the inhabitants of the United States are
easy and confident under the maintenance of it ? What
is the reason all discussion of it is put down, and the
abolition of it is apprehended ? It is on account of the
growing antipathy to slavery ; and my conviction is,
that that country cannot be blessed which maintains this
cursed slave trade.—(Cheers.) For a considerable time
there have been frequent complaints of it, and they have
led to its gradual abolition.
They must ultimately lead
to its total reduction, because there is a blot upon the
land that has slavery on it.—(Cheers.) The unhealthy
and unwholesome relation in which the proprietors and
their slaves stood towards each other led to constant
complaints ; but now they possess the means of security.
—(Hear, hear.) I hope you do not repent of the efforts
and of the magnificent determination you evinced in
the sight of Europe to put an end to it.—(Cheers.)
It is true that those men who favour it are pos-
sessed of great riches ; but I hope we will not
have to say that it is in vain we cleansed our hearts and
washed our hands of the stain of that crime.—(Hear,
hear.) Under no circumstances and at no time can that
country feel secure in which the system of slavery is
permitted to continue; and I, for one, do hope that no
Government will give encouragement to such a trade,
affording its advocates a hypocritical pretence for de-
feating free trade, and assisting this cursed traffic.—
(Hear, hear.) I hope those who uphold it will be wise
in time, and see the consequences that may ensue from
the continuance of it. If I thought that a measure pro-
posing temporary protection would have the effect of
impeding the slave trade, I would vote, for it at once;
but your temporary protection expiring at the end of six
years, and then bringing you into competition with
foreign sugar, would be of no avail.—(gear, hear.) But
at no time, under no circumstances was this system
of slave trading secure, and have there, I ask, any
events occurred which have a tendency to add to
that insecurity?—(Hear, hear.) There has been a
mighty convulsion in Europe, and the man would be
considered a mad speculator who, in speaking four
months ago of the events in Paris, would prophesy that
they would involve Vienna and Berlin in anarchy and
confusion. He would be thought a very unwise man
who said it, but still that has occurred, and the mighty
heaving of the convulsion is already felt at the other
r: hear.) Look to the state
the Governments of Brazil
and
furnishingsaifdMartinique,
t 1
eaasansdtoi ca remember(
which
of Cuba—aye, and of the United States—should
learn, and, in fact, are learning.—(Hear, hear.) My
opinion is,
that the events which are happening in Eu-
rope must precipitate the time when there shall be a
lle
also that these events are
final extinction both of the slave trade and of the
slave.—(Hear, hear.) This state of things should
be met by timely
precaution
on the part of
this country. There will
beincreased sympathy with
the condition of the slave ; and he who traffics in
human blood and brings the slave to Cuba and to
Brazil from the coast of Africa, may find, notwithstand-
ing his present prosperity, and the price he sets on sla-
very, that his prosperity may
come to an end.—(Cheers.)
to an end, through wise
and provident legislation,
It is my hope that it 1:11 ay come
but whether it be brought to
'dent legislation or not, I be-
end by wise and pro
lieve its doom is sealed.—(Cheers.)
an
I d —(Cheers.) I believe that it
cannot long survive, and that the slave at no remote pe-
riod must be emancipated.—(Cheers.) To use the mag-
nificent language of Curran, which was expressed in
words worthy of the aspiration : "No matter in what
language the doom of the slave may have been pro-
battle his liberty
ma} no matter in what disastrousy
may have been cloven down—no matter what complexion
incompatible with freedom—an Indian or an African
his brow, the time is fast
sun may have burned upon
walk abroad in hisna-
tiveapproaching when his soul shall
hen his body shall swell beyond the
majesty—when
measure of the chain which bursts from around him,
and he shall stand forth redeemed, regenerated, and
disenthralled by the genius of universal emancipation."
Mr. URQUHART moved the adjournment of the de-
bate amid loud cries for a division.
Mr. ANSTEY seconded the amendment.
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the House would come to a
division before they again separated.—(Hear.)

s;!-p his amend-
ksx
assent to the'
Mend to the ge- •
44iht the comii-
meptional case. '
4itse, by assent-
Onet to save outs
Ot'so imminently

Mr. URQUHART, having withal
ment, proceeded to say that he could,
Government proposition. He was ne
neral principle of protection, but he t
tion of the West Indies presented an
—(Hear, hear.) He called upon the i]
ing to the amendment of the Hon. Bp
West India colonies from the destruct
threatening them. t•
A.
,
The Marquis of GRNBY denied Flint the distress,
of the West India planters arose fro nar recent coin,-
mercial depression. If so, how was!, ;that tiro same'
cause had not operated upon the imp; lntions to thiits
country of Brazil and Cuba sugars ? I;:ny pursuing th e
course pointed out by the Right Hon. 5- net the:wageil
of the labourer were to be reduced, we i . the planteras
be enabled to take advantage of that; :Auction ? HO
at once said no ; the only mode of bell ring the plan-
ters was by giving them protection,
pi , ...encouraging
immigration of labourers. His Right i ~1 . Friend the
Member for Ripon had asked the othet .
pliglit how the
West Indies could contend with the sla I:grown Sugars
produced at 15s. 9d. under the 103. prio 'ire duty pro-
- by the West Indian party ? If hey could not
k
contend with these sugars at such a 9f,- how much
!eis could the West India planters cum • at the diff.:-
rential duty proposed by the Governmen 'Of 7s. They t
certainly could not do so. Were they i. consider the 1
great question before them on party: . tives ? Ile
protested against entering upon such aco se,,and befoie
he sat down he must intreat the House , remember
that in 1834, when the interests of the 0 rmiei and j
humanity were antagonistic and opposed; ~ each other
the Legislature did not hesitate to indem ' —Ow planter,
end now when the interest of the coloniee ed hum of hu.-
t
nity were identical, it was still more inc?
.ent on than
to have a regard to those two consideratt sk,. and not to
expose the West Indies to certain ruin by &wing iree
competition with them the cheaper pre de of slave-
holding colonies.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the sulk , before -he
House was one well worthy of its most;•. ious cersi-
&ration. After hearing all the argu ' is that aad
been urged during the debate, he had co' 'to, the same
conclusion that had already been stated • e courso.of
the discussion—namely, that the motio4tafk the Hen.
Baronet had only embarrassed the qua'tion -withcat
affording the House the means of comingijto amortect
conclusion as to the real subjects at issue. rlf the LOD.
Baronet had moved an amendment on the ropositica. of 4
the Government to the effect that no quate relief
0
could be afforded to the West Indians sa -
..y the atop-
tioa of the recommendations of the West ~,,e3/4 Commit-
tee, he (Lord J. Russell) was ready to •Itithat the
House would then be on the road towards ~ , gto some
conclusion on the question before them. i >,e. the Hon.
Baronet's amendment merely went the 'i ;: tlr. of con-
demninz the propositions made by her Maj : •• ''s Goiarn-
, ment. If be had even allowed it to bejlipposed that
the present was a party movement for t urpoie of
o
unseating the Government, he (Lord J. spell) Mould
have understood the proceeding. But it hatViken.cliarly
shown that whilst there were many who w.ie dis?osed
to vote for his amendment, they comprise4t* inconsi-
derable number of Hon. Members who alt ' et
.;iiap-
proved of the views entertained by the H .11trcuet ;
and therefore, although be might succeed., . destroying
the Government, he would not make any ogress to-
wards giving relief to the Westindiaes. ' Abe lion.
h
Baronet's amendment was affirmed, he wosed film! the
Right Hen. Gentleman the Member for Oiffird Ur-ver-
sity and the Right Hon. Gentleman thecifembe! for
Cambridge University both alike ready tO toppost his
10s. protection duty, and to declare it to be ;more than
the House could consent to ; and one of ose Light
Hon. Gentlemen would inform bim that the. etion of
Tthu
the 14s. duty to 10s. would be dangerous to e revenue.
How then would the question stand in the inient Of the
amendment being carried ? The Govern i' .t would
thereby have a negative put upon their . ..oskions,
and the Hon. Baronet's proposal would mieet with a
similar reception, and the Right Honourgile Gentle-
man the Member for Oxford Uuiversityt; would be
ready to bring forward his views, which it . ht be ad•
vantageous to discuss, but which could not the be entered r
upon. The only result which the Hon. Ba net would
i
arrive at would be that the propositions of 140 Govern-
ment being rejected, and none others b4ing been
adopted in their stead, the West Indians, tfould find
themselves, after so many nights' discussiop landed at
the scale of duties which would come into operation on
the sth of July. Was that the Hoe. Barenefs mode of
coming to their assistance and relief? Having said this
much with respect to the probable results of the affirma-
tion of the amendment, he should take that opportunity
of making a further statement respecting the, views en-
tertained by the Government on the subject under con-
sideration. The great changes which had tkizen place
in the West Indian colonies—first, in the emancipation
of the slaves; subsequently, in the admission. of foreign
free labour, and then of slavlabour sugars into the
home market—had made an immense change in the
condition of the planters and proprietor": of those
islands. Those changes—more especially! the first—
called for corresponding legislative measures on the
part of the Government. Those measure had been
projected and brought forward, but they met with every
species of obstruction and delay, by which ,means they
were prevented from proving so beneficial as they
ought to have been to the West Indian Colonists. He
would first allude to the Vagrancy Act, and the means
proposed for regulating the employment of labourers
in those islands. Having been for some time Chief Se-
cretary for the Colonies he was enabled to state from his
own knowledge that the difficulties which had been put
in the way of passing those laws chiefly referred to the
fears that an infringement of the Emancipation Act was
contemplated. There was at that time a very strict and
zealous supervision exercised over the colonial legisla-
ture by the anti-slavery party in this country.,,,and this
supervision was carried to a very high pitch of jealousy
and watchfulness. But that feeling was a very natural
one, resulting, as it did, from the long and arduous
struggle that had been made between the party seeking
to perpetuate slavery and the emancipation party. But
be that as it might, the contest certainly had the effect
of preventing the free course of legislation, and the
speedy passing of the vagrancy and employment Act;
and the constant reports sent home by the ;stipendiary
magistrates respecting the treatment of the labourers in
the West Indian islands created and maintained a
great degree of irritation. He only referred to those
topics in order to show that the Emancipation
Act could not be considered complete unless it was
accompanied by other laws, regulating the state of free-
dom in which the negro population were to exist.
Another and a more important question came to be con-
sidered at the same timo with the preceding one. The
West Indies were in a condition, owing to the large

amount of capital poured out upon them, to compete
with Cuba in point of production, notwithstanding the
advantages which the latter island possessed over the
British West Indian planters. But the great want ex-
perienced by the latter was that of continuous labour.
Great objections had been raised to the importation of
any labourers from Africa, as that, it was feared, would
endanger the liberty of the negroes. He had tried to
promote immigration into the %Vest Indies from Sierra
Leone of liberated or free Africans, but few went.

European immigration was next resorted to, and
failed. The Coolie immigration also failed. The want
of continuous labour had existed for upwards of
ten years, and yet that want had hardly had its
full effect, and under this belief he thought it fit
that the Legislature should enable the colonists to
increase their stock of labourers—a measure that would
be highly beneficial, as a small number of imported la-
bourers thrown into the market would stimulate others
to work. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tamworth had not estimated very highly the utility of
the proposed advance of 500,000 i. for the purpose of im-
migration, and he had asked whether a portion of that
sum could not be applied to other purposes. If he (Lord
J. Russell) were to assent to this proposition, he should
be leading the House to think that the Government was
prepared to advance money on loans to the West Indian
planters upon a plan similar to that by which the land-
owners in Great Britain and Ireland obtained loans for
the purpose of draining, and such a course with respect
to the colonies was almost impossible to follow. As they
advanced money to Canada for public works, so, it there
were any works in the West Indies, such as those to
which the Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded—the
making of canals and tramways and great works of
drainage which would be likely to increase:the produce
of those,colonies—he would have no objection to extend
the appropriation of the 500,000/. to such works.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentle-
man the Member for the University of Cambridge
attributed the whole of the distress in the West Indies
to the Act of 1846. It did not appear to him that the
Act of 1846 was the principal, though it might be one,
cause of that distress. In stating the probable effects of
that Bill at the time he introduced it, he stated that
240,000 tons might be introduced from the British pos-
sessions, 20,000 tons, the produce of free labour, and
20,000 of other foreign sugar, making altogether 280000 own
possessions He did not expect that the produce of their
possessions would halve been increased, but it happened
that their produce last year reached 280,000 tons, and
this, together with 48,000 tons, the produce of other
countries, caused a very great depression of prices. The
increase of their West Indian colonies alone, as appeared
by the returns moved for by the Hon. Member for Leo-
minster, was from 2,000,000 cwt. to 2,200,000,
2,500,000 cwt , 2,800,000 cwt., and last year it was
3,202,775 cwt. That showed an enormous increase of
production, though he admitted to the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman (Mr. Goulburn) that this increase was not to be
attributed to the Act of 1846. But it showed an im
mense increase of production; and if that had been con-
comitant with the high prices which prevailed in the
time of monopoly, he believed it would have caused as
much distress as prevailed at the present time. The
Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the University
of Oxford, did not concur in the proposal of a 10s.duty,
neither was he in favour of the plan of a 7s. duty as
pro-
posed by the Government. He must therefore suppose
that the Right lion. Gentleman was in favour of
some
intermediate scale between 7s. and 10s. That would
only make a difference of ls. 6d. or 2s. at the utmost,
and he owned that; it might be fairly taken into consi-
deration in Committee. Another lion. Gentleman was
in favour of the 10s. duty, but for three years only, be-
cause, if the 105. duty were:to exist for a longer period
—for 10 years—it would raise the rate of labour. If
the Hon. Gentleman was right as to the effect such a
measure would have on the rate of labour, he (Lord J.
Russell) did not see why it should not have the same
effect, though the duty was to continue but for two or
three years. He believed that such a proposition
would give rise to fresh speculation and compe-
tition, and that at the end of the three years the
West Indians would come to them with the same com-
plaints that they did now. In the midst of the various
schemes proposed, that of the Government seemed to
him to combine every advantage. lie did not think, in
the face of the distress of the West Indians, that it
would be right to allow the Act of 1846 to come into
further operation. What they proposed, therefore, was
to give immediate protection to the planters by increas-

Ing that protection for a time, and to increase that ad-
vantage still more, ani at the same time to benefit the
consumer by lowering the duty. He expected that the
consumption would oe greatly increased by this plan,
and he believed the only chance of the planters con-
sisted in that great..!onsumption. The recommendation
of the Committee leld out the same advantage, but at
a sacrifice to the revenue of 960,0001. He would not
then go into the question of the probable increase of
consumption, but it was calculated that the revenue
would not suffer to the extent of more than 30,000/.
or 40,000/., and ultimately it would not be less than
it was at present. There remained the objection that
the measure would encourage the slave trade. If it
were now a question proposed for the first time, that
no sugar, the produce of slave labour, should be
admitted, he would admit that was a fair ground
of objection.—(Hear.) But the proposition the House
had to deal with was not that of admitting slave labour
produce fur the first time. It was a question of increased
protection in favour of their own colonies. If the Hon.
Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) would repeal the act of 1846 al-
together, and totally prohibit slave-grown sugar, he
could then admit his argument against the present plan;
but his Hon. Friend must be convinced that it would be
a vain and fruitless effort. If hie Hon. Friend were to
succeed in his views, and that sugar became dearer in
consequence, it would only occasion a fresh struggle and
fresh agitation, which would place the West Indian body
in the worst of all positions—namely, in the uncertainty
as to the amount of protection that Parliament could
;:fiord them.—(Hear.) his belief was, that they adopted
a sound system when they said, in the first place, that
hey would not admit slavery iu any British possession,
and in the next place, when they said that they would
nut consider the institution of slavery as a bar against
the admission of goods the produce of slave labour. It
was said that the Act of 1846 was inconsistent with
the Acts for putting an end to slavery; hut, in his
opinion, the inconsistency was far greater in making a
distinction between sugar and other articles which were
produced by the labour of slaves, excluding one and
admitting the others.—(Hear, hear.) His belief was
that these distinctions of tariffs were not the mode by
which they could attain the abolition of slavery in the
world. He rather thought if they relied on the progress
of opinion, on the impatience that there would be on the
part of the slaves themselves retained in slavery in Cuba
and Brazil, when they saw the inhabitants of Jamaica
and Trinidad, and in the neighbouring islands, in a state
of freedom, that they would go on a better basis than by
giving protection to the West Indians. Setting aside the
question of slavery in the United States, of which he
was not able to see any satisfactory solution, he died ex-
pect that slavery in Cuba and Brazil would be abolished
—abolished all the sooner if they did not make it a
matter of tariffs and regulations—if they said, We
have abolished slavery ourselves—we stand free from
any stain of this kind—we do not inquire into the insti-
tutions of foreign countries—we wish to see freedom
prevail—we leave it to its own strength and security,
and we leave to you the time and manner in which you
will follow our example."—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MUNTZ said he had voted for the Bill of 1846,
because he understood it was to be a settlement of this
question. He would now vote against the proposition
of the Government because it was an unsettlement of it.
—(Hear.) He supported the measure of 1846 on free-
trade principles. There was no doubt the question was
one whether they would have free trade or slavery, or
whether they would give up their colonies. Her Ma-
jesty's Government proposed a measure which was no-
thing in itself. It deranged everything and arranged
nothing.—(Hear.) It was said that it would give time
to the planters. The planters would be in the same po-
sition in 1849 as they were now. It was a question of
whether they would kill them at once or bleed them to
death.—(Laughter.) Because he voted for the amend-
ment of the Honourable Baronet it did not follow from
that that he was going to support any proposition he was
going to make. He was going to vote against the pro-
position of the Government because he considered it
futile, peddling, and trivial—(Hear)—and was a depar-
ture from the Act of 1846.—(Hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY rose amidst loud shouts of " Divide,"
and " Oh, ob." He looked upon the present question as
a question of justice. As an Irish Member he protested
against the degrading offer made on the part of her
Majesty's Government by some agent, that if they sup-
ported the Government on this question they would not
be too firmly bound by the measure before the House.—
(Oh, oh.) The Hon. Member fbr the West Riding
must look on this as a question of the dismemberment
of the empire, because in a pamphlet called " England,
Ireland, and America, by a Manchester Manufacturer,"
supposed to be the Hon. Gentleman, he says that the
colonies are an encumbrance to this country; that it was
desirable they should get rid of the colonies; that
America had said that; and yet that America was their
best friend. Such were the opinions of the
free-trade school of Manchester. Honourable Members
on that side of the House had prophesied the results
of this measure, and now they might be recognised.—
(Cries of " Question.") The Hon. and Learned Member
continued amid much noise to quote from Mr. Cobden's
pamphlet, with a view of proving that the policy of the
flee-trade school tended to the sacrifice of our colonies
and the dismemberment of the empire. The impatience
of the House increased to such a degree that the Hon.
and Learned Member was unable to obtain a hearing,
and, in consequence, he moved the adjournment of the
House.
Mr. FORBES seconded the motion.

Colonel DUNNE emphatically denied that any bar-
gain had been effered by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer to the Irish Members, or had been accepted by
those gentlemen, respecting the differential duties on rum.
Lord J. RUSSELL appealed to the Hon. and Learned
Member for Youghal to withdraw his motion for adjourn-
ment, and to allow the House to come to a division on
the main question.
Mr. ANSTEY having complained of the interruption,
explained that he had made no charge against the Irish
Members, of which body he was one himself. All he
had said was that an imputation of compromise had gone
abroad, and he had felt it to be his duty to stand up in
his place and repudiate it. Having withdrawn his mo-
tion for adjournment, the Honourable and Learned Gen-
tleman proceeded. With respect to the main question,
he conjured the House to pause before they voted for a
policy which might involve the destruction of some of
the most important of our colonies. It was hard that
the West Indies, which for 150 years had been the vic-
tims of a most rigid restrictive system, should now be
cast off and exposed to poverty and ruin, in compliance
with the new-fangled doctrines of free-trade policy.—
(Loud cries of " Divide.")
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the original motion 260
For Sir J. Yakington's amendment 245
Majority --15
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheers by the Protectionists.
The House then went into Committee, Mr. R..-ERNAL
in the chair.
A resolution to the effect that the duty to be imposed
on
July, foreignlB49r
bgea rl9fsr.o m6d
.t hpeers tchwotf. Jfurloym, 1
tBh4eBn,
ct
eo
to t he
jsu
lt
yh of
5,
1850, 18s. per cwt.; from thence to July 5, 1851, 16s. 6d.
per cwt.; and after that date 15s. per cwt., was then read,
and the Chairman immediately reported progress, the
Committee to sit again to-morrow (this day), when the
resolution will be discussed.
Mr. M. GIBSON intimated that Mr. Bright intended
to propose his amendment, " That it was not expedient
to alter the Sugar Duties Act of 1846" as a substantive
motion.

Mr. WARD obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regu-
late, for a time to be limited, the premiums and annuities
of the Naval Medical Supplemental Fund Society.
The Bill was brought in and read the first time.
REPRESENTATIVE REFORM—MR. HUME'S

MOTION.
Mr. OSBORNE begged to ask his Hon. Friend the
Member for Montrose what he understood was to be
done with regard to his motion. A number of gentle-
men had come up to town on purpose to be present
during the debate, and being one of them, he wished to
know if the motion would positively be brought on on
Thursday next. He could assure his Honourable Friend
he was losing his division by thus putting off the motion
one day after another.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME said, if his Hon. Friend had been in the
House at five o'clock he would have known he had no
alternative but to put off the motion. He could only
say, in answer to the question that had been put to him,
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had
assured him he would not interfere with Thursday.
Mr. MUNTZ did not understand these sort of ar-
rangements Last week the Noble Lord gave up to-
morrow; then he took it back, and now wished to defer
the debate till Thursday. A week ago the Hon. Mem-
ber refused to put off his motion, yet now he postponed
it in the face of the Noble Lord's own direct acknow-
ledgment that he should have to. morrow.

Mr. WA WN said they had LI, en sitting for six months,
and done very little.
Mr. MUNTZ wished to put another question to the
Hon. Member for Montrose. It was not yet fairly
settled when the subject was to come on again. It might
be deferred again, supposing it were fixed for Thursday;
and he again asked his Hon. Friend whether he had
come to a positive understanding with her Majesty's Go-
vernment that the debate should be resumed next Thurs-
day ?—(Hear.) _ _

Mr. IIUME' could only say the House had directed
the debate to be resumed next Thursday, but whether it
would come on then, he could not tell. He should

certainly endeavour to bring it on. There was some-
thing unreasonable and unfair in the proceedings of his
Hon. Friends, because they had stated publicly their
impressions just as if he had taken any part in post-
poning the subject. The fact was, at the commencement

of the sitting ho had protested against the postpone-
ment ; and he considered it extremely unfair in his
Hon. Friends to argue as if he had agreed to the post-

ponement._

Mr. OSBORNE—You gave up.
Mr. HUME—I did not.—(A laugh.) If his Hon.
Friend had been in the House at five o'clock, he would
have found that the House agreed that public business
should go on to-morrow. It was unfair in his Hon.
Friends to go out of town themselves, and then reproach
him for not bringing on the question. He would tell
them, however, he did not want them.—(A laugh.) It
appeared to him that they only wanted to hold him up
to the country as a traitor; but he was not, and he never
would be.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BROTHERTON bore testimony to the efforts of
his Honourable Friend to bring on the motion, and he
added it was unjust for Members who bad scarcely been
in the*House [once during the session, to assail his Hon.
Friend for not being successful. The fact was, it was
the duty of all Hon. Members to attend in the House

constantly, and not come up to town from the country
just when they thought a particular motion was coming
on.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUDSON thought the llonourable Member for
Montrose was entitled to the sympathy of the House.
—(A laugh.) In his difficult situation as head of a pro-
visional government, it was a little unfair for his friends