The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-14 00:00:00

ornin int

LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 14, 1846.

The Lose CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at
five o'clock.

Various petitions having been presented,
The Earl ST. GERMANS moved the third reading of the
Irish Pacification Bill.
Several verbal amendments were proposed and agreed to,
and after a desultory conversation, the Bill, as amended, was
read a third time and passed.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

The SPEAKER took the chair at Four o'clock.
Several railway Bills were read a second time and ordered
to be committed.

Lord HENRY BENTINCK took the oaths and his seat for
North Nottingham.
Several railway Bills were read a third time and' passed.
The Grand Trunk, or Stafford and Peterborough Railway
Bill was read a second time, after a division, by a majority
of 20.

Lord J. RussELL gave notice of his intention on Thurs-
day, the 26th of March, to move that the House on that day
do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House for the
purpose of considering the state of Ireland.
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question from' an Hon.
Member, said it was impossible for him to, say on what day
lie should bring forward the reduction of the sugar duties.
It was his intention, however, to do so as soon as the corn
importation measure was disposed of.
In answer to a question from Mr. O'CONNELL, Sir It Palm
said it was the intention of the Government, immediately upon
the Irieh Protection of Life and Property Bill coming into the
House, to move that it be printed, and taken into con-
sideration on an early day.

The South Sea Company Bill was read a third
passed, on the motion of the CHANCELLOR of theExC.me and
Sir J. Gl:Amara moved for leave to bring in a Bill n uffi:c.l
temporary provision for persons affected with fever in Ireland.
Mr.WAKLEY,thought the best course to stop the ti that
was now raging ill Ireland was to provide the people withfood.
After some observations from Mr. COLQUHOUN, Captain
OSBORNE, Lord G. BINTINCK, Mr. HOME, Mr. OTONEELL,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that nothing had been lost sight of by
the Government to alleviate, as far as possible, the distress
and misery that was existing in Ireland.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN believed if the English proprietors of Ire-
land were compelled to do their duty, the people of Ireland
would be in a much better condition than they were at pre-
sent, and would not be under the necessity of calling upon
British generosity.
After some further discussion, leave was given to bring in
the Bill.
Mr. GREENE then brought up the report on the customs
and corn importation measure; and on the question that the
first resolution with respect to silk be read a second time,
!,Jr. R. SPOONER moved that it be read a second time that
day six months, believing that, if carried, it would have the
effect of paralysing native industry. The Hon. Gentleman
attributed the whole of the evils under which the country
was at present labouring to the Bill of 1819, enforcing the
resumption of cash payments.

Mr. NEWDEGATF. seconded the motion.
Sir G. CLERK seconded the resolution. and, after a short
discussion, the amendment was withdrawn.

Upon the question that a reduction should take place in
the duty on foreign butter, some considerable discussion
ensued, and, upon a division, the original resolution was car-
ried by a majority of 102.

Upon the question for the reduction of the duty on hosiery,
a division took place, when there appeared a majority for
the reduction, of N.

The further consideration of the report was, after a short
discussion, postponed till Monday.
The other orders of the day Were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned till Monday.

The House of Commons took holiday on Thursday for the
first time this session, there being, not altogether, we pi e-
sume, without management, " No House" at four o'clock.
The most important business on the paper was a motion of
Mr. Moaersoses for a Committee to inquire " whether, with-
out discouraging legitimate enterprise, conditions may not be
embodied in Railway Acts better fitted than those hitherto
inserted in them to promote and secure the interests of the
public." We conclude that the untoward event of ye,ter-
day will only have the effect of postponing Mr. MoxersoN's
motion. Not that we agree by any means entirely in
Mr. MORRISON'S views, as he has explained them
in his published pamphlet; but the subject id
one of very great importance, and we anticipate much benefit
not only from the labours of a Committee, but even from
debate in the House of Commons, where Mr. MORRISON'S
views will be modified and corrected for the public by other
Members of equal authority on such subjects.
Mr. MORRISON'S chief object appears to be to procure the
intervention of the Legislature for a great reduction of rail-
way fares. Through such a reduction he hopes to administer
a great check to railway speculation ; and he seems to believe
that this, and this only, is the way to check the speculation.
Now, at first starting their seems to be a great inconsistency
in Mr. MORRISON'S reasonings. lie recommends a reduction
of railway fares to railway companies as likely to produce
even an increase of profits; and there is no doubt that,
within limits, such would be the result of reduction. I t
has been found to be so in practice ; and, in the last two or
three years, there has been, on the part of almost all the
great established companies, a gradual reduction of fares
for the sake of increasing profits, and profits have been in-
creased. How then is this reduction of fares to diminish
speculation? Mr. Mozursow says, by the reduction of pro-
fits. And here is his inconsistency,
Now with regard to the diminution of speculation in rail-
ways, we suspect that the time has gone by for Parliament
to trouble itself about it. Parliament might have interposed
last year with advantage : if it had then interfered judi-
ciously many of the evils of the railway excitement of last
autumn might have been prevented. But the mania was
allowed to go on unchecked, and it has, we believe, now
worked Its own cure. There is an end of excessive railway
speculation. The railway share-market is now suffering
from a reaction. To diminish speculation is not now the
object for Parliament to strive at, but to mitigate the evil
consequences of speculation which has already existed
in excess, and to prevent as much of suffering as
can be prevented from the railway mania of the
last autumn. This appears to us to be the extent to which
Parliament should interfere ; and to this extent, and fur this
purpose, it deeply behoves Parliament to interfere promptly
and with vigour.
We have observed, with regret, in the progress of the
Railway Committee, appointed at the instance of Sir ROBERT
PEEL at the beginning of the session, a complete departure
from the principles laid down so clearly and ably by Sir
ROBERT PERI. in moving for its appointment. We cannot
see on what principle the interference recommended by Mr.
MORRISON is to be made—on what principle the rates are to
be adjusted—except on the commercial principle; and by
that principle the companies themselves would be
guided, and that principle will not suffice for Mr.
MORRISON'S ulterior object of diminishing the inducement to
invest in railways. Interference on any other principle would
be unjust and impolitic. All direct interference with rail-
way speculation, as with any other speculation, we repudiate.
But there is a mode in which Parliament might earlier
have guided railway speculation with advantage, and may
yet materially smooth difficulties for those who have impro-
vidently embarked in the excessive speculation which has
existed, and that is, the adoption of some principles of selec-
tion in dealing with the railway schemes which are
brought forward. Notwithstanding Sir ROBERT PEEL'S
emphatic warnings as to the amount of capital already
authorised to be raised for railways in the next three years,
and the immense addition which would be required for the
schemes of the present year (allowing in all cases for only
one out of any number of competing schemes being passed),
the Railway Committee appears to have flown entirely in
the teeth of Sir ROBERT PEEL'S recommendation, and Par
liament is about to submit all the schemes which have come
before it to separate Committees, as before, to be dealt with
in separate groups, and without any comprehensive view
takes. of the various degrees in which different dis-
tricts want railway accommodation, or comparison be-
tween one group and another. Sir ROBERT PEEL'S plan
did not involve the rejection of any railways, but merely the
postponement of many. When we consider the immense
number of railway schemes now before Parliament, the im-
mense amount of capital which will be required, and the
practice of requiring in the Act the completion of the rail-
ways within three, five, or at most seven years, no one will
say that the simultaneous construction of such a large
amount of railways can be viewed without apprehension.
We look forward with interest to the discussion on Mr. Mon-
BISON'S motion, principally to ascertain whether Sir ROBERT
PEEL'S views have undergone any change, and whether the
Government will abandon their desire to limit the annual
expenditure on railways, in consequence of their having been
left in the lurch by the Committee. We have never con
templated any close or illiberal limitation of such expendi-
ture; but a large limitation of the expenditure at present
proposed might be made, and the Government be on the
safe side.

The returns moved for by Sir ROBERT PEEL, and presented
to the House of Commons on Monday, relative to British
shipping, exports of manufactured goods, Customs' duties,
silk and woollen manufactures, and revenue commercial
sources, of which we gave an outline yesterday, form per-
haps the most important and matiefactory document ever laid
before Parliament. They show how much trade was ham-
pered by the old prohibitive system, and point out, in the
clearest language, the absurd principles of those statesmen
who considered that revenue could be obtained only by im-
posing high Customs and Excise duties, and that protec-
tion was the only means of encouraging domestic manu-
factures. On looking at these tables, we find that
a striking change began to take place shortly after the
period when Mr. Hosxissox, after many vain attempts,
and long conviction of their necessity, introduced
only partially free-trade measures. Since then an in-
crease has taken place in almost every department,
though the plan was still defective, and the Minister's views
were not half adopted, but when brought into full play, when
Sir ROBERT PEE. boldly ventured on the grand experiment,
and gave the favourite principles of Husiossox a fair chance,
the soundness of his views was confirmed by facts, and the
very prelectionists themselves stood astonished to find all
their dismal forebodings falsified. The shipping interest
was among the loudest in its complaints. The Americans,
they said, were ruining the British trade, and in a few short
years the strength and glory of England would be gone, her
seamen and her shipping would diminish to those of a third-
rate maritime power, and all this owing to the wild theories
and visionary schemes of a man without practical knowledge.
What has been the result? In 1820 the number of vessels
belonging to the several ports in the British empire was
25,374, and the men and boys employed in navigating them
amounted to 174,514. For several years these numbers con-
tinued to fall off, but when the changes had time to come
into operation a great rise took place, and in 1844 the num-
bers had increased fully one-third, for the number of vessels
had risen to 31,320, and the hands to 216,350. The tonnage
during that period had been increased also to the extent of
one million of tons. Foreign vessels carrying on trade with
this country bad increased in still greater proportions. The
number, for instance, of all vessels entering British har-
bours in 1832 was 14,627, and the tonnage 2,497,893,
while, in 1845, they amounted respectively to 23,859,
and 5,023,583, the tonnage thus being more than doubled.
The exports from the United Kingdom had consequently
increased in nearly an equal proportion. The real or de-
clared value of native produce and manufactures exported
in 1827 was 36,860,3761., while in 1844, it had increased
to the enormous amount of 58,584,2921. According to
the protectionists, the silk trade was to be ruined
by Husiussotes wild scheme, and the poor Spitalfields' wea-
vers for many years attributed all their sufferings to his evil
genius. But the trade sprung up in other quarters where
the baneful influence of monopoly had not alighted, and
while, in 1826, two years after the partial alteration, the
value of British silk goods exported wa.s 168,8011., in
1845 it had risen to 764,4244 or about 450 per cent. The
impulse given to the woollen trade was equally remarkable.
In 1824 the number of pounds imported both from the colo-
nies and foreign countries was 22,564,485, and the price of
the best Soutbdown Is. 2d. the pound. In 1844, when the
import duty was abolished,the price remained still at Is. 2d.,
and next year the price of domestic wool rose to 13.4 d., though
not less than 76,828.1521b5. were imported. These are truths
not to be disputed by any casuistry of the RICJIMONDS and
BECKINGRAMS, and NEWCASTLES ; and if any two facts are
more palpable than others in the range of human knowledge,
these two are, that the price of cattle has increased (and is
still increasing) since foreign cattle were admitted at next to
a nominal duty, and that since the duty on foreign
wool was abolished, British grown wool has ri-en
in price. But the net produce from the Customs and Ex-
cise paid into the E
xehequer is another feature of a most
astonish,ng character. In 1832 the set produce, exclusive
of the corn duties, was 32,178,8141., and in 1845 it
amounted to 33,415,4311., though the total amount
for the two departments remitted during that period was
5,197,074/. These show, above all other things, how in-
jurious protection, under the guise of prohibition and heavy
duties, is to the well-being of the community; how it robs
the Exchequer, without benefiting any class; and how well-
founded are those liberal measures adopted by such a large
majority of the Commons House of Parliament.

Among the dropped motions which stood for discussion in the
Commons on Thursday, is one of considerable interest and im-
portance for the press, and, we venture to think, not less in-
teresting and important to the public. Lord Iwartrraw is
to call the attention of Parliament to the contents of a peti•
tion which he has presented from the proprietor of the
Wolverhampton Chronicle, complaining of his having been
proceeded against for libel, having been cast in damages, and
by costs and damages together having been put to an ex.
pense of upwards of 3001., for printing in his newspaper an
extract from minutes of the Committee of Council on Edu-
ce►tiou, published by authority, on the tubject of the Lich.