The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-29 00:00:00

MPERIALPAR AMENT

THIS DAY. MONDAY, JULY 29.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took his seat at a quarter past 12 o'clock,
THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
The SPEAKER said, before the House proceeded to
the business of the day, he wished to be informed what
it was their pleasure to proceed with first. Last Friday an
'ntimation was made that to day the Abolition of Slavery
Bill would be first taken, and now be had on his paper a
list of names for the presentation of petitions. As the
intimation given on Friday evening was not in the form of
a distinct resolution, he wished to be informe I what course
the House would take.
This give rise to some discussion between Lord Althorp,
\lr. Roebuck, Sir E. Knatchhull, Lord Darlington, Mr.
Ewart, Mr. Stanley, and other Hon. Members ; and at
length it was understood that all the petitions except
those relating to the West India question should be pre-
sented on Wednesday, and those relating to that subject
he presented to day, with an understanding that no dis-
c•u•sion should take place nn them.
Mr. EWART presented a petition from the Association
of Merchants in Liverpool trading to India and the Bra-
zils. The following is an extract from the petition :
" four petitioners, whi'e they contemplate vi ith
satisfaction the prospect of the abolition of slave:y
throughout the British dominions, have beard with
the greatest alarm and consternation that, in ad-
dition to the munificent grant of 20,000,000/. to
the West India colonists, as a compensation for the injury
they may sustain by the emancipation of their slaves, they
have also been promised by his Majesty's Government, or
some of them, a continuance of the existing monopoly of
the home market for sugar, coffee, rum, &c., to the
virtual exclusion of those articles, the growth of our
eastern possessions, and Brazil., to the great injury of the
commerce with those important countries—the ma-
nufacturing and shipping interests of this country, and
to the revenue ; adding also greatly to the burdens of the
people, and depriving many of them of those important
commodities so necessary to their comfort. Your peti-
tioners have to submit that the present prices of the im-
portant articles of sugar and coffee are already enhanced by
this injurious monopoly to the commerce of this country
fehm 40 to 60 per cent. (exclusive of the duties thereon)
over and above the prices paid by the people of any other
European State. Thus this monopoly operates on those
two articles alone as a direct annual tax upon the people
of this country to the extent of upwards of two millions.
The consumption of coffee in this country already
exceeds the growth of our western colonies, and every
shilling per cwt. added to the price of sugar and coffee
takes upwards of 200,000/. out of the pockets of the
consumers of this kingdom; and a continuation of the
existing monopoly may so increase the prices of those
commodities, as to impose a further tax of four or five
millions on the people, and injure the revenue to a great
extent ; whereas a more free admission of these articles

would increase their use, extend our commerce, manu
facture., and shipping, and add millions to the revenue.
" Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that the
House will not sanction a measure so pregnant with
injury to commerce with our fellow subjects in the East,
who are equally entitled to our protection with those of
the West Indies, or hazard the destruction of our valuable
and important trade with Brazil, a country receiving up-
words of three millions annually of our manufactures on
the most favoured terms."
Mr. DOBBIN presented a petition from a place in
Sligo, for the abolition of slavery.
Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from Bath, pray-
ing that the Abolition of Slavery Ball might not pass in
its present shape, and particularly objecting to the grant
of, compensation to the amount of twenty millions. Also
a petition from Bristol, praying that no compensation be
made to the slave owners, until actual loss had been
proved to have resulted, and slavery had been entirely
abolished.
Lord DARLINGTON presented a petition fa a repeal
of (as we understood) the duty on polished bricks.
Lord G. SOMERSET wished to advert to a subject of
considerable importance. There were many Committees
now sitting, and he wished to know if it was the inten-
tion of Government to proceed with so important a sub
ject as the Abolition of Slavery Bill, when so many
Members were absent, attending Committees.
Mr. STANLEY regretted the inconvenience, hut said
at present be saw no help for it. It was for the House
to say whether the Government should be permitted to
go on with the public business at the morning sittings,
having regard to the late period of the session.—( Hear,
hear.) If there were any point on which great difference
of opinion was likely to arise, it could be so arranged as to
postpone it until the evening. The House could proceed
at once with those parts, respecting which but little dif-
ference of opinion prevailed.
Mr. HERMES said the subject was one of great im-
portance. In order to attend the House he had been ob.
liged to absent himself from a Committee of considerable
importance. He tlatiught that when subjects of great mo-
ment were brought forward at the morning sittings, the
Committees should not be obliged to sit.
Sir E. CODRINGTON presented a petition from the
parish of St. James, Clerkenwell, praying that the six-
pences now paid by merchant seamen to the Greenwich
Hospital chest, be formed into a fund, and be appropriated
for the use of merchant seamen.
Mr. MARSHALL presented two petitions from Leeds,
one against the compensation clause in the Slavery Bill,
and the other praying for an equalization of the duties
on sugar consequent upoa compensation.
Mr. STRICKLAND supported the prayer of the pe-
titions.
Lord HENNIKER presented a-petition from Yoxfortl,
praying for the establishments of local courts.
Mr. SHAW presented a similar petition from Hales-
worth.
Mr. VIGORS presented a petition from the parish of
St. Pancras, against the police system.
Mr. F. BUXTON presented a petition signed by 2,300
females, tesident in the town of Bolton ; another from
Hammersmith ; and several other petitions, for the imme-
diate and absolute abolition of slavery.
Mr. S. TRELAWNEY presented a petition from
Tavistock, against the provisions of the abolition of Slavery
Bill.
Sir RICHARD VYVYAN presented a petition signed
by the planters, mortgagees, annuitants, and others in-
terested in the island of Jamaica, praying to be heard by
counsel against the Abolition of Slavery Bill.
Mr. EWING concurred in the prayer of the petition.
On the order of the day being moved for the House to
go into Cammittee on the Abolition of Slavery Bill,
An Host. MEMBER gave notice that he should move
on the 25th day of August that the sure of fifteen mil-
lions be inserted in the compensation clause instead of
twenty millions.
On the question that the Speaker leave the chair,
Mr. WILKS rose to inquire of the Right Hon. the
Secretary for the Colonies what provision was intended
to be made by the Government for the moral and religious
instruction of the enfranchised negroes ? It was fully
understood that the provisions of the Bill were to be
founded upon the resolution which had been agreed to by
both Houses of Parliament. The last of these resolutions
determined that such instruction should be provided for the
liberated slaves; but on looking over the Bill be had not
been able to discover the slightest indication of
that intention. Within the last two months
religious persecutions hail been renewed in the island
of Jamaica, and the property of unoffending indi•
viduals had been confiscated to pay penalties inflicted
for attending religious worship. His conduct, and that
of mmy other Members, would be regulated in a great
measure by the answer which he received.
Mr. STANLEY said he did not precisely know the
meaning of the Hon. Member. If it was to ask whether
the Government intended to give full effect to the esta-
blishment of civil and religious liberty, he would answer, yes,
such were the intentions of Government ; and he believed
that one clause in the Bill established the same law in the
colonies, as r.spected that, as was in England. When that
clause was under consideration would be the proper time
for introducing any amendment.
In answer to a remark from Mr. O'CONNELL,
Mr. BERNAL said he believed that an Act had
passed the Assembly of Jamaica, putting the Catholics on
the same footing as Protestants, as well in naturalization
as in other matters.
Mr. A. JOHNSTONE did not think the Hon. Secre-
tary had fully answered the question of the Honourable
Member, and trusted that that Honourable Mern•
bee would take another opportunity of pressing his views
by proposing additional clauses. He could not agree with
that part of the Bill which put education under the care
of the Colonial Legislatures. He would as soon have left
the legislation upon the Irish Coercion Bill to the White-
feet, as agree to leave the local Assemblies to regulate the
religious education of the slaves.
The House then went into Committee, when the 9th
clause passed with a verbal amendment.
On the 10th clause being read,
‘aVAill the TH
said
o a. he
would
Member
fr suggesto Weymouth t o the Right
Hol%ni.r.SPec. EreStTat7 n
an alteration might be made in that clause, to allow slaves
ha t
to be transferred from one island to another during their
apprenticeship, providing it was with their own consent,

and under any restriction either of that House or the
Assemblies.

Dr. LUSHINGTON opposed such an alteration on the
ground that, if it was permitted, it would be subjected to
much abuse. _ .

Mr. F. BUXTON said, there was no part of the
slavery question in which he felt more interest than that
which was now before the House, and his firm conviction
was, that if they were to depart from those principles,
which had been so long the law of the country, the con-
sequence would be, that in the course of the next six or
seven years there would be a transfer of 20,000 slaves
from island to island, and that not a thousand of that
number would be alive at the end of their apprenticeship.

- _
Mr. R. GORDON fully concurred in the opinion of
the Hon. Member fur Weymouth. He considered there
was no proposition that would be attended with more
difficulty between the planters and their apprentices, than
that which was made by his Hon. Friend opposite (Mr.
Stewart), and while his Hon. Friend supposed it would
be an advantage to the people of Barbadoes, they were
protesting strongly against it.
Mr. STEWART said he took only one view of this
question, and of the question decided before by his Hon.
Friend the Member for Weymouth. He thought that
when this Act came into operation it would be found the
restriction contained in the 10th clause would be an im-
pediment to the commission of the Act.
Mr. BUXTON said he should produce a multiplicity
of cases in which the consent of the negroes was actually

given.
After a few words f►om Mr. EwING, Lord SANDON,
and Mr. MARRIOTT, the amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. F. BUXTON then moved as an amendment to the
10th clause, " that no apprentice should be removed
from one colony to another after the passing of this Act,
without the consent of the said apprentice given and
recorded in writing before and by the said two Justices
of the Peace." He could produce a great number of
eminent authorities equally conclusive on this point, but
he felt satisfied the House would fully concur• with him in
thinking that these apprentices ought not to be considered
as slaves, and that they should not be removed from place to
place without their own consent or authority. If any
objection was made to this, be should certainly feel it his
duty to press it to a division.
Sir F. BURDETT fully concurred in what had fallen
from the Hon. Member who bad just sat down, but he
thought at the same time it ought to be accompanied with
some sort of regulation that they should be better provided
Err, and that there should be some place made for their
reception when they arrived at those colonies.
After some observations from Mr. RIGBY WASON, Mr.
GORDON, and Mr. EWING, in support of the amend-
ment, the clause, as amended, was ordered to stand part
of the Bill.
Clause 11, as amended, was ordered to stand part of
the Bill.
Mr. STANLEY said that it was intended to amend
clause 12, by adding that the slave should not he employed
more than 45 hours each week, and that the time for cul-
tivating his provision ground should not be deducted from
his weekly but annual time.
Lord HOWICK concurred in the amendment, but
with it he still thought the clause tended to great objec-
tions. For many years, it would be in the recollection of
the House, endeavours had been made to prevail on
the colonies to make more liberal allowances to the slaves.
The clause, as it now stood, would give advantage to
those colonies that had been most obstinate in preventing
the • execution of the orders of Government. He should
therefore suggest that, instead of granting to the slaves
a certain amount, they should give small sums to
the slaves for their labour, say even the sum of 6.1. for
seven hours and a half, that would reconcile him to the
apprenticeship imposed upon him. It was very well known
that the slaves were very fond of having money given to
themselves. The adoption of the proposition which he
had brought forward, would, in his (Lord Howick's) opi-
nion, meet the wishes of both parties. Although the
amendment would not remove all the objections he
(Lord H.) had to the Bill, it would have the effect of
removing many of them.
Mr. STANLEY thought, by carrying into effect the
amendment of the Noble Lord, a gross breach of justice
would be committed, and Parliament would be taking to
itself a power which it never ought to exercise.
Mr. P. M. STEWART concurred in the amendment
of the Noble Lord.
Lord HOWICK, in explanation, entered into a discus-
sion of the propriety of the orders in Council.
Mr. STANLEY thought the present time was not the
proper one to discus• the orders in Council.—(Hear.)
Mr. R. GORDON hoped that the alefunct orders in
Council, whether they were founded in absolute wisdom
or otherwise, would not now be brought forward and
discussed.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. BUXTON was convinced that nothing would in-
duce negroes to work so well or so readily as holding out an
inducement of wages ; the evidence given before the Com-
mittee proved that fact, but the House had already decided
against the system of wages. He hoped that the Right
Hon. Secretary (Mr. Stanley) would consent to the
introduction of a clause that should approximate towards
wages, by allowing the negro a small sum, say a halfpenny
per hour for their labour. The planters complain of the
expensive and tiresome mode of laying in stores of pro-
visions for the negroes, and therefore it would be better to
allow a small sum for wages, that the negro might know
he was working for wages. The prospect of emancipa-
tion through an apprenticeship, would be no inducement
equivalent to wages. At all events, the slaves should
have the option of having allowances and provision-
grounds, or of having wages.
Mr. O'REILLY said be hoped the Right Hon. Se-
cretary would, instead of following the negro so many
hours on an annual average, snake it so many hours per
week, so that he might cultivate his own grounds. It was
true that the crop season was a busy one for the planter,
hut it was also an important one for the negro in the
cultivation of his garden ; but if at that period the master
chose to call on his negro for extra labour, he should pay
for it.
Mr. STANLEY said that was precisely what the clause
would effect. If the negro worked for his master more
than the 45 hours in crop time, the latter would be bsund
to pay for the extra labour.
Mr. JAMES could not let the fallacy inferred by the
speech of the Hon. Member for Weytnouth go forth.
If the negro was not paid money wages, he was paid
for his work in food, clothing, provision, garden-
ground, and other conveniences. On one of his estates in
the island of Jamaica, he (Mr. James) had slaves who hail
made from 201. to 2001. by the produce of their provision
ground, besides being provided fair in other ways.
Who ever heard of an English labourer saving 2001. out of
money wages? It was seen by the papers that such was
the distress of English labourers that they were actually
starving in the streets. He condemned the tissue of false-
hoods and scandalous exaggerations appearing on those
subjects in the " Anti• Slavery Reporter."
Mr. F. BUXTON said the fact of these savings on the
part of the Hon. Member's slaves was an argument in
favour of his position. He defended the anti-slavery
reporter from the attack of the Hon. Member.
Mr. P. STEWART hoped the amendment of his Right
Hon. Friend would be adopted. The amendments of the
Noble Lord, and the Hon. Member for Weymouth, would
be unnecessary interpok ions on the principle of the Bill.
Mr. O'CONNELL spoke in favour of free labour.
Mr. STANLEY said the Hon. Member for Weymouth
seemed to labour under a mistake. As he (Mr. Stanley)
understood the amendment, the slave was to have 61. a
day whether he worked or not—that was not giving any
stimulant to the slave, which was done by the original
clause.

Lord HOWICK did not think any thing had been
urged which should induce him to withdraw
his proposition.—(Hear, bear.) Though the sixpence
a day migh not altogether be considered as wages,
yet still he thought the sl Ives would consider it
as an improvement in their condition, if they
were allowed to receive a small remuneration,
in money instead of having that remuneration in the
manner in which they have been accustomed to receive it.
Dlr.. R. GORDON wished to know whether the Noble
Lord was prepared to find some means, or whether he
intended establishing a sort of bank, at which those six-
pences were to be paid ?
Lord HOWICK explained.
Aster some observations from Sir R. Vyvyan, Lord
Sandon, Mr. Sandford, and Mr. Buxton,
The House resumed, the Chairman reported progress,
and asked leave to sit again, and the SPEAK ER left the
chair.

-- - -- - - --- - -
MURDER OF A WOMAN BY HER lIUS-
EAND.—The circumstances attending the death of MARY
NICHOLS, whose body was disinterred from the burial-
ground of the Ebenezer Methodist Chapel on Wednesday
se'onight, by order of the official authorities, in conse-
quence of certain reports as to the cause of her death,
have been fully investigated before a Coroner's Jury, and
proves the case to be one of equal atrocity to any ever be-
fore the public. The miserable man (Mellott-0, who is
near 70 years of age, married the deceased about six years
since, and they had lived together happily until within
the last twelve months, when, it appears, that the wif-
became jealous that too much attention was paid by him
to her sister (HONOR RUNDLE), to whom he made a
weekly allowance of 65., and to do which he not unfie-