The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVIENINGI JrNE 24 1846.

..1.,

Mr, HUME presented a petition from a percon of the name
41 Daniel Stour, complaining of his dismissal by the Board of
Ordnance. The petitioner complained that he had been the
cause of leading to the expceure of certain met-practice., ar-
tied on by some of the officers, for which, he believed, thotigh
another cause had been assigned, lie had been dismissed.
Mr. HUME postponed his motion relating to the Raja of
Battara till this day fortnight, and his yesolutiens with reference
to sugar till the sugar duties came before .he House.
WAYS AND MEANS.
On the motion for the orc'er of the day for receiving the
Port of the Committee on the Wa3 s and Means,
Mr. cARDWF.LL (in answer to a quesion by en Hon.
Member which did not reach the gallery) said that the only
alteration which had been made in the Post-office communica-
tion from London to Dublin, was made at the time that the
Grand Junction Railway was opened. The Post-office au-
thorities seized on the opportunity to secure a double communi-
cation to Dubts, and the effect of that arrangement vial to
double the inconvenience, instead of convenience.
Mr. HUME inquired whether any further information had
been received from New South s'a'es with respect to the de-
falcations of Mr. Manning. He had asked last session for
some information respecting the defalcations of that officer, and
foe dispatch ought to have arrived by this time.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (as we
Understood) said that information had been received, and the
Money and the securities had been recovered.
The report was then brought up and received.
_ SUGAR DUTIES.

Mr. B. ESCOTididnOt know what necessity there was
for continuing the present duties for a month, because the pro-
pored Government measure would reduce the price 3s. 6d.
Per cent.
Mr. HUME had placed a notice en the paper, with reference
to sugar duties, but as the Noble Lord the Member for the city
of London had a notice upon the paper, he thought it better to
postpone the case until the matter could come more fully before
the Home.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER made some
remarks on the subject of the postponement, which were totally
inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. MOFFATT thought it a great hardship on those per-
tug who had taken large contracts that the present duty should-
continued r‘r a month.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that the reduction of the
duty to 3s. 6d. would be opening up the whole question.
Mr. THORNELY said it was a most important tax, and he
did hope the Government would take the opportunity of reduc-
ing the sugar in price:
The resolution was thew put and agreed to, and leave was
given to bring in the Bill.
PAUPER LUNATIC BILL.
Sir JOHN TROLLOPE wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Government to carry into operation the provl-
li"s of ,he Bill.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied that the opinion of the law
ers on the provisions of the Pauper Lunatics Bill had been
iZen. arid it was considered necessary in consequence to bring
au amended Bill.

Mr. RECORD OFFICE.
Pp
, BULLER
he moved that a Select Comm be ointed
7; consider t propriety of establishing ittee
a General Record
tdfice for England and Wales.
The motion was seconded, and read from the Chair.
After a few words from Mr. C. WYNN,
the PROTHEROE thought nothing could be v.iser than
? object of the motion of his Hon. Friend, and he should
11111;ngly support it. It was highly desirable that a gereral
b„,
""ie office for the preservation and consultation of the records
illottld be established.
Mr. C. WYNN explained, and wished it to be generally
tlttderstood that be had not the slightest wish to check the
motion of his Hon. Friend, but it appeared to him that there
ere two concurrent objects in the proposition, which could
not conveniently be carried out together.
Mr. HAWES hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would
aglee with the general proposition for the record office, and
""at the motion of his Hon. Friend would slot be opposed.
laice CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would give
oconsent to the formation of the Committee proposed by the
n. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Buller), but there would he
afraid
points for them to decide on, and he was very much
:_7.:d that the result of the inquiry would not be attended
eewtth the effects anticipated by the Hon. Member. He sin-
,Le4 hoped, however, that the Committee would point out
"ule adequate means to accomplish the object of the motion.
._e After a few words from Mr. Christie, Mr. Protheroa, and
14Chancellor of the Exchequer,
u"- C. BULLER wished to call the attention of the Right
.ne Chancellor of the Exchequer to the necessity of can-
:Acting a public building sufficiently large to hold the future
_tter eased number of reports, as well as the present large
`l_!ritity. He thought that the public would be better Wits-
"red if a commission were appointed to arrange and select the
ads, than if the inquiry were entrusted to a Committee of
- nouse
viThe mt;tion was then put from the Chair, end agreed to
"lout a division.

MESSAGE PROM THE LORDS.
N,lll%.legaengers from the Lords brought up the following Bills,
rteh their Lordships had agreed to :—Arbroath and Forfar
ailway Bill; Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Pettycur
• Per Hrbour and Deviations) Bill ; Great
to"labyth a
Gas Bill ; Lei,hcPaying Bill ; Portsmouth Har,-
Pier Bill ; Bromsgrove Improvement and Small
cements Bill; Manchester and Birmingham Railway
Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction Rail
• Bill ; Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Rail-
(Humber Ferries) Bill ; Liverpool Improvement Bill ;
gijieastle-upon-Tyne Improvement Bill; Hamilton New Gas
112. without Amendment ; Alford -Valley Railway Bill;
;;;Itidee and Atbroath Railway (Extensions) Bill; Edinburgh
dreg Northern Railway (Newport Railway and St. An-
t,W's Branch) Bill; Great North of Scotland (Eastern
tiitiension) Bill; Lancashire and North Yorkshire Railway
; Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
-▪ 44 .
a.._,etion Railway Bill York and North IVAidland Railway
s'us Extension) Bill ; Birkenhead, Lancashire, and
noeshire Junction Railway Bill ; Great North of England and
gnr"ghbridge Branch Railway Bill; Great North of England
d
14e Bedale Branch Railway Bill, with an Amend-
ttlr Explosive Substances Bill ; -Liverpool Sanatory
btl2 Midland Railway ( Erewash Valley Extension) Bill;
litaldee and Perth Railway Bill; Burnley Improveme t
;I:, Waterworks Bill ; Slamannan and Borrowstouness
triway Bill ; North Staffordshire Railway (Churnet Valley
Nne) Bill ; Direct London and Portsmouth Railway Bill ;
2rth Western Railway Bill; Boston, Stamford., and Bir-
"lgham Railway ( Stamford to Wisbech Line) BM
• Paisley, and Greenock Railway ( Harb•iur Branch) Bill ;
Northumberland Docks Bill ; Eastern Union Railway (Ard-
Iligh to Colchester) Bill; Rye and Derwent Drainage
.lls with Amendments. That they have passed. a
hlel~, "An Act for making a railway from
proposedintituled Sheffield and Lincolnshire Junction Railway to
s", city of Lincoln." Also, a Bill, intituled, ‘. An Act fur
tarrying in o effect an agreement respecting the Estates of
the
: Corporation of the borough of Ludlow, and other
;,?,thates vested in the said Corporation in trust,
117er partly or in whole, for certain e aritable
fur appropriating certain estates to the chttlity
_ereinafter mi-ptioned, and declaring the trusts thereof, and for
'll4king Provision for payment of the debts of the said corpo-
ttti.oi, and other pu-p,:ses." Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act
the trust,
tho Guvernors and Managers aupointed under
e trust, di3psition, Lnd settlement of Rol,ert Philp, of
444denshead decea•eci, and to explain and extend the poises
rid provisions con ained in the said deed."

TRADING IN SEDUCTION.
err. SPOONER then moved for leave to bring in a Bill for
rnore effectual suppression of trading in seduction and
Prostitution, and for the better protection of females.
4 Air. HUME saw no hope of such a Bill passing the House,
1.
s".hoSPuld oOppose its introduction.
bent
resumed, and said it would be then incum.
upon him to make a statement to the Hou=e. The Bill
url not his (Mr. Spooner's), but it emanated from the Society
the Protection of Females, of which society the Archbishops,
It
and several Noblemen and Gentlemen were tuhscr ibers.
‘", suggested by the Association that a Bill of the nature
°lf that which he proposed, should be presented to the House
by an independent Member of that tiouse. He had been
"PPlied to to present the Bill by that Association, and should
endeavour to promote their object.
~Art Alzatinta here moved that the House be counted,
-"(41 there. not being forty Members present, the House ad-
%tied at a Quarter past Seven.

HOUSE OF LORDS,.Thne 23.
Their Lordshi met at ten minutes to Five o'clock.
till
Nlessengers from the House of Commons brought up severs
THE SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
A
„ Noaca LORD presented a petition from Lincoln against
Loa union of those two sees, and praying for the immediate ap-
Poiotment of a Bishop for Manchester.
The Bishop of EXETER presented several petitions to the
same effect. The Right Rev. Prelate also presented a pelt-.
tion from the magistrates and other inhabitants of Wolver-
hampton, praying their Lordships to pass some measure which
UM make it penal to carry on the trade of prostitution. He
was very glad to find that an Hen. Member of the other
House of the Legislature had given notice ot his intention to
bring in a Bill to the same effect.
SOUTte DEVON RAILWAY.
Lord DEVON presented several petitions against th:a
Project.
LORDS HARDINGE AND GOUGH.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE wished to know whit the
intentions of her Majesty's Government were with respect to
the Annuity Bills of Lords Hardinge and Gough. He thought
that the time had come when the subj"ct should be, taken into
Consideration.
The Eail of RIPON said that, on Tees-'ay evening next, he
should move that the report be brought up, and the intentions
of the Government would be announced.
OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE RAILWAI.
Earl HARDWICKE presented a petition feorn A.lr. Frede-
rick Brown in favour of the Oxford and Cambride e Railway Bill ;
and the petitioner requ!sted to withdraw the petition presented
from him a few nights since against the line. 'flu Noble Earl
Presented a petition from Aylesbury and other places in favour
of the railway.
A petition from Spilsby, in Lincolnshire, was presents:i
against the Charitable Trusts Bill.
SCOTTISH (RAILWAY) CONSOLV,ATIONS.
Lord BROUG HAM presented a petition from Mr.
H.
fldie, solicitor for one of the competing lines for connecting
England with Scotland, stating that a notice had b,ten served
,tit him to deliver up the papers which had been eon usted to
!I at in his capacity as solicitor, and for the possession of which
'
he was responsible. He prayed, therefore that he mig'it he
protected, and not be convicted of a contempt of then. Lord.
ships by withholding such papers.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that in his chae actor of
solicitor, be was perfectly justified in within.ddieg the papers.
On the motion of Lora BROUGHAM, tne petition was re-
ferred !o the Committee.
THE REV. SHOREXE TER AND THE BISHOP OF
E .
Lord BROUGHAM then presented a petition from the Rev.
Mr. Shore, who had been for ten years in orders. After that
time he was conscientiously convinced that it was his duty to
leave the Church. Previously, however, ,o his leaving the
Church, he had been licensed to a certain chapel, which was
afterwards e' dowel by the Duke of Somerset ; having ob-
tained that license from the Bishop of Exeter, under the autho-
rity of a certain incumbent, where he performed the service
according to the rules of the Church of Eng and. After-
wards, however, the living under which he was
licensed passed into other hands, and Mr. Shore wls deprived
of that license, but the chapel had then pq ssed
out of connexion with the Church of England. Mr. Shore,
who had in the meantime been converted to the principles of
the Protestant Dissenters, and under the impression that his
connexion with the Church had ceased, administered the
Sacrament, under the authority of the Te:eretieri Asst. Yet
he bad, nevertheless, been dealt with in the spirituel court as if
he were still under the cognizance of the eceles'astical law.
Thispetition was from the Learned Sergeant who eendueted
the ease for Mr. Shore, an, it complain• d that there was a
defect in the law, which ought to be remedied.
The Bishop of EXETER said that he must preface the few
retearks which he had to offer to their Lordship,: with the
statement that nothing could have been more fair sod straight-
forward, or liberal, than the conduct of his Nt.ble and Learned Friend. The facts were these :—Previous to the endowment
of the chapel, he had received a communication from the Duke
of Somerset, inquiring what was the smallest sum that would
be necessary to endow the chapel. He had replied that 1,00.4.
or 1,5001. would be a sufficient sum to justify him in centecrat-
Incg the chapel though, of course, his Grace would not think
of attaching so small a stipend to a chapel of that kind.

The Noble Duke had departed from his engagements, from what
'vas ns were best known to himself, and he had no doubt they
were ,atisfactory to his own mind At the time the applica-
tif,n was made to him he licensed Mr. Shore, when he found
that that gentleman had received theleave of the incumbent;
and their Lordships need not be informed what were the
rights of incumbents or of patrons. One clergyman coul., not
go into a parish and officiate there without the leave of the
incumbent, and when the incumbent of the parish refused to
grant leave to Mr. Shore. he did not feel himself at liberty to
sanction his officiating. Mr. Shore then said he would officiate
in spite of the refusal, and so he did. flo,temonstrated in
the mildest manner, and called upon him by the oath which
he had taken to pay obedience to the Church, but he had n..t
chosen so to do.

Lord BROUGHAM said that his object in commenting-
upon the matter at all was, to draw attention to the defective
state of the law, with the view to have it amended. Theophilus
Lindsay, who had been twenty-five years a rector in the English
Church, and who afterwards became an Unitarian, minister,
and founded the Essex-street Chapel, had never been proceeded
against ; neither was Dr. Lardner, nor any of those who had
recently left the Church and become Roman Catholics, the
Hon. and Rev. Mr. Spencer, Mr. Faber, and Mr. Newman.
He thought, therefore, that their Lordships should pause before
they turned a deaf ear to the comelaints of petitioner.
The Bishop of EXETER explained that Mr. Shore was a
Dissenter from the discipline, not from the doctrine of the
Church of England, and thus, repudiating the authority of the
diocesan, still continued the service of the Church of England.
He stood in a very different position to those gentlemen who
had seceded from the Church of England for that of Rome.
Mr. Shore might have escaped this prosecution if he had cons
sented to deposition but this, by his counsel, he had expressly
refused to do. The only relief the House could afford was-that
from costs, and if this gentleman still continued obstinate, he
could not conceive tharthis was the right way to obtain the re-
lief which he sought.
Lord BROVG HAM said that he could cite the venerable
authority of Lord Stowell for stating that when once invested
with the character, a priest could never be deposed, but
could only be suspended.
The Bishop of EXEHER could cite an equally high autho-
rity', namely, that of Lord Stowell himselt, in the case of
some one against Stone, in which the decision had been, that
after the sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court, the Bishop
could pronounce the additional sentence, and depose an offender
from the ministry.
The Bishop o: LONDON thought that an interminable confu-
sion wou!d arise if a party, after years ofsturly and prayer, were
to be permitted at once to act in contravention of the oath which
he had deliberately taken, and resume the civil position which
he had forfeited when he-entered into-holy orders. - The proper
course to adopt under such circumstances would be the deposi-
tion from the tnnistry,-but"eare should be taken not to confound
deprivation with deposition. •
After to few words from` Lord CAMPBELL,
- CASE OF THE BEV. ROBERT KYLE.
The Earl of RODEN pre,erited a pbtition from the inha-
biqtas of Donnybrook, near Dublin, complaining of the dis-
missal of the Rev. Robert Kyle from his ministerial duties by
the Archbishop of Dublin. The complaint of the petitioners was
so earnest, that he thought it his duty to acquaint the Right
Rev. Prelate with the contents of that petition He could not
but think it most harsh to deprive this gentleman of the office
which he had so long filled with great credit, for no other
fault than joining the Evangelical Society. The petitioners
prayed their Lordships to take 'such steps as will prevent a mi-
nister being deprived by his dioce.an of his living, without it
could be shown that he was guilty of- heresy, immorality, or
impiety.
The Archbishop- of ARMAGH hoped their Lordships would
suspend their judgment till he had an opportunity of writing to
the Archbishop of Dublin respecting' the complaint of the peti-
tioners. The Archbishop of Dublin stated that he should hare
been manifestly guilty of a dereliction of duty if he had not
acted in the way he did, however respectable the petitioner
might be. The Right Rev. Prelate here read a communica-
tion from the Right Rev. Prelate justifying the course he had
taken. It was in substance to the effect that the 'Rev. Mr.
Kyle had acted in opposition to the discipline of the Church,
and adopted a course which he (the Archbishop of Dublin) did
not approve of ; hence, in virtue of the authority vested inhim,
he had caused the petitioner to be removed. He acted in the
matter with the best wishes for the interests and prosperity of
the Church. He could not, with a safe conscience, have given
his consent to the movement which was going forward, and in
which the Rev. Gentleman took an active part' Such were
the sentiments of the Right Rev. Prelate, which he had now
placed before the House.
The Earl of GALLOWAY entirely agreed with the senti-
ments of the Noble Earl who had introduced the petition, and
if the allegations of the petition were true, he must conclude
that the conduct of the Archbishop of Dublin had been most
reprehensible. The subject of evangelical alliance was one in
which there was great difference of opinion among the best
friends of the Chun h. If these attempts at union were to be
put down, it would lead to very serious results. In a free
country like thi', such attempts toput down freedom of opinion
should not be encouraged.—(Elear, hear.)
Lord REDESDALE should be sorry if the House should
be of opinion that the Right Rev. Prelate had not acted pro-
perly in the matter. He, for one, thought, that the Right
Rev. Prelate had acted with great discretion, and ought to be
supported in such a course. It was said, that with regard to
all essential points of doctrine, there was no difference between
the members. of this evangelical alliance ; hitt to that he re-
plied, that many of these parties were avowedly against an es-
tablished chnrch. -It was not prudent for young members of
the Church of. England to be allied with them. There was in
many respects a greater similarity betweep the Church of Eng-
land and the Church of Rome than between the former and
many Dissenters, yet would not the Bishops have a right to in-
terfere if the clergy of the Church Of England united for reli-
gious purposes with.the priests of the Church of Rome.
Lord RODEN denied the statement that the doctrines of
the Churth of Eugland and the. Protestant Dissenters differed
more: than those of that Church and the Church of Rome.
After a few words from the Duke of LEINSTER, in vin-
dication of the conduct of the Archbishop of Dublin, and
from several other Noble Lords, the sebject dropped.
CU -S fOM S' IRS BILL.

The House thee resolved itself into Committee on this Bill.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY proceeded to read the
schedule attached to the Bill.
On the articles butter and cheese being read,
The Earl of HARDWICKE moved that they be struck
out. He moved this as an act of justice to many of the
poorer classes. Butter and cheese were agricultural produce,
raised in -inany—instauces by peribitif—tioanng snYan--prors ur-
land, and by the removal of the duty they would suffer se-
verely. This was especially the case in Ireland, where very
many depended—if not altogether—at least in a great
measure on the production of these articles.—(Hear,
hear) By the course they were taking they would not
lose a great deal of revenue, but those poor people would be
made to suffer very much. In 1844, the duty or, butter was
186,6662. ; in 1845, it was 247,6041. 'Yet this amount of
duty they were about to sacrifice. They were also proposing
to give up the duty on cheese, which in 1844, was 117,272!. ;
and in 1845, 141,8181. The effects would be very mischievous,
and therefore he would propose that they be struck out.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said the only object in all the
reouctions in the tariff was to supply the poorer classes with a
full supply of the necessaries of life. He believed the price
of butter and cheese would be reduced to the consumers, but
not re such an extent as to prove seriously injurious to the home
producer, while the price would be reduced, and thus a go-d
t e effected in as far as the poorer classes were concerned He
thought the importation would take place when
.the home
market would be effected in the least degree He considered
-that a duty of 20s. per cent. was too much to be levied on an
article of so great a consumption as butter, and of so much
importance to the lower classes, and therefore proposed to re-
duce the amount of 'duty to ten shillings per cent.
Lord STANLEY considered that either the Noble Earl was
right or he was not.. This reduction in duty would either re-
duce the price of butter or it would keep up the price, and the
revenue would lose the amount they now received tor that ar-
ticle, which would have the effect of placing 127,000/. a year in
the pockets of foreigners; and would not bestow a propor-
tionate benefit cn the classes at home.
Earl DALHOL SlE—The Noble Earl who spoke before,
and to whose statements he alluded, said the reduction in duty
would not affect the price of the article to the amount of one
farthing per cwt.
Earl STAN HOPE—It was a farthing a pound.
Earl DAL HOU lE—The difference is of no importance. If
however, there was not a reduction of prices, it could not be
considered a matter of blame to the Government, for they had
endeavoured to dose by proposing this reduction of duty.
After a few words from Lord STANLEY, their Lordships
divided, when there appeared—
For the omission of the words 33
Against it
Majority —l7

On our re-admission into the gallery, we found
The Duke of RICHMOND on his legs, speaking against the
proposed alteration in the item of hops. He considered that the
proposed alterations would materially affect the interests of the
home grower. The reason why great quantities of hops had not
been introduced into the country yet, was that it required three
years to produce a Rood crop; the home produce also had to
pay the heavy excise' duty of 17s. 9d., which the foreigner
would not have to pay; it would therefore be placing them in
unjust and unfair competition. The average produce of 'hops
in Austria was 42,090 per acre, while it had been proved that
the cost of cultivation was 25/. per acre. Now the coat of cul-
tivation in this country was 421. per acre, and he wanted to
know how the. British producer could compete with the
foreigner under such circumstances as these ?—( Hear, hear.)
In Kent there wera 250,000 acres of land devoted

to the growing of hops, and the capital which
had been invested in the cultivation amounted to two millions
sterling. Every year an additional sum, amounting to upwards
of 900,0001., was invested in this land, and he believed
230,0 01. was for labour aLne. Now he wanted to know, with
these facts staring them in the face, how they could justly re-
duce the duty imposed on foreign hops for the protection of the
British produce. ( Hear, hear. )
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said they could net rely upon
such data as that given them by the Noble Duke, and he would
there:ore pass over some of the Noble Duke's statement:, and
come to the real question at once. Now, the nearest point
from whence hop3couldbe brought tothis country was Belgium,
and they could not be imported trom that country under six per
cent. When they arrived in England they would have to pay
excise duties to the extent of 60 per cent. more than the
Britisb producer. Surely this would be an ample protection to
tie hop interest of this country.—( Heer, . hear.) At all
events he was convinced they could not with any fairness carry
pretec ion further than 60 per cent.—( Hear, hear.)
- The Earl of WICKLOW said Government, in carrying cut
the fry e- trade principles, ought to repeal the malt -tax. It
aepeared to hint that they wished to abolish every other day
Lord ASHBURTON and Lord Cot-
Af:er a few t
but this.
CHESTER, Viho were opposed to the change,
-(Hearo,r, dhear. )
v from
was a very pre-
sTA N 1-1()PE said' h"Cgrf"ingto be well protected.
orebeard of Trade had re-
marked The Noble Earl the President of the . ,
while
it
carious Earl trade, and it ought, there s
enough,s
in titres of
sveuid enable Ergland to obtain forelgosnp
that 60 per cent. was protection
scarcity.— ( Hear, hear.)
that the hop trade of Kent was a perfect juggle, and that I
thrTreheypEaarra: Why,
grower never made any profit unless the crop failed him once in
about to keep up prices.—( Hear, hear.)
oltrni!teiepdoaNf
oiblistereno,:ci es in. three, years was brought
that the Noble Earl had ad-
duced a most ex •
traordinary theory as an argument against the
proposed change.
theory was, it applied te
The Duke of RICHMOND
to almost every trade in the country.
said, extraordinary though the
Government were now
people cheap
with theithougia
bread, and all the pro-
tectionists cry of give the yeop:e
that they had given the
malt-tax.—(laser.dill red
)
tectionists could do now was, to get up
~
ithrehtil from the
cheap beer with it. and repeal the
bL.
hear.) He
this,He
Earl FITZ WILLIAM sapido,matslt,h_ot,utgreed
Noble Duke on many of his pointy, he
that the malt-tax ought to be abolished.—(Hear, h
quite agreed with his Noble Frend that no greater advantage
cowl I be conferred upon the people of this country than a re-
peal of the duties upon malt, and .f their Lordships would per-
mit him to say so, he contended that no greater boon could be
conferred upon the landed interest. The nseesere which they
were no diseessiog, although it was teehnica,ly called the
tariff, was, in fact, the question of the repeal of the duty on
corn.— (No, no.) All these matters were merely subsidiary
and contributory to that great question. Very possibly the
Government could not have introduced the one without intro-
ducing the other. Ile Was sure his Noble Friend would agree
with him that the question which they were then discussine
was, whether they should allow foreign corn to be imported
into this country free of duty, and ha contended, that if they

were to have free trade in corn, they ought to have free trade
in beer, that necessaryarticle of domestic use; and that it ought
to be imported into a man's house free from the inspection or
interference of he exciAeman. _ .

Lord ASHBURTON said the Noble Earl who had just sat'
down, had said that this was but the part of that one great,
question, the repeal of the duty on the importation of foreign
corn. It was certainly a part of the great question, " Shall
we protect our native industry ?"—Hear, hear.) In that
respect then, he agreed that this question was
part of the question of free trade. The question
for their consideration was whether they should protect the
cultivation of their own land—whether their home industry
should be protected as far as the cultivation of hops. After
that, they would go into the question of shoes, boots, and all the
different articles of home manufacture. The question, as it
had been laid before their Lordships by the Noble Earl opposite,
and those who held the same opinions was whether the manu-
tacturers, &e., of icreign countries should be preferred to the
labouting population of our own country. In that respect he
agreed with the Noble Earl, that it was one question only, and
that was, what they called free-trade. _ _ _ _

The Earl of RADNOR, said, that the cultivation of hops
was avoe edly a gambling speculation. A very extensive
hop-grower in the county of Kent had told him so about two
years ago ; and he knew that it was the opinion amongst hop
growers elsewhere, that that business was entirely a gambling
speculation. In one year a man might realise by his hops several
hundred pounds, and in the next year be might be a:most
ruined. And, with respect to the wages paid to the labouring
classes in the hop-growing counties, to cot Id assure their
Lordships, that so low were the wages paid to them, that they
were in the most abject state of pauperism before the carrying
out of the late Act fix the amendment of the poor-laws. The
wages in those parts of the country were, on the average, less
than those paid in any other part of the kingdom.
Earl STAN HOPE admitted that the duties on malt ought
to be repealed, but be contended, at the same time, that the
people of this country, from one extremity to the other, were of
opinion that the Government ought at once to repeal the duties
also on tea, coffee, soap, and all such necessary articles of do-
mestic consumption.
_ The article was then agreed to without a division.
On the article lace being read,
Earl STAN HOPE rose for the purpose of giving his decided
objection to the reduction of the duty upon its importation, be-
lieving, as he did, that of the articles in the tariff this was un-
doubtedly the one on which the duty should not be repealed.
The reduction of the duty on the article of lace would inter-
fere moat uejustly with the poorer portion of the labouring
classes of this country, and more especially those resident in
the county of Buckingham. Into whatever cottage their Lord-
ships might enter in that county, they would, find that the
wives and children of the labouring classes were engaged in the
manufacture of lace.' And what would be the consequences
if their Lordships consented to repeal the duty on this article?
The labouring classes of the people of Devonshire were largely
employed in the manufacture, of lace. The wages at present
were as low as six shillings per week, and yet, low as that re-
muneration was, the Government proposed to deprive the poor
people of it. In Buckinghamshire the wages per week allowed
to a woman and one or two children, at present, amounted to
twelve shillings, and on that remuneration the labouring
classes in that part of the country chiefly depended for their
liviihood. The proposal of her Majesty's Government, how-
ever, was that those poor people should be deprived of their
present remnant of protection. If there was one article more
than another on which the duty should not be repealed he con-
tended that that article was lace.—( Hear, hear.) He felt
strongly upon this point, and he was determined to take the
sense of the House upon the question.
The Duke of RICHMOND—His Noble Friend had said
most truly, that of all other articles included in the tariff, that
of lace was pre-eminently the one on which the duty should not,
for the protection of the interests of the labouring people of
Buckinghamshire, &c., be repealed. At the present moment
the wives of the labouring classes of that part of the
country were employed in their own cottages in the
manufacture of lace, and their children were instructed by them
in everything pertaining to industry and morality.—( Hear,
hear.) Those habits of industry enabled the families at present
to purchase all the necessaries of life. Lace was an article
of luxury, and not necessary far any one. But what would be
the effect of this proposed repeal of the duty thereon on the
children of these eartiee ? They would be deprived of educe-
ti It, clothing, and the comforts of life, which they now en-
joyed. But, of course, his Noble Friend was prepared to obey
the orders of his bishap—Sir Robert Peel—( laughter)—in
everything, and it could not be expected that he would be per-
suaded to withdraw his consent from any measures of the Pre-
mier. He (the Duke of Richmond) should have the greatest
satisfaction of voting with his Noble Friend.

The E?rl of DALHOUSIE said that it would have been
more appropriate, perhaps, if the Noble Duke had termed Sir
Robert Peel his (the Earl of Dalhousie's) moderator instead of
bishop, as he happened to be a Presbyterian. But he denied
that he fell, wed Sir Robert Peel in anything that did not
appear to him ( the'Earl of Dalhousie) to be just and reason-
al,le.—( Hear, hear.) Those engaged in the manufacture of
lace would not, in his opinion, be injured in the least by the
passing of this measure.
Lord STANLEY looked upon this measure not as one cal-
culated, in the opinion of her Majesty's Government, to benefit
the people of this country, but merely as a measure to fill the
coffers of the revenue. That had been the effect
of the measure of 1642, and he had no doubt that this
1301 was 'drought forward with the expectation that
similar results wool I follow the passing of this measure.
He did hope that the 'Muse would not consent to the proposed
reduction. They were dealing with a matter which, if it
might be one of indifference to the revenue, was not so by any
means to the parties concerned, who were women and chil-
dren. And he would ask the House to' deal in the same manner
with this article as they had done with regard- to made-up
goods.
Earl D ALHOUSIE hoped that the House would adopt the
suggestion of the Noble Lord, and deal with lace as they had
done with made-up goods, and that would be by not agreeing
to the amendment proposed, but by imposing a rate of ten per
cent. ad va'orem. In his opinion Mr. Deacon Hume never
went so far' as to assert that 25 per cent; could give them
the same amount of protection as 20 per cent.
Lord STANLEY—Mr. Deacon Hume says that merchants
and traders will be willing to pay the 25 per cent, sooner than
run the risk of paying 20 to die smuggler, and that the revenue
will not suffer at the 25 per cent.—( Hear,hear.)
Earl FITZWILLIAM said that Mr. Deacon Hume never
said that the same per centaec of-duty would secure them in
every article. He was sure that Mr. Deacon Hume never said
'That-such .roat•i tro .ho cirvce witl, ragas-,1 to bra. —(llrar,
hear.) It might be so with regard to some bulky article, such
as corn, but not in that of a lighter texture, such as that which
they were at present discussing. He was very much connected
with a country where the lace trade existed, and he considered
that there was no employment less conducive to the moral cul-
ture of the young than this very manufacture. The trade was
not carried on in the houses of fathers and mothers; but in
manufact,,ries, and it also unfitted the'women employed in it
' for any other kind of work.
The Earl of GALLOWAY said it was a grieVance in this
country that parents were too apt to employ their children in
such occupations as the lace manufactures from motives of cu-
pidity, and that at a time when those children should be at
school. He was aware of• many who, from being thus early
employed; were totally ignorant of every other subject, and
were not even capable of mending their own clothes.—(Hear,
hear.) He would therefore support the reduction.
After a few words from Earl Stanhope, the Duke of Rich-
mond, and the Earl of Galloway,
Strangers were ordered to withdraw. On our re-admission
we fe,uud that the clause had been agreed to without any

division.
Earl STANHOPE rose to object to the reduction of two.
pence per square yard on stained paper.
Lord ASHBURTON said that these reductions were the
mere pedantry of political economy. He would oppose the
reduction on the ground that it would reduce the wages of the
operative.
The Eail of DALHOUSIE did not dispute that certain
masters might take advantage of the reduction to diminish
wages, but he denied that suit's would be the case with the
paper stainers of the country generally.
The item was then agreed to.
SILK.

On the reduction on silk being proposed,
The Duke of RICHMOND regretted that their Lordships
did not accede to the motion he made last night, that they
should hear counsel at the bar relative to the effect of this re-
duction. He thought that the course then pursued was inju-
dieioue. He would ask why counsel was not heard? Was
there a fear entertained that the case would be too strong for
them to resist ? He would ask what were the operatives to do
when the reduction took place ?
The Earl of GALLOWAY—Give them cheap provisions.
Duke of RICH MOND—The Noble Earl said "give them
cheap provisions ;" but if they had no employment and no
wages, where would be the benefit of cheap provisions ?
The Earl of GALLOWAY—If all kinds of provisions were
accessible to the working °lasses, in proportion to their means
to purchase them, would .the Noble Duke think- that no be-
nefi, ?—( Hear. )
Duke of RICHMOND—That was the fallacy of all recent
proselytes to the principles of free trade. He would now
briefly refer to the petition, and he regretted that he was so
it beforehand. The petitioners stated that a. great mistake
employed during the morning that he had not time to peruse
had been made with regard to the protection of. 15 per cent.
They also stated the argument as to smuggling was either
sheer folly or intentional de'usion.—( Hear, hear.) The
gross annual value of silk goods manufactured in this
country at present was from two to three millions
less than in 1824 —( Herr.) He would detain their Lord-
ships no further upon the subject, but he thought when a large
class of the humble classes of this country asked to be heard
against a reduction which affected their interests they ought to
have been heard. He thought that when another Government
came into office, they would be obliged for the sake of the
revenue, to put on some of tho,e duties which it was now pro-
posed to take cif. He would in conclusion move that the item
cn silk be omitted.
After a few werds in explanation from the Earl of GAL-
LOWAY and the Duke of BUCCLEUCH,
The Earl of DAL .iOUSIE regretted that he felt himself
called ui.on last night to oppose the motion of the Noble Duke,
but his reason for doing so was because he considered
it would be establishing a precedent which on future
occasions would materially interfer with public busines.
He did nut think, however, that petitioners suffered
any loss from counsel on their behalf not having been heard
at the bar, as the case had been ably advocated by the Noble
Duke on the cross-benches. He would now refer to the duties
on the article of silk. The mode of levying the duties on this
article was a matter of extreme difficulty, arising from the
varieties, and the very delicate differences which prevailed in the
manufactured aiticles. It was impossible to levy a duty ad
vat)? cm, for in that case it must have been necessary to have
examined the separate parcels, so great was the variety. But
that would have in solved a loss of time to the officers employed
and to those interested in the manufacture ; and much snore
this practice would have proved destructive to articles of so
very delicate manufacture as some of them were. If, however,
the) levied the duty not ad valorem, but according to the
weight of the article, that would have raised the objections
so common in interfering with commercial transactions,
that they would be raising the highest duty on the heaviest
article, although that article would generally be found theworst.
It had been attempted on that account to make a classification,
and to give the parties concerned the option of a duty ad valo-
rem, or according to weight. Since the year 1824 (the year in
which a great"change was made in this trade), it was
silks eeen ma
therefore
foundl
had been up ;
A new classification
on tables un
and
unequal.
A the existing classification was become exceetlingl
ribbons were placed by themselves,
satins and
descriptions of fabrics, whether plain or figured. The
different
cent. on the average value. When he stated
was fixed at lb her
imposed on the average value, he was
that the duty had been Imp
separate articles was ascertained, and the duty
articles must be of a higher value, and
t, must be 'somewhat less than 15
that therefore the duty ont,,CM
some of them of a lower
and on the. other hand that
per cent.,
higher rate of duty than the 15
value must necessarily pay aarticles the merchant
per cent. But on the whole of
cant. These re-
will find that he has to pay a duty of per
ant. ribbons.
In consequence of representations made t.)
vaa„leeot. :hattse:nee of these art
Marks applied to broad clks, satins, and silk goo
the departments
with which he (Earl Dalhousie) was connected, by "I
manufaeturers of Co.entry and .the Member for the place,
these parties had been put in communication with the proper
officers of the department. And classifications and modifica-
tions
thatD the
oaursgiue'ms) enrjahsotev forer ably
had been made, which he understood were quite satisfac-
toryiieairtng )t
counsel
parties.nsei
a t
t His h
e (Fart
was, not
conducted, and the examination of an array of witnesses would
not have led their Lordships one bit nearer the point which

recopied their attention. The duties, he said, must be fixed
by the usual, the experienced officers, put in .comrztunication
with those men practically-engaged in the trade, and versed in
its details ; and, accordingly, the present classifications and cal-
culations fJr fixing the duties hat been left to the officers and
these parties. The duty fixed was 15s. per cwt. on the average
value. If, however, the question before the House had been
the general duty, he must remind them that that question bad
been before the House. and they had given their deliberate opi-
nion 'on it—an opinion contained in this Bill, and
that was that 15 per cent should be levied on the
average value. He would now come to the second point in the
petition, the past exrerience of the petitioners, that the legis-
lation for the last twenty years had produced an alteration in
their trade, by giving, an advantage to the foreign manufac-
turer, and thereby bringing ruin upon the home trade. It
would be in the recollection of their Lordships, that the language
used by the petitioners .Was the same as that, made use of by
those wilt, opposed the progress of these measures, both in that
House and in the other. These were in the habit of saying that
the effect of these measures would be, that the trade would be
destroyed, the capital would be withdrawn, and the trade would
entirely go down. How were they to determine this question?
If the silk trade had failed, if the capital had withdrawn from
it, if the silk mills had been stopped, if the imports of the raw
material had diminished, if the number of those employed in it
had decreased; if all these had taken place, the, worst fears and
prophecies of these parties had proved true. But if the opposite
of these had occurred—( Hear, hear)—if the imports of
the raw • material had increased, if the 'manu-
factures for the home market had augmented,
if the exports had increased, then these statements about the
ruinious effects of this course were false.—(Hear,, hear. ),, He

would show that it was so from the. returns Which had bei,ri.

on their Lordships' table, from the period since the conclusion
of the war up to 1844. Lie must observe that the raw ma-
terial was divided into three descriptions, the raw material
properly so called ; the waste, the knubs and husks ; and the
thrown silk. ( The Noble Earl was about to quote from the re-
turns when he • was interrupted by a remark across the table
from Earl Stanhope.) The Noble Earl said he would attend
to the points which had been alluded to. It had been said that
in the returns on their Lordships' table the waste, knubs, and
husks and,the thrown sink had been combined in the amount

given for.the raw material. But he begiWroobserveihat if by
means of science they could now manufacture articles from that

waste as good as they were able to manufacture in former years,
he saw no reason why the waste should be excluded
from the returns..: But, in giving his quotation, he would
take no account of the waste, knobs, and husks, or the thrown
silk. The importations of the raw material for the ten years,
from 1814 to 1823, amounted to 15,200,0001b5. In the re-
turns for the yeirs 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, an account, of the
waste, knobs, and husks had been included. but he would
make every reason able allowance—such a deduction a% must
_ _

satisfy the- Noble Earl (StanhOPe). He would take the
amount given in these for the year preceding, and for that
which followed those he had mentioned, and making his cal.

culation on such data, deduct accordingly. For the ten years,
then, from 1824 to 1833, he found the gross amount
given for raw material imported, waste being included,
was 32,916,000 lbs. ; and making the deduction for
waste and thrown silk, there would be left 31,551,000
lbs. In 1824, the great change was made, which re-
moved entirely the prohibition on foreign manufactures.
The increase for the next ten years was annually 1,521,000 lbs.i
in the next year 3,500,000 lbs., then 3,742,000 lbs., and from
that it increased to 4,310,000 lbs., so- that while in ten years
it had so increased, could their Lerdships, with that fact staring
them in the faCe—could they, he repeated, believe the allega-
tion in the petition that the reduction in the duty had caused
ruin to the silk trade by the introduction of the foreign
import, when this great increase of the raw material had
followed that reduction. In. the year 1845, there was an in-
crease of the import of the raw material amounting to 200 per
cent. over that of the import prior to the reduction of the
duty. Such, then, had bean the increase of the raw
material as compared to the trade previously to 1824. Indeed,
for two hundred years prior to that year there was not a
system of high protection, but a moderate duty. With the
increase of the import of the raw material, the Noble Lord had
failed to prove that the reduction had been injurious to the
trade. It wag well known that the price_ of the article silk

was a great restriction on the general use of the material. The
reduction of the duty enabled 'the great mass of the people to
wear silk dresses.-("No," from Lord Stanley.) The Noble
Lord would surely. admit that all servant women now wore silk
gowns—they wore them now the same as they wore cotton ones
twenty years ago. This was a proof that the reduction of duty
which had taken place, did not injare the trade, but on the
contrary had greatly served it. It was well known that the
trade would very materially increase, but for the difficulty of a
supply of the raw material. The china market was now open
to us, and from the supply of the raw article from that
country there was every expectation of the trade increasing.
France was the great silk manufacturing country, and
was still able to outvie all other nations in the beauty of
that fabric, but he hoped that it would not be for long—had
had an importation of our manufactured article, and that spoke
most favourably of the prospect of our trade.—( Hear, hear.)
When their Lordships considered the allegations contained in
the petition, which complained that the•trade in silk had been
destroyed, they would ao well to remember that he had shown
the import of the raw material to be three-fold, and that,.
instead of the trade being injured, it was progressing.
—(Hear.) He was of opinion that the petitioners had failed
to show that the trade had been destroyed, or even injured
ever so slightly, by the change which had taken place. He
had been told that the population of Spitalfields had rnaterially
decreased. He did not deny that fact. But it should be re-
membered that the reduction of-the population there had taken
place long before the reduction of the duty. This was occa-
sioned by the Spitalfields Acts, which had pressed upon them
long ago. Those Acts had been done away with, and deputa-
tions had often waited upon him (Earl Dalhousie), since he
had the honour of being connected with the governMent, for
the purpose of having the law re-enacted.---(Hear, hear.) The
Acts bound the employers to pay a certain price, and no more
nor less, and bound the employed to take no less, and demand
no more. This restriction upon the free exercise of labour
caused the Spitalfields weavers to take their labour into other
markets, where these Acts had no effect, and thus it was the po-
pulation of that place had decreased., They must not accept the
amount of work done as any conclusive evidence of the rate of
wages paid to the operatives. By the improvements in ma-
chinery, though as much might not be paid for a given quantity
of silk wove, it did not follow that there might not be more
paid for the amount of work done in the day than
there was before. If, because there had been a reduction of
wages paid to
-silk weavers they were to conclude that the trade
was in a languishing and fading condition, they must consider
the same of all other branches of hand-loom weaving ; for in
every one of them a reduction had taken place.—( Hear,
hear.) All kinds of hand.loom weaving had been affected in a
similar manner. The report of the Commission appointed to
inquire into the condition of the hand-loom weavers, proved
that the distress and reduction of wages among that body did
not wise from competition with foreign producers, but arose
from competition between the weavers of this country.—( Hear,
hear.) Hand-loom weaving was easily learned. They were
generally employed at home, and assisted by their families, and
the result of the competition among them was, that not only the
silk trade but all other branches into which hand-loom weaving
entered had been reduced in wages. —( Hear, hear.) The com-
petition of weavers with weavers was enormous, and
that was the cause of the reduction in their wages.
It was a case in which Parliament could not
apply a remedy, at least not by the exclusion of foreign com-
petition. The Noble Lord here read an extract from the re-
port of the Factory Inspectors of last year, to show that the
condition of those engaged in the silk trade had greatly im-
proved, and that the demand for labour had been very great.
In many instances a rise of wages had taken place. He would
only advert to one point more. It was said that all this im-
provement had taken place under the old system, and was no
proof that the new one would work well. But he would in-
form their Lordships that they had been under the new sys-
tem for' the last quarter of the year—that was, from the 16th
of March. By a Treasury order, on the resolutions passing
Elie House of Commons, the various' articles in the tariff had
been introduced duty free. And what was the result? The
following would show. The following return of manu-
factured silks was taken from the Custom-house, and
contrasted with the imports of the corresponding months
in 1844 and 1845: In the four months of 1844,
the amount imported was in value 129,5001. ; in
the four mouths of 1845, 127,0001. ; while in the four months
since March 16, the amount was 158,000/.—(Hear, hear. )
This showed that, compared with last year, a considerable in-
crease had taken place. Now, let them take the importation
of raw silk duringthe same period :--,in the four months of 1844
the quantity was 912,0001b5. ; in 1845, it was 1,617,0001115. ;
and in the four months just ending, the amount was
1.916,0001b5. ; thus showing an increase from 912,0001b5. to
1,916,0001b5., or an increase of 100 per cent. ; and a far
greater increase than had taken place in the importation of
manufactured silk. He would now speak of the effect of the
measure en " throwsters," or those who were engaged in form-
ing twisted silk and thread out of the raw material. A reduc-
tion on foreign thrown silk was made last year, and strong re-
monstrances were made at the time. In the same returns from
which be had quoted, it appeared that from 1814 up to 1823,
the amount imported on the average was 360,0001bL,
while for 1834 to 1840, -the average was 2;15,000,
showing a reduction as compared with the former
period.—(Hear, hear.) In 1844, the total amount
of raw silk imported :was four millions
of pounds, while the
whole thrown silk'brOught in was 410,0001b5.. The propor-
tion of thrown silk fa' raw silk imported was, therefore, 10
-
per cent. Now, let them compare that proportion with what
it was during the former period to which he referred, and they
would find it formerly was 23 per cent.---(Hear, hear.) The
relative quantites in 1844, 1845, and 1848 were, in the four
months to which he had previously referred, as follows :
Raw Silk. Thrown Silk.

1814 912,0001bs 135,0,;01b..
1845... ...... 1,600,0001b5. 157,0001b5.
1846 1,906,0001bs ..136,0001b5.

This showed that the proportion of raw silk in 1846 to 1844, was
1,906,0001b5. to 912,000Ibs.—an increase of 1,000 per cent.,
while the amount of thr.wri silk had actually decreased.—
partiestiie ir engagedLordshi p
a
i n
thatthe
there never wa a time when there was greater
would respect
informto
prosperity or more full employment.—(Hear, hear.) In
silk Hear,
trade,hear') h We i t h
Spitalfields itself there had been a great improvement, and the
same had taken place throughout the country. A short time
ago he heard that a meeting of the silk-weavers in Spitalfields
the
had been held, and a resolution come to to solicit a rise of
wages. A gentleman had informed him that the rise in
wages had been solicited, and in many instances it had been
acceded to. This showed that the trade was in a healthy and
nourishing condition. He had now tried to trace the progress
of this trade, and he had endeavoured to show that the mea-
sures which were said to be based on such fatal and mis-
chievous principles, had operated quite otherwise ; that they
had stimulated industry—increased the demand for employ-
ment—extended the exports and enlarged the imports of the
country—and had generally improved the - circumstances
of all parties concerned.—(Cheers.)
Lord STANLEY said, that after the speech iust delivered
by the Noble Lord, no one could doubt but that
couldanything
be proved by figures. The Noble Lord had, from his
access to documents and figures, derived information which
proaueednn' effect that he (Lord Stanley) was not surprised
at, and which,-in the absence of the case counsel would have
presented on the other side, had that been permitted, he cer-
tainly did not hope to euual in effect upon their Lordships.
His Hon. Friend had not established his case. He had at-
tempted to prove a ground for this great reduction of duty;
which they were, now called upon to sanction. If his Hon.
Friend had proved anything, it was that the silk trade at the
present moment was in a good condition that the imports and
exports of silk were largely increasing. But if, his Hon. Friend
was going on to prove that the present prosperity 'was- owing to
the great alteration which had taken place in consequence of
the principle -of free trade, he was wrong. • Admitting, how •
ever, the fact of our being so prosperous, and that this
enormous importation was now taking place, his Honourable
Friend went. en to say that they should interfere with all
this, and reduce the duties on the manufactured article, trust-
log that he would not injure the producers of this country by
competition. First of all, he differed from his Noble
Friend as to the facts he had stated. He differed from the
facts he had adduced with regard to the prosperity of the silk
trade in 1824, and he differed from him, more especially as to
any facts he had proved, for he had proved nothing. The
effect of which he had spoken was not produced by the dimi-
nution of the duty on the raw article, for if they took off the
duty on the raw article they would see afterwards that a con-
siderable increase had taken place in the consumption of that
article. He was not surprised that, after the year 1824, a con-
siderable increase had taken place in the consumption of the
raw material in tbiscountly, but the increawe did not take

place at the time, or in the manner, or to the extent, to which
his Noble Friend had alluded in his speech. His Noble Friend
was extremely ingenious in the statement which he had made
to the House; and, by any one who did not look
at the facts before them, he was quite sure that
his Noble Friend's statement would have been accepted as
conclusive. He would not trouble the House with figures, but
if they looked at the immense improvement which had taken
place in the decennial period before the year 1823, they would
find that the average importation amounted to 1,520,000 lbs.
weight, and in the tingle year 1844 they imported 4,021,000
lbs. It sounded very well from his Noble Friend, whom he
hoped to have seen there to hear his expression. Ho would not
go to decennial periods, but to more conclusive arguments.
By the progress made by the silk trade, both before the altera-
tion was made in the law aid afterwards, he thought that he
.could induce them to adMit that the free-trade measure had
not been of any benefit. He would take the amount of silk
imported in the ten years before the year 1823, and compare it
with the consumption which had taken place up to the year
1844. The average in the three years 1815, 1816, 1817—he
evoke with regard to the raw material—was 1,388,0001b5.
'he average in the years 1818, 1819, 1820, was 1,841,0001b5.,
and the average in 1821, 1822, 1823, was 2,325,0001b5. In
1824 was prodisced 3,884,0001151 Now, before the principle of
free trade Came into opyration, the increase from the year 1815
to 1824 (a Becennial --Period -which his Noble Friend found it
convenient to take) was from 1,000,3:481bs. to 3,884,0001b5. on
the raw material alone. The duty was reduced in March,
.1824, and in 1824 the importation amounted to 3,884,0001b5.
The increlke in. the three triennial periods, from 1815 to 1823,
;:was an, increase of one million on the raw material. Now let
them go to a period beyond that, and ascertain the imports of
raw silk. In ' the year 1822, the raw material
amounted to 3,880,0001b5., showins, as he- had said,
an increase of a million. His noble Friend did not
like par tentage, and the absence of it would make
his case the stronger, for he could roundly state that there had
only been an increase of one million in six years. In the year
1824, there was introduced into the country 3,800,000 lbs.,
and in the year 1844 were introduced 4,400,000 lbs.--( Hear,
hear.) The • increase went on at a much greater rate before
the introduction of Mr. Huskisson's measure then it did now,
for while the increase before its introduction 19;13 1,000,000 lbs.
in six years, the increase since it -had passed-was-only
800,000 lbs. in the last twenty years. The duty was
taken off the raw material in 1824, and the
duty was afterwards taken 'off the finished —Material.
The Bengal and waste silks were mixed up in equal quantities,
and were made up in articles of the value of of 7a. 6d. per lb.
Bengal silk cost 20s. per lb., and Italian silk cost 475. per lb.
He mentioned that it was not a matter of indifference whether
the increase bad been in the best sorts of silk or in the knobs
and husks. The export trade in silk was not an increasing
trade, for in the year-
-1826 the exports were £290,000
183 F 691,000
- 1846 -
But it might be said, take the case of a single year. He
would do so. In the year—

1840 the exports were £792,000
1839
1838 760,000
1836 ... 917,000
1835 973,000
Of the quantity of goods sent to France, a great quantity was
formed of these knubs and wastes. From the year 1844 to the
year 1845, 159,0001b5. had been exported ;of these, 93,000 re- '
presented 245,0001b5. twist and yarn made up of knubs and
busks ; and the value of these articles was only 7s. per pound.
He was satisfied that the greater part of the exports to France
was made from this Bengal silk, mixed up with these knobs
and husks. He followed his Noble Friend through the exports
and imports of these articles. His Noble Friend had
stated a reason for the stagnation of the silk trade
from a paper which he held in his hand (Durant's Circular).
On the Ist of January, 1846, the stock on hand was 15,715
bales, while in most previous ye ars it had not amounted to more
than 12,000 to 13,000.—(Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend had
not upon that occasion ventured to put forward the question
of smuggling. He had not urged upon them the necessity of
preventing smuggling ; but upon a former occasion he did state
that it appeared from the return of the French Custom-houses
there was a larger amount of goods shipped for England than
paid duty here. Now, he (Lord Stanley) did not deny there ,
was a,great deal of smuggling carried on bete eon this country
and France, but he believed that of all articles, there was less
smuggling by way of running goods in silk than any other
article.—( Hear, hear.) And what smuggling did take place
in that article was carried on through the connivance of their
own Custom-house officers. He held in his hand a return of
the number of persons convicted for smuggling. The total num-
ber convicted was 755, and of that number 511 were for smug-
gling tobacco, 171 for smuggling spirits, 11 for smuggling tea,
and only ten persons for smuggling silk.—(Hear, bear.) Since
the last time they debated this subject, he had looked into Mr.
Deacon Hume's evidence of 1835, and he found that gentle-
man recommended 30 per cent. as the maximum duty for
protection to the silk trade, and 25 per cent. as an increase
duty to guard against smuggling. Therefore, he said that, as
far as smuggling was concerned, there was no case made out
for the further reduction in the duty. It had been represented
tc him that the proposed duty, instead of being as it was repre-
sented a duty of fifteen per cent., would be a duty
of seven per cent. on some goods, eight per cent. on
others, and nine per cent. on others. This arose from the
duty being levied according to the weight, and not upon the
value of the goon's. Now, he could see no reason for departing
from the old and usual mode of classifying silks; and to show
what result the change had produced, he might mention, that
twenty-four pieces of figured silks had passed through the
custom-house that morning, which, under the old classification
would have produced 25/. 10s. at a duty of ten per cent.,
while, under the present system of levying the duty according
to weight, they had only paid 12/. 10s. It was proposed to levy.
the duty on ribbons in the same manner, but on a representation
of its injustice and impolicy being made to the Board of Trade
by the Hon. Mr. Ellice, and, the ribbon manufactories of
Coventry, the old classification was adopted; and be could not
see why the same should not he done with regard to silk.—
(Hear, hear.) He was not eonipetent to enter into these
details, or to explain the minutia of the silk trade, but it
must be plain to their Lordships, and to every man of common
sense, that there would be a manifest injustice committed in
proportion to the application of these duties on articles vary-
ing in amount from 501. to 1001. per cent., or charged with
more duty ; and when, for the first time, this reduction tool:
place, notwithstanding the principles which their Lordships
had always hitherto recognised.--( Hear, hear.) Well,
now,ingh
thefte Lordships had n o
thatt ie
his
means,
Noble undo,
Fieunbdt,e d,4lyh onf s
da
ot
bfyt-,
supposed that has address was a most triumphant one,
was mistaken in his statements as to the silk trade of this
this country, but his arguments with reference to the wages
and employment of people concerned in that trade were erro-
neous. This he (Lord Stanley) knew, that from 1826 to 1832,
there was, as appeared by the evidence of Mr. Groat, who
was examined before .a Committee of the House of Commons
in 1832, a large and progressive decrease in the number of
spindles and people employed in the silk trade—there was
a large increase in the number of mills standing still. He (Lord
Stanley) had not the documents to refer to, but the accounts
which he bad received from private individuals was very much
at variance with the statements made by his Noble Friend who
had lately addressed them. Now he would beg their Lordships
to recollect that there was one article in the silk trade in which
there had been an important falling off in the wages of the la-
bourers engaged in that trade, and that one article was the
article of figured velvets, upon which the highest protecting
duty to this day was 1/. 7s. 6d., he believed, but by this mea-
sure the Government proposed to reduce the amount to 9s.
per lb.—( Hear, hear.) They were going to reduce that duty
which, according to Mr. Deacon Hume, was only 30/. per cent.
in the year 1824. The effect of their present proposal would
be to reduce it two-thirds. Notwithstanding the statements
of his Noble Friend, as to the prosperous state of the silk trade,
he (Lord Stanley) had learned that not only in Spitalfields, but
in Macclesfield, and iu other parts of the country, the silk trade
was in a declining state.—( Hear, hear.) He could only state
the evidence of private individuals on this subject, but
the Noble Lord had only offered them similar evi-
dence in support of this measure.—( Hear, hear.)
He should certainly be surprised to hear his Noble Friend say
that therehad not been a decrease in the manufacture of plain
silks, and the wages of the people employed in the manufacture
of them. The wages he had lately heard, had decreased in
London from Is. 4d. and Is. 2d., to Is. per day. He bad
been assured by the most eminent sick-merchants, that their
trade was gradually declining since the introduction
of what were called the principles of free-trade.
—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord concluded by saying
that this measure was, in his opinion, not called for by policy
or wisdom, nor justified by the arguments which had been
adduced by his Noble Friend, and he would only add, as
a very inferior, but not altogether unimportant consideration,
that the effect of this measure would be still to reduce the
revenue derived from our imports, by reducing the duty one
half of what it was at the present moment, and by which we
realised about 332,0001.—(Cheers. )
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—

50

t
For the amendMent
Against it
Majority h
The item wa joernity
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The,House then resumed, and the Bill was reported with
out amendments. .
It was then agreed, on the motion of the Duke of WEL-
LINGTON, that the Bill should be read a third time on
Thursday next.
Their Lordships then adjourned, at a Quarter past Twelve.

[AovEarisEmna.]—The Atrapilatory, or Liquid
Hair Dye, the only dye that really answers for all colours; enc.
does not require re-doing, but as the hair grows, as it neves
fades or acquires that unnatural red or purple tint common tc
all other dies. Ross and Sons can, with the greatest confidence,
recommend the above dye as infallible, if done at their esta-
blishment ; and ladies or gentlemen requiring it are re-
quested to bring a friend or servant with them to see hew it is
used, which will enable them to do it afterwards without the
chance of failure. Several private apartments devoted en-
tirely to the above purpose, and some of their establishment,
having used it, the effect produced can be at once seen. They
think it necessary to add, that by attending strictly to the in
structions given with each bottle of dye, numerous persons have
succeeded equally well without coming to them. Address
Ross and Sons, 1 l 9 and 120, Bishopsgate-street,London, the ce.
lebrated Perruquiers, Perfuiners, Hair-cutters, and Hair dyers.
A most important addition and improvement to Ross and
Sons' Liquid Hair Dye. Ross and Sons most respectfully in.
form the public that they have succeeded in producing a Po-
made, that after the hair has once been thoroughly dyed by
their Atrapilatory, will_keep it in the most beautiful order, and
prevent it again showing grey, with no more trouble than ar..
plying any other sort of grease to it. This most astonishing
invention is only to be had of them, as above.
(ADVERTISEMENT.]—AN AUTHENTICATED CURE OF
A FEARFUL CASE OF PILES BY HOLLOWAY'S PILLS AND OINTMENT.—
John 'Thompson, Esq., the very respectable editor and proprietor of
the "Armagh Guardian," an Irish newspaper, vouches .as to the
fact of. an extraordinary cure of a case of piles of the most dis"
tressihgnature; -and of some years' standing, which was effected by
these medic:hies-when every other means had failed
alluded to gentleman of large estate, and great influence Perin "thne
county of Armagh. No one need suffer longfistula, and
piles,
what is termed'" a tearing down," if they have recourse to these
far-famed remedies.—Sold by most of the respectable chemist
throuefiont the civilised world, and at P
Esta-
blishment, 244, Strand, London. Professor
Holloway's Esta-
[ADVERTISEMENT.] —The artificial aid aftbrded to
the sight by ,Lenses is one of the most valuable gifts derived from
science, and it is indeed of vital importance that the adoption of
Spectacles to imperfect vision should be regulated on proper prin-
ciples... Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, °Adana, 39, Albemarle-street,
Piecaailly, having devoted their whole lives to this branch of science,
and their long extensive practice, have enabled them to invent Spec-
tacle Leases upon anew construction, which have gained universal
approbation. . Immediately trey are placed before imperfect vision
that mist and dulness which appear before the eyes is at once re-
moved, every object becomes clear and distinct, eo that the most
aged, defective sight becomes bright and brilliant, and is brought to
its youthful natural and original state. Also, the most powerful
Achromatic Telescopes, Opera Glasses, Microscopes, Invisible and
all kinds of Acoustic Instruments for relief of extreme Deafness.
Caution.—M easrs. S. and B. Solomons, Optician', are not in any way
connected with a person of the same name in the immediate neigh-
bourhood. To prevent mistakes, be cautions and observe, onl,-to
be had at 59, Albemarle-street, rieeadin3 , opposite the York Hotel.
COLLISIONS AT SEA.—It appears from an official
document just presented to Parliament, that there wetrheelast year 454
to
collisions of vessels at sea, and in the present year, 12th of May
last, the number was 150.
THE BAKERS AND THE Conx-LAWS.—The bakers
of bread have run their stocks of flour so fine that it was difficult to
obtain bread in some of the villages in this county at the beginning
of last week. Even in Liverpool some of them are so completely out
of stock as to require that the flour bought by them shall be seat Dime
I Ito sawa aftvrnoon for tuunediate um-44mM Tint'.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
(From the Votes and Proceedings of the Rouse-of Cantozanit.)
TUESDAY, JUNE 23.
The following Railway Bill was withdrawn:— , •
Manchester and Leeds and Leeds and Bradford Railways Amai•
gamation.