The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-20 00:00:00

Whigs will be obliged, in self• defence, to bring out popular
measures without any loss of time. They will, per force,
have to commit themselves. On the whole, we are inclined
to suspect that is their best policy under any circumstances.
The Protectionists, however, it appears, will not leave them
a choice. They will have to abide the result.

(From the Chronicle.)
All further speculation as to what the Government will do
with respect to the sugar duties will be set at rest to-night.
Our own opinion was from the first made up, not from any
knowledge of the views of the Cabinet, or rather of those
who were expected to form the Cabinet, but from our know-
ledge of the general principles and declared opinions of the
First Minister, and our confidence that he had neither the
will nor the power to depart from them. Lord John Rus-
sell is too thorough a Reformer to throw away the oppor-
tunity of giving effect to the matured and settled opinions of
the country upon the sugar monopoly. The Noble Lord is
too good a tacticiannot to comprehend throughwhat influence
he has obtained his present position—and by which policy
alone he can retain and strengthen it—to think of hesitating
for one moment as to the course lie should pursue. It is truethat
Lord George Bentinck, Mr. Disraeli, and Mr. Borthwick,
swelled the majority which was the immediate cause of
throwing the Government into his Lordship's hands, but the
great necessity which led to that anomalous division in which
the late Government was defeated, was the fixed opinion of
the country against monopoly, and in favour of free trade.
It was a knowledge of the principles and position of Lord
John Russell which gave us confidence in forming the opi-
nion which we did, even against such positive announcements
to the contrary. Our confidence from the first has been un-
moved, and it remains so still. We have no anxiety as to
the announcement to be made this evening. The settlement
must be substantially the same as corn. If, however, as we
suggested on Monday last, revenue considerations should
make it desirable that the protection, instead of continuing
the whole three years entire, should be cut down year by
year, then it may not be unfair to extend the time from three
to four or five years. Such a plan will not only be more ad-
vantageous for the revenue, but also for the consumer ; the
additional quantity of sugar produced in each year will find
increasing facilities for admission in each year. A perfect
parallel between sugar and corn would ran thus:—
Corn duty. Sugar duty. •
1846 ...... 4s. to 10s. per qr. 14s. and 20s. per cwt.
1847
1848
1849

~
But if in place of retaining the full protection (205.)
for three years, it is gradually cut down year by year, it
would be no greater concession to the West Indians, and
would be a benefit to the revenue. Thus, if one or two
years more were taken, in that case the scale would
stand:—

Parallel of To be reduced Or be reduced
Corn duties. in four years. in five years.
846 ... 145.. and 20s. 14s. and 20s. ...14s. and 20s.

847 ... 14s. „ 205.... 14s. „ 18s. 6d....145. ~ 18s. 9d.
848 ... 14s. „ 20s. ... 14s. „ 17s. ...14s. 175.6 d.
849 ... 14s. „ 14s. ... 14s. „ 15s. Gd.... 145. „ 16s. 3d.
850 l4s. „ 14s. ...14s. „ 15s.
851

14s. „ 14s.
It is clear that by this plan the consumer will gain as much
by the reductions in the first, second, and third year, as he
will lose in the fourth or fifth ; such a settlement, therefore,
may be regarded as substantially the same as that of corn.
There is one branch of the sugar duties question to which no
reference has been made throughout these discussions, though
it is one involving questions of most serious inconvenience to
the trade. We allude to the foolish scale of classification of
duties according to quality, introduced by Mr. Gladstone.
This distinction we have the greatest confidence will be en-
tirely given up, and the old and simple plan of uniform rates
of duty on all qualities restored. The failure of this classi-
fication as a mode of increasing the revenue, and the frauds
and inconvenience to which all parties have been exposed,
have been so palpable, that we feel assured we shall hear no
more of the distinction between " white clayed, or equal
thereto," and " brown clayed, or Muscavado sugar."
(From Douglas Jerrold's Weekly Newspaper.)
The principle of colonial protection, while it secured to the
produce of the mother country the exclusive markets of her
tranamarine possessions, guaranteed a similar privilege to the
colonists in the markets of Britain. This system, based on
the jealousy of trade, established a commercial monopoly,
and it was pushed to the unjust extreme of imposing heavier
duties on the sugars and coffees of Bengal than on those of
the West Indies. The preference formerly given to the
western over the eastern colonies is traceable to the fact of
Parliamentary influence, the proprietors of the West Indian
soil being members of both Houses of the Legislature, and
the extra profits they realised on their estates through pro-
tective duties, formed the valuable consideration for which
they gave their votes to the Minister of the day.
When the various states and kingdoms of South America,
ancient colonies of Spain and Portugal, had asserted their
independence, and Mr. Canning had, as he said, called the
new world into political existence, to rectify the balance of
the old, these countries sought a market for their produce
in Europe, but they were excluded from Britain by what
have been called the " differential duties." Thus when the
duty on West India sugar was 245. per cwt., the duty on lb•
reign sugar was 635. per cwt., and it is obvious that this
difference of 395. per cwt. between the two rates, operated as
a prohibition, and secured a monopoly to the colonial grower.
A short extract from " Porter's Progress of the Nation,"
will suffice to demonstrate the extent of the injustice inflicted
by this system on the consumer in the mother country:--'
"The cost, exclusive of duty, of 3,764,710 cwt. retained
for consumption in 1840, was 9,156,872/, if calculated at the
Gazette average prices. The cost of a like quantity of Brazil
or Havannah sugar of equal quality would have been
4,141,1811., and consequently we have paid 'in one year,
5,015,691/. more than the price which the inhabitants of
other countries in Europe would have paid for an equal quan-
tity of sugar."
Though Mr. Porter considers this an extreme case, yet he
unqualifiedly asserts that " we are made to pay for the sugar
consumed in the United Kingdom, more than we need pay,
by an amount exceeding the value of all the goods which we
manufacture for the West India colonies." Such a state-
ment, from so highly competent an authority, having every
official document at his command, clearly proves that we are
annually sacrificing native industry, through an absurd and
ruinous tariff.

It is calculated that in the rich and middle ranks the an-
nual consumption of sugar by each individual for all purposes
is 401 b., while among the labouring classes it does not exceed
91b. for each individual. Every person serving on board one
of her Majesty's ships is allowed lioz. of sugar a day, which
amounts to 341 b. 3oz. yearly; and the allowance given to
aged paupers in the Union Houses is 1 oz. a day, or
2241 b. in the year. If we take the labouring dames
at four-fifths of the population, we perceive the
gross injustice inflicted on the great body of the
people by depriving them of wholesome food through
excessive taxation, and the extent of the injury suf-
fered by our export trade by limiting the consumption of
sugar. Why should not the honest working man have as
plentiful a supply of sugar as the pauper or the sailor? Why
should the poorer classes be deprived of the means of prS-
serving fruit in abundant seasons? Are they not as descry-
ing of protection as the West India landlords, who divided
among them twenty millions sterling as the price of the re-
demption of their slaves?
In order to resist the abolition of differential duties, colonial
' avarice has formed an alliance with their former opponents_
It appears that the introduction of the sugars of Brazil and
Cuba would encourage slavery. The very men who would
not manumit their negroes till their bodies were ransomed
with gold, now affect to sympathise with the African, and
under the mask of Christian philanthropy seek to sustain
their rents by levying an annual tribute upon the very people
whom they taxed for the emancipation of their former slaves.
We ask these hypocrites if they will consent to pay the dif-
ference between the colonial and foreign duty into the public
treasury, instead of putting it into their own pockets? That
would test the purity of their motives. We ask them further,
why do they not prohibit the admission of slave-grown cot-
ton, for the principle is the same in cotton as in sugar, and
what is just in the southern States of America cannot be un-
just in Cuba or Brazil ? " Silver and gold," said Milner
Gibson—and we hail his appointment to office as one of the
most promising acts of the new Ministry—" are slave pro-
duce;" yet who refuses to pocket them? Will These mono-
polists strain at gnats and swallow camels ! And ?bat will
those of our readers think who may now hear for the first
time that slave-grown sugar is regularly imported into
London, refined, and then exported, the drawback being
allowed, to be consumed in those very West India colonies
whose landowners insist that such sugar is sinful food
for the people of Britain, but a most holy diet for anefe
negroes who cultivate their own estates? By this con-
trivance they sell their own sugar to us for 7d. per lb., and
purchase slave-grown sugar for their own consumptio.n at
4d. per lb. Are we not then justified in having remarked
that colonial avarice has formed an alliance with hypocrisy?
This subject is invested with peculiar interest at the, pre-
sent moment, and will decide the strength of Lord John .Itu,s-
sell's Administration. Whatever the Ministerial measure
may be, it is probable that it will not be submitted to Par-
liament for complete decision, before the following section.
But the people must be vigilant, and the same futile: and
energy which wrung from the reluctant grasp
abolition of
tectionists a free trade in corn, will compe
l
the differential duties on sugar. The
landowners of the the
West Indies must prepare 'for the same competition_r.n. in. %he
markets of the world as the landowners of