The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-25 00:00:00

Total lb 10,770,293

r malt consumed in Irelanil at

2d l'eriod. Barrels of Malt
1796 1,197,033
1797 • 1,3';3,1-17
179.4 1,190,875
1799 1,124.837
1800 B-13,91)

Total 5,620,783

. .
" A decrease of 500,000 barrels in five years.

" The decrease of malt in the last year of the table was
not owing to an increased consumption of spirits ; for I
find, on ref-rring to my note-book, that the corn-spirit
&stilled in Ir land was—

In 1798 gallons 4,783,954
In 1799
In 1800

" It would, 1 fear, be tedious to proceed with statements
so incontrovertible. A sufficient number have been ad-
duced to refute the assertion that Ireland progressed so
much in commerce at the close of the last century. Not-
withst +lading all the factitious aid of bounties moat lavitP ly
supplied, and although a vast number of En,lish tr•,ops
were sent to Ireland during the years 1798, 1799, and
1800, the introduction of which has always been consi-
dered by the Irish as an advantage to the trade of the
country, yet did commercial prosperity decline. It is not
difficult to assign a cause for this event, when we reflect
on the turhu'ence and rel,elion into which the agitators
of the period deluded the people ; and which, although
confined to one province (Leinster), had a serious effect
on the mercantile condition of Ireland. But this is a
subject which trill he devd,ped in another chapter ; I
therefore proceed to inquire, whether the allegation of the
Legislative Union between Great Britain and Ireland
having caused the ruin of the latter island is as little in
unison with truth as the subject now fully explained."—
Times.

We stated some days ago that Lord Palmerston
and Prince Talleyrand, finding Baron Zuylen, the
resident Dutch Ambassador, intractable to their
purposes of a further mystification of the affairs of
Holland by fresh enterprises in diplomacy, had,
after some two or three useless at tempts at conver-
sion, at last wholly given him the go-hy, arid ad-
dressed themselves directly to the Court of his
master, the King of Holland. They have accord-
ingly caused a joint note to be presented by their
diplomatic agents at the Hague, in which they en-
ter largely into the whole subject of the differences
between Holland and Belgium, explaining their rea-
sons for entering again, unbidden, into the field of
protocols; profess the purest and most impartial
views, as respects the opposing interests of the two
parties, and conclude by expressing their great re-
gret that purposes so well intentioned should be
marred by the unreasoning arid unfair obstinacy of
the Dutch King, burdening him with all the con-
sequences, whatever they may be, to_ which such
selfish arid ill-judged conduct may lead. This
document, which is of great importance, as
it is in fact a luminous resume of all that
has been done in Belgian diplomacy since the
capture of Antwerp, will be found at length
in an adjoining column, and is deserving of
air attentive perusal. It is impossible riot to see
that one great and leading object with the concoct-
era of this diplomatic paper is to make show of an
intense anxiety to accommodate matters in the Ne-
therlands, and, by contrast, to cover the King of
Holland, the only dissentient from the cause, of con-
ciliation, with all the reproach of a selfish and un-
principled litigant. They refer repeatedly invidiously
to the number of attempts which they have made
to bring the Dutch Minister to a discussion, the
obstacles they have met with, and, lastly, evenin-
sinuate some jugglery with respect to the powers to
negotiate avowed by M. Van Zuylen at one time
and disclaimed by him at another, which amounts
to an undisguised attack upon the good faith of the
Dutch Councils. It would appear that very soon
after the affair of Antwerp the Ministers of England
and France took occasion to make advances to the
Dutch Minister in London, all diplomatic commu-
nication with Holland during the siege having
been suspended, for a renewal of the negotiations
which had been rather hastily terminated by the
secession of Russia and Prussia from the Confe-
rence. The first proposed embraced the basis of
a general and final treaty, and, in substance, was
but a revival of all the conditions which had
been before offered but rejecied by the Dutch
King. It assumed, as the abstract which we have
already published will show, the reciprocal and im-
mediate evacuation of all places, Forts Lillo and
Leilkenshoek included, which the Dutch or Belgians
held, the free use of the roads so long in dispute, of
the right bank of the Meuse, and unrestricted navi-
gation of the river Scheldt to the latter. As a set-
off fur this reciploc,ty, which was certainly all 011
one side, the Dutch were simply offered a cessation
of the embargo, and a restoration of the shipping
and property up to that time detained. To this
proposal M. Van Zuylen replied that he had no
powers to negotiate upon a basis so extensive, and
that, in short, he was riot instructed to treat, as con-
cerned final arrangements, with any other parties
than the whole of the five great Powers assembled
in Conference. Upon the receipt of this answer,
Lord Palmerston and Prince Talleyrand would ap-
pear to have altogether changed their tactics, and,
coming to M. Van Zuylen, they say " It may be
true that you have no authority to discuss the terms
of a final treaty, but what do you think of a preli-
minary Convention ?" Allons, said he, let us hear.
Arid then they suggest the outline of one, which
proves unpalatable, when they fall back upon
another that, in the result, proved not less so.
The first intended the immediate evacuation of
the occupied places on both sides, but differed
from the general project first proposed, inas-
much as it would postpone the consideration
of a final arrangement to a fitter and indefinite op-
portunity. This was declared inadmissible, as the
Dutch Kng was known to be indisposed to surren-
der his halo upon Lillo and Liefkenshoek until he
saw his way more clearly than he bad yet done.

The second seems to have been thought beyond
objection, for it conceded the retention of the places
in question to Holland, and only asked an armistice
until the preliminaries for a final settlement, and a
disarming, could be arranged on both sides. The
concessions demanded from Holland by this arrange-
ment, were that it should agree to the armistice,
recognise the independence of Belgium, and agree
to the opening of the Meuse and the freedom of the
Scheldt, which were declared to be the sine qua non
of the negotiation►, and, in return, the English and
French Governments again offered to take off the
embargo on the Dutch shipping, and to send back
to Holland the prisoners taken at Antwerp, who
are now detained in France. This, it is almost nee
necessary to sey,was also rejected. .The" e" then
proceeds to express the bitter disappointment which
the subscribers felt at the failure of all (heir friendly
overtures; in the first place, by the coldness of M.
Van Zuylen, but principally by the receipt of a
counter-project, with which the last " preliminary
arrangement was met on the part of Holland ; and
a considerable portion of it is devoted to the task
of disclaiming and disproving the pretensions which
are put forth in that counter-projec•. In this
latter the right of imposing a toll on the Scheldt is
contended for, on the part of the King of Holland,
as irrefragable under the treaty of 1815, but denied
by the Ministers of England and France—first, as
unreasonable, because of the annoyance it would
occasion to ships coming to Antwerp to be over-
hauled at Forts Bath or Flushing ; and, secondly,
as illegal, as not having been chimed for the last
two years, or even in 1814, before the union of
Flanders with Holland took place. The counter-
project next requires that the Belgians shall be
bound to undertake to pay their moiety of the in-
terest of the common debt of Belgium and Hol-
land, the first instalment in July ; to which it is
answered now, that such an obligation is already
hanging over Belgium by the treaty of the 15th
Nov. 1831, but that its fulfilment depends upon a
condition precedent of all other matters being en-
tirely and finally arranged. It would be, therefore,
unfair to call upon the subjects of King Leopold to
recognise this claim until their independence was
unquestionably recognised. The Dutch King, it
would further appear, protested against the required
disband rig of his troops, unlsss simultaneously with
a general European disarmament ; and for this and
other reasons Lord Palmerston and Prince Talley-
rand complain that King William has no sincere
disposition to arrange the pending differences with
Belgium, hut is actuated by an irregular and selfish
ambition, and therefore they put it to the world to
say whether he ought not to be fairly made answer-
able lir all the consequences of his obstinacy which
may occur. We have yet to learn what effect this
last note will produce upon the Court of the lingua;
but there is at present, as far as we can judge from
the papers, no reason to Elea that it will be very
much more successful than arty of the overtures to
M. Van Zuylen, the Ambassador in London.—
Morning Herald.
Ministers have not yet made known their inten-
tions on the question of slavery to the West India
body, but we have learnt from authority that we
cannot doubt that immediate emancipation (!) is
determined on; but there is at present a difference
of opinion in the Cabinet as to whether compensa-
tion shall be given to the extent of twenty
or that sum advanced by way of mortgage, at three
per cent., to enable the planters to pay off the pre-
sent mortgagees. It is -proposed also to give them
the entire monopoly of the English market. An
armed police force is to be sent out, for the double
purpose of protecting life and property, and com-
pelling the freemen to work in the fields. We
cannot believe that another week will elapse with-
out some communication from Government in re-
ference to this momentous affair. The Govern-
ment cannot much longer insult the West India
body by withholding from them that information
which tiny have so freely communicated to others,
and in the meantime we will offer a remark upon the
proposed measure, and first, we would ask, how are
the negroes, in old age and sickness, and bodily and
mental infirmity, to be supported ? There is scarcely
an estate that has not more negroes upon it than
can be profitably employed. In an instance within
our own knowledge there are 1,500 negroes upon
an estate where 500 are amply sufficient to do the
work. The owner of that estate, under the present
system, is bound to maintain them ; but what will
be the case when those freemen are buffetted with
constables' staves ? The extra I,oot must turnout
and get employment where they can, or, in failing
to obtain it, they must s'arve. Where
are the free negroes to be located ? Their
old masters cannot be expected to retain more
upon their estates, than they absolutely re-
quire. But they are to be compelled to work,
whether they can meet with work or not, by the
excitement of the constable's bludgeon and the
tread-mill. The tread-mill in a tropical climate !
The humanity of the Anii-Slavery Society recom-
mended field-stocks, which have produced more real
suffering to the negroes than any other punishment
they could endure, and the tread-mill will be an
excellent accompaniment to them ; but the Minis-
ters are caught wish the pseudo-philanthropy of the
Anti-Slavery Society, and the negroes are to be
reduced to destitution and suffering to gratify the
wishes of wild theorists, whilst the measures of ame-
lioration that have been commenced, mid for some
time in progress, which would produce ultitnate
emancipation without a struggle on the part of the
slaves, or resistance on the part of the planters and
proprietors, are to he discarded as being much too
slow in their operation for the revolutionary spirit
of the age.—Morning Post.