The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-13 00:00:00

CHINA TRADE BILL.

Mr. C. GRANT moved ti e third reading of this Bill.
Sir ROBERT HARRY INGLIS thought, without
some dipl.,tnatic arrangements with the Court of China,
it would be impossible to carry into tffect the provi-
sions of the fur the establishment of agents and
residents in India.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable
Baronet then entered, at some length, into the im-
pi.sibility of establishing a trdde with China, except
through the accredited agents of the East India Com-
pany, and condemned the Government plan of now inter-

.ring with the trade. He thought it %hould have kern
left in the bands of the East India Company till it could
,radually have withdrawn from the trade,.
Mr. WILK'S and Mr. G. F. YOUNG each said a few
words.

Mr. CHARLES GRANT wag rather surprised to bear

the remarks then made on the Bill in its last st ge, when
that and another measure, involving► the same principle,
id already been discussed. He would not then ewer
into arguments to show that the monopoly of the Coins
rade ought not to he done away, though the Hon.
Bironet's argument went to establish that proposition,
out merely observe, that all experience showed tbat ouch
monopoly was not advantageous. He had heard no
',son why the trade snould not be opened to the enter-
irise of all the inhabitants of this country; and 11,•
jesty's Government meant to take, perhaps, the ex-
solve precaution of establishing a consular agent in
to iiroiect the interests of his Majesty's subjects.
:e conceived that the alteration was desirable and ever.

Mr. HUME though: there would be no danger of
cuali-
on between Englies seamen and the Chinese, particularly

if prudent men were appointed to the management of
affairs. He would give his humble support to the Bill.
Lord SANDON asked when the trade with China
would be thrown open?
Mr.C. GRANT—The East India Company was not to
give up it. privileges unil April, 1834; consequently the
trade would not be opened until then.
The B 11 was e'en read a third time.

Mr. G. F. YOUNG moved the following clause :
" And be it enacted that the expenses of the establish-
ments of this Act, authorized to be maintained within the
Sa;d dominions, shall be defrayed in like manner as the tx-
penses of British Consular establishments in other parts
of the world are defrayed, under the authority of an Act
pouted in the 6.h year of the reign of his late Majesty
King George the Fourth, entitled An Act to regulate
V.r payment of salaries and allowances to British Consuls
at foreign ports, and the disbursements at 'Lich ports for
certain puttlic purposes ;' and su..ject in all respects to
t e provisoes and regulations in the said Act made and
provided."
Mr. CHAPMAN supported the clause.
Mr. C. GRANT opposed it on the principle of making
India as well as England contribute to the expenses ci
Consular establishments in Chin
After a few words from Mr. EWART,
Mr. HUME suggested the propriety of trying for a
year or two bow the system proposed by the Act would
work, and hoped that the Hon Member would not per-
sis• in dividing the House on his clause.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG consented nor to divide the House.
The clause was then put and negatived.
In answer to a question from Mr. Husax, Mr, GRANT
stated that the whole amount of the establishment would
cost about 25,000/ a year.
The Bill was then passed.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at two o'clock.

ROUSE OF LORDS, AUCPINT 12.
Mr. BERNAL and others brouvt up the Grind Juries
(Ireland) Bill, Offences against the Pelson (Ireland) Bill,
the Bankruptcy Court Amendment Bill, with amendments,
and the Roman Catholic Marriage Bill.
The Irish Grand Jury Bill was read a first time, and,
on the motion of the Marquis of CLANRICARDE, or-
dered to be read a second time on Thursday next.
On the motion of Lord AUCKLAND. the House went
into Committee upon the several Consolidation Bills in-
troduced relating to the Customs.
The House went into Committee upon the Bill for
reducing the duty on dwelling houses, and repealing part
of the assessed tsx.s.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from
the planters of Jamaica, praying to be heard by Counsel
against the Bill for the aholition of slavery in the West
Indies, and expressed a hope that the Noble Earl would
not object to such a course.
The Earl of RIPON could not believe that the Noble
Duke was serious in the hope he had expressed that he
should not object to Counsel being heard, for the general
principle of the Bill bad already been discussed, and as far
as regarded the details of the Bill, they were still open to
he discussed by the House. It would be a delay for no
advantage at all.
The Duke of WELLINGTON thought it highly
essential that that course should be allowed, to argue upon
the interest of the petitioners.
The Earl of RIPON could see no necessity for post-
poning the second reading of the Bill in order to afford an
opportunity to the petitioners to be heard by Counsel.
The Duke of WELLINGTON thought it was unjust
not to allow the petitioners to be heard at the bar, espe-
cially when the material differences were looked at be-
twen the Bill and the resolutions. If, however, the
Noble Earl thought it right to persist in the second read-
ing of the Bill, without hearing those who were materially
interested, t e must go on with it, and make the best of it

he could.
Lord WYNFORD said that the Bill, in many particu•
Tars, was directly contrary to the r. solutions, and he
therefore thought the petitioners ought to be heard at
the bar.
Lord SUFFIELD thought the request of the petitioners
a most unreasonable one at that late period of the session.
After some observations from Lord ROSSLYN,
The LORD CHANCEi.LOR put tie question that the
petitioners should be heard at the bar, which was negatived
without a division.
Lord SUFFIELD presented 43 petitions, praying for
the total and immediate abolition of slavery; and two,
praying their Lordships to pass the Ball before the House,
as it was better than nothing ;,and on. from Leeds,
which a ated they had vie,. ed with grief and indignation
the introduction of a Bill professedly for the abolition of
slavery, which perpetuated it for a length of time.
E rrl ROSSLYN presented a petition from the Provosts
and Magistrates of Glasgow, against certain parts of the
Scotch Burgh R.-form Bill, and praying that all voters tor
Maeistrates should he burersses. Also one to the same
effect from the Trades' Hous•..in Glasgow.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from Chair', in Somersetshire, complaining of the greet
inconvenience and delay experienced try the petitioners in
the recovery of small debts, and expressing their regret
that the Bill for establishing local courts had been re-
jected by their Lordships. The petitioners prayed that a
long time would not elapse before their Lordships passed a
measure of that kind.
The Earl of HARROWBY presented a petition from
a parish in Yorkshire, praying for some measure to foci
little the removal of vagrants.
THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY BILL.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the order of
the day f..r the second reading of this Bill
Lord BELNIORE asked if it was the intention of the
Noble Alarquis (Lansdowne) to proceed with the Bill,
and without any prep iratory remarks to recommend it?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said the House having
aereed to the resolutions, it did not appear to him to be
neces-ary to enter into a discussion on moving the order
of the day. He should lie reedy to give any explanation
Noble Lords might think nece-sary. The same course had
been adopted on the Etat India Bill.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was customary
that the details of the Bill should be stated in this stage.
Minist re ought to state to the Hous.. the general princi-
ples and details of the Bill. If not, their Lordships must
pioceed to discuss it in the best way they were able.
Earl GREY hoped the Noble Duke ( Wellington) would
not consider that any mark of disrespect was intended by
the Noble Marquis to proposing the second reading of the
Bili without going into a di-sus-ion upon ir.
The Duke of IMI ELLINGTON slid, in one or two in-
stances there had been a complete al eration in the inea.
sure. In the first place, there was the apprenticeship
tor six years and four years. ins e of twelve years, to
commence from June, 1834 Them were then three
description• of apprenticeship in the Bill, instead of one,
and, besides this, there was a total al•etation in tt e law in
iither levee's. These alterations were made in the first
fines of the BM, and yet no staiement wa- to be made try
the Noble Marquis relative to these alterations, and he
thought that this was not treating the House wi h respect.
He (the Duke of Wellington) did not care one pin if the
Noble Lord made a speech or not; the country would
judge between him and the Noble Marquis.
Lord COLVILLE thought that, in so thin a House,
the measure ought not to be proceeded-with.—(Hear.)
He objected to the principle of the Bill in toto.

The Earl of RIPON said as to the alterations referred
to by the Nob', Duk , they were not of that nature to
ieuder it neces•ary that Ministers should have entered into
a discussion upon them. The first was as to the length
of time of the apprenticeship—and it was undoubtedly
true that it had been proposed that the apprenticeship
,i,ould be for twelve years. The proposition was dis-
cussed in the other House of Parliament, and the re-
sult was to make it evident that the term could not
he kept in the Bill, and Ministers had thought it ne
cessary to make the change. Their Lordships ought
nit, however, in consequence of this alteration, to delay
proceeding with the Bill. He would now refer to the
classification of the slaves. They were classed as predial,
non predial, and unattached. The classification was part
of the Bill that had been introduced into the other House,
therefore it did not involve any principle on which
he measure rested.—( Hear, hear.) the amendment
introduced on this subj. ct was only to obtain a more
cot rect mode of dispensing to those individuals the benefits
•niended to be given to them ; so far, therefore, from
conceding to owners of slaves—from b ing any deviation
from the principle of the Bill, it app aced that the amend
ments were neither more nor less than to further tl • prin •
c ple of the plan liovernment had framed, and which was
contained in the resolution that had been adopted. As to
• Operation, lie
:ihtoeutlidmbee"a'hbelen ttohsetaßteditli; into';routontlec(rnewhch the alteration
.vas ma e. By the lust proposal it was provided that in
November, 1833, the powers of punishment should he
aken from the mas er, and that in August, 1834, the ap
irenticeship should commence, so that for 10 months
would I
was e
proposed leftinastatet uncertainty, and to
thatpre-
sentif
the
Power
of the waiver
.nould exist till the period of apprenticeship commenced.
ft was with no hostile fetling
lungs
this w 'oui
to the planter that they
vere desirous to get rid of the intermediate period, and to
ave the authority of the master precisely as it is till
1834. It might be a wise or an unwise plan, hut it did
~tit alter the ptinciple of the Bill. He assured the House
,hat lie had no desire to treat the House with disrespect.