The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-24 00:00:00

THE SUN,

LONDO

FRIDAY EVEN INTG MAY 24,

,

was absolutely frightful to read of. The sea was strewed
with the bodies of these poor people for miles; and then,
when this butchery had been performed, and these help-
less creatures destroyed—for they had not bows and
arrows, nothing but a sort of blow-pipe with which to
defend themselves—clown came her Majesty's Govern-
ment to this Christian assembly, and asked for 201.
a head for slaughtering them! He asked what was the
ground upon which they had committed this massacre?
What proof did they possess that these people had in
any way molested our commerce? He had looked
through the papers connected with th• affair, and he
had said that these people had been murdered without a
tittle of evidence that they had ever molested us—with-
out evidence that would have convicted a man in this
country of petty larceny. But the largest sum was for
payment of head•money for the destruction of pirates
upon the coast of China. But where was the proof that
they were pirates?
Col. SI Bnio RP—They were Free-tralers.—(" Hear,
hear," from Col. Chattarton.)
Mr. COBDEN—What was the fact? Somebody sent
word to Hong-Kong that a piratical fleet was on the
coast of China, and a steamer was then dispatched,
which fired upon them from a distance at which they
were powerless. These people too were said to be
pirates, but we had no proof of their having molested
one of our vessels on its way to Hong-Kong, Shanghai,
or any other Chinese port. He objected to the people
of England being taxed for any such purpose. He
thought we had no right whatever to go about offering
to be executioners for other nations. He (Mr.Cobden)
doubted the legality of the claim, because the orders of
the Admiralty were to the effect that English vessels
should not molest native vessels, unless English ships or
English commerce was attacked.
Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND was not able to say
why the Government repealed the statute; but when
the Honourable Member asked for proof of these Bornean
pirates being really such it was enough to say, let him
look for any record of voyages or travels, printed or i❑
manuscript, that called them anything else.—(Hear.)
Yet now we are to be told they were only innocent
Free-traders.—(" Hear," and a laugh.) They dealt
in men and women, to be sure—(Hear)—and their
last act of trade, before they were attacked by Sir J.
Brooke, was that they seized upon a body of persons who
were really trading, and put them all to death. It was
true they carried on war among themselves; the tribes
upon the coast were of a different nation and religion from
those in the interior, who were able to trade, but these
pirates would not let them.—(Hear, hear.) What was
the proof of their being pirates? The judgment of every
competent court; and the House of Commons was not
fitted to set aside the judgment of the courts in Singa-
pore and elsewhere.—(Hear.) Because Sir J. Brooke
was carrying on most successfully and meritoriously a
most thriving colony, which a certain person wanted to
turn into a matter for his own aggrandisement, taking
shares and making Sir J. Brooke a joint jobber with
him, that man had been an anonymous slanderer of Sir
J. Brooke for the last three years —(Hear, hear) —and
that was the truth of the matter.—(Hear, hear.) As to
our having no right to attack persons unless they were
pirates against our commerce, why then did we send
Lord Exmouth out some years ago against pirates who
never touched any person sailing under an English flag?
—(Hear.) He (Mr. Drummond) hoped there would be
an opportunity hereafter, as was promised, of going into
the matter fully, when Sir J. Brooke's salary should be
before the House.
Mr. COBDEN said the lion. Gentleman showed much
more ignorance of geography than ho did in reference to
the Saribas and Sakaran tribes. Sir J. Brooke, the
Hon Gentleman said, was carrying on a prosperous co-
lony; but if the Hon. Gentleman meant Labuan, he
would find that Sir James Brooke resided at Sarawak,
his own territory, 300 miles distant, for eleven months
in the year, for which he received, as Governor of that
colony, 2,0001., a year, and as Consul, 5001. a year. He
(Mr. Cobden) had never seen Sir J. Brooks., and had no
personal feeling, therefore, on the subject; but he op-
posed the grant on public grounds, because he did not
wish the people of this country to be burdened for such
a matter.
Mr. PLOWDEN had lived in China for several years;
but if the Ladrones of the present day were equal to
those of 1809, they committed the greatest°atrocities.
The Honourable Gentleman was therefore quite
wrong in supposing these pirates innocent traders.
He (Mr. Plowden) could bear witness to the atrocities
of the Chinese pirates, and to their daring also, as
he was on board the Daedalus, as an amateur, when
they had possession of the upper part of the Canton
river. Another instance that happened the same year
referred to one of her Majesty's vessels, a sloop of war,
commanded by Captain Wells, which was attacked by a
fleet or 40 piratical junks, who, however, received a ter-
rible thrashing.—(Laughter.) The chief of the pirates
in those days, as the Hon. Member says has taken place
in these, was created a naval officer, with high rank in
the Chinese fleet. Up to that period the pirates had
possession of the inner passage of the Canton river,
where they seized the boats and crews of Indiamon, and
subjected them to the most atrocious punishments.
The Malays on the coast of Borneo were equally bad; in
proof of which he needed only refer to the wreck of the
Alceste, during the embassy of Lord Amhurst; and to
the conduct of the crew of a prahu, on board of the Sa.
marang, ship of war; all of whom were hung up at the
yardarms of the ship, or had round shot tied to their
legs, and were flung overboard.—(Laughter and cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT deprecated the indulgence of merriment
and exultation at such a narration. He argued that the
cause must be very bad when the facts referred to in its
support were dated so far back as 1810.
Mr. PLOWDEN said 1816.
Mr. BRIGHT had never heard of a vote introduced
by a statement so bald and unsatisfactory. The question
was whether the evidence in this case was sufficient to
satisfy courts of justice? If so, why was it not laid be-
fore the House? He hoped, therefore, that his Hon.
Friend would move the postponement of the vote until
sufficient explanations were given. The proceedings
under Sir J. Brooke, and on the coast of China, horrified
the public; it was, therefore, absolutely requisite that
inquiry should be made into them. The Legislature
professed to bo very Christian, and yet it was now pro-
posed to grant 100,0001. to reward indiscriminate
slaughter, without any proven cause.

mined before Committees of this House, to show that
this sum was not one-fourth of the expense to which the
country had been put by those Commissions. According
to the return which he held in his hand, and which was
printed in the vacation of 1848, this statement was
fully corroborated. Let them take, for example, one
commission, which was the tidal harbour commission.
The expense of that commission, as it appeared by the
return, was 1,7791., but he found by the report of the
committee upon miscellaneous expenses, that for print-
ing alone, during the limited period of three years, the
sum was 5,117/. When they found this to be the case,
what value could they place upon the statements eon-
Wined in returns of this kind ? Another commission
was issued in 1845, called " the Metropolitan Railway
Termini Commission." The return set down the ex
pease of that commission at the modest sum of ,502/.
But the report of the committee on miscellaneous ex-
penditure stated that the printing of this commission for
two yearn amounted to 2,857/. There was a gross de-
gree of carelessness evinced by these returns, which should
not be passed over without the marked notice of the
House. The result of the whole of this report showed that
the country had been put to an expense above 2,000,000/.
by these commissions of inquiry. One of the witnesses
examined, a gentleman of great experience on the
subject, stated that those 91 commissions of inquiry.
since 1830, were one great cause of the immense increase
of the expenses for printing, and he added this remark-
able statement, that the sanitary commission was likely
to entail an expense upon the country for printing of
about 60,000/.
Colonel SIBTHORP said he had taken a great deal of
trouble to procure accurate information upon the subject
by moving for certain returns with very little effect. H,
concurred with the Hon. and Learned Member in think-
ing that there were great inaccuracies in these returns
which had been laid before them. Indeed, nothing could
be more inaccurate, unfair, and unsatisfactory, than the
returns of the expenses of the commissions since 1830.
Sir F. BARING apologised for the absence of his Hon.
Friends connected with the Treasury, who were not
aware that this subject would be brought under the con-
sideration of the House at so early an hour of the night.
He apprehended that the gravamen of the offence was
not being included in those
th
e returns. expense
of
printing
Mr. STUART—Yes ; stationery and clerks also.
Sir F. BARING was afraid, in the absence of his
Hon. Friends, he would not be able to go into details. He
should have understood, by the order of the House, that
the expense of printing was not to be included. There
was no separate account kept for stationery; there was
a general estimate for printing and stationery. He was,
however, informed that regulations had been recently
issued by the Treasury, in conjunction with the Home
Department, by which it was intended to include in such
returns the expenses of printing. If the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would direct attention to the subject
when the officers connected with the Treasury were
present, he would no doubt receive every satisfaction on
the subject.
SUPPLY.—NAVAL ESTIMATES.
The House then went into Committee of supply; Mr.
BERNAL in the chair.
Sir F. BARING said that the supplemental expenses
under different heads, now put into the hands of the
chairman, included the original estimates as well as the
supplemental. The first vote proposed was 883,999/.
for the deficiency in naval stores, for building machinery
in steamers, and fur the building of vessels placed under
the command of Captain Austin.
Mr. COBDEN regretted the absence of the Hon.
Member for Montrose on the present occasion, as he
knew that that Hon. Member had prepared a statement
in reference to these stores, and had given notice of an
amendment to this vote. He complained of the custom
adopted by the Government of proposing the heaviest
votes on the first day the House met after the holidays.
This was an inconvenient course, and ought to be put a
stop to. The practice of the Committees above stairs
was altogether different, for, considering it unlikely that
lion. Members would be back so soon after the holidays
they adjourned until Monday next. This was also the
case in respect to the Easter holidays. He hoped that
the Government would not persevere in thin course.
Sir G. PECHELL asked whether this was a supple-
mentary vote, or whether they were proceeding from
where they had left off ?
Mr. BERNAL said that the vote was taken from
where they had left off.
Sir G. PEC HELL said he was satisfied that not one-
half of the vessels now in ordinary would over be of the
s
slightest use to them, and he would recommend that the
class should be put up to auction and sold. In
many cases the building of vessels was considerably less
than in the public yards ; for instance, the Water
Witch, one of the most effective ships on the coast of
Africa. was purchased at the rate of 12/. a ton, when the
other vessels of the same class were built at an expense
of 20/. a ton. He complained of the enormous expendi-
ture of coals in the navy steamers. He was told that by
a due economy there might be a saving of 201. a day in
each port.
Sir F. BARING remarked that Members could not
complain of being taken by surprise, when the Govern-
ment determined upon proceeding with the estimates
that night. There was a large attendance of Members
at five o'clock. When the Honourable and Gallant Offi-
cer complained of the expenditure of its stores, he should
have mentioned that there had been a reduction in

that item this year of 390,000/., and upon coals the re-
duction had been 54,0001. As to the Water Witch it
bad been purchased at second hand, which was a very
different thing from the cost of a vessel as originally
built.

Sir G. PECHELL explained. He gave credit to the
Government for having made large reductions.
Mr. FITZROY asked upon what ground the reduc-
tion in the expenditure of coals had been made ?
Sir F. BARING replied that it bad been made by the
diminution in the expenditure, and the reduction in the
price of coals.
Mr. DISRAELI did not agree in the recommendation
of the Hon. Member for the West Riding that Ministers
should not proceed with important business the first day
after the holidays. He would not recommend that the
motion of which notice had been given should be post-
poned, because there was a possibility of its being car-
ried ; whereas it would not be so if the Financial Refor-
mers were present.—(Laughter.)
Lord J. MANNERS hoped the motion would be pro-
ceeded with, as they would thereby be spared another
night.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote was 339,8391. for the improvement and
repair of naval establishments.
Sir W. MOLES WORTH proposed to stop the works
at Keyhara and at Brill Point, and therefore moved to
reduce the vote by 140,000/.
Sir F. BARING did not consider it necessary to enter
into a detail of the works at Keyham. The Committee
had recommended that they should be proceeded with
gradually, and in conformity with the engagements which
the Government had formed. He thought' it would be
very unwise in the Government to abandon works that
had cost half-a-million, and which, in ease of war, would
be very useful.
Mr. PETO did not think that the Government ought
to stop the works in hand. They ought to expend the
money, and stop there.
Mr. COBDEN said the basins were only intended
to bo joined to the factories for the purpose of re-
pairing boilers, and putting in machinery; but no
private builder found it necessary to have such a
basin, and he could not see what necessity the state
had for such magnificent establishments. In voting
this 120,0001., they were only advancing a step to-
wards the completion of the establishment. The opinion
of the Committee, who had reported on the subject, was
that if those works wore for the first time now proposed,
it would never advise the House to sanction them. But
when those basins wore finished there would be required
not less than 80,000/. fur wages for artificers, and, in
addition, 30 per cent. or 40 per cent. for incidental
charges. The question then was, whether they would
stop where they were, or whether they would make up
their mind to incur an expenditure in wages and charges
of 100,000/. or 120,0001. With all the basins and fac-
tories which they had at present they would be able to
repair engines and boilers of vessels to an extent of
200,000 tons.
Sir F. T. BARING said there svas not one farthing
taken in the vote either for factories or machinery, but
only to complete the basin. Nothing would be done in
that respect without coming to Parliament.
Admiral BO WLES regretted to find Hon. Gentlemen
opposite oppose a proposition which was of such vital
importance to the state.
me, MACGREGOR supported the vote.
Mr. BRIGHT did not sea the necessity that there was
for the proposed establishment. Private builders did not
require anything of the kind. Mr. CORRY contended that those establishments were
absolutely necessary to the safety of the country.
Mr. COBDEN repeated that it would be more
economical to have the machinery made by private con-
tractors.
After a desultory conversation,
Sir W. MOLESWORTH, upon the assurance which
bad been given by Sir F. Baring, consented to withdraw
his amendment, and the vote was then agreed te—as was
also the next vote of 27,680/. for medicines and medical
stores.
On the vote of 175.698/. for miscellaneous services,
Mr. COBDEN said that of this vote he perceived that
100,0001. was for the destruction of ships of war and
piratical vessels. He should be glad if the Right Hon.
Gentleman could inform the Committee of the details of
that sum.
Sir F. T. BARING was understood to say, in
reply,
ca that it was for head money for pirates ptured and
destroyed on the coasts of Borneo end China.
Lord D. STUART expressed his astonishment at the
increase which had taken place in this vote—the amount
last year being only 20,000/. He doubted much if a
single "ship of war" had been captured or destroyed.
Sir F. T. BARING said that the whole of the trans-
actions had appeared in the newspapers, and he did not
therefore deem it necessary to detail that which all were
probably acquainted with. If the Committee wished to
have the names of the vessels to which the prize money
would attach he was quite prepared to read them.
Mr. COBDEN wanted to hear something about the
pirates themselves, for he doubted if they
were pirates,
or if the transactions were legal, The very fact of
almost the first measure of the Government this
session being a Bill to abolish those Acts
which entitled parties to head money in certain
cases for the capture of pirates, was a proof to him
that the law never applied to such cases at all, He
should like to know if the predatory tribes of Bsrneo
had attacked or molested any English ship. Although
they were going to pay for the destruction of 500 of these
savages, it appeared that not one Englishman had re-
ceived a wound, or even a scratch in the encounter. The
fact was that the savages, whilst returning to their own
rivers, were intercepted by our ships of war. No sum-
mons was given to them to surrender—no inquiry was
made where they had come from or whither they were
going, but they were fired upon, and our steam-boats ran
tbeni dm with their paddle-vrheelo it 3 G Ulmer that

Sir F. T. BARISId deprecated the speeohes of the
Hon. Gentleman in stigmatising honourable and gallant
officers without a just cause. The Act of Parliament
required the decision of a court of justice on every single
case, to the effect that the party upplied against was a
pirate. That was a better tribunal than the House to
decide smith a question.—(Hear.) Taking the Borneo
case, it appeared that Sir C. Rawlinson insisted up )11
minute inquiries upon the first application, and finally
decided that the parties were pirates upon the
fullest evidence only. The Right Hon. Gentleman pro-
ceeded to read extracts from this evidence in support of
his proposition that the Saribas who had been destroyed
were pirates. Besides the high legal opinion of Sir C.
Rawlinson, he had also the opinion of the residents of Sin-
gapore as to these parties being pirates. Whatever
might have beet the slanders heaped on the British
sailor, they were never before charged with inhumanity.
(Hoar.) If the Hon. Member went to a division he
would do so with every authority of weight against him.
Colonel SIBTHORP should support her Majesty's
Ministers upon this vote.—(A laugh.) The speech of
the Hon. Member for Newport (Mr. Plowden) bad not
satisfied the llon. Member for the West Riding (Mr.
Cobden), nor did he suppose it would satisfy his " Man
Friday," the Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright.)—
( \Lich ltu'hter, and cries of " Oh, ols," and" Order.)—
It, was high time that a stop should be put to this out-
of-doors kind of humanity which was put forth upon the
hustings. He should cordially support the vote.
Mr. COBDEN —The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Baring) had spoken as if some one had attacked the
army and navy. Now, if any one had passed a satirical
reelection upon the service it was the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman himself, who had brought in a Bill to abolish
lastad-money.—(Hear.) What he (Mr. Cobden) blamed
the service for was, not that they had done this, but that
they had done it without orders; and what he asked
him was, whether he was correct in saying that the ad-
miral on the station had issued the order h. had cited,
and that this order had been confirmed by the Govern-
ment at home, namely, that oar ships of war were not to
attack the natives under the plea that they were pirates
unless they had attacked British vessels?

Sir F. BARING said, the ships were sent specifically
for the purpose of this expedition by Sir F. Collier, the
admiral on the station. The orders under which they
acted were to be exceedingly careful as to the parties
whom they attacked, but his (Sir F. Baring's) im-
pression was that the lion. Member had misunderstood
the order.

Mr. COBDEN.—Then that .was another reason why
the Committee should defer 'the vote. The address to
Sir J. Brooke to which the Right Hon. Gentleman re-
ferred was signed by a very small minority of the Eu-
ropean population of Singapore, which consisted of lee
persons. There had not bean one single proof that the
pirates had ever attacked English vessels.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the payment
was ordered by Act of Parliament. There was no, means
of escaping from the obligation of paying the head-
money so long as the Act of Parliament was unrepealed.
Lord J. MANNERS deprecated the statement of the
Hon. Member for Manchester, that Hon. Gentlemen sit-
ting on that (the Opposition) side of the House were
disposed to cheer every unprincipled and bloody senti-
ment.—(Hear, hoar, and cries of " Oh, oh.")
After a few remarks from Mr. PLOWDEN, in explana-
tion, and Mr. COBDEN,
Mr. MACGREGOR said, it was with great reluct-
ance that he opposed any vote brought forward by the
Government—(Cheers from the Opposition)—but he
could not support the vote now under consideration. He
believed the time would come when Sir J. Brooke would
be:tried in this country for the massacre, and that gen-
tlemen, at the next election, would hear more on this
subject than they would desire.
The O'GORMAN MAHON was surprised that Hon.
Gentlemen on the Ministerial aide of the House should t
be allowed to describe their opponents as the rewarders
of murderers. The House bad a great reputation for
twaddle, which he trusted would not be perpetuatA by
the sanction of such proceedings as had taken place
during the present discussion.
Colonel THOUPSON still remained unconvinced that
any English vessel or subject had been molested by these
pirates. He did not hear any tangible attempt to state
the name of any vessel or individual that had been at-
tacked, and ho could not believe that any such had ever
taken place. He did not think that the Hon. Member
for Newport was entitled to all the inferences that
had been drawn from his statement. It was not an
unusal thing for the captured to turn round upon
their captors in the way he had described, and they
were not entitled, on that account, to accuse them
of blood-thirstiness. He thought the; Honourable
Gentlemen (Mr. Plowden) said that the captain
of a British man-of-war—a Christian man, who
would have felt himself injured if he had been called an
infidel—had ordered his captives to be run up the yard-
arm, and that such as ware wounded he ordered shot to
be tied to Chant VA Clam Odom ormb9srd. A wire a

1850.

shame to this country that in the Rouse of Commons , PARLIAMENTARY DIVIS. IO ...NS.
such transactions should have been stated to have taken !
place and should not have been met with universal repro- ' (From the Pores and ---41°
gs ------
Proceedin of the House of ( :,I,lkrit,:i.
hation.—(Hear, hear,) He cou d detest himself for ever 1
THURSDAY, MAY '23.
having kept company with men who could quietly hear SUPPLY.
of such transactions and still call themselves Christians. (IN Tllrti,Er,drj
jts.,:a.lC,
jinuno.€.l3.llNllTTE E.)
But the public, he trusted, wou!d judge of them, and it Motion made, a' d Question put, " That a sun t not would soon soon be seen whether the opinion of the House or ceeding 175,t398/. be granted to her Majesty, to defray the
that of the public would finally cowry the day. He should Charges of divers Miscellaneous Services which will come in
like to ascertain whether the transactions with China course of payment during the year ending the :31st ,day of
were in accordance with the orders of the commander on March, 1851 ; also, for divers Miscellaneous Serviced con-
that station or not. He knew something of Sir F. Col- onfectead with the Searching Fxpeditions under the command
Tier; he happened to have served under him, and against divided
Penny and Captain Austen." The Committee
pirates too. That warm-hearted British sailor bad given
; Adderley, C, a, MAJORITY—AYES, 145.
out orders contrary to the transactions that took place
Naas, Lord
and it behoved the House to know by whom those orders
. AA
nAltoyei
rty,i Colonel
,ghTt.,
O'Brien, Sir Lulu
were contravened.
O'Connell,plaurte•
Mr. S. HERBERT thought the whole of the motion Armstrong, R, B. FFEESdeII rirtwi ger° Ferrer,
son, sir K. O'Flaherty, Anthony
Oswald, Alexander
was founded on a misapprehension, and saw no reason Baines, M. T. Foley, J. H. Palmer, How:Well
for postponing the vote. The prize money was allotted Baldock,.E. 11. Fordyce, A. D. Parker, John
according. to Act of Parliament and the decision of the „r.Baldwin, Barry Forster, M. Plowden, W. H.
Raring, sir k. T. Fortescue. J. W.
Admiralty Courts, and if Hon. Gentlemen opposite did Raring, Thomas Powlett, Lord W.
Freestun, Colonel Price, Sir R
not by address to the Crown attempt to invalidate the Baring, Francis Gordon, Admiral Bowdon, Colonel
decision of Sir C. Rawlinson, they could not refuse to Ilateson, T. Grace, ,4. D. Ricardo, John L.
Bellew. it. M. Grey, Sir George Rich, Henry
vote the money. Without denying the merits of Sir J. Bennet., P. Grey, Ralph Win Romilly,.Colonel
Brooke, he wished to know whether it was true that he Berkeley, Admiral Grogan. Edward . Romilly, Sir John
was engiged in mercantile speculations at Sarawak? lierkelcy, Henry F. Grosvenor, Lord R. Russell .F. C. H.
Berkeley, C. L. G. Ilallyburton, Lord J. Scholerield, Willis,
Hr. HAWES said all his information was directly
Ss's
eecyyu el inyoe'ur,:r henry
oa redis Seer
Birch, Sir Thomas Harris, Captain
opposed to the report of Sir J. Brooke being engaged Blackstone, W. S. Hastie, Archibald
in mercantile speculations. He believed it was because Bolder°, H. George Hatchell, John
Sir J. Brooke had abstained from entering into mercaa- Bowles. Admiral Hawes, B. Sibthorp, Colonel
tile speculations that he had incurred the enmity of Boyd, John liayter, W. G. Simeon, John
Brand, Thomas Ileathcoat, G. J. Smollett, A.
those with whom he was formerly allied. Brockman, E. D. Herbst, 11. A. Somerville,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had advised Cardwell, E. Herbert, Sidney Spearman, Isis'
Sir J. Brooke, not professionally, to abstain from ap- Carew, W. P. Hobliouse, Sir J. Stanfoid, J. Y.
plying for a criminal information to refute the impute- Carter, John B. Ilobhouse, T. B. Stanley, E.
Cavendish, C. C. Hodges, T. L. Stanley, E. H.
tions against him. Sir J. Brooke was a public servant, Cavendish, GAL Hood, Sir A. Stansfleld, W. R.
and his opinion was that the House of Commons was the Chaplin, W. J. Hope, Henry T. Talbot, C. K.
place in which charges against him should be preferred. Chatterton, Colonel Howard, C. W. Tattered, IL W.Childrs, J. W. Jervis, Sir John Thicknes
After a few words from Mr. HERBERT and Colonel Clive,e henry 11. Jolliffe, Sir W. H. Thornely,s's. Ralph
Thomas
THOMP3ON," Cocks, T. S. Jones, Captain Townley, R. G.
The Committee divided, when there appeared— Collins, W. Lascelles, W. S. Tovrnshend, Capt.
For the vote ...
Corry, H. Lewis, George CI Trail, George
... ... ... 145 Cowper, W. F. Littleton-, E. R. - Trollope, Sir J.
Against it ... ... ... ... 20 Craig, Sir W. G. Lockhart, A. E. Tun:tell, Henry
Majority ... -. -----125 Crowder, R.:13. Lowther, Colonel Verney, Sir H.
The House then resumed, and the Chairman reported Currie' Henry Mackie, John Wellesley, Lord C.
Davie, Sir H. Mahon, O'Gorman • Westhead, J. P.
progress. Dawson, T. V. Manners, Lord J. Willoughby, Sir R.
The Stamp Duties (No. 2) Bill was read a second Drumlaurig, Vis. Matheson, J. - Wilson, James
ime.
Drummond, Henry Matheson, Colonel Wilson, Matthew
'

The Exchequer-bills (8,553,7000 Bill was read a se-
cond time.
On the motion of Sir W. SOMERVILLE, the Mu-
nicipal Corporation (Ireland) Bill was read a second
time.

The House haying resolved itself into Committee
on the

TIMBER DUTIES,
Mr. BROTHERTON moved (at half-past one o'clock)
tkat the Chairman report progress; and
The gallery was cleared for a division, but none took
place.

Duke, Sir J. Maule, Fox
Duncan, George Milner,7W. M.
Dundas, Admiral Milton, Viscount
Dundee, Sir David Mitchell, T. A.
Dunne, Coionel Mostyn, E. M.
Ebringtou, Lord Mundy, William

Weod, 'Sir Charlea

TELLEXI.
Hill, Lord Mum
Howard, Lard E.

Mr. MITCHELL then moved a resolution—" That it
a expedient that a drawback be allowed on wood im-
ported for the purpose of ship-building."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the Chairman do now leave the chair. Nothing to
his opinion was so objectionable as a system of draw-
backs; and a great merit of the policy of the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth was, that it put an end to their.
It was suggested that the measure now proposed should
be confined to vessels surveyed by Lloyd's. Of 10,000
vessels registered there it would apply only to one-third;
and to obtain the boon, parties must come under the
regulations with respect to survey at Lloyd's, involving
much expense and trouble. It was admitted that no
check could be applied to boats, barges, and the smaller
class of vessels not registered at Lloyd's. They were
the fittest objects of the proposed boon, which must
therefore be regarded as of a most partial character. It
they were to recommence the system of drawbacks, he
did not see why it should be limited to timber used in
shipbuilding. He did not see how he could refuse to
extend it to timber used in mines and for railway
sleepers. He did not mean to say, if it could be ho-
nestly done in the way proposed, that the loss to the
revenue from its adoption would be very serious. But
he believed that it would open a door to a large amouet
of fraud against which there was no adequate means of
protection. He admitted that the timber duties were in
a most unsatisfactory state—(Hear, hear)—and he hoped
that Hon. Gentlemen would not imagine from anything
he had said that he was opposed to a revision of them,
although he certainly was not inclined to add to the
confusion by the adoption of the present motion.—(Hear,
hear.) He begged to move that the Chairman do now
leave the chair.
Mr. CARDWELL thought that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had at least entirely justified the ♦ote which a
majority of the House had come to on a former occa-
sion; because the arguments he had used to-night were
as dissimilar as possible from the arguments which were
formerly used on this subject.—(Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon, Gentleman had said that he did not see how
he could resist the extension of the principle to wood
used in mines and in railway sleepers if the present
motion were agreed to. The cases were not at all
analogous. The sole ground upon which the Ho-
nourable Member for Bridport rested his motion
was that, having subjected British shipping to free
competition with foreign shipping, the Legisla-
ture ought to remove the impediments which operated
against that free competition. The shipping of foreign
countries was allowed to come in free of duty, but they
imposed a duty upon the raw material of which those
ships were made. This was an anomaly, and the only
one of the kind which was to be found in our tariff.—
(Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Gentleman said there
were difficulties and impediments in carrying it out.
Why not allow the lion. Member to bring iu a Bill, and
if, after looking at it, he should find that it did not pro-
tect the revenue, and that he could insert no provision
which would enable him to do so. then it would be
time enough to oppose the measure?—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MITCHELL said, that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had to night laid down the rule that he would
permit no fresh drawback on any article, whereas in his
budget speech he had distinctly pledged himself to agree
to a drawback upon timber, provided it could be done
without loss to the revenue.—(near, hear.) He (Mr.
Mitchell) denied that the measure would either open a
door to frauds upon the revenue or exclude the smaller
class of vessels from its benefits.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ex-
plained that what he had said in his budget speech was,
that though he was himself opposed to the system of
drawbacks, yet, after the strong opinion the House had
expressed on this question, he should feel it to be his
duty to reconsider the matter ; but ho did nut say
whether ho would agree to it.—(Hear.)
Mr. WYLD and Mr. J. L, Ricsano briefly supported
the motion.
The Committee then divided on the question that the
Chairman do leave the chair, when there appear ed—
Ayes ... ... ... ... 50
Noes ... 19

Majority ... ... —3l
The House accordingly resumed without proceeding
with the resolution in Committee, and the remaining
Orders of the Day having been disposed of, the House
adjourned at a Quarter past Two o'clock.

MINORITY-NOES, 20.
Brotherton. J. 11`Gregor, John Tenison, E. K.
Greene, John Molesworth, Sir W. ThompsomColonel
Hall, Sir Benjamin Pechell, Sir G. Walinsley, Sir J.
llardcastle, J. A. Pigot, Francis Williams, John
henry, Alexander Robartes, T. J.
ileyworth, Lawrence galwey, Colonel
King, P. J. Smith, J; B.
Luihington, C. Stuart, Lord D.

TELLIES.
Cobden, Richard
Bright, John

WOOD USED IN SHIP BUILDING.
(IN THE COMMITTEE.)
Motion made, and Question proposed, " That it is ex-
pedient that a Drawback should be allowed on the Duties
now payable on all Woud imported for the purpose of Ship
Building :"—Whereupon Motion made, and Question put,
" That the Chairman do leave the Chair." The Committee
divided :

MAJORITY—AYES, 50.
Armstrong, R. B. Fortescue, J. W. Parker, John
Baring, Sir F. T. Freestun, Colonel Price, Sir Robert
Bellew, R. M. Grace, 0. D. Rawdon, Colonel
Berkeley, C. L. Grey, Sir G. RonallY, Colonel
rand, Thomas Grosvenor, Lord R. Romilly, Sir Joke
Cavendish, C. C. Hallyburton, Lord Russell, F. C. H.
Cavendish, G.H. Hatchell, John aomerville, Sir W.
Childers, J. W. Hawes, Benjamin Spearman, H. J.
Cowper, W. F. Hayter, W. G. Stansfield,lW. R.
Craig, Sir W. G. Hodges, T. L. Tenisoa, E. IC.
Dawson, T. Y. Howard, C. W. Townshend, Captain
Davie, Sir H. Jervis, Sir John Tufnell, H.
Dundas, Admiral Lascelles, W. S. Wilson, James
Dundas, Sir David Lewis, G. C. Wood, Sir Charles
Dunne, Colonel M'Cullagh, W.
Ebrington, Viscount Simile, Fox TILLIIII.
Elliot, John E. Mostyn, E. HM, Lord Marcus
Foley, J. H. O'Connell, Maurice Howard, Lord Z.