The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-18 00:00:00

ART-UNIONS.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from
the Art-Union of London, praying that the Art-Unions of the
country might be legalised.
IRISH POOR-LAW.

Captain PECH ELL presented a petition from an Unitarian
congregation in Brighton, and from several other Dissenting
congregations of the town, in favour of the Dissente s' Chapels
Bil!.
Mr. PATTISON presented two petitions to the sam-2 effect.
Lord POLLINGTON presented a similar petition.
Mr. HUAIE presented a petition from a Dissenting congre-
gation in Warwickshire, against certain clauses in the Dissen-
ters' Chapels Bill.
Mr. C. BERKELEY presented a petition from Cheltenham,
in favour of the Bill.
Mr. HIN DLEY presented a petition against it.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition from members
of the Established Church at Preston, in favour of the Dis-
senters' Chapels Bill : also a petition from the Roman Catholics
of the same place to the same effect.
Mr. BARNARD presented a petition from the Vauxhall
Bridge Company, against the Lambeth Suspension Bridge Bill.
PULTENEY TOWN HARBOUR BILL.
On the motion of Mr. GREENE, the Pulteney Town
Harbour and Improvement Bill was ordered to be re-com-
mitted to the former Committee.
Mr. ESCOURT brought up the report of the Standing
Orders Committee on the Great Southern and Western Rail-
way (Ireland) Bill.
Alr. WYSE presented a petition from Kilkenny, praying for
the suspension of the Standing Orders in reference to the
Great Southern and Western Railway ( Ireland) Bill.
Petitions in favour of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill were pre-
sented by Mr. Ward from Sheffield, Lord A. Lennox from
Chichester, Mr. V. Smith from Northampton, Mr. Labou-
chore from Taunton' and Mr. C. Wood from Halifax.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented petitions in favour of the
Disenters' Chapels Bill, from the Protestant Dissenters of the
New Meeting-house at Birmingham ; from the Protestant Dis-
senters of the Old Meeting-house ; from the officers and
teachers of the Dissenters' Sunday-school, and of the adult
pupils of the same at the Old Meeting-house ; also one from
the descendants, relatives, and friends of persons who have
been interred in the burial-ground attached to the Old Meet-
ing-house.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a petition from Devon-
shire in favour of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
Lord WO RSLE Y presented several petitions from Lincoln-
shire in favour of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
Mr. RUSHBROOKE presented a petition from Suffolk in
favour of severer punishment for the crime of arson.
Sir J. HANNIER presented two petitions in favour of the
Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
NOTICES OF MOTION.
Mr. HUNIE gave notice that, when the Savings' Banks
Bill should be brought before the House, he should move a
clause, repealing the section of the 9th George IV., cap. 19,
which allowed the Minister of the day to deal with moneys de-
posited in Savings' Banks in the purchase of Government
securities.
Mr. 11. BERKELEY gave notice that, when the Inelosure
, Bill should be in Committee, he would move to expunge
clause B6.
IMPORTATION OF BOOTS AND SHOES.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE then rose, pursuant to
notice, to present a petition respecting the state of the Eden-
derry Workhouse, in Ireland. The prayer of the petition was
Merely for inquiry, in order to prevent a recurrence of such
conduct in future on the part of the Commissioners. This
was a matter of vast import, because the law, as
it now stood, was most unpopular amongst all par-
ties, with the exception, perhaps, of some few amongst the
higher claises. It was perfectly impossible, if they wanted to
m in a n peace in Ireland, that this law could be continued.
In thent wepapers of that day were detailed the circumstances
of an alray caused by the collection of poor.rates, when the
highest amount due was only Is. This measure had been car-
ried completely against the will of the greater number of the
Irish Members, and therefore must have been ill-suited to the
oondit'on of the country.
The Duke of WELLINGTON agreed that this was a sub-
ject of great importance. The report of the Commission ap-
pointe.l to inquire into the subject would be laid upon the
table in a very short time, when their Lordships would have
better information. He was ready to do every thing in his
power to insure the beneficial operation of the poor-law in
Ireland.

• The Earl of POWIS presented petitions against the union
of the sees of St. Asapli and Bangor, and in favour of the
establishment of a bishopr c in Manchester. The Noble Earl
gave notice that he should submit a motion on the subject on
'Tuesday, 11th June.
The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition from certain
persons praying their Lordships to take into their consideration
the state of the common women of the metropolis. The peti-
tioners were the members of certain societies for the recla-
mation of unfortunate women. The petitioners stated that
seduction was carried on to an enormous extent in the metro-
polis, and many thousands of houses had been established
for the purpose of facilitating that vice ; and the petitioners
prayed the House to take some measures for putting a stop to
so horrible a system as that which at present prevailed in the
metropolis for the seduction of innocent young females. The
Itight Rev. Prelate laid on the table of the House a Bill for the
purpose of the more effectual suppression of brothels, and the
suppression of trading in prostitution.
The Bill, after a few words from the Earl of MOUNT-
CASHEL, was read a first time.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE then rose to call the attention of
their Lordships to the present state of the new Houses of Par-
liament. He said it had become necessary to bring the sub-
ject under the consideration of the House, inasmuch as very
extensive alterations had been made by Mr. Barry in the plans
as originally laid down—these alterations having been made
without the concurrence of the Committee which had
been appointed to watch t}e progress of the new
buildings. The alterations he would shortly describe to
their Lordships. In the original plan it wan proposed
that her Majesty when going to the House of Parliament
should enter the new Houses by the western door of what was
called the Victoria Tower, an.', she would then proceed along
a staircase into her robing-room immediately behind the throne
in the new House of Lords, and after robing she would pro-
ceed at once into the house of Lords. The alteration which had
been made by Mr. Barry was, that the Queen should enter the
Victoria Tosser at the east door, proceed along a passage up a
staircase, and crossing a yard to the robing-room. From the
robing-teoweshe would pass into the House of Lords by way of a
passage to -be called the Victoria passage. Now, Mr. Barry
had no authority whatever for making those alterations, and
certainly was not justified according to his own account in
tbtaking them. Ile (Lord Wharncliffe) protested against its
being urged that these alterations were mere matters of taste.
They were no such thing, and he could not discover that they
were alterations of convenience, or that sufficient benefit would
be derived from them to justify the outlay of money, which
they would require. He moved that the matter be referred to
a Committee of the Board of Works.
• Lord SUDELEY said he was one of the Commissioners
who were appointed to decide upon the plans which were ori-
ginally sent in for the construction of the new Houses of Par-
liament. There were ninety-seven competitors, and the num-
ber of plans submitted was upwards of 1,100. The task of
the Commissioners, therefore, was not a light one. The Corn-
missiouers came to the determination of deciding in favour of
the plan of Mr. Barry, and in coming to that conclusion the
Commissioners fully understcod that, in carrying out the plan,
Mr. Barry would, from time to time, make various alterations
in the details of his plans ; but they believed that ho would not
do so without the concurrence of the Government. He differed
very much from the opinion of the Noble Lord opposite that
these alterations were not matters of taste.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE—The House of Lords is not the
proper place to discuss a question of taste ; but 1 have no taste
upon this subject at all.
Lord SUDELEY hoped then that their Lordships would
not attach much weight to the observations of the Noble
Lord upon this subject.—( Laughter.) The Noble Lord then
Proceeded to show that the alteration which had been made in
the Victoria Tower had arisen from the mode in which Dr.
Reid had determined upon earl-yin his apparatus for ventilat-
ing the new building into the new 'Houses of Parliament. He
contended that the plans ought to have been definitively settled
eight years ago, and ought not, as in point of fact was the case,
to have been pustvoned until the present day, and they were
not settled yet. Although he had great confidence in Mr.
Barry, yet he never would have consented to allow him to
make any alteration he pleased without first consulting the Go-
vernment, and he trusted that in future the Government would
not allow any alteration to be made without their express ap-
proval.
The Mat-psis of LANSDOWNE thought it would he most
inconvenient to go into a general discussion on the subject; but
what he wished to say was, that he entirely concurred in the
observations which had fallen from the Noble President of the
Council (Lord Wharneliffe). Ho had no doubt that the al
aerations which had takenlaeo in the Victoria Tower, had been
made at the instance of Dr. Reid, in order that he might the
more easily erect his apparatus for the ventilation of the new
houses of Parliament.
Lord BROUGHAM expressed a hope that Mr. Barry
Would, in futtire, make no changes without first consulting the
Covernment. lie must protest against Mr. Barry's conti-
nually fighting with the Committee on the subject of delay.
No doubt Mr. Barry, like all other artists, wished to make a
display by having the whole of the new building opened at the
same time. He ( Lord Brougham) however trusted that the
.Government would not allow this, but compel Mr. Barry to
stick to his implied bargain of opening the House of Lords
next session.

The Marquis of CLA N RIC A RDE expressed a similar hope.
Lord COLBORNE did not think it was politic to take the
Vesponsibility of any changes off the shoulders of Mr. Barry.
If Mr. Barry was to carry this great work to completion it
'as absolutely necessary that they should place confidence
in him.
After a few words from the Earl of IlEssonouctr, and the
Marquis of NOR NIA NEI', the motion was agreed to.
The Courts of Common Law Bills, were read a third time
and pas,ed.
' Their Lordships then adjourned at Eight o'Clock.

111 r. H. BERKELEY moved for a return of the number of
boots and shoes imported during the years ending Jan. 5,1840,
to Jan. 5,1844, stating the amount of duty paid thereon.—
Agreed to.

SOUSE OF COMMONS, .ifoy 1;.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at. Four o'Clock.
The Westminster and Lambeth Suspension Bridge Bill was
read a second ti'ue, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. BROTIIERTON presented a petition from Salford
against certain clauses of the Poor-law, Amendment Bill ; also
w
a petition in favour of the DenterS Chapels Bill.
Petitions in favour of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill were pre-
sented fcv Dr. Bowring, from Bolton; Mr. Pusey and Sir
Ceorge Grey from Devonshire ; Lord Robert Grosvenor from
Chester ; and the Solicitor-General from places in Ireland.
Petitions were presented against the Bill by Colonel Con-
'lolly from Donegal, Mr. Plumptre from Durham, and Mr.
•Ileatheoat from Tiverton.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL presented a number of petitions
against the Irish Registration Bill.
• Lord DUNCAN presented a petition from Bath, praying
that the practice of granting Post-office money orders on the
•Lord's Day may be abolished.
• Sir R. 11. INGLIS presented a petition n4,tinst the union
of the sees of Asaph and Bangor, and in fa' our of the esta-
blishment of a Bishopric of Manchester.
Lord CIIARLES MANNERS presented a petition from
againstMowbray, certain clauses in the Ecclesiastical Courts
FERRAND presented a petition from the Welsh Cal-
vinistic Methodists resident in London, against the Dissenters'
Chapels Bill.
. Sir 'l'. WILDE presented
a petition very numerously
signed to the same effect.
• Mr. FOX MAULE presented two vetitions, one in favour
of, anti the other against, the Dissenters Chapels Bill.
Colonel LOWTHER presenteda
persons, in favour of agricultural protection, signed by
4'l"

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY is, 1844.

larger during the years of low duty, than during the years of
high duty. The average exportation of British woollens from
1816 to 1819, the years of high duty, was 8,127,0001. per year.
The average importation of the same commodity during
the corresponding three years of high duty, from 1820 to 1823,
was 6,014,0001. From I 821 to 1824, the South Down wool
averaged at 2s. per lb. ; Kent wool, Is. ; Highland wool,
2s. lid. New these were the three years of low duty. During
the years 1820, 1821, and 1822, the three years of high duty.
South Down wool averaged at is 3id. per lb.; Kent wool at Is.
1 id. ; and Highland woo: at Is. 4id. In 1823 the duty was
reduced from 6d. to Id. per lb. The lowest price of wool for
the last 20 years was, in 1829, when South Down wool aver-
aged 7d. per lb., and Kent wool 9d. In the same year,
91.000,000 lbs. of foreign wool were introduced, being a much
smaller quantity than in any former year. This, in the very
year that home-grown wool was lowest in price, the smallest
quantity of foreign wool was introduced. In 1836, when the
prices of British wool were highest, there was the largest im-
portation of foreign wool. In 1829, the price of South Down
wool, as he had already stated, was 7d. per lb., when so small
a quantity of foreign wool was imported; whilst, in
1836, when a large quantity of foreign wool was
imported, South Down wool sold for Is. 53. per lb.
In 1836, instead of 21,000,0001b5. of foreign wool being
imported, there were no less than 64,000,0001b5., being the
largest amount imported for the twenty years preceding. The
conclusion to be drawn from all these facts must be obvious
and irresistible—that the price of home-grown wool was
higher in those years when the duty on foreign wool was least,
and that when the duty on fNeign was highest the price of
home-grown wool was lowest. Now, this might seem strange,
but let it be recollected that foreign wool and home-grown
wool were not rivals—that they were not articles in competi-
tion, and that, as they were mixed, in order to make a better
article, the sale of the one improved in proportion as the other
was snore attainable, so that they might as well take the duty
off tea whilst the duty remained on sugar ; in order that the
reduction should be beneficial, it must be simultaneous on both.
He was sorry to have detained the House so long, but he
thought that, looking to the situation of the country, any injury
which the wool growers might suffer would be more titan
counterbalanced by the good which would be done to the ma-
nufacturing interests by the measure.
Mr. MILES said he knew from experience that this duty
upon wool was looked upon in the light of a protection by the
growers. lie bad, sometime back, moved for extensive re-
turns, which would show the state its which the British farmers
were placed, and prove the impossibility of their competing with
the foreign wool-growers. Ile was sure that the quantity of
long wool imported into this country was not at all sufficient
to justify the abolition of this protection to the agriculturists.
If he looked to the imports of 1843, and compared them with
those of 1842, he would see an extraordinary increase in the
woollen manufactures. In 1843, the imports were 6,790,000 lbs.,
while in 1842 they were 5,195,000 lbs. The remission of those
duties would not at all benefit the consumer. He had most
anxiously sought for the returns to which he had alluded in
order that every information might be laid before the Home.
With regard to the Australian colonies, wool was the staple
product which they exported to this country, and it had vastly
increased of late years. In the year 1831, the amount of
wool imported was only 2,493,337 lbs., while last year it had
increased to 17,433,000 lbs. ; and ho thought this showed
that the protective duty was a stimulus to the farmers in that
colony. After what had occurred last year he was sorry to
see this duty taken away at the present moment, when the
agricultural interest were in some degree recovering ; and he
felt this regret the more when there were so many other ar-
ticles front which the duty might have been removed with
much less injury, which, he hoped, would be done eventually.
Mr. C. WOOD was glad to hear the Hon. Gentleman ex-
press the hope that those duties would be remitted. Ile
differed from the conclusions of the Honourable Gentle-
man, drawn from the data which he had given to that House.
The increase in the importation of wool front the Australian
colonies had been so enormous—the importation being, in
1831, two millions of pounds' weight, while in the last year it
had been upwards of seventeen millions—that they need not
fear any injurious effect from the remission of this duty.
Mr. SHEPPARD was understood to support the proposi-
tion of the Government.
Mr. DIVETT supported the abolition of the duty on wool,
not so much from the benefit it would confer on the Australian
colonies, as the impetus it would give to trade generally.
Mr. 'fitoTTF. ft supported the Government proposition, on
the ground that the greater the importation of. foreign wool
into this country, the greater would be the consumption of

home-grown wool. -
Mr. COLLETT, in supporting the Government upon this
proposition, expressed a hope that ere long they would extend
the principle upon which they were now acting with respect to
wool to the article of corn.—( Hear. )
Mr. ALDAM said the lion. Member for Somersetshire
(Mr. Miles) had stated that other duties might have been re-
pealed which would have been more beneficial to the manufac-
turing interest. Now he (Mr. Aldarn) knew that the manu-
facturers were of opinion that no duty could be repealed that
would produce the same loss to the revenue, that would be half
so beneficial to them as the repeal of the duty on wool.
Mr. DA RBY did not think the Hon. Member for Somerset-
shire was justified in saving that this abolition of the duty on
wool was a step in the way of free trade. He (Mr. Darby) be-
lieved it to be no such thing, or he never would have supported
the proposition.
Mr. LABOUCHERE reminded the Hon. Gentleman that
the First Minister of the Crown, in introducing his measure,
had stated that he acted on the principle of free trade, and
that Right Hon. Gentleman stated that if he did not carry that
principle out quite so rapidly as Hon. Gentlemen on the oppo-
site side of the House could desire, yet he acted upon that prM-
elide in the measure which he proposed. Ile (Mr. Labouchere)
heard that declaration with the greatest pleasure, and he be-
lieved that all the friends of free trade must have
heard it with the utmost pleasure. He, therefore, could
not listen to the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat
down, without reminding him that the first Minister of the
Crown had placed this measure upon a different footing than
that upon which the Hon. Gentleman now found it convenient
to place his support on the present occasion. He (Mr. La-
bouchere) protested against the Hon. Gentleman asserting
that this measure had not been introduced by the Right Hon.
Gentleman in accordance with those sound principles of
liberal commercial policy, which the Right Hon. Gentleman
had so expressly announced on the part of her Majesty'y Go-
vernmer.t.
Mr. DARBY explained.
Mr. LABOUCHERE explained. He never said the prin-
ciples of free trade should be adopted at once without any
regard to existing interests.
Mr. WARI3URTON said he was glad to perceive the
general concurrence of the House with regard to this subject,
and he would not disturb the unanimity which prevailed by
any general discussion on free trade.—( Hear, hear.) The
home growers would now have to trust to their own energies,
which was a better ground to rely upon than any protection.—
( Hear, hear.) He rose merely to express the satisfaction his
constituents felt at the abolition of the duty on wool, and to
thank the Government on their part.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir IL PEEL said it would be unfortunate to have the ge-
neral concurrence expressed on this important measure of
relaxation disturbed by any differences upon other subjects.—
( Hear, hear.) lie would not, however, shrink from the
general pi inciple he avowed.--( Hear, hear.) The removal of
the duties on wool, coffee, and currants, was in conformity
with the general principles he professed—(Cheers)—because
they could be removed without producing an injurious effect on
existing interests. lie adhered to all the principles he had
ever professed on the subject, and those measures were in con-
formity with them. His Honourable Friend admitted dis-
tinctly that lie thought, on tke whole, this reduction
of the duty on foreign wool would be an absolute benefit to the
agricultural interest of the country, and yet he said he was
very sorrr that the present time had been selected. Ile would
ask from Iris lion. Friend, whether he thought they would be
justified as legislators—as Ministers of the Crown—if, believ-
ing they could propose a measure which would enlarge the
sphere of matruiacturing industry and increase the export of
manufactures, and which would at the same time confer a po-
sitive benefit on the agricultural interests, as was conferred by
encouraging the growth of wool—he would ask from his candid
mind this mission, that they had performed their duty in so-
curing to the agricultural interest a positive benefit, though
amongst ignorant and prejudiced persons it might be doubted.
Mr. MILES explained.
I Air. S. WORTLEY expressed his satisfaction at this mea-
sure of the Government. It would not only not be an injury
to the agricultural interests of the country, but he believed it
would be for their advantage. Whatever might be the effect
of the measure, it was certain the old duty was neutralised by
the introduction of Australian wool.
The clause was then agreed to.
The House then resumed, and the Chairman reported pro-
gress.—The report to he brought ti on Monday next.
BUSINESS
TIIE
HOUSE.
On the mottoUnSoffNSEirSßS OF
.PE' EL it was ordered that after
Monday, the 3d of June, orders of the day should have pre-
cedence of notices of motion on Thursdays.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was committed, pro forma, and ordered to be com-
mitted on Friday next.
COUNTY. CORONER'S BILL.

The further consideration of the report on this Bill was fixed
for Monday, the 341 of June.
STAMP DUTIES BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
The several clauses having been agreed to, on the schedule
I)ingread
Mr.
FORSTER moved the following scale of duty on ma-
rine assurance, as an amendment on that proposed by the Chan_
miler of the Exchequer, viz. s, d.
On premiums under and not exceeding 10s 0 3
On ditto exceeding 10s. and not exceeding 00s. 0 6
On ditto exceeding 20s.
On ditto en time risks, not exceeding six months
On ditto on time risks, exceeding six months ... 2 0
On mutual insurance policies
Dr. BOWRING, in seconding the motion, trusted that his
Noble Friend would force it to a division.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the
motion on the ground that it was the reduction of a duty ter
the advantage of a particular class. The adoption of the pro-
position of the Noble Member was, in fact, to give up the duty
on insurance altogether.
Mr. HUME considered the tax upon insurances was a tax
upon prudence. The duty, not only upon marine insurances,
but upon fire and life insurances, ought to be reduced one-half.
—( Hear, from Colonel Sibthorp. ) The revenue would be in-
creased by such a measure. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
that the principle which regulated the increase in the premium
of marine insurances was wrong. Why; then, did he not cor-
rect it? His Hon. Friend proposed to reduce the duty on
long distances to 25., and the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed
to make it 4s. Ten years ago all insurances between England
and America were effected in England. Now, two-thirds of
these insurances were effected in America, because there no
duty was payable. The underwriters in London should ha
placed upon the same footing as the underwriters in America,
in Australia, and in India. If they kept up the tax at all they
should keep it up as a moderate tax only.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no rea-
son to fear the competition of America with regard to these in-
surances. The competition which they had to fear was the
competition in small policies, which were effected in Hamburgh,
for short distances, and by lowering the duty on those policies
they would gat all these insuranees effected in this country,
Mr. WAWN, as the representative of a northern mari-
time borough, %kited to call their attentionsto the facts con-
nected with the North American trade—a trade principally
carried on in that borough ( South Shields). These ships made
two voyages in a year, and they were subject to the highest rate
of premium. Now, he thought they ought to have some portion
of the relief which it was proposed to afford.
Colonel SIBTEIORP, in allusion to what had fallen from the
Hon. Member for Montrose, would impress upon his Right
Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer the necessity of
reducing the duty on fire insurances. Ile wished the subject
had fallen into better hands ;7 but he should certainly, on a.
future occasion, bring the subject before the attention of the
House. He was glad to hear his Right Honourable
Friend speak in praise of prudence, for the tat
on fire insurances was a tax upon prudence.—(hear. )
He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman should not fur a
moment hesitate to make the concession sought for. He
thought the reduction would rather add to than diminish the
revenue. The duty ought to be taken off fire insurance as
well as marine insurance. Though he sat on that side of the
House, and generally voted with the Government, he would on
this question oppose the Right Hon. Gentleman through thick
and thin.—( Laughter. )
Mr. WARBURTON said the Chancellor of the Exchequer
ought to make hie tax so low as to offer an inducement to all
persona to insure their property.
Sir C. BURRELL thought that if the duty upon insurance