The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-15 00:00:00

appointing to every interest it applied to. His Hon. Friend
said it did not assist the revenue, that it did not please the free
traders, though they would vote for it, and that it still less
pleased the West Indian proprietors, because it admitted to the
home market, at a reasonable duty, what had been before ex-
cluded. When they discussed thisquestion, they must bear in
mind that there was a great and growing feeling in the public
mind against any protection beyond what the necessity of the
case required • and in fixing the sum which he thought the
justice of the case required, he considered it better to fix
it at the amount he had done than to be under the necessity of
making further reductions hereafter. It was disagreeable to
be placed in opposition to those with whom he generally acted,
and for whom he had a great personal esteem ; but he could
assure the Hon. Gentlemen that he had acted in the present
case under the certain impression that the measure was one for
their own ultimate interest. He believed the worst thing that
could happen for the colonies was, that sugar should rise in
price, in this country, to the level at which it had been ;
and whatever the colonies might have suffered—what-
ever they might have lost by the suppression of the sys-
tem of apprenticeship, which was prematurely cut short—
yet the feeling was strong that considerations of individual
interest should give way for the general good of the community.
Notwithstanding all that had been said on the subject, he firmly
believed that the measure was a sound one, and that it was not
adverse to the permanent interest of the colonies themselves.
He recommended the measure to the House, and he thought
the House would concur with the Government in the view he
had taken.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the speech of the Right
Honourable Gentleman had strongly tended to increase the
impression he felt, when the financial statement of the Govern-
ment was made, that the discussion of this question, and that
of the income-tax, ought not to have been separated. He
regretted that the Government had severed these two questions.
The House came with great disadvantage to the discussion of
them, but they could not help themselves. They were in
Committee on the sugar duties, and they must discuss them in
the best manner they could. It was his intention to support
the motion of the lion. Member for Bristol. The question was
the choice between the measure of Her Majesty's Government
and that of the Hon. Member, and he considered the plan
of the Hon. Member the best of the two.—( Hear, hear. )
He would now proceed to consider this question with regard
to the interests of the consumer, the West Indian interest, and
the revenue, and, as compared with the scheme of the Govern-
ment, he thought that the proposition of the Hon, Member for
Bristol would be far more beneficial to the consumer in this
country, whose interests should be first in their regard.—
( Cheers.) How the Right Hon. Gentleman could argue that
the measure of the Government would be more beneficial to
the consumer was to him perfectly astounding.—( Hear, hear. )
Perhaps the Government intended to: re-open this, question
next year in connexion with the income-tax, but if that were
so, was there ever an important public interest treated in such,
a way as the W/st Indian interest was by the present Govern-
: ment?—( Cheers. ) It was desirable they should have some
• explanation from the Government on the subject, because the
language used by the Government had spread consternation
amongst the merchants, and produced a perfect stagnation in
trade.—(Hear, hear.) The principle of the Government
measure, if principle it had, was that they should exclude
slate-grown sugar, and quarrel with their best customers to
give every encouragement to free labour produce. But no-
body believed that they could obtain that object. Not a
single Minister had said that in his conscience he believed they
would be able to do so ; but the Right Hon. Gentleman, the
President of the Beard of Trade, said that if it came in it
would not be on their consciences.
Mr. GLADSTONE denied that he said se.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he should be sorry to misrepre-
sent the Right Hon. Gentleman. He was under the impres-
sion that he said so ; but it was, at all events, utterly absurd to
suppose that they could exclude sugar. He held in his hand
rather a curious document. It was an extract from the Ha-
vannah Price Current, of the 9th of May. This was when it
was understood what would be the general features of the
measure of her Majesty's Government.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
measure of her Majesty's Government could not have been
known then.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he thought it was pretty gene-
rally known what that measure would be, after the discussion
which had taken place on the subject f the Brazil treaty.—
( Hear, hear.) At all events, the merchant who wrote the
extract he was about to read, made a pretty accurate guess.
He said that during the last month large purchases of sugar
had been made, and at a higher price, in consequence of the
London advices of March, from which it appeared that there
was an intention of an alteration in the English duties, which,
though indirectly, would increase the quantity of Havannah
sugar exported to Europe.—( Cheers.) He was more inclined
to believe the merchant who wrote this, than the calculations
and prophecies of her Majesty's Government, who would per-
suade them that the system of certificates would effect the
exclusion of slave-grown sugar from this country. It was a
perfect delusion to suppose that they would have such an
effect. He hoped they would have a more satisfactory expla-
nation from her Majesty's Government than had yet been ob-
tained on the subject of those certificates. It was a system
entirely novel in their Custom-house regulations. The notion
of certificates of origin coming from foreign ports, and de-
pendent for their accuracy on the signature of foreigners, ex-
cept that they were to be seen by her Majesty's Consul, never,
he believed, came into the head of any Government except
that of her Majesty's present Government.—(Hear, hear.)
Then what a duty did they impose on her Majesty's Consul ?
How was their Consul at New Orleans to act and decide upon,
the different representations which would be made to him?
The fact was, that the scheme of the Government would get
them into interminable difficulties with foreign countries.
These who thought that the scheme of the Government was
better than that of the Hon. Member for Bristol, were of
opinion that the sugar of Java, Manilla, and Siam, would not
come in at the low duty of 30s, but at the high duty of 345.
He (Mr. LabouchereMoubted that it would be so. He held in
his hand a return' upon which relianee might be placed, of the
average price of the various descriptions of sugars in bond in
the months of May, June, July, and August, in the years
1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, and 1843. Not to go through the
whole, he would take that for 1843, and he found by it that
the average price of Java, Manilla, and Siam brown sugar in
bond averaged 19s per cwt. The price of white Brazil sugar
during the same month was 235., and of yellow sugar 17s. 6d.
The price of Havannah white sugar was 285., of brown, 19s.
The consequence he deduced from these figures was this :
that the greater part of the sugar produced in Java, Manilla,
and Siam,land in bond in London at that time, must have more
closely resembled the brown sugars which would be intro-
duced under the 30s. duty than the white sugar which would
be introduce a t 345. His opinion was that they would have a
considerably larger supply of brown Muscotiado sugar at the
low duty than of the white sugar at the high duty, and that
consequently the consumer would be greatly benefited.—
But he would not consider exclusively the interests of the con-
sumer. He would also consider the interests of the West
India planters, and he rejoiced that on this occasion he could
support a plan that reconciled their interests with
the interests of the consumers. (Hear, hear. )
Then, with regard to revenue, it was not alleged by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer that he felt any great alarm at the
motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol on account of the re-
venue, nor in his ( Mr. Labouchere's) opinion was there any
fear on that. account. He would vote for the scheme
of the Hon. Member for Bristol as preferable to that of the
Government. Any attempt to distinguish betiveen slave-
grown sugar and free-labour sugar would be fraught with' diffi-
culty and danger, and would he proved to be altogether nuga-
tory. It was most important that there should be a permanen-
setilement of this question, and confidence amongst the mer.
cantile interest was far better than a duty of Is. more or lessf
For the reasons he had given he should support the motion o
the Hon. Member fur Bristol.---( Cheers.)
Mr. GODSON could not congratulate the body to which he
belonged on the Right Hon. Gentleman's advocacy. It was
not pretended that this was anything more than a temporary
measure. It was understood by all parties that it would be made
known next year precisely upon what footing the duties were
to be placed. He looked forward to a time when there would
be a duty of 14s. or 150. and that change he believed would be
a real benefit to the consumer. In the meantime, he be-
lieved the alteration would not make a difference of more
than 5,000 or 6,000 tons in the year. The question was
often asked why there should be any difference at all between
the duty on colonial and that of foreign sugar. He thought
the simple answer to that objection existed in the fact that
the colonies were their own. All the instruments used
in the production came from England : their rates were all
the same; there was the same Church Establishment ; there
were, in all respects, in fact, similar expenses ; and that
being the case, he thought it was
but just that there should
be a distinction made between the colonies and foreign coun-
tries. He regarded the present measure as an indication
of what was to take place next year. If the
duty were reduced down to 15s. next year, the free-labour
sugar would, of course, be admitted, and then would come the
question of the admission of sugar from Cuba and Brasil, in
which the question of the slave-trade should not be lost sight of.
He would not vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for
Bristol, because he thought that by doing so he would pledge
himself to consent to a larger extension of the principle in
future.

Mr. BERNAL thought the arguments of his Hon. and
; Learned Friend were most inconclusive. If he was such a friend
to a general settlement, why was he so enamoured of the pre-
sent proposition ? Why did he not oppose this at-
tempt to take a tithe of the change en that
occasion when he expected a final settlement next
year ?—(Hear.) They must look their difficulties in the face
' He considered the course advocated by his Hon. Friend oppo-
site one in which he was imperatively called oa to concur. He
had heard it hinted en that side that there might be some
conspiracy in the proposal of 345. in reference to the free-
grown sugar of Manilla and Java. He did not believe that
any conspiracy existed. The Hon. Gentleman then made a
detailed statement of the process of claying and refining
sugars, and explained the difference between clayed sugars,
Muscovado sugars, and bastard sugars. He was surprised to
hear the statement of the Hon. Member for Dumfries, that the
differential duty between the Muscovado and the clayed sugars
had been reduced at the solicitation of the West India body.
He believed that a solicitation to that effect might have ema-
nated from the grocers and the refiners, but it had certainly
not emanated from the West India body. The Right Hon.
Gentleman had said that the Custom-house officers could not
distinguish between the Muscovado and the clayed sugars,
but he really could not imagine that there could
be any difficulty in distinguishing between them. If no
difference were made between clayed and Muscovado sugar, a
great hardship would be inflicted upon the West India body.
No clayed sugars were prepared in the West Indies—he believed
none were prepared in the East Indies or the Mauritius, and it
would be a great hardship if the clayed and crushed sugars of
Siam, which had undergone a partial process of refinement,
were admitted at the same duty as the Muscovado sugar. The
words of the Bill were " clayed, but not refined ;" those words
were calculated to produce confusion. He protested against
being fettered in any subsequent transactions by supporting
this measure, except that he admitted that the West Indians
could not expect any protection beyond 10s. He thought the
West Indians ought to have some relief afforded them in th'e
article of rum.—( Cheers.) It was ridiculous that it should
be excluded from the markets of Scotland and Ireland by the
differential duty at present existing—( Hear, hear)—and he
was also of opinion that molasses should no longer be excluded
from the distilleries by the pregent absurd regulations.
Mr. BOUVERIE, in allusion to the statement which had
been made, that there was a conspiracy among the West India
body to carry this motion, would observe, that although there
was'no direct evidence of conspiracy, yet, it they admitted the
doctrine of conspiracy as laid down in another country, there
certainly, was evidence of a conspiracy among the West India
body to carry this motion.--( Cheers and laughter.) If he
could be convinced that the proposition of the Hon. Member
for Bristol would not create an additional differential
duty, he would support it, but as far as he could understand it,
the effect of the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol
would be to create a differential duty of 14s. instead of pne of
10s., as proposed by the Government, and, therefore, he should
vote against it. Hear, hear.) In a revenue point of view,
it was of importance that the money raised to carry on the
Government should be raised in the manner the least bur-

densome to the people, but it was also a fundamental prin-
ciple that no portion of the money so raised should go to any
purpose except to the support of the State.—( Cheers..) Now
what was the operation of the differential duties? A differen-
tial duty of 41s. per cwt. gave the West Indian and the East
Indian proprietors a monopoly of the market. Whatever
amount of differential duty was imposed, if it did not give a
monopoly, it gave a bonus to the whole amount of the differen-
tial duty.—( Hear, hear.) He could not see any reason for
giving an additionel bonus to the West India proprietors.
Even at a differential duty of 103. 6d., which was proposed by

the Government, the West India proprietors had, during the
last four years, received 2,050,000/., and the additional half-
penny proposed by the lion. Gentleman would give them
818,000/. more, which would be taken from the purposes of
the State, and must be raised out of the pockets of the
people to supply the deficiency. Now if everything went
well with the West Indians, there might be some excuse for
continuing this system ; but they had always been complain•
ing of suffering and loss since they had been under the system
of protection. It was useless for them to say that the abolition
of slavery had produced these losses and sufferings. They made
the same complaints before slavery was abolished. He held in his
hand a memorial from the West India proprietors, in 1801,
containing the same complaints. It was clear then that they
did not prosper under the system, and he would recommend
them to try another. Let them try the system of free trade.—
( Hear, hear.) Why should not free trade answer with regard
to sugar as well as it had with regard to silk ?—( Hear, hear. )
They had better at once make the change, and consent to an
equalization of the duties.
Mr. F. BARING was not surprised that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer should be anxious to confine the discussion to
the proposition immediatiately before the House, and should
not diverge into a discussion on the principles of the measure.
He could not but recollect the arguments which had been used
against the proposition which he had submitted to the House
in 1641—how slightingly and contemptuously the arguments
he had ventured to use had been passed over. He had been
assured by the Right Hon. Gentleman, the present Chancellor
of the Exchequer, that there was no necessity for alteration—
the prices would fall—that there would be an ample supply for
the West Indian Colonies and for India, and that the most per-
fect reliance could be placed upon the estimated amount of the
supply. He had ventured to suggest that the estimates might
be exaggerated, and that the supply would not equal the de •
mand. The Right Hon. Gentlemen found that the arguments
which he had then used were now used against himself by
the Hon. Gentlemen behind him. Night after night had he
(Mr. Baring) been taunted with these estimates, and now the
Right Hon. Gentleman whe had so taunted him told him very
coolly that they might be mistaken in their estimates, and
that, in fact, no reliance whatever could be placed upon them.
—( Loud cheers.) Another weighty argument was, that a
great experiment was going on in the West Indies, and they
were asked how they could reconcile it to their duty to
introduce the competition of slave-grown sugar pending that
experiment. What were they doing now ?—( Cheers.) The
price of West India sugar must be regulated according to
the proposed plan by the price of free-labour sugar. Now, if
they had as ample a supply of free-labour sugar as they
wanted, its price must be regulated by the price of sugar in the
markets of the world ; that was, by the price of slave-grown
sugar.--( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman gave a pro-
tection of 10s. and a shade, which he calculated at 2s. Now
he (Mr. Baring) bad proposed a protection of 125., so that
there was no great difference between them. The great ar-
gument against his proposition had been, you are encouraging
slavery. What were they doing now ? He admitted they
were not doing it directly, but they were doing it as
surely as if they took 10,000 tons of slave-grown sugar.
The Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool had told them that
they were indirectly encouraging slavery, but the Noble Lord
had given no notice of a resolution now, as he had in 1841.
(Cheers and laughter.) The Government had adopted a
most unfortunate course in stating that they would re-consider
the question next year. Whatever they intended to do they
should do at once, so as to disturb the markets as little as pos-
sible. They should not leave the markets for one whole year in
fear of they knew not what.—( Cheers and laughter.) He had
heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer say that nothing could
be more unfortunate than for a Government to hold out an
expectation of change. At the commencement of the
present session his Hon. Friend the Member for London had
asked the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Governs ent
if he intended to alter the sugar duties, and the Right Hon.
Gentleman had replied, that he could only suppose that such a
question could be put by the youngest Member in the House.
But the Hon. Member for London now had his revenge. The
Right Hon. Gentleman would not tell him three months be-
forehand what he intended to do; nothing could be more in-
jurious to trade. But now for a whole year they left the colo-
nial interest under the announcement of the proposed reconsi-
deration ; nothing could be more injudicious or more
inconsiderate. The Honourable Gentleman who had just sat
down, and who had addressed the House so well—( Cheers)—
had stated it as his opinion that there was concealed under the
proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol some intention of
a proposal for giving additional protection to the West India
interest. If he had the slightest idea that such would be the
effect of the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, he would
not support it, as he intended doing. He did not believe it
would give any additional protection to the West India in-
interest beyond reducing the price of sugar, and that was a
legitimate advantage to which they were fairly entitled. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had fairly stated the pro-
position of the lion. Member for Bristol, and he admitted
that the protection proposed by each of them was the same.
He feared the sugar of Cuba would come into this country.—
( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches.)
Yes, he did not wish to see the Government of this country
defeated in its main object; and if slave-grown sugar was to be
received, he wished it to be received only in a fair, open man-
ner.—( Hear, hear.) In 1841 the question of clayed sugars
was brought under his consideration, and he proposed a gene-
ral duty of 365. Between the time of his announcement of
this plan and the period of its being brought under the full
consideration of the House, he received so many, and such
forcible, remonstrances, that he became perfectly convinced
that it would not be wise and discreet to put all sugars under
the same rate of duty. The consequence was, that though he
had announced his plan, he made the desired alteration in it.
The opinion of the late Mr. Hume, on which much weight
should be placed, was, that there ought to be three scales of
duty. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was true, told
them that it was the opinion of the Custom-house officers that
no difference of scale could be made. Well, he (Mr. Baring)
was not disposed to place much weight on the opinions of these
gentlemen, for when they understood what the Chancellor of
the Exchequer's opinions were, they generally contrived
to square theirs accordingly. What was impossible
to-day with them might become possible to-morrow. He
held in his hand an extract from the American tariff, and
there he found that the duties were divided into three classes.
Nearly the same system prevailed in Holland. He felt bound
to say that he thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer be-
haved extremely fair in his statement regarding the revenue.
He entirely agreed with him in thinking that there would be a
considerable loss in the falling off in the revenue, but he knew
it would be only temporary, and felt confident that the revenue
would recover itself in the course of next year. He regretted
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not based his system
on a more definite and permanent principle. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer said that there would be a reduction of
800,0001. by the reduction of colonial sugar, and they would get
20,600 tons of sugar in addition to what was at present re-
ceived. By this additional 20,000 tons we get back 600,000/.
of revenue, so that there was only a lose of 9.00,000/.—a very
small risk when compared with the good it would certainty
effect for the colonies. Mr. Huskisson was a careful, steady
man, yet in 1829 he proposed a reduction on colonial sugar
to 275., and foreign sugar to 665. On that occasion Mr. Hus-
kisson was met by the argument of the reduction of the
revenue. The change was made, and it was anticipated that
542,0001. would be lost, but there was not one-half of that sum
lost. He hoped and believed the reduction of the Right Hon.
Gentleman would be attended with all the success anticipated
by him.
Mr. GLADSTONE said the Right Hon. Gentleman had
(and he was not surprised at it) sought to distract the atten-
tion of the House from the real question under the considera-
tion of the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman talked
fluently of frauds and certificates of origin, but they had
nothing whatever to do with the motion of the Hon. Member
for Bristol. The great charges against the Government were
that they disturbed and unsettled public mind and left the
colonies to the chance of the future. Now the fact was the
Government could not have made a final settlement of the
sugar question at present—the consideration of the income-tax
alone was sufficient to prevent a decisive arrangement.
He did riot think it would be justice to the country to agree to
the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman. If they did so, they
would take a short-sighted view of the interest of the colonial
producer. He granted that they had no reason to suspect that
there would be a deficiency of supply, if they measured the
supply by the supply of former years. But was the demand
likely to be the same as in former years ? Had there not been
a great change in the state of the country? Now what was
the state of the market for the four months during which the
sugar duty remained in a state of uncertainty—that was
the four months which elapsed before the declaration of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer ? If they compared the prices
of the four months of this year with the corresponding four
months of the last year, they would find an average rise of
4d. in the prices of the present year. He therefore said
that they might fairly expect a scarcity this year. A gentle-
man named Ripley, with a deputation from Liverpool, had
waited upon him (Mr. Gladstone) upon this subject, and he
stated that the measure of the Government would have the
effect of reducing the price of sugar lid. per pound, taking
the prices then ruling. He would beg the House to remem-
ber that this year the Gasetted average price was higher than
it was last, when it was known that the measure which 's as to
be proposed would not be a permanent one. One great object
of the proposal of the Government was to so arrange
as to be a great benefit to the consumer. The Go-
vernment had been induced to propose this measure
front a sense of the great evils attending an absolute state of
uncertainty. This Bill went to create a permanence in this
great branch of our commerce. It would establish the duty
which was to he imposed upon sugar the produce of slavery,
and the sugar the produce of free labour, and also to fix the
amount of protection to the colonists, which was to be main-
tained. lie complained that the measure of his Hon. Friend
the Member for Bristol would have a most injurious effect on
the trade in sugar in this country. He asked his Hon. Friend
the Member for Bristol- whether the reduction which he
proposed in British Plantation sugar was to be a permanent
arrangement ? He would take the answer either one way or the
other. Did his Hon. Friend contemplate a further reduction
in the duty next year ? If he did, then what became of his
argument respecting the permanent settlement of the question ?
If he did not contemplate a further reduction in the duty, then
he (Mr. Gladstone) said that his Hon. Friend was not just
to the colonists in the protection which he imposed,
nor was he just to the consumer in this country.
The Hon. Member for Bristol had not given any reason for
re-opening the question of those duties at a future time. Re-
ference had been made in the course of the debate to a letter
which was published that day ( Friday) in the Times newspaper.
That letter was written by a gentleman who had long been
connected with-the West Indies. But that Gentleman had
assured him this day, that although he disapproved of the pro-
position of the Government, he would prefer it to the measure
of the Hon. Member for Bristol. He did not object so much
to the principle of classification as to the mode of classification
proposed by his Hon. Friend the Member for Bristol. Accord-
ing to the present law great injustice was done to the producers
of inferior sugar of British colonies. The distinction proposed
by Hon. Gentlemen opposite would operate most injuriously
on the colonies. He thought that the measure of the Govern-
ment was the best that could be proposed, and he called on the
Committee to support it.
Mr. M. GIBSON (who rose amidst loud cries of " Divide,
divide") said that he had come down to the House disposed to
vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Bristol, but, on
examining more carefully the terms of the motion, and looking
to its objects, he found that the object of the Hon. Member,
and of those who supported him, was to give the West Indies
a protection of 14s. per cwt. A gentleman in the City, who
was well acquainted with the subject, told him that he (Mr.
M. Gibson) was not "awake to the trap" for the free traders.
—( A laugh.) When he saw the anxiety of the West India in-
terest to oppose this proposition, he looked on with suspicion.
—( Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, regarding as he
did, that both the propositions before the House contained the
principle of protection, but believing that the measure of the
Government went further in the direction of free trade than
did that of the Hon. Member for Bristol ( Mr. Miles), he
should certainly give his support to that of the Government.
Mr. HUME said that his own opinion was, that the mea-
sure would greatly assist trade, and that, say what they might,
or do what they might, there would he no pro-
hibition to slave-grown sugar. Indirectly it would
be admitted. Indeed, his opinion was, that there
would be a very considerable addition to the supply of sugar.
Slave-grown and free-grown sugar would get into the market
alike. But what the House ought to consider was not the
interest of the West Indian planter, or any of the many inte-
rests that had been referred to in the course of the debate,
but the interest of the consumer. That was the only light in
which they ought to look at the question. The plan of the
Hon. Member for Bristol he (Mr. Hume) did not hold to be
a good one. But a good sound plan never would be got
until they changed their plan altogether. During the time

he (Mr. Hume) had been in that House, he had witnessed
three attempts to make discriminating duties, but they had
all failed. Under the plan of the Government there would
be a large supply of sugar from America, and the consumer
was certain almost immediately to have a benefit of one half-
penny per pound in the price of sugar.
Mr. COLQUHOUN said that whilst the friends of the
Government plan trusted that by it the consumers would have
their sugar at a halfpenny per pound less, it ought also to be
known that by the plan of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Bristol, the reduction to the consumer in the price of his sugar
would be one penny. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
strangely enough stated that this year's supply of sugar must
be looked upon as a decreasing one, whereas it would turn out
to be an increasing one. The stock of sugar was greater now
than it had been previously known to be. We had a stock at
the present moment of 40,000 tons, and yet this was the time
selected for the introduction of the Government measure, and for
the singular statement in support of it made by the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
It had been said that the rod was over them ; but they were
driven by the rod of stern necessity. They could not go
beyond the amount of duty named by the Government. He
had heard nothing in the arguments of either of his Hon.
Friends that induced him to change his resolution to vote for
the amendment of the Hon. Member for Bristol.—( Hear. )
Mr. ESTCOTT said he knew that many West India pro-
prietors had been ruined. He knew, also, that it was the duty
of the Government to apply a remedy to their case. They
had been reduced to this condition under a prohibitory system,
and he wished to ask the Hon. Member for Bristol whether he,
thought his proposition would be the cure for the condition in
which they were placed ?—(Divide, divide. )
Dr. BOWRING rose amid loud cries of "Divide." He
said they had a right to take the benefit of the declaration of
the Hon. Member for Bristol, that he did not mean to aug-
ment the amount of protection ; but it was perfectly clear that
a duty of 103. upon 20s. was a somewhat greater amount than
10s. upon '24s. He felt a great disposition to support his Hon.
Friend, because a reduction of duty would tend to cause a re-
duction of cost.—(Hear, hear.) The amount of duty was one
of the elements of price, and whatever diminished the duty must
diminish the price of an article. At that hour of the night, and
with the House so impatient, he should not detain it, except to
inquire what the Hon. Member for Bristol, with such a re-
sponsibility resting on his shoulders, meant to do with the pro-
position of his Hon. Friend?
Mr. COLLETT said, as a free trader, he should support
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol.
14r. JAMES said he should not attempt again to move the
flinty hearts of her Majesty's Government with the bad case of
the West Indian proprietors, but he wished to make one re-
mark on something that had fallen from the Right Hen. the
President of the Board of Trade. He understood him to say
that next year it was in contemplation to apply the principle
of an ad valorem duty to sugar. If he would do that he should
have his vote. He would also ask one question. Was this
foreign sugar to be brought in in foreign vessels, or was it to
be imported in what were called foreign bottoms?
Mr. GLADSTONE said it would be imported according
to the provisions of the navigation laws. Under certain con-
ditiona it would be allowed to be brought in foreign vessels.
Mr. HAMPDEN said he was unwilling to enter into the
subject at all, but he was urged to it by the instinct of self-
preservation.—( Hear, hear.) He avowed at once that he had
a personal interest in the question.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
He did not ask them then for any deference; they might re-
ceive his arguments with all the distrust and suspicion which
attached to the opinions of an interested man.—( Hear, hear.)
As for his facts, he should only use those that were deplorably
notorious.—( Hear, hear.) He should not go into the whole
question of the policy of commercial restrictions. He should
only ask them not to enforce them with greater stringency on
the West Indies than on any other country. They must re-
member that they could not apply the same principles now, in
their present complicated circumstances, that they could
do if they were beginning to establisn a system of trade
de novo. With the high prices and heavy burdens which
existed in this country, it would be impossible for them to con-
tend with other nations without protection. They were de-
priving the West Indian interest of protection, and the conse-
quence was that the proprietors were abandoning their estates.
If the object of the Government was to benefit the consumer,
they could effect that object by adopting the proposition of the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Bristol, and at the same time
leave a small profit to the West India roprietors. He rose
with pain to oppose her Majesty's present Govern-
ment, but he thought their conduct relative to the
West India interest, was cruel, unjust, and tyrannical.—
( Hear, and cheers.) He had on more than one occasion
voted with her Majesty's Government against his own con-
scientious judgment.—( Great laughter and ironical cheering. )
He repeated it, and he would tell why he did so. It was be-
cause on certain important national questions the Right Hon.
Gentleman at the head of the Government could take a wider
survey of those questions than he could, and had also access to
sources of information beyond his ( Mr. Hampden's) reach.
For these reasons he considered it more-prudent and patriotic
to surrender his own opinions to the Right Hon. Gentleman's
judgment.—(lronical cheers.) But there were certain ques-
tions upon which he could not vote with the Government—as
the New Poor-law and the present question.—( Cries of
" Question, question," " Sugar, sugar.") He considered
British merchants more likely to come to a sound conclusion on
this subject than any Minister, however large his comprehen-
sion. If the cheapening of sugars to the extent of a penny
were so great a boon surely this country should contribute
something towards the national benefit.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not one of those who blamed
the Government for having proposed an alteration in the
sugar duties. He did not think that the reasons given in
favour of these proposed alterations were so strong as those
which had been urged in 1841 in favour of a similar motion,
but they were nearly as strong, and of a very similar character,
and, therefore, he did not blame the Government for having
proposed the alteration--( Hear. )—but he did think that the
manner in which they had brought the proposition forward, the
nature of the proposition itself, and the proposal that another
alteration should be made next year, had introduced great dif-
ficulties into the question.--( Hear, hear.) With re-
gard to the question before the House to-night they
had to consider the proposition of the Government,
on the one hand, and the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Bristol on the other. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade, following the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, had shown that the great objection to the proposi-
tion of the Hon. Member for Bristol was the evil that must
follow from the reduction of the duty not taking place before
November. No doubt some evils would follow from that pro-
position, but they were the inevitable results of the manner in
which the proposition of the Government had been brought
forward. If that 'proposition had been similar to all former
propositions of a similar nature which had been brought for-
ward for the reduction of duties, the reduction would have
taken place at once both on foreign and colonial sugar. But
the House had followed the guidance of the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite, and had adopted the proposition of
the Government, and made a distinction between free
labour and other sugar, and the Hon. Member for Bristol.
had, consequently, been obliged to frame his proposition accord-
ing to that decision. Having so framed it, it appeared clear
that the reduction would not be less than 9s. The reduction
of duty proposed by the Hon. Member for Bristol would give a
reduction of ld. per lb. on sugar more, which would be a great
advantage to the consumer, and on that single ground he pre.
ferred the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol to that
of the Government.—(Cheers.) But the Hon. Member for
Manchester said that the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Bristol would give a greater protection to the West India interest
Now, he did not think that the proposition would give any
greater advantage to the West India interest than the proposi-
tion of the Government. He did not think that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Manchester was well founded in his facts. The Right
Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had stated
the subject with great fairness,. he had stated that the protec-
tion given by the Right Hon. Gentleman's proposition,
and that given by the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Bristol was equal ; therefore, in point of protection, the two
propositions were equal—there was no superiority of protection
afforded by the proposition of the Hon Member for Bristol.
—( Hear, hear.) His Right Honourable Friend the Member
for Taunton had stated that the sugar imported from Siam,
Java, and Manilla would, in general, be brown sugar, and not
white clayed sugar, which was imported from Brazil and Cuba,
and the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board
of Trade had assented to that statement. It would be of little
advantage to add anything to the authority of the said state-
ments, but the returns of the imports of sugar into the United
States from Siam, as published in the newspapers, showed that
the sugar from that country was chiefly brown, and not
clayed sugar. It would, therefore, follow that there could be
no great advantage in the way of protection in the 14s.
as compared with the 10s. duty. If, therefore, only the sugars
of Java, Manilla, and Siam, were admited, there would be
nothing gained in the shape of protection by the adoption of
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol ; but if the
clayed sugars of Bristol and Manilla were to come in, then, in-
deed, it might make a difference. On the whole, he thought
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol was more ad-
vantageous to the consumer, and,therefore,he should support it.
The great advantage gained by the proposition of the Hon.
Member for Bristol was, that it would increase the consump-
tion. The Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board
of Trade said it was impossible to consider this question in a
large and comprehensive manner, because it would be necessary
in that case this year to consider the question of the income-
tax. It would be very desirable that the House should know
whether or no they meant to continue the income-tax,
and he saw no just reason why they should not
state it. The present proposition created great alarm
among the sugar growers, and it was calculated to prevent
capital from being employed—to diminish the energies neces-
sary to well-directed enterprise, and had already produced
great disturbance in the market. He saw no reason why the
whole system should not be considered and finally settled this
year. He did not say that the proposition of the Hun. Member
was a perfect settlement of this question, but in the difficulties
in which the House was placed, he considered it preferable to
the Government proposition, and should vote for it.
Captain BERKELEY would support the Government pro-
position.

Mr. MILES replied. In answer to a question of the Right
Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, he
would say that he did not intend his proposition, if carried into
effect, should be permanent.
Captain GLADSTONE then rose, but was not at all
audible in the gallery.
Mr. RICARDO rose, but was met with loud cries of
" Divide, divide," and great uproar.
Captain BERKELEY—If this debate is not allowed to go
on, I shall move the adjournment.—(Uproar.)
Mr. RICARDO said that before he could support the amend-
ment of his Hon. Friend he wished to know whether his lion.
Friend would be willing to give up the 45., for if he did not
consent to do so the amendment, in point of fact, would be to
establish a differential duty of 14s. per cwt.—( Great uproar. )
Lord HOWICK rose amidst great uproar, and said I only
rise to explain to my Hon. Friend that he is in a mistake as
to the form we now are about to vote. The Hon. Gentleman
has moved certain substitutions for the clause as proposed by
her Majesty's Government, and the question will now be put
that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question;
and if we have a majority on the first question and negative the
Government proposition, it will then be competent for any
Hon. Gentleman who wishes to propose an amendment on
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bristol, to move to
leave out any part of that proposition. The question, there-
fore, upon which we are now to vote is not the adoption of the
amendment of the Hon. Member for Bristol, but aye or no,
will you, or will you not negative the plan of her Majesty's
Government. As I believe that plan to be a bad one, I shall
vote against it, but I am not pledging myself to adopt the
amendment of the Hon. Member for Bristol without alteration
or substitution.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The Committee
then divided, when the numbers were—
For the original motion
Against it
MAJORITY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT —_2o
The announcement of the result was received with tre.
mendous cheering.
Sir R. PEEL said:that the Dissenters' Chapel Bill was fixed
for Monday next, but he thought that the resolution of this
night was of so much importance that the Committee should
take precedence of the other business.
THE SALMON FISHERIES BILL.

_.
The House having resumed,
The Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Bill, after a brief con-
versation between Mr. Warburton, Mr. Drummond, and the
Lord Advocate, passed through Committee.

COMMERCIAL MARINE COMMITTEE.
Mr. HAWES, in resuming the discussion on the nomina-
tion of this Committee, complained of the partial complexion

of the Committee, and particularly objected to the oral°
of the name of Mr. Foster.
After some discussion the following gentlemen
dition of Mr. Foster) were nominated as the Committe,e;
Mr. Lyall, Mr. Gladstone, Viscount Sandon, Mr. Aaron t'''."fic:
man, Sir William Clay, Mr. Liddell, Mr. Bingham 13V;,,,
Mr. Stuart Wortley, Captain Gladstone, Mr. Hutt, Itfr. via
Baring, Mr. Ross, Mr. Dennistoun, Mr. Hawn, and gr. Pa
Barclay. (with the st

COMPANIE. 'a t°
On the motion ofCANAL Mr. GLADSTONE, leave was glO 0111,
bring in a Bill to empower canal companies to vary their
rates, and charges on different parts of their navigations..
Mr. JAMES moved for a return of the quantity of DTI,
made sugar, from potatoes or other things, upon which ai,p,
cise duty has been paid, in the years 1841, 1842, an, otos,
ree respectively ; together with the amount of duty paid tu.
and in what manner that duty was ascertained.—Agd4k,
Mr. FRENCH moved for some returns from the
fiastical Commissioners of Ireland.—AnTeed to.

CUSTOMS FRAUDS. IrCO
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the E---,„iert
QUER, the following Members were nominated a
Committee on Evidence taken before the Revenue C°,s°,-„1e I
sioners :—Mr. Pringle, Mr. Wallace, Mr., Trotter, t'°-
Rolleston, Mr. Hume, Mr. Henley, and Mr. Tufnell.
The House then adjourned at a Quarter to Two.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE. odd
A case of smuggling came on which exposed an
system of imposition.
Martin 111' Donald and William Debois, the
Irishman, with a countenance very like that 0103,
foreigner, were charged under the following ch.°
stances.
h, icag
A Custom-house officer stated that as be
along the Minories, the prisoner Debeis bid
dressed him in a confidential tone, and invited the
into the Horse and Trumpet public-house:
Old Jewry, to see some • - which had rule.
cigars
a low ' to
smuggled, and were to be had at
Re accompanied Debois, who introduced hi° ere
latter 4
ill‘Donald, up stairs in the public-house, and there lc
.15
exhibited to him a quantity of cigars, and some shbelll'eti
and handkerchief's, which the defendants said had h.jog
smuggled. They also stated that they had a vessel7leti
at Blackwall, in which immense quantities of sulticles
goods were stowed away, consisting of teas, boo the
shawls, hankerchiefs, and tobacco. A seizure °I of
tobacco was subsequently made, and some shr„srof
English manufacture were also taken by the 0111—
the revenue. goer,
Coleby A. Davis, an extremely ac ive revenue 9-h be
stated that, in consequence of' the information wille"ty
received from the first witness, he proceeded t°, Dot
public-house and seized the tobacco, the defendalieeti
being licensed to sell the article. They were 11tetn sell hawkers, and, therefore, they were at liberty to se're of
shawls land handkerchiefs they exhibited, which We four
English manufacture, but in order to get three O the
n,
times as much as was the value of the goods, it 1"-,he,,'
practice of such persons to pretend that the articles •ci
of
had to dispose of were contraband. Many peoPle' itsreesl
the higher classes too, opened their mouths the mite be'
they heard the word " smuggled" mentioned, in Welieg
lief that they would get a capital bargain by cleloll
with such adventurous persons, and they were regg eto
humbugged. When witness went to the publicloslo
gerallos
make the bargain he saw a highly respectable
who lodged at the London Coffee-house, doing husaal eei
in the cigar way with M'Donald, and who, the ra,lo-
- knew that witness was about, ran off with all tin""
able speed,
onald asked the first witness whether the shoo?
and handkerchiefs were shown to him as foreign g°
—The witness replied that they were. sec lag
M'Donald said that was quite impossible, as '1- ec lag
prove that he had purchased them on Thursday 1:11°tlie
at the warehouse of a gentleman who resided Den'
Nlansion-house.—(Laughter.) , are
The LORD MAYOR—That's the thing /1'
very
convinced of. Y :based thee sor 51' .or

_ou purchased these for five fifteee
lings each for the purpose of selling them for
sixteen. teess
M'Donald—But I purchased them after the 1'
says he saw them with me. a for
The LORD MAYOR—You might have exhibitfre
sale the exact patterns of these easily enough. 5 fal
ao doubt that you succeed extensively in the trePtsinif
thus lay for the lovers of smuggling, and they Cer
of are not to be pitied.
name
C. A. Davis called forward a tailor, of the
Nicholas Rosa, who produced two shawls, Whig but
,tated he had purchased of M'Donald for 21. 45' v
which, upon being submitted to the judgment of a„
keeper, were pronounced to be worth at mostDeshase
each. The cigar gentleman wanted him to Purd get
cigars also, but he declined, and he thought he 115
an excellent bargain in the shawls.
haw-'
M'Donald—My Lord, I am a regular haw-
pedlar.
volt n$ Faye
The LORD MAYOR—NO doubt of it; and t
that occupation auxiliary to this pretence, tqwfice
smuggle silk and other articles of the kind franA
But the direct charge against you is, that you ha'
cigars for sale without being licensed. eon
M`Donald—There, I confess, I have been an aggr eon`
but I intended to take out a license, as I can Po
13
After all, my Lord, it is doing in a little wax %wag
done by high tradesmen in a great way. It is
shillings where people in Regent-street get pounus' e
The LORD MAYOR—At all events we have a cat
having cigars for sale without a license instituted eb-
you, and I fine
,r
M`Donald—l can't pay it, my Lord. lam as Pv"
a cheek-mouse. (Of
The LORD MAYOR—Then you must go to prise"
three months, to hard labour.
Debois—But you don't mean anything of that
for me, your Lordship? t
The LORD MAYOR—Certainly I do. You must
the fine, or go to prison too. ore
Debois —Why neither the tobacco nor shawls
mine ; I was surely not so bad as the other. 0
The LORD MAYOR—I can make no distinctio
cannot by the Act of Parliament inflict a smaller pen
The defendants were then committed to prison...s go
It appears that enormous quantities of cige,.'be
manufactured in London from the very worst tuu6clLl
and sold at a guinea or twenty-two shillings 3 PC)t st
foreign cigars ; that hogsheads of the cut-throScreoll
called British brandy is sold as smuggled
brandy, and that British gin, of very inferior gyed
bu
upon which the flavour of the juniper is rei°l3 stad;
aniseed, is passed off upon those who encourage /6
filers in Hollands by fellows like the defendants.
red tia;
above case, the ladies and gentlemen were assure bee
the goods they were invited to purchase ne
brought over, as bales of wool, in a yacht.
CLERKENWELL.
William Neale was brought up for final ex3i- of ',O
charged with wounding Mr. Osman, landlor", os
Red Lion public-house, Cow-cross, so serions'Yojic"
endanger his life. The prosecutor was in ette„; b. t
and seemed to be suffering the most intense angl: nigh r
The evidence went tom rove that on Sunda}
last the prisoner was behaving in a disorderly
at the bar of the Red Lion. The landlord desirfs't cies
to leave. The prisoner refused, and became ythen tb
sc 1,01,
lent. The landlord attempted to expel him, ft,'
prisoner, with an oath, declared he would " he',.,secas
and had no sooner done so than he kicked the Prucith
twice in a delicate and vital part of his pers°ll,f Pll,llO
his might. The landlord fainted from excel' dcler,",(l
One of the blood-vessels in the region of the we "'
ruptured, and profuse hemorrhae.e took place'
be
since then been confined to his at d. wore os-
t
Dr. Joshua Verdy, of Stamford-street, 5 the o.oe
when he arrived the prosecutor was suffering orae °bet
excruciating pain from the injury, and was t°l;
big
in danger. Had the blows been struck all '-
„
sch
death would probably have ensued
stage
The prisoner was committed for trial.
William Harris, the driver of the metropoliatlorl
carriage, No. 334, belonging to Mr. Hedges, and a trilicog
the badge 3,341, was charged with overturnilifosy,
containing 216 bottles of ginger beer, and °°,l lkit°P
the property of a poor costermonger, 6•10
to the amount of 1/. lls. eon' ea
It appeared, from the evidence of Mr. Cara totig
attended on behalf of the Marquis of AngleaeYsocess
Saturday evening last, the Marquis's carriage W" sirit",oe
down Holborn, towards the Blackwall railwaY,4o, bed
and the Marquis were in the carriage. fa reed.
driving at a very slow pace, and when they h:*be jefe-
Fulwood's-rents, where the street is narrow, the c`
-,1
ant, in attempting to drive his omnibus berb!nts fe!A,
riage, pressed upon the wheel of the latter, wiffecte;i6%
it against the truck, whereby the damage w,Etsci. ht
Other evidence, confirmatory of the a,n°o-' pa/
been tendered, the defendant was oblige"
amount of the damage and the costs.
erg'
1012
BIRTHS. tv 131°° oft'
On the 11th inst., at Southampton-stree
f
Mrs. R. G. Hennell, of a son. lady ° tO•
On the 12th inst., at Cadogan-place, the mine 00'
M‘Malion, Esq., of a son, who survived but a f.e,f„rt of e
On the 12th inst., at Camberwell, Mrs. G• 13"
On the 12th inst., in South-street, Grosvenor-eci
floe
'r. W. Capron, of a (laughter, lady °
On the 12th inst., at Cockspur-street, the rob°
Eisenberg, Esq., of a son.
On the 12th inst.. at Fretherne Rectory,
the lady of the Rev. W. L. Darell, M.A., of a (-;e tad,'
0
On the 13th inst., at Surrey Parsonage, 1-" he.lY
Rev. James Sherman, of a daughter. Aet the
.1.
On the 12th inst., at Carlton Villas, Maida-vw
105.
A. Mendes, Esq., f a daughter. —Ace,
On the 12th inst., in King-street, Covent-PA-
C. Stevens, of a son.
riot,
G, outtgcbetsetr.
)1 0,
MARRIED. . CAlliPie 6
On the 11th inst., at Ockly, the Rev. William
,John
M.A., to Charlotte Hay-don, daughter of
Esq., of Leith Hill-place, near Dorking, Stsrr.i v.
iiati,
On the 12th inst., at St. John's, Wappig, IL to
Phillips, Esq., of Trosnant Lodge, PontyPon'
`Vil„or,
daughter of the late W. Maud, Esq. ,-(raiter pf
On the 13th inst., at Surrey Chapel, Mr. daughter
of Nelson-square, to Harriet Eliza, youngest
J. Newsom, of High-street, Se,uthwark.

t)
Pt;

DIED. ',Teo'
On the 20th of January, at Bronti. Bungonia' 1 .O,N'. .1,
Wales, Mary Anne, the wife of W. F. Baker, ElectPc'f
On the 26th nit., at Dover, Mrs. .1• C• Lew. of
• C. ,
Lear, late of Milton, Gravesend. ~,,
Wife
On the 3d inst., at Frankfort-on-the-Main, EP--
R. Roper, Esq., Roscommon, Ireland. a a 67*
On the Bth inst., at Greenwich, Mr. I. Piper, g a ~C., i
On the 9th inst., at Brompton, A. J. Jellicoe, xl'it Soli
eld
On the llth inst., William Tennant Harrison, 'Per'
R. Harrison, Esq., of Doughty-street. ;e S
On the 11th inst., Bridget, wife of Mr. Dan--IPI
of Sebbon's-buildings, Islington. aged Oa?'
On the 12th inst., at Clapton, Mr. W. Wilson, ad, p-
On the 12th inst., at Prospect-place, EdgeWare-r° of
Mary Cook, aged 81. t,ter
On the 13th inst., at Bexley, Emma, youngest dill"'
Mr. Firmin, of the Strand, London.

----- 400 rj!
London: Printed and Published by lITURDO,
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sum Orucebogaw
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the
Daiddiegex, Saturday, June 15, 1844,