The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-25 00:00:00

sident of the Board of Trade had acknowledged, and the
Right Hon. Baronet, in bringing forward his statement, de-
clared that it was the intention of the Government to give the
colonial proprietor a protective duty of 10s. 6d. per cwt. What
was the meaning of a protective duty ? Why, to raise the
price of the colonial planter 10s. 6d., 55., or 2s. over that of
any other produce. The Hon. Members for Cumberland and
Bristol understood it in this its simple meaning. They did not
take it in any new or novel sense. They said, " 10s. 6d. for pro-
tection means that their sugar should be raised 10s. 6d. higher
in our market than it would be if there was no protection given
to it." It had been stated by the Right Hon. Baronet, that if
the West Indies sent 104,000 tons of sugar raised by a law
pissed in that House, at 10s., the natural price would be
14,700/. ; 7,3501. for the East Indies, and 4,20 1. for the Mau-
ritius, making a total of 2,625,0001. Whilst this was going
on, it must be borne in mind that the whole exports to the
West Indian colonies in the year 1843 was considerably
under three millions, and yet they were going to vote
to them as a protectioa the sum < f 147,0001. nearly more than
b itf the amount of the whole trade they had with this country.
They were to give to the Mauritius a protection of 4,208/.,
whilst the goods imported there from this country, in 1843,
only amounted to 2,5801. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the:late
President of the Board of Trade, speaking with a freedom
which he did not use while in office, said the Mauritius
had no claim to protect.on ; but the Right Honourable
Gentleman admitted that the only ground which
could entitle tbem to protection was the high price
of labour. Now every body knew that there was as great an
abundance of labour in the Mauritius as in Dorset.—(Hear,
hear.) Every body knew that in the East Indies—they had
the authority of the Chancellor of the Exchequer for it—
labour was not scarce. Now, besides all these extra pay-
ments, they were called upon to make, there was another most
serious and important matter. They must bear in mind the
great trade carried on between this country and the Brazils.
This trade, according to the last returns of 1840
and 1841, amounted to two millions and a half.
Of this, the production of cotton manufacture alone
exported into that country amounted to one million and a half.
—( Hear, hear.) Now the Right Hon. Baronet the Prime
Minister, on bringing forward his financial statement, dwelt
upon the importance of the cotton trade ; but, notwithstand-
ing some of his measures bearing upon this subject were con-
sidered by some to be inexpedient. Now, here was trade of
the same description extending to a million and a half, and yet
the Right Hon. Baronet, by the measures he was passing, was
not only decreasing, but absolutely destroying the trade.—
Brazil naturally and very justly said, "We will take your
goods if you will take our sugar in return." But he thought the
strongest argument in favour of the proposition which had been
brought forward to-night had been those that bore upon the
interest of the West India colonist. He would ask the House
to observe what was the progress made in the cultivation of
several articles in those colonies for many years past. New,
in the year 1821, the West India islands shipped to this country
raw cotton to the amount of 5,854,5001 b ; in 1840, nineteen
years afterwards, 866,0001 b; while the whole quantity which
came in now did not amount to mere than from 12,0001 b. to
55,0001 b. Now, in 1821, the United States imported
116,000,00)lb. ; in 1840 154,000,0001 b. ; and it must
be remembered that during the whole of this time the West
Indies had been enjoying a protection upon sugar as well as
upon cotton, but the United States had none whatsoever. And
yet the exports of the one had increased, while the exports of
the other, in the same article, had very materially diminished.
Between the years 1830 and 1835 the exports of sugar into this
country from the colonies amounted to 3,375,819 cwts. ; from
1637 to 1842 the amount was 3,868,500 cwts. But in the
article of coffee the results were still more striking. Between
1830 and 1835. the average exports of the West Indies
were 20,837,000/.—from 1836 to 1842 the amount was only
16,618,e00/., showing that the article of cotton had given
place to the production of sugar. In the article of coffee,
they had made progress also, while the production of cotton
had retrograded to less than 20 per cent.—( Hear, hear)—
and notwithstanding, there was a protective duty
more or less upon every one of these articles.—(Hear.)
Monopoly acted as an opiate, and at the same time it made
every interest grumblers. The West Indian interest, fifty
years ago, made the most extraordinary complaints, and pro-
posed the most extraordinary remedies ; they prayed that
slavery might not be abolished, on the score of humanity!
Yet they treated their negroes so barbarously that their numbers
constantly decreased. The Right Hon. Baronet recommended
science to the farmers. Lord Elgin, in Jamaica, thought his
Government distinguished because under it the first plough had
been used in the island. Why was such advice given to two
such different bodies? Because they were both protected.
No attempt whatever had been made to explain the difference
that was made between East Indian and Mauritius sugar ; and
it had been found necessary, by the late proceedings of the
Board of Trade, to write a pamphlet, defending the Premier from
the supposition of having attacked the West Indian interest.
He maintained that this system was hurtful, not only to the
colonies, but to the characters of public men. On the pro-.
posal of a reduction on the duty on gloves, silks, and other
articles, in 1824, the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) re-
minded the House that the eyes of Europe were upon them,
and called upon them not to yield to the fears of the timid or
the representations of the interested. Why was he not equally
courageous in the matter of sugar ?—( Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the
Home Department, in bringing forward his Bill for
making an alteration in the Law of Settlement, stated
that one in ten of the population of England and Wales were
paupers, and a million and a half subsisted on parochial relief ;
and that, since 1815, when the corn-law was passed, there
had been spent, in administering parochial relief, the sum of
two hundred millions. Must there not be something wrong in
the system, when it led to such an extent of pauperism ?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer had not spoken on this ques-
tion, and he presumed the reason was that he was himself a
West India proprietor. There was certainly mo-
desty in that course ; but still he thought the Chancellor
of the Exchequer ought to speak on such a question, and
to consider only the public interests. He protested against
the continuance of a system for which none but the lamest
excuses were offered ; a system which formed the main barrier
to that successful attack which must at no distant day be made
on that greatest of monopolies, the monopoly of the food of
the people.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) This debate
bad gone on long enough.—(lronical cheers.) It was not at all
remarkable that corn and sugar monopolists should be found
banded together. He believed no one who had risen on his
side of the question had expected to offer anything soothing
to the feelings of Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—( Hear, hear. )
They were of another sart.--( Loud ironical cheers.) They
came there to produce an injustice, which they proclaimed out
of doors, and which they did not proclaim with less freedom in
that House. " Don't suppose," said the Hon. Gentlemen,
" that we are here for any purposes of our own—(Laughter)—
or for any purposes of yours—( Ironical cheers and laughter
from the Ministerial benches.) We are here for the purposes
of those who sent us ; and if you were to do that which those
who sent you profess to represent they sent you to do, or wish
you to do, I am sure there would not be another debate wherein
a single individual would stand up in favour of this gross injus-
tice—an injustice which, by-and-by, you will be ashamed of." In
the division there might be a very moderate minority in favour of
the abolition of protection ; but if they had had any experience
in Parliamentary warfare they must recollect that all the great
questions which had been carried had been at one time
as far distant from being carried as that before the House.
Why, when their slaves were being wrested from
them, within three years of the time when the Minister pro-
posed the abolition of slavery, the West India papers in their
interest stated that the Anti-slavery Society was dead, and
that its last meeting at the Crown and Anchor Tavern was
the effort of an expiring faction.—( Hear, hear.) They might
depend upon it, that the party which was in favour of a free
trade in sugar and a free trade in corn, was one that was every
day swelling in numbers, while their own ranks were
every day being thinned.—(Cheers from the Opposition.)
Although they might divide that night, and be in a minority,
yet there would be other occasions before these sugar reso-
lutions were passed, when they could ask for an explanation
why this tax of two millions was imposed to benefit the East
India proprietors and the planters of the Mauritius, who had
no claim, and had made no claim for it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could assure
the House that there were many reasons for his not trespassing
on the time of the House. The subject before the House had
been almost entirely exhausted, and if he wanted proof of this,
he need only refer to the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who
had just sat down, for in that the Hon. Gentleman had wan-
dered into every possible subject but that before the House.
The Hon. Gentleman had thought fit to impute to him (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) that he was actuated by feelings
of interest on this question, as he had property in the West
Indies. If the Hon. Gentleman had known him during the
number of years he had been in that House, he would not have
expressed such an opinion. He (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) thought he might appeal to his politi-
cal opponents as to his general political conduct.
It was not difficult to make these insinuations, and he usually
found them unnoticed, and he would have done so now had
not the charge been so pointedly made. The Hon. Member
for Stockport had in the course of his speech read a letter.
Now he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had seen that letter
and the first paragraph in it—which the Honourable
Member for Stockport did not read—advocated the
imposition of a discriminating duty of 10s. upon foreign sugar.
Mr. COBDEN—I gave the facts of last year.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER repeated his
statement that the opening of the letter contained an argument
in favour of a discriminating duty. He apologised for being
unprepared to enter into this question, as he intended to do so
on the motion of the Noble Lord the Member for the City of
London.
Lord SANDON rose amid loud cries of " Divide, divide."
He said that Hon. Gentlemen opposite had gone on the as-
sumption that the amount of duty regulated the price of foreign
and colonial sugar. Nothing could be more fallacious than
this. The difference between the duty on foreign and colonial
sugar now was 635. and 245., and yet in the price the diffe-
rence was only 7s. The only thing which regulated price was
the supply.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared,
For the Amendment
Against it
Majority —l27
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock.

HORRIBLE MURDER AT RAMP

STEAD.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

' Sta,—ln your publication of this evening it is stated that.
the Mr. Delarue, who was barbarously murdered at Hamp-
stead, was supposed to be related to the Messrs. Delarue of
Bunhill-row.
.You will oblige us by the earliest possible correction of this
mistake, which has already occasioned many anxious in-
quiries In London, and which, unless immediately rectified,
Is calculated, from your extensive circulation in the country,
to spread unnecessary alarm among our friends at a distance.
—Yours, very respectfully,
110, Bunhill-row, Feb. 94, 18'4i.THOkS DELARUE AND CO.

PHILANTHROPIC
LAMBETH
formances at the Surrey SOCIETY.—The per-
th? benefit of the Lambeth Theatre
on
Wednesday
are for
Philanthropic Society. The
object of this Society is to furnish relief to the necessi-
tous poor of the district. and
must have occasioned a severe
benefitl)essure on their funds
we trust that the approaching
coffers of this excellent chanty. will replenish the
THE HISTORY OF MARGARET CAT
CTOl(GP:liilrle-
are requested to state that Mr. Colburn:
Marl-
borough-street, has this day published • Historyb of
Margaret Catchpole, a Suffolk Girl," dedicated,
per-
mission, to the Marchioness Cornwallis, in 3 vols 37, small
Bvo., with illustrations, which can now be had. of all
booksellers. Mr. Colburn has also just published the
following popular new novels :-1. Strathern ; a Story
of the Present Day, by the Countess of Blessington. 2.
Lady Cecilia Farrencourt, by Henry. Milton, Esq.,
author of "Rivalry." 3. Hillingdon Hall ; a Tale of
Country Life, by the author of " Handley
Parsons and Widows, by the author of " Peter Prig-
gins." 5. Young Love, by Mrs. Trollope. 6. Mr.
Lever's " Arthur O'Leary," edited by Harry Lorrequer,
and illustrated by George Cruikshank, cheap edition,
uniform with the author's other works, in 1 vol., Bvo.,
price only 12a. bound.