The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-20 00:00:00

forward a measure for fixing the duty on foreign
sugar at 345. a cwt. of all kinds, not refined, and 245.
on colonial sugar; that is, they give to the colonists
10s. a cwt. extra on all they brought to market,
seeing that in the case of the Hammer-
smith cabbage-growers they could not sell
one ounce of sugar until they could get the same
price for it that was given for Java sugar, which paid
10s. extra duty. Now, taking the annual import of
sugar from the colonies at 4,000,000 cwt. annu-
ally, that would give them 2,000,0001. sterling at the
lowest as protection, as they called it—monopoly, as
he called it—and that was what the Government pro-
posed to give the West India planters. Those who,
with him, advocated free trade principles in that
House had brought forward a motion for equalizing
the sugar duties—that all sugars, without distinction
of the country in which they were produced, should
pay the same duty to the Queen. That was a ques-
tion which had not excited any great party or poli-
tical interest. The free-traders had the best
of the argument, as he thought, though their oppo-
nents beat them in the votes. Another amendment
proposed was Mr. Miles's proposition, which was to
charge 20s. a cwt. on colonial sugar ; 30s. a cwt. on
certain descriptions of foreign sugar, but he intro.
duced a third line of
_distinction; which was not in-
troduced in the Government measure. According to
the Government measure, all foreign sugar, without
distinction of quality, was charged the same duty ;
but according to Mr. Miles's proposition, all white
clayed sugar, or sugar of a. quality equivalent to white
clayed, was charged a duty of 345. a cwt. He had been
told that a great number of people in that enlightened
metropolis believed that the free-traders were wrong
in resisting Mr. Miles's amendment. In the first
place, its origin was suspicious, but he would not
udge it by that. The _ West Indians complained
to Sir Robert Peel that they did not re-
ceive protection enough, and yet there were
some people gullable enough to believe that they
would propose for themselves a less protection than
Sir Robert Peel would give them. The 4s. reduc-
tion of duty on colonial sugar was ol all colonial
sugar; the 4s. reduction on foreign sugar was
only a reduction on a certain description of
foreign sugar. Now, the free traders were de-
sirous of ascertaining what description of sugar was
affected by this exceptional duty of 345. Men not
conversant with the trade were unfit to judge of those
matters, and they had gone into the City to inquire
what clayed sugars really were ; and they thought
they could not do better, whilst they were consulting
refiners and importers, than consult one of their oldest
and truest friends, who had been the chairman of
Lord John Russell's and Mr. Pattison's Committees
—he meant Mr. Travers.—(Loud cheers.) He be-
lieved Mr. Travers was_ one of the largest wholesale
dealers in sugar in the country; and not being him-
self a colonial proprietor, but simply interested in
the distribution of sugar, his interest was identical
with that of the consumer. He had received a
letter from Mr. Travers on this subject, which he
would read to the meeting. It was these in words :
"MY DEAR SIR,—I repeat to you, without hesitation,
that the practical effect of Mr. Miles's amendment upon
the proposed sugar duties will be to establish a differ-
ential duty of 14s. per cwt. in favour of colonial sugars,
as against three-fourths, at least, of the foreign sugar
named for home consumption in November next. Java
sugar, which will yield much more than half of this
additional supply, is wholly c'ayed, and its lower qualities
are, in substance (or the amount of saceherine matter
contained in them), more than equivalent' to the
white clayed of many other countries, which, in com-
parison, are often weak and worthless. The same
remark will also apply to a portion of the China and
Manilla sugars, though the latter are not clayed at all;
" Then, again, as to the terms brown clayed' and
white clayed,' it is impossible to draw a line of distinc-
tion in which any two parties, whose interests are
oppose-I to each other, agree. There is, between these
two extremes, every shade and variety of brown
white' and white brown,' and, thus, the disputes of
the importer and the Government officer will prove
endless, terminating, however, there is no doubt, in all
cases, in favour of the revenue, and the imposition of
the higher duty, unless, indeed, there is any fraud or
collusion between parties in favtur of the lower duty,
which would, of course, operate to the injury of the
fair trader.
"Both in the substance and colour of sugar there
exists, in fact, as to the value, no point of fixed gene-
ral argument. The real substance of sugar can only be
determined by frequent experiment and real practical
exrerience on the part of the refiners; and the value of
colour is a thing generally settled between buyer and
seller—caprice of the moment—the colour itself varying
with every light to which it is subjected.
"If the Government intend a differential duty of
only 10s. per cwt. between colonial and foreign sugar,
Mr. Miles's amendment will not answer the object. In
the absence of fraud, the colonial interest may be
benefited by it to the extent of 4s. per cwt., but it will
be just so much out of the pocket of the consumer.
" I am, my dear Sir, faithfully yours,
" JOHN TRAVERS.
" Swithin's-lane, June 17, 1844."
He had received letters to the same effect from
Messrs. Thornton and West, Messrs. Goodhart, John
and Henry Taylor, Mr. Peter Martineau, and Mr.
John Davis. He had no hesitation in saying that
that motion was a trap to catch unwary free-traders.
—(llear, hear.) He did not charge Mr. Miles with
originating it, or with being an accomplice in the
trick, but he believed that it had been got up in
Mincing-lane by those who understood well what
they were about, and who thought the free-traders in
the House of Commons would be caught by their
superficial contrivance. The effect of the duty on
colonial sugar being reduced from 245. to 205., while
the great bulk of foreign sugar was only admitted at
a duty of 345., would give 14s. as a protecting duty
to the colonial interest, instead of 10s., as was pro-
posed by the Government plan. There were some
unwary people, who said, if they got sugar cheaper,
what mattered it if the colonial interest got a little
advantage too. The free-traders denied that sugar
would be rendered any cheaper by the reduction of
the duty on colonial sugar. The 4s. would be trans-
ferred from the revenue into the pockets of
the monopolists; and 45., on two million hun-
dred weight of colonial sugar, amounted to
800,0001., which would be annually taken from the
revenue, and which the people would have to make
up in some other shape. The public and the revenue
were in the same boat—the monopolists were in the
other boat. If that sum were thus abstracted from the
revenue for the benefit of the colonial interest, they
would have to pay it in some other form. It was
through the absorption of the revenue that ought to
go to Queen Victoria, by the monopolists of this
country, that they had to pay the income-tax already.
—(Loud cheers.) What was this mean amount they
proposed to transfer to the pockets of the monopolists ?
They said it was a small sum. A duty of 41s. on
4,000,000 cwt.—which was what the monopolists
wanted—amounted to 800,0001. per annum, and that
in capital would purchase what was equal to
20,000,000/. ; and the proposition of the Hon. Member
for Bristol would take from the pockets of the people
of this country another 20,000,0001., and put it into
the pockets of the monopolists.—(Cheers.) He had
stated these things because he perceived there were
good friends of his whose chins were not long enough,
and who were liable to be gulled by this trick.—
(Laughter.) He told them that the reduction of
the duty on colonial sugar would not reduce the
price to the consumer one farthing, and as they
were told that a future period, probably next year,
there would be a great change in the sugar duties—
for Sir R. Peel put a hypothetical case with regard
to the reduction of the colonial duty to 165., and the
reduction of the duty on foreign sugar in a corres-
ponding proportion—it should be their business to
understand what differential duties were, and if they
could once make the people understand that, no Mi-
nister would dare to come down and make such a pro-
position.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he told them that if
the Government were to take oil' the whole of the

duty on colonial sugar to-morrow, they would not
have sugar one farthing cheaper than they had it
now.—(Hear, hear.) The only way to re•luce the
price of sugar was to increase the supply of it in the
market, if the power of consumption remained the
same.—(Hear, hear.) If the whole of the 245. duty
were taken off, it would only be putting the whole
of the amount derived from the duty by the revenue
into the pockets of the monopolists.—(Hear, hear.)
Take off 4s. or ss. from it, and they would have an-
other income-tax.--(Hear, hear.) If they could
only have the public well informed on the sub-
ject, they would soon get —rid of the gross
fraud of differential duties. The proposition
of the Hon. Member for Bristol was neither more

nor less than to take so much from the pockets of the
people and give it to the landed owners of Jamaica.
—(llear, hear.) When the colonists came forward
and proposed protection as a remedy for their griev-
ances, they should see whether it was a system which
worked well for the colonists even themselves. Se-

veral gentlemen in the House of Commons almost
cried over their distresses and the distress of those