The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-21 00:00:00

he put it to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman as a Mem-
ber of her Majesty's Government. which brought in a
Bill to disfranchise Sudbury.--(Cheers.)
COMMONS' INCLOSURE BILL.
In answer to a question from Lord J. MANNERS,
respecting the Commons' Inclosure Bill,
The Earl of LINCOLN said that it was not true that
the Government had taken charge of the Bill. 0n
Monday, were
the probably, he would be able to state what
the intentions of the Government with regard to it, as he
intended before then to have an interview on.the subject
with the Noble Lord who introduced it.
NATIONAL EDUCATION IN. IRELAND.
Mr. SHEIL wished to know from the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the GoVernment whether he had
given any directions to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland
with regard to the distribution of the patronage of the
Church with regard to education.
. Sir R. PEEL said he did not know upon what the ques-
tion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was founded,
and what he stated :to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire-
land was • that he was desirous that the patronage
of the Irish Church should be appropriated to them who
had the best claims on the ground of professional merit
and character, and that he hoped he should never hear a
word respecting any appointment on political grounds.
He gave his cordial approbation to the system ofNational
schools, but it was untrue that he desied the Lord
Lieutenant to require any test on the subject of eduction.
He would again caution Honourable Gentlemen not to
place implicit credit in reports which appeared in news-
papers.—(Hear, hear.)
SUGAR DUTIES.
Mr. GREENE brought up the report on the sugar
duties.

Mr. EWART said that, in the absence of the Hon.
Member for Montrose, who, not being able to attend
himself, had requested him to embody the motion of
which he had given notice, he begged to move that slave
and free labour sugar might be admitted into this country
on the payment of equal duty. Ile (Mr. Ewan)
objected to the. Bill of the Government, because it
was uncertain, and the merchants of the country would
not know how to act. under it.- -He also ob-
jected to the Bill, incense it • left a discre-
tionary power in the hands of the Government.
They had. in vain endeavoured to put down the slave-
trade, by means of gun-boats, and of treaties with
foreign states. Sir Thomas Powell Buxton, and, in fact,
nearly all persons who had
.‘vritten on the subject,
acknowleged the inefficiency of such proceedings.
With whatever object the Bill might have been
framed, it was based on false principles. Such, briefly,
were the reasons which led him to bring this subject
before the House. He called on the Goverment to
adopt one of two alternatives—either to define on what
terms they intended to admit foreign free-labour sugar,
or at, once to adinit foreign slave-laboor. sugar. The ques-
tion was not one of party, but strictly one of principle,
and as - such he entreated the Muse to Consider it.
Hd begged leave, therefore, to move—" That, slave and
free labour sugar be admitted upon the payment of equal
duties."

Mr. JAMES said he deeply regretted that the Hon.
Member for Montrose, who ha,d,put this notice upon the
paper, was prevented by domestic affairs from attending in
his place thatevening. Thepresent motion wasneither more
nor less than the motion which had been brought for-
ward on a former occasion and had been them disposed
of. And how did the Hon. Member for Montrose speak
and vote upon that occasion. Why lie spoke against it,
and he voted against it. He. said it was impossible
• for the West India colonies to compete with, the
foreign growers of sugar, tied up as they were. If any-
thing, then, could astonish hiin (Mr. James) at, his time
of life, and after all he hid seen, it was to find that
Hon. Member putting on the paper such a notice as this.
He recommended the adopting measures that' should
insure a 'supply of free labour to the West India colo-
nies, and suggested that the Government should' afford
the planters a supply of convict labour. Many parts of
the colonies were healthy; the expense of the transport
would be less, while the punishment would- be greater.
He stated that convict labour was thus employed in
Bermuda. He could not support the motion, and. de-
nounced it as unjust.
Mr. BARCLAY said it was impossible for the colony
to prosper till this question was finally settled, and he
hoped the present arrangemeht would be definitive for a
great number of years. As long as they were exposed
to these harrassing discussions, capital would be prevented
from going into the colonies.
The House then divided, and the numbers were—
For receiving the report • .183
For Mr. Ewart's amendment
Majority for Ministers ---1 18
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to -know when the Right
Hon. Baronet intended to proceed with the Bill.
Sir R. PEEL said, in case there should be a disposi-
tion to enter into a lengthened discussion upon the Bill
on Monday, he proposed that the Bank charter should
have precedence on that day, and that the further con-
sideration of the sugar duties should be. postponed till
Thursday. He would name Monday for the third read-
ing of the Bill with that understanding.
The report was then received, and the Bill was or-
dered to be engrossed, and read a third time on Monday.