The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-03 00:00:00

birb 'ambition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock.

TATTERSALL'S.-THIS EVENING.
QUARTER TO SIX O'CLOCK.
ASCOT CUP.
7 to 4 agst Alice Hawthorn •
7 to. 1 agst Lothario
8 to 1 agst Coranna
10 to 1 agst Poison

ASCOT VASE.
7 to 4 agst Alice Hawthorn
2 to 1 agst Alice Hawthorn winning both Cup and ViIES
ASCOT STAKES.
5 to 1 agst Priscilla Tomboy
6 to 1 agst Fox
6 to 1 agst Donnybrook
Blackdrop does not start, and Ameer has broke his leg.

ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY.-THE
FREE-TRADE QUESTION.
(THIS DAY.)
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. SMITH, of Sheffield, rose to address the meeting. If
he could have pinned his faith upon any set of men, it would
have been upon his friends on the platform ; but, having
carefully considered the subject, he had come to a diametri-
cally opposite conclusion. This question involved the exer-
cise of the right of private judgment. The question was as
to the best mode of carrying out the anti-slavery. prin-
ciple. The adopting fiscal regulations involved the principle
of applying to Government to inflict a pecuniary penalty
upon those who differed with them in opinion. They had
no right to do this. He held it was not the best course for
any philanthropic body to apply to Government to carry out
its views. The society which sought such aid fettered their
operations and became mixed up with political parties.
Where was the principle to end? Was. it the province of
Government to interfere in this way? No 1 They had too
much Government meddling already. If they bad a right to
go to Government to carry out their views, so had any other
body a right to ask for the imposition of a tax to carry out their
views. They were establishing a dangerous precedent, and by
thus acting they were placing the anti-slavery principle at issue
with other great principles.—(Cheers.) Free trade was phi-.
lanthropy upon its noblest basis. It was said, it was a diffi-
cult thing to ask Government to -maintain 'existingduties
and to impose fresh duties. The principle was the same. He
denied the existence of any such distinction as that now
sought to be established.—(l-lear.) He did not hesitate to
say that if they succeeded in their non-intercourse with
Brazil, they would inflict upon the population of Sheffield
and Manchester a•- degree -of suffering of which
they had no' idea. Sheffield- was reduced almost-
to a state of desolation by these fiscal regulations..
If they ceased to buy, they must cease to sell, and by re-
fusing to buy Brazilian sugar they tied up the bands of the
Sheffield workman, and prevented him earning his living by
his labour. These men thought the sympathies of the
Society should not be carried to the other side of the water
only. They demanded their sympathy—not their alms,
but their assistance—to enable them to earn their
own living. He considered that their plan was
ineffectual for the suppression of slavery in the Brazils, be-
cause nothing was more delusive than certificates of origin.
They would continually have forged certificates, and a re-
gular system would arise of defeating the law. Now, accord-
ing to our treaty with America, we should be bound to take
the slave-grown sugar of Louisiana on the most favourable
terms. It was true that Louisiana did not produce more
than enough for its. own consumption ; but Cuba sugar
might be imported into Louisiana, and the whole of the Louis-
iana sugar might find its way into this country. Would you
take stolen goods it was said? He knew no difference be-
tween the receiver and the tkief; and he could not make any
difference between the man who took Russian tallow, know
ing that it was purchased by Brazilian sugar, or he who wore
American cotton and the man who received Brazilian sugar
directly. But then it was admitted that all that was wrong,
but they wished not to do any more .wrong. Let them first
take the mote out of their own eye before they attempted to.
take the beam out of their brother's eye. They were not in a
position to go to the Government and ask them to impose a
pecuniary fine upon those who differed with them in opinion.
Ile should therefore move, as an amendment, that the clause
in question Ise annulled.
Mr. Joi'sx BRIGHT, M.P., rose -to second the amend-
ment. It would be observed that with respect to this question
there were. many points on which they were agreed. They
were all agreed in opinion as to their -detestation of the
horrors of slavery and the slave trade. They were all agreed
that prima fiicie it would be better to have a free impor-
tation of sugar and of every other commodity. It would be
admitted that freedom of trade conduced to maintain the
peace of the world, and that restriction produced
first the •war of tariffs, and then the .war of force,
but it was said that thii was an exception if
we refused to Aid intercourse. with nations holding slaves,
they ought.also to refuse t 6 hold intercourse with nations
committing crimes of other kinds. Now, that was an un-.
tenable principle. If they refused the produce ofßrazil, they
should adopt tLe same rule with respect to Russian and
Egyptian produce. The produce of land which was stolen,
was as much stolen goods as the produce of labour which was
stolen, therefore they ought to refuse the produce of our West
Indian Islands, and of the United States. He considered the
principle absurd, but if they adopted it they should carry it out.
They were told they were increasing national guilt. Who
were to be the judges of national guilt? Ile denied that we
ware increasing national guilt, or the right of any body of
men to call on the GoVernment to interfere to make them
nationally moral in that respect. Everybody was anxious
to sell more of our cutlery- to Brazil.
:We exported large
quantities of goods to the Brazils, sleet received in
return sugar, a portion of which was refined
in bond, and a portion taken to foreign countrit.
Our ships took sugar from Brazil to. Russia, and purchased
leather, and tallow, and flax, and brought them to this coun-
try. Did not the gentleman, therefore, who lit his candle,
or wore his shoes, or put on his shirt, incur the same airiourit
of guilt as. If lie used Brazilian sugar ?—(Loud cheers.)
There was no guilt in either. Then came the question of the
stimulus to the slave trade. Now he did not admit that the
total abolition of all discriminating duties would stimulate
slavery, although be was willing to admit it for the sake of
argument. The Committee admitted that theypetitioned Go-
vernment in favour of the admission of free=labour sugar.
Now_ that would give quite as great a stimulits. to slavery as
the admission of all sugar, without distinction. There was no
essential difference between the effect on slavery of the pro-
position made by the Committee and that of the free traders.
The free labour sugar of Java was in the markets of the
world competing with Brazilian sugar, and selling at the
same price. It was absurd to say that ours was a better
market than any other—we did not give a higher price than
any other parties; it Was clear that the price here must be re-
gulated by that abroad. The free labour ' sugar which
now went to Germany would come here,' and its place
there would be supplied by slave labour sugar. With.
regard to Lousianian sugar it should be remembered'
that every Lousianian ,planter exporting a hogshead of
sugar was entitled to, receive a hogshead of Cuba sugar free
of duty ; that would set free the, whole of the Louisianian
sugar, which we were bOund to take by treaty at the lowest
rate of duty. Let their see the argument which they were
giving to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a planter, and
the President of the -Board of Trade, a planter; they were
giving them every inducement to continue slavery in Brazil,
in order to keep up their own monopoly, which would of
coarse fall whenever slavery should fall in the Brazils.
They made the Government odious abroad. The Brazils
knew that the Government was not sincere, and therefore they
viewed them in the light of hypocrites. It was no light mat-
ter for the Committee to weaken the exertions of the friends
of the anti-slavery cause in this country, by dividing it upon
this'question. It was giving a weapon to monopoly, and
monopoly was but a milder form of slavery. They were
abetting a crime of precisely the same nature as that which
they warred against, although it might not come in so-hide=
one a form. At the late meeting there was manifested a
strong feeling in favour of the abrogation- of-that clause; and
the Committee should recollect, that however conscientious
and honest might be their scruples; those scruples were not
participated in by the bulk of those classes who had been the
very backbone of the anti-slavery movement in this country..
They bad no right to inflict upon the poorer clues of this
country the sufferings which they were inflicting on them by
the course they were pursuing. If they persisted in carrying
out this most unreasonable proposition there was scarcely an
individual in the counties of York or Lancaster who could
give the society his cordial support. Throughout the king-
dom there was a difference of opinion with the committee.
It was not essential, and why, therefore, should they obsti-
nately adhere to it. He was sorry to hear from Joseph John
Gurney, as lie had from others, that they would with-
draw unless this resolution were carried. He doubted
whether the present was the sort of meeting •in
which the question ought to be discussed. The question had
been carried by a large majority in Exeter Hall against the
resolution. The Government were making use of the Com •
mittee as their tools merely—had' no sort of affection for
them—and would throw them off as soon as it might suit
their purpose.
Mr. LEFHOY considered that the admission of slave-
labour sugar would effect the repeal of all the
laws which they had passed for the abolition of slavery.
Mr. Bright said that this matter would interfere with the
commercial policy of the country; but if 'that gentleman
thought so, surely the best means would -be to apply for a
remedy for this evil.to, the Legislature, and not impede the
great Christian movement for the abolition of the slave trade.
He would trouble the meeting' no further than protesting,
strongly against any measure that would present any obstruc-
tion to the negotiations which the Society might enter into'
with the Government.—(Cheers.)
A long discussion here.. rose upon the proposition of ad-
journing the meeting until four o'clock, which was supported
by Mr. George Thompson, Mr, Bright, and the majority, of the
meeting, and eventually carried.

- The meeting resumed at half-past three o'clock, although
it was understood to hare been adjourned for an hour from
three o'clock. ,

-After a few words from Mr. AtxxAsihsa,
Mr. G. THOMPSON said he felt assured that slavery, in its
most odious forth,' existed in the' Rroduction of other articles
of trade ; bnt they now songht to induce the meeting to be--
lieve that the Government ought to discriminate the particu-
lar articles which should be consumed by the great mass of
the people.
He thought their condUct was in some degree inconsistent,
'for they_ made no efforts to do 'away with the serfdom
of Russia, or the galling slavery which prevailed in
Egypt. But they never protested against commer-
cial relations with thcse countries. , He considered
all legislation upon this subject was wrong, because they
were only a minority, and consequently had no -right to
coerce the great majority by legislation. They disclaimed
all appeal to force,' yet they sought for the Government
force, which was nothing more than physical ;'and he thought
it was a wicked prostitution of the powers •of Goverpment
to prevent a population of twenty-six millions from trading
with the Brazils or Cuba. The great mass of the people
were opposed to such a course ; and they never
committed power' into the hands of Government
'for any such a purpose. No justification could be given for
limiting free trade or preventing the people from purchasing
this sugar while there were so many other slave-grown ar-
ticles in consumption is this country. • He regretted to hear
some of his friends pronounce those to be nevi fangled doc-
trines, and suggested that they should go back to the days of
:Wilberforce.
Mr.,S. BOWLING thought that it was not right to attribute
error or sin to others because their conduct might be contrary
to the views of the objectors. lie denied that the effect
Would Press so.heavily *vim the artisans of Leeds and other
large manufacturing towns, as had been represented by his
friends, Messrs. Bright and Thompson. He could hot tinder-
stand why the minority now—supposing it to be a minority
—had not quite as much right to appeal to the Government
now acCiarkson had to apply almost unsupported for the
abolition of slavery.
wMsuultrcg.aSr. not
GURNEY did not believe that the majority of
the people of England, if they ' knew the case thoroughly,
hadHe ee
tooto haigfhreaenaiddmeaisosfion the
people o f all o
E descriptionsngiand
of o
to believe that. The general prosperity of Culni would he
considered be 'materially and rapidly increased if slavery
were abolished in that country, although some philters and