The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 15, 1845.

Colonial-office had sanctioned the explanation ; and therefore
he (Mr. Aglionby) would say that this was an agreement,
though Hon. Gentlemen opposite mig'it say it was only " a
ilccumest.'' But, let its name be what it may, he had many
many times met Captain Fitzroy since, and conversed with
him upon the subject. Yet he (Mr. Aglionby) up to that
time had never heard of those letters, though lie mentioned to
Captain Fitzroy what had already taken place on this subject.
Now, he would ask, what was the reason that those letters
which, no doubt, contained—
Sir ROBERT PEEL begged leave to remind the lion.
Member that be ought to confine himself to his arguments, and
not assume the contents of a letter.

Mr. A GLIONBY—He begged pardon for having trans-
gressed any rule of discussion, but at all events he believed it
was admitted that Lord Stanley had received those letters.—
lie could not understand how these letters had been kept
secret. If lie had been aware of this duplicity it would have
induced him as an individual to consult Lord Stanley on the
subject, and unless some explanation were given, he should
never be able to meet that Neble Lord with anything like
good faith.
Mr. Hl3 TT could not see how the subject could be brought
before the Hou-e on Tuesday. Many motions of considerable
importance stood on the paper for that day, and he therefore
could not see how the question could be brought forward. lle
did not think that the Hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary
for the Colonies would have displayed so much zeal to have
the matter discussed on Tuesday, had be not been aware that
it was quite impossible th..t it could be brought forward.
Mr. HUME said there was a charge made against the
Noble I.ord, the Secretary for the Colonies, and another
against the Colonial Department of the Government. Now,
he would suggest, that these two charges should be discussed
separately. Would it not be better for the Government to
tal:e the one on an order day, when they could command time
and postpone the personal charge until another occasion ? The
first question might be ten oa Monday or Wednesday, but
he thought Monday the preferable day.
Sir R. PEEL said the sugar duties and other measures of
importance were to be brought forward on those days, and he
saw no reason why the New Zealand question could not come
under the consideration of the House on Tuesday.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL entirely agreed with the Hon.
Member for Montrose, whatever was the day mentioned. It
would be better to separate the personal charge against the
Noble Lord from that question which related to the govern-
merit of the colony of New Zealand. For his part, he wished
the question to be fully discussed, and every explanation given.
There was no doubt there would be a large majority to support
the Neble Lord ; but the other question was invested with
more importance, and he hoped it would not be lost sight of.
New Zealand was an important colony, and, if rightly go-
verned, he thought it was destined to have a great influence on
that part of the world. He believed the 18,000 or 0,000
Englishmen residing there were destined to become the pro-
genitors of the future governors of that part of the world. The
correspondence which had taken place between the Colonial
Government and the New Zealand Company did net evince a
very good spirit, but he hoped when the matter was brought
fo- ward it would be discussed with more calmness.

„
Mr. HOPE said several of the important motions which
stool for Tuesday had been withdrawn, and he certainly enter-
tained the idea of being enabled to bring the question forward
on that day.
Mr. COLLETT, as one of those who had a motion on the
paper for Tuesday, was quite prepared to postpone it, if it would
in any way convenience the Government.
The matter then dropped.
GREECE.

Mr. B. COCHRANE said he wished to ask a question of
the Right Hon. Baronet respecting the communication which
had been held with France upon the affairs of Greece. He did
not stish to say anything which would interrupt the entente
cordial between this country and France. He was aware
that, whatever might be the nature of the conduct of
the Government, the people did not share in the feelings
of the Minister. He had been lately there, and had hedrd the
conduct of the Ministry denounced in the most unmeasured
trims, but., if there was any difficulty, he did not wish to open
the question, but he trusted such was not the case.
Sir R. PEEL said that the opinion expressed on this oc-
casion was not, he thought, effected by anything which had
fallen fom him. With respect to the country of Greece itself,
it was most desirable that the present attempt should prove
successful, for it was a great attempt to combine a popular
government with a limited monarchy. With respect to Sir Ed-
ward Lyon, he had heard some comments the other night on
naval officers ; but he believed that all would allow that in the
difficult position in which that gallant officer had been placed,
he had exhibited en example that the affairs of a great
country might with safety be committed to the care cf a naval
officer. With respect to M. Piscatori, the Hon. Gentleman
must excuse him making any remarks. With respect to
Genoral Church, he must say that he and every Member in
that House had joined in the expression of deep regret for the
ronioval of that gallant and distinguished officer from office.
He had served his country with ability 'and zeal for more
than twenty )ears, and what was the cause of the removal of
that distinguished officer? With respect to the loan promoted
by Russia, France, and this country, he believed that Greece
was ready to pay the burden of its debts. He felt sure the
House would excuse him for not expressing an opinion as to
the acts of the Government. He conceived it to be his duty
to respect the independent actions of the Government,and he
would rather not trust himself with the expression of his opi-
nion, however strongly he might feel on the occasion.

allowance was made also to the retail dealers. He held in his
hand a bundle of letters from all parts of the country, and by
those lie learned that the stocks in the hands of the retail
dealers were never so light as at the present moment. That it
was difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain the extent of the
stock in the hands of the retail dealers, lie was quite ready to
allow; but he thought that this circumstance ought net to pre-
vent that justice should be done to wholesale dealers, and thus
obviate that stagnation in the trade whieh was now so
grievously felt, and he did hope that from these several consi-
derations her Majesty's Ministers would be moved to listen
with attention to the representations of the memorialists, and
with this hope he would leave the matter to the House and
the Government.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted that
he should not seem to treat the motion of the Hon. Member
for Lambeth with want of attention. If he did oppose it, public
considerations alone induced his conduct. If he granted the
petition of the memorialists he would be doing injustice to all
other parties engaged in the trade. Now the petition which
the lion. Gentleman had presented was from six of the whole-
sale sugar dealers in London, when the wholesale dealers
alone amounted to fifty-two. The Hon. Gentleman seemed
to think that these gentlemen conceived themselves taken by
surprise. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought ;hat
if any person had observed the course of the debates during
lait session, he must have conceived that one of the earl:est mea-
sures this year would be some modification of the sugar duties.
So far as the time at which the charge in the duties had been
proposed those parties had no cause of.complaint, and, there-
fere, they had no fair claim for a return of duty. The effect
that the Government anticipated from this change in the duty
was a greatly increased consumption, which would make up for
any loss which the complainieg parties might sustain. The
Hon. Gentleman had grounded his claims for these parties on
precedent, and alluded to what had taken place some years ago,
with respect to sugar. That precedent to which the
Honourable Gentleman referred he ( the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) thought was not analogous to the pre-
sent one. In that case no notice as in the present
case was given, so with the case of wine to which the Hon.
Gentleman had referred. Wine was an excisable article, and
therefore the course which had been adopted at the time of the
reduction of the duty upon it could not be taken now with
respect to sugar.
Mr. LABOUCFIERE said that upon this question he had
been dispo ed to adopt the line which the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done, but yet,
upon mature deliberation, he had come to the conclusion that,
in the present instance, a case had been made out by the mer-
chants of London, who had signed the memorial, and he thought
that the House would not be acting justly by them if it did not
adopt some measures which would be calculated to afford them
the relief they prayed for. He thought that, under the peen-
liar circumstances, it was the duty of the house to comply
with the whole of their demands, and to make such arrange-
ments as would mitigate the evils they complained of. The
sugar duties had been brought forward this session under cir-
curnstaeces totally unprecedented in the history of commercial
legislation. Last year they had passed a Bill, fixing the duties
up to the month of July.
An HON. MEMBER—No: June.
Mr. L AI3OUGH ERE—Well, June in this year ; and they
were now called upon, at an earlier period, to alter the very
spirit and letter of that Act. They were disturbing the ar-
rangements on which the parties connected with the sugar-trade
had calculated, and or, which they had relied. They had a right
to conduct their commerce in accordance with the principle
of that Act, and it would be a most unusual circumstance if
Parliament were to step in and disturb those arrangements.
He did not wish to introduce matters which had been already
sufficiently discussed on the former evenings, and he would
therefore confine himself to this one particular. What did
Government do in this case ? They called upon the House to
effect a total change in the very measure they had passed the
year before. The respectable merchants who signed the memorial
begged the House and the Government to renounce their inten-
tions with regard to the sugar du ies. lie had stated last year,
and he tepnated again, that if the Government had settled the
question during the last session, they would have been seared
the difficulty of their present position. If they had settled the
property-tax also last session, they would also have avoided the
difficulties and perplexities which now attended that question.
How would this proposed measure affect the holders of sugar in
bond? They bad purchased sugars in large quantities, at a con-
siderably higher rate of duty than would be levied under the
present measure proposed by the Government. The Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said
that if Government granted this boon, it would be a departure
from established rule, and would furnish a dangerous prece-
dent. But he ( Mr. Labouchere) thought that when
they could so much and so easily alleviate the
hardship endured by a large and respectable body of persons,
it was incumbent on them to do so. If Parliament had passed
a Bill for a year, and if they afterwards sought to disarrange
the settlement made so lately, it was but perfectly reasonable
that they should at least protect those individuals from the
losses which they might sustain by such a change in the
sugar duties. The Honourable Member for Lambeth had
stated that many persons in this town would be great
sufferers, and he knew of four houses in Liverpool that had at
that time in bond at least 550 tons of sugar, on which
they had paid duties to the amount of 6,0001. Was it fair or
jest that these men should suffer to this extent by the proposed
alterations of the Government? Certainly not. He agreed
with the general principle pursued by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, but he greatly doubted the propriety of the answer
returned by the Government to the memorialists. He greatly
doubted the propriety of, after having passed a measure for one
year, to seek to subvert it at the end of nine months ; and he
was of opinion, therefore, that Government should use all en-
deavours to mitigate the hardships to which the sugar mer-
chants would be exposed by the alteration.
Sir H. DOUGLAS said that be had presented a petition, a
few days before, to the same effect ; but he was not aware that
any of the names of the persons who had signed the memorial
would be found attached to the petition. Of this he was cer
fain, that not one of the sugar refiners signed that memorial.
He had, after a careful consideration of the circumstances, come
to the conclusion that the representations of the memorialists
were founded in justice and in equity, and he would therefore
vote in favour of the motion. _ _ _

Mr. AGLIONBY was anxious that some indulgence should
be extended to those smaller merchants who took sugar out of
the Queen's warehouses, to supply the present demand. Those
who had large funds could afford to purchase large stocks, and
to leave them in the Queen's warehouses for an indefinite pe-
riod ; but there was a still larger class of purchasers who were
obliged to remove from the Queen's stores what was required
for the present demand, and he thought it hard that they filmed
Eo
fL Ll a considered
, oe
itfyhahf
raonha:gdrte
bdtcohephnbeeua;Grnl
eyegnohepevaaaetrbssore,es
inesidd.nmdi
being
fornnmß tua,t
not inp pledge
themselves that no further alteration would take place until
p-
posing
have the same advantage as the other and more favoured
pc class.—.
ct(hAHeße aApr .ewt)
merchants
eooarntr
cit
alhp:asen,trhti
aosa
ndt,
the wetreheraAeit
pux.ocpfnei
induced
lastet
htdoe.
eewe
viemnel vrei ey-t
t
body knew that some further alteration was intended.
Mr. F. BARING said he did not wish to trespass long upon
the time of the House, and therefore he would begin by saying
that this question had been discussed in a spirit of of hostility
more warm than he had been led to expect. But, then, be
should observe on the other hand, that if he were disappointed
by the manner in which this question had been met, he should
also be ready to admit that the circumstances with regard to
the importation of wine, and the 'bottling of it,
demanded some explanation. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had given a certain power to extensive
merchants with regard to bottling wines ; but why not give
some relief to the small retail dealers?—( Hear, hear.) The
Right lion. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government
had said something to the effect that such an extension of
the excise laws would be made ; and if SO, he (Mr. Baring)
would ask why not also give a protection to the small dealers in
sugar ?—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Baring) had been told that
the required relief would be found in the reduced prices of
questionn gt that
talti the
t h ;e charges sugar that would follow the proposed alterations ; but he
very much feared that no such result would follow.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said he slid not rise for the
made against the Govern-
edhe begged to assure Hon.
purposei\nicenm Govern-
ment
eurpos
of
onpdpteoifisei
denial of the drawback, of which
they so much complained, would not be found to present so
many causes of complaint as appeared to be anticipated.
He hoped the House would agree with his Right lion. Friend
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that any deviation from the
established practice would be a most dangerous precedent, and
he wondered that the Hen. Member for Montrose, and others
who were the great advocates of economy, and always so care-
fel of the public purse, should recommend this sacrifice of the
revenue.
Mr. HUME said it was true that he had often had
occasion to complain of the extravagance of Ministers,
and of the House—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—but
he had never complained of justice.—(Loud cheers.) The
proposition of the Government in the present case was
not only against justice, but it was against the law.—( Hear.)
The Act of Parliament for the sugar duties now in force was to
have continued until the sth of July next; and he had received
letters front Liverpool, London, and other places, stating that
the holders of sugar in bond had acted upon the understanding
that there might be some change in the law in July, but not
until then.—( Hear, hear.) He thought that the late Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer hail very properly pointed out the
difference, as to whether the alteration was to take place now
or in July.—( hear, hear.) The parties who would he prepared
for an alteration in the law in July were now taken by sur-
prise.—( Hear, hear.) He agreed with his Right lion. Friend
the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, that no change of this
kind could take place without some loss to individuals.
But he never before heard, that where there was gross injus-
tice done, the House would not interfere to remedy that, be-
cause justice could not be completely done in all cases.—( Hear,
hear.) The practice of the Government in this case was
very sharp practice indeed—( Hear, hear)--and this was not
the case with regard to sugar alone, but every other exciseable
stock now on hand. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer
should read in the newspapers to-morrow what he had said this
evening, he would see that it was unworthy of a Minister of the
Crown. The House was bound to interfere to prevent in-
justice, which no consideration of revenue could warrant.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was sure the House would believe
that it was the wish of the Government to effect great com-
mercial changes with as little inconvenience as possible to in-
dividuals. He had received deputations from Liverpool, Lon-
don, and other places, and he appealed to the Hon. Members
who accompanied those deputations, whether he had not given
every manifestation of a desire to avoid injustice`.'—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last accused the Go-
vernment of "sharp practice," as if he were speaking of low
practitioners upon the outskirts of a profession. The Hon.
Member overlooked the fact that they (the Ministers) were
public, men, actuated by no other influence then a desire for
the public interest.--( Hear, bear.) In the case which had
been referred to—that of the wine duty—what his Right Hon.
Friend the Secretary to the Treasury had said in his letter
was, that in the event of an increase of the duty it was not the
practice to add the increase to duty previously paid upon stock
still in bond.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY—Is not the duty increased
upon stock still in bond ?
Sir R. PEEL did not think that a single case could be
shown where stock in bond, having paid the lower duty, was
afterwards charged with the increase. Ministers had felt it
their duty to adhere to the usual practice, at the same time
that they admitted that there would b s a great loss to indi-
viduals, which they regretted.--( Hear.) Ile could not deny,
however, that it seemed to be the sense of the House, that in
this case there ought to be some amount of drawback. —( Hear,
hear.) But he did not believe that the late Chancellor of the
Exchequer or the late President of the Board of Trade would
give their opinion in favour of that view. if they did not think
that this was a special case calling for special consideration.--
( Hear, hear.) He had frequently supported them on similar
occasions, as in the case of the Danish Clalms; and, on the
other hand, he had frequently received their support, for he
believed that all men in office knew what it was to have to con-
tend vt ith pressure in these cases.—( Hear, hear.) lie thought
that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer proposed in this case that the total amount of drawback
which had been paid should be returned to the party who paid
it, but that, if in consequence of the reduction, and the keep-
ing back of stock, prices should rise, there should be no greater
amount of drawback than the actual loss.—( Hear.) lie consi-
dered that Ministers had done their duty in adhering to the
general rule. But he understood the sense of the House, unin-
fluenced by party feeling, that this was a special case, and that
it did not necessarily lead to a precedent for other demands.—
( Hear, hear.) He hoped the House would understand the
difference between sugar in bond in the Queen's warehouse,
under the seal of the Customs and that in the hands
of the general dealers.—( Hear, and
_cheers. ); In this

case the article might be considered as one which came under the
Excise rather than the Customs. It being understood then
that it was the opinion of the House of Commune that a draw-
back should be allowed on sugar upon which the duty was paid,
and which remained in the Queen's stores, he thought, on this
account, it would be unwise if the Executive Government op-
posed
itself to what appeared the prevailing opinion in the
House, but he trusted that they would be supported by the
House in resisting the demands of those, whether wholesale
dealers or retail grocers, who had not the same special grounds
of exemption. To this extent, therefore, he was willing
on the part of her Majesty's Government to make some pro-
vision by which the Treasury would be enabled not to restore
the whole amount of duty to those particular parties, but to
snake them such compensation as would be equivalent to the
whole of the loss su'tained by them ; that loss being estimated
to the period when the reduction was to be made. --(Hear. )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that no per:on could suppose
the Government were actuated by any other motive or wish
than the protection of the public revenue. Ile thought that
case which the Right lion. Paronet had taken into his con-
sideration was exactly the case put by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Portsmouth. That case rested in the
first place cn the justice or extending the time to the period con-
templated by the former Act, and secinally in tlie certainty
that nn fraud could be committed, and ha understood that the
Flight Hon. Gentleman, taking the circumstam es into his
consideration, was prepared to consider the loss sustained by
those who paid the duty on sugar in bond, before the reduction
of the duty, and to make them some compensation. Such
being the case, he thought his Hon. Friend the Member for
Lambeth could not do better than withdraw his resolution,
and leave the matter in the hands of the Government. Ile sup-
posed that those parties so circumstanced would have a power
of making representations as to the arrangements Government
might think fit to make, and that it would be open to them, if
they thought any circumstaaces wi'h regard t • their case were
not fully considered, to make representation; of those circum
stances to the Government.

Mr. Alderman HUNII'HREY was rejoiced that persons
who had paid the duty on sugar in tho-e circumstances had
the assurraice of the Right Hon. Baronet that they would
receive some remuneration for the money they had paid.
Mr. HAWES said, that after what had fallen from the
Right Hon. Baronet, he thought the proper coune for him to
pursue would be to withdraw his resolution and leave the
matter in the hands of the Government.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, that as the Right Hon, Baronet
had admitted the principle of allowing a compensation to those
persons who had paid the duty on sugar which remait.ed in the
Queen's stores, he thought that in justice he was bound to
carry out the principle, and deal in the sane manner towards
those who had paid the duty, and removed the sugar to their
own warehoused, but who had not broken bulk. In that case,
no fraud could be committed.
The resolution was then withdrawn.
REFINED SUGAR.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did
not think that the lion. Gentleman opposite (Sir W. Clay)
would act with prudence if he brought forward his motion with
respect to refined sugar, after the discussion which had just
taken place. The case of the refiners had a double aspect—
they had claims for the sugar which was in bond, and on
which the duty had been paid, and they also put for-
ward claims on account of the sugar which had
been taken out of bond. Of course, with regard
to the sugar in bond which had paid the duty, the refiners
would participate in the general advantages which all other
persons similarly circumstanced would have. But the Hon.
Gentlemen would see that the other question was one of a dif-
ferent character, and that they had not the same claim upon
the sugar which was taken out of bond, and which they might
have exported.
Sir W. CLAY said that the case of the refiners was different
from the other persons who took sugar out of bond, because
the refiners must of necessity take it out, while the others need
not. The case of the refiners was not different from those
who had sugar in bond upon which the duty was paid, be-
cause it was impossible that any fraud could be committed
by them. The same concession, therefore, should be made in
their favour. On a former occasion, the Right lion. Gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that the refiners
could take care of themselves, and that they had exported con-
siderable quantities of sugar. Now, he begged to say, that the
Right Hon. Gentleman was mistaken in the information he
had received on that subject. The refiners of London exported
very little, with the exception of one gentleman who exported
sixty tens of refined sugar. They did not ask for a remission
of the whole duty, but for a remission calculated for a given
number of weeks. He would not now call for any expression
of opinion on the part of tae House, but he hoped the Right
Hon. Gentleman would consider the case of the refiners, which
was one of great hardship.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was under-
stood to sav that he would state on Monday what he would do.
The case of the refiners was somewhat different from the other
case ; but he held iu his hand a return, from which it ap-
peared that forty-five thousand three hundred cwt, of
brown sugar and LOCO cwt. of refined sugar was exported from
London, the drawback on which was received by the refiners.
If the House would allow him till Monday he would inquire
into the subject and state what he would do.—( Hear.)
Sir W. CLAY said that this statement was to him per-
fectly satisfactory, and he only hoped the details would be as
satisfactot y as the plan.
Mr. HUME said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had postponed the further consideration till Monday, and he
must say that on all the points the statement appeared to show
a very satisfactory conclusion, but as time was aff trded for
the consideration of those matters, he trusted that some infor-
mation would be gfven with respect to the exp.•rts. 'Dm
Right Hon. Baronet had stated that he was anxious to bring
about those changes with as little loss and nnplessantry to
individuals as po.sible ; and this, he thought, ought to be sa-
tisfactory through all the country.

trusted Hon. Members had heard enough to justify them in
voting for the omission of the clause.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Com-
mittee divided, when the numbers were, _ .

For the amendment
Against it
Majority for the clause ............
On the gallery being re-opened,
Mr. HUME was addressing the Committee. lie wanted
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to explain how the propo.d-
tion could be said to be founded on economy ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that he had taken the opinions of those acquainted with the
subject, and he was justified in adopting the measure.
ttr. BOW RING said, for the sake of saving b,OOO/. a year
to the Government, a gross injustice was about
to be done. Applications had frequently been made to the
Treasury for a drawback of the duty on the waste of bonded
gods, and they had seemed so equitable in principle, that they
had again and again been conceded.
Alderman HUMPHREYS could not see the woof haying
such officers, or of having sugars under lock at all. He would
ask why not make the parties give security for the sugars when
entered, and have no officers at all?

Mr. H A WES said it appeared to him that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer was putting his anthurity against that a Mr.
finskisson ; and be ( Mr. Hawes) would ask, Which was the
House to be I,id by? What was the object of warehousing
sugar at all ? It was, in fact, only making men pay a duty (.n
waste, white the nbj.•ct. was to prevent fraud, by compelling them
to pay duty on fir,t-class sugar, and thus increase the revenue.
Now he did not think this should be persevered in; and it it
should, he now would give notice that on bringing up the re-
port he would move for the omission of the clause.
Mr. 11U11E said he understood that the actual waste on a
ton of sugar, after it had been warehoused, was about three
cwt., and, therefore, nothing could be more unjust than to
make the merchant pay fur that. If the Bill were ,o pass
with these imperfections. he would say it was a mode of retro.
grading that wnu'd be most unwise.
Alderman HUMPHREYS would ask the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to suppose that one of the weighers could not. write
the figures in his Blue-book, and, therefore, he passed a qtrin-
tit. of sugar a quarter of a cwt. shurt, then the Crown would
be defrauded by employing such officers, and yet such were not
unfrequent.
Mr. ;MILKER GIBSON begged to draw attention to a
fact which this Bill presented. He understood by it that mo-
lasses were to be admitted at a duty of Bs. 9.1. from all foreign
countries from which sugar should he admissible. Now, the
fish cause gave a power to admit sugar at a duty of 28s 9.1.
from countries under reciprocity treaties, but then: was no
provision for admitting molasses from these countries.
The clause was then agreed to ; and clauses 15 and 16 were
next agreed to, without discussion.
Mr. RICARDO would like to know how white clayed
sugar could he distinguished from brown, by sample, in ten
years hence?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Bill contained a provision for renewing' the sample from
time to time.

Mr. M. GIBSON could not see why the preamble of this
Act should not set forth the fact, that it was merely intended
as a protection to East India proprietors._( Hear, hear. )
Mr. BRIGHT believed that the qw,stion was now better
understood in the country than it had ever been before. Hon.
Gentlemen connected with the West India interest must not
imagine that the question was finally settled. Next year, when
the question would be brought forward again, a more deter-
mioed opposition would be made to the passing of this measure,
and he trusted that the opposition would be backed by an in-
crease of public opinion. He h-pod that Hon. Gentlemen
opposite would take warning and cultivate their estates to the
utmost possible extent. He entered his protest against this
Bill, as one that was altogether unjust.
Mr. lIORTHWICK contended that protection to the West
India interest had been rendered necessary by the legislation of
that House.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to say a few words upon a
subject concerning which he bad addressed the House on a
former occasion. He alluded to emigration to the West Indies
and to the Mauritius. This country, which had done so much
for the destruction of slavery, should take care that no course
was permitted which would revive it. He had received seve-
ral letters from persons who were related to missionaries, and
who stated that considerable alarm existed in consequence of
some proclamations which had been issued regarding emigra-
tion. When he had spoken on the subject before, he adverted
to Jamaica, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer told him that
a loan had been made for the purpose of emigration. He
(Lord J. Russell) was informed that a proclamation had been
issued sanctioning loans for the purpose of emigration. Thus
he thought it was only proper that the Government should lay
all the information they possessed on this important matter be-
fore the House. Previous to any measure regarding sugar
being sanctioned by Parliament, they should be aware in what
manner Gov•iawiesitt approved of what had been done regard-
ing emigration. It was said that the Noble Lord the Secre-
tary for the Colonies some time ago stated that it was in contem-
plation to propose a guarantee for such loans. e wished to
know holier it was really intended to introduce any Bill on
the subject?
Sir W. JAMES denied that a ,ingle farthing would be put into
the pockets of the planters by the proposed change. When
the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) was Chancellor
of the Exchequer, which no doubt he expected to become one
day or another. but which might God avert, said the Hon.
Member earnestly.—( Laughter.) When the Hon. Member
had attained that position and entirely removed protection from
the colonies, then their ruin would speedily

Mr. HOPE said he could assure the Noble Lord there were
no grounds whatever for his apprehension. It was an etro-
neous supposition that there was not now sufficient work for
the emigrants in the Mauritius and West Indian c Monies.
Since the Government had taken up the system, there was
abundance of employment. Some might be unemployed there,
bus they were persons unfit fur agricultural Lbour. The Go-
vernment would have no hesitation in producing all the papers.
Lord HOWICK maid that he had no desire that emigration,
h,,wever desirable in other respects, should be car. ied on by
means of there loans.

Mr. HOPE said that there was no report from Antigua.
Mr. P. M. S't'EW AR I' said that all the West Indies re
quired was a sufficiency of labour. They were told that thete
was a sufficiency of labourers to be obtained at Penang and Sin-
gapore, and that they could lie obtained i any numbers; but
in the present state of the West Indies, he did not think that it
would be advisable to act upon the lic,nces. The Hon. :Mem-
ber for Durham (Mr. Aright) had said that it was a good plan
to kick a man when he was down, but he would beg to tell
the on. Member tha► they yet retained sufficient vitality in
them to resist any attack that they could bring. The Hon.
Member for Nor. humberland said that there was no want of
labourers in the West Indies, but he would ask the Hon. Mem-
ber what would be the state of their cotton factories if they
deprived them of labour ; he had said that without labour it
would be impossible to continue the manufactures of this

country.—( Hear. )
Sir W. JAMES explained, amid much interruption, and said
that he only wished to say that if they would give the West
Indies plenty of labour, they would heat slave-grown sugar
out of the market.

Mr. HOPE believed that all the papers which contained the
instructions had been sent out for the transmission of la-
bourers to the West Indies. He believed that the difficulty
was this :—•the vessels which had been sent out to carry the
Chinese had not been sent direct to Singapore, and on their
arrival at the island the shipping agent did no, perfectly under-
stand the instructions which he had received, and he declined
to act upon them.

The Bill was then passed through Committee, the Chairman
reported progress, and the report was ordered to be brought up
en Monday next.
On the inquiry of an How. MEnnta,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
Customs' Liuties Bill would be taken the first thing on Monday.

stsf"
observing that the Right Hon. Baronet opposite hau,-sor
that he would go through as much of the Committee of of
ply before Easter as would enable the House to agree t:ro,
Mutiny Act. But as the questi,ins in supply would of
sity give rise to prolonged discussions, he thought the 'Oll
Hon. Gentleman had better postpone them until
Faster.
Sir R. PEEL said that he did not intend to propmeo
other estimates before Easter, but those that «ere rwee'o9o
for the public service, such as the half-lay list, &e. He a
take that opportunity of saying. that lie could not put tit,
_or
motion of the Hon. Member for Somerset the same con Litij
tion that had been put upon it by the Hon. Member :bphim (Mr. Borthwick.) He thought it would be
for the House to affirm that resolution w.thout incluTst
pledging itself to the remission of some tax or otber,co
pressed upon agriculture. As he was not prepared to aeclui
in such a pledge he could not agree to the motion. or
th
Mr. MILES would not refwe to an.wer the question af 0
Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell). His moti,n vould 40
the reduction of the county rates, and other burdens

land, to the amount of about 400,000/.
n", t Ott
Mr. BRIGHT wished to ask the Right Hon. Barolei,
it was his intention to put an end to the anxiety wil'u..,'"oilee
veiled on the subject of the cotton duties? With all
tent Government—( A laugh)—the question could be sesn ty
five minutes. There was at present great difficulty
menutacturing districts. in re nsequence of cotton being bei4
hell from the maTket, in the prospect of tie duty
speedily listen off.
Sir R. PEEL said that he would bring on the Conftn-itee
corn as possible.
The House then proceeded to the other orders oF th,'asl.
The Mastardy Bid w v
as read a third time, and p.o'
NEW ZEALANt>—LORD s I'ANLEY•c, „gent/
Lord EBRINGTON aid that the Noble lord the ''elft
for the colooies stood :moused, for nearly a year and 240 e
under grave charges, breught by the New Zealand o°l DI
anti he wished to ask whether any answer was intended"
given to those charges? lei
Mr. HOPE said that the charge against Lord Staos thl
been made in that House only two or three days eg°,,,aa
House might be assured that it would be fully answerlu.
The Infeftments Bill Scotland) was read a a second
and ordered to he rep 9-Jed.
Anlt !SPHERIC RAILWAY.
Mr. SHAW said that at that late h ur of the niff",„,
not mean to occupy the time of the House in o.9`:Te
a select cotnetittee to inquire into the rinu.,,sPool
the atmospheric railway. He asked for the ifeluu'repott
of the Committee principally on the ground of
here sye
of the tßoard of Trade, which stated that the atmosphorn
tem had secceeded in a int chanical point of sit w, but. r4,lit
success in a commercial point of view was doubtful. _A-beta
would ask for a Committee even on that ground It hiworl
tried in the Dublin ar.d Dalket line, and was found to al Of
and it was about Si be estabiished in two lines in F.nglan.o
thought that it was most important to decide the qat't/
this important period of railway specarlation.
Mr. WARBURTON said he would oppose them °4l.°P-9
lielbe
cause he did not see why a different principle should be ;Preri!
in this case from what was applied in the case of any ntedefe
vention. Let the atmospheric principle be proved by
ment, and then it would be easily introduced. wba.
Mr. HODGSON HINDE agreed very much in bite
fallen from the Hon. Member. He had no obiection .vi
to an inquiry into the merits of the atmospheric sYjsl
though he believed it would have very little.l3oo;
until the results of the experiments were I 010
but he was afraid that under his Right 11„°71°4
Friend's motion there lurked an infection of rstr-lofu"-
railway Bills before the House. There were two sided
to
ques ion. Not only were there engineers who dou.e,
bad
success of the experiment in a mercantile point of 11„feitoli
there were many who doubted it in a mechanical pniut.: 001
and he could see no reason for supposing that the °us-p010,!,
sett'e the difficulty. At all events, he should objeet tattle als', tor
merit of the Committee, if the progress of the raitesYsl
impwded by it. bia 000.
Lord HOWICK said it would have been well lf
td
Friend had applied a little of his usual acutenel ;an
question. A Committee had been asked to assist futeyest•
in forming an opinion. It so happened, in the Two°, PI
great number of railway Bills had been proposed to th
ropot,,
In two or three cases the competition was between P 000,,",
atmospheric line, and a proposed line upon the Inc droh-t
plan. Mr. Stephenson, the only engineer who objecge,
atmospheric principle, had stated before the FIA°: of o
on the very first trial which had been I°--010t1
it had exceeded both in safety and in speed the IS
00 ltd
system after sixteen or seventeen years. 10 S,
other hand, engineers of the greatest eminencerittwith
that the atmospheric system combined groat spied
aced ~e
feet safety; and in a commercial point of view, it aPP;SO.4
the expense of working a line upon that system wa' ode:„0
mile, while that of the other mode was Is. 20,4. Thisl„oo",ij
proved. They ought to inquire into the merits of thelps',llo;i
as the time must come when it, the atmospheric sr" „el tr.,
supersede the present one. If they did not they 17-oriblo
the whole que-tien over the Kent, the Cornish, ied
brian lines. He knew the Board of Trade could o°t ter 000/
the inquiry, ft om the mass of business it had to get, ii„Oir
but the appointment of the Committee, instead t" t
the progress of the present railway Bills through° tol
meet, would, on the contrary, expedite them. ,
Sir GEORGE CLERK said the Noble potiflistit,
given a most able panegyric on the 01 'Ol
system, but he had also furnished reasons
.ittel,;
Committee should not be appointed. The C00""sof
last sessi n elicited all the facts, but they had no weld 60.,"
perly knowing what the expense of the system wu.utio is?
lines where the traffic would require large steam-cOOl-torei iris
smut action. The experi,nent on the Kingston and vainst.ji
was not sufficient, and, without any prejudice atittee,4
atmospheric principle, he did rot. think the Corn°,oo,
be productive of any good. It would not influ,nee iris
Committee, and would mach retard the progress of .yleg hills Ploeie
tli
Mr. BARKER did not think the atmosphericbo k
would ever queceed, but he would not do anything tsl
preven Mr. .t a fa
H. COLLETT dir trial of the expeler not think that the eyiment. de° f
itea 1?,/
this subject could be of any importance, unless eli_ 11'
Cie
private Committee. The eyes of Europe, he might :old
now on this country, and upon its decision would del;terit
trier other lines now in contemidation would be comp soooe
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said, great inteteld 0
stake in railways, and therefore he holed it You. 00f
turely censidei ed. He was himself rather scepft'old.
yet he hoped toe appointment of the Committee
be bs
opposed. opposed. couljoi#
Mr. RICARDO could not see how this projet onto`'
opposed merely because it had hitherto been tried onion('''
lines. If ihit [tower had bi•eri given for making •ip
they wo
R uld have been made also. „t„titt
Sir E. PEEL said he would be in favour of grail ft 'r
Committee, though he could not see what would re4.,130
for the public alone were the party to tb•cide as t°,te.
should be ,doted. He was himself in favour of the on' of
tic plan, but he could not see what, good could f 4°014
appointment of the Committee. However, he
oppose it. 14 $ll4
After .t few words from Lord EBRINGTO
0010:
GILL, the motion was agreed to.
Mr. SH A W hoped the Committee would be poi° it/!
Monday next. said,
Sir ROBERT PEEL, in answer to a question, 0,011 /
appointment of this Committee would not interfere 10
general progress of railway business. 61 of 1114
The other orders of the day were then dispo-.
House adjourned at hall-iast One o'Clock.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE
(YESTERDAY.)
MA NS/OA-HOU SE. four`ea:
John Crellier, a licensed victualler, in Mark-lane' ,14F.
with a violent assault upon an omnibus conductor. oene:
Chapman, the complainant, stated, that ?fter too pe
the preceding night, the defendant assaulted kiln
without having received the slightest provocation. b els;
fendant, who was accompanied by a drunken 015er031
omnihus in the Poultry, but the complainant
condition in which his companion was, refused tn
mission. The defendant was exasperated at ihni,i,,,itb.;oll)
struck the complainant, accompanying the blot', tos,..
language. That offence, however, was permits a
impunity, and the omnibus passed on till it reantlrm Olt tee
reed
when it wats hailed by a gentleman, wha 11tan.r
inside. The defendant took the opportunity to caaboev;o444
tleman not to allow the lady to go with such a caredy
the complainant having stated the facts, the 010'7-4;
whereupon the defendant knocked the complain ° lie':
was then handed over to the care of the police. 40. :;'
The principal parts of the statement of the comp ict;rw!
confirmed by a witness. st°l4lo,
The defendant said that he had been ablved atiajal'-fiatott:
the complainant before he raised his hand. ok ad'" ars
kicked in the stomach by the complainant, who Ink. P. lor.l
of the elevation of the footboard to make the a- me
and tea
positively Beni, d that his friend was at all (1n11:011kt:tit ceer
that it was quite impossible to endure the
es' 07-
the vow-lector.
The loan Nlaroit asked whether the per,oo:,h;.ris'
tit tee
partied the defendant was present? The defendaro'cotY
Lord, lie knows nothing about it; but I eau P be
I, ,1"
witnesses that I was struck first. 11°
The Loon MAYOR— Your witnesses shod 0 d "a COl3ll
I have the evidence upon oath that you struck the
repeaiedly, COO.ferV. ft
Th Ltird Mayor and Sir John Pirie having e eel/
gtthcr, jote pl.
His LORDSHIP said that he and his brother WI oet Ifer'
,e
of opinion that the c •nduct of the defendant le ha
. v
n4,ote ,
reprehensible, inasmuch as, being a publican.
.Atgrn
s,ag
voured to obtrude a drunken man into an on lo
sent,' the very proper refusal of the conductoerron 11.09
passengers to be disemstal and Insulted by a therefseattt.
condition. The sentence upon the defendat,t, et)
that he be fined the sum of 31., and, in default 01.11.
he be imprisoned ler one mouth.
The fine seas immediately paid.

of
lice#o
f c
CIIARGE 01' FORGERY —The iilspect- •:of -11„f9P6
Rochester received instructions from the 1300".-,,
to apprehend Fredia ick lanes. the collectlJ tlietev
the Custom •house, Rochester; the ~fricer procoe :"atigh
Wednesdav afternoon and apprehended
whilst he was attending to the duties of his (31' o'
sorer is the-son or :lir: Janes, a res ectahl jb
who has resided in Rochester'for matey vors. r 61robe,
against him is for obtaining. from the coroptt"fli'i
Sawyers, Esq., 121. 10s. on producing a receiriti 06140.,1;
nature of Mr Simmons, a blockmaker, resiu.:,Tirbt,"
end, who had sent in his account to the Cc-at
--
payment. It is stated that there are other 03. roitlici
the prisoner. (too00 t 4
ALARMING FIRE IN THF CITY.--Yt's(er,"ig
about half-pact one o'clock, a fire burst Or,- 0,:i.-OJ;4
lower part ola large pile of buildings occal'iu'i A. cllsiY
on the ground and upper
NPLauren and Mr. G. Clapham, bboth '
situate behind the General !.'os-t-otfice Aci 3'll-061
of stock is destroyed, and the premises' mac- "
fire and water.

210
On the Bth inst., at Coblentz, on the Rhille'craliikre;‘F'l6::
Rev. W. Moxon Mann, British Chaplain, 0,, 4 pa. ofP
On the 10th inst., at Salt- hill, Kingstovi 1 e 1
n,
D. L. Jones. of a son. tbe,
On the 11th inst., at Terl;ngs-park, her"; 64-11 -
T. Rivaz, Esq., of the Bengal Civil Service, 0,001
On the 12th inst., at Woolwich, the lady' o'
Mundy, Royal Artillery, of a daughter.

Absol'
.4 lil 11 E f *To"-
Oa the 12th inst., Mr. Samuel E. Perkin. 9, 0„:„`0
to
.Anne, third daughter of Mr. George Jac
"'-
Wilton, near Guisborough, Yorkshire.

rotigi
IE
On the 29th ult., at Berlin, firmly belielirigthtlio?
lektilljii
merits of her Redeemer, Jesus Christ, Antiii.,
daughter of the late Mr. John Prickett, surve)".e, P•efoP
On the 12th inst., at Little Holland alartues
the Hon. Caroline Fox. niece of Charles
sister of the late Lord Holland.

v•
0
L-mrlon: Primed anti J., 14 • b cr, • ((.1
':O.0 V
1)
O. Ili, Strand, Printer. ~.tr Tile 31"':- 118
Straid, in PreQ.ii;vr of the Savoy,
Middleata, Saturday, Mardi 15, IMS.

r