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

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, MARCII 15 1845.

opportunity of substantiating those charges if it were in their
power.
Mr. A G LI ONBY was one of th,., Members who had spoken
on the occasion alluded to. He did not know whether or
not the Government alluded to him, but if they did he begged,to
inform the Hon. Under Secretary tl-at he need not wait until
Tuesday. for he (Mr. Aglionby ) was perfectly ready now to
substantiate any charges which he had made against the tfficers
at the head of the Colonial Department. If the Hon. Under
Secretary did not wish to wait until Tuesday, he was perfectly
ready now to give his oph.ion as to the conduct of Lord
Stanley.
Lord HOWICK understood the Hon. Under Secretary
to say that. on fuesday he meant to go into the defence of the
conduct of Lord Stanley. Now, if the papers for which the
Hon. Under Secretary meant to move were necessary to the
defence of Lord Stanley, he must protest against any discussion
taking place on the subject until he should be in possession of
those papers, so as to be enabled to form an opinion on the
Noble Lord's policy as regarded New Zealand.
Mr. MANGLES having been a party to that debate, and
having expressed a strong opiniOn on the conduct of the Co-
lonial-office, rose to answer the accusation of the Hon. Gen-
tleman. He was quite ready to substantiate any charge which
he had made against Lord Stanley. He would not allow the
Hon. Gentleman to dictate to him.

Mr. HUME rose to order, but was interrupted by
Lord J. RUSSELL, who said that the Hon. Gentleman
had made a statement which he (Lord J. Russell) did not
clearly understand. He wished to know what it was that the
Hon. Gentleman proposed to do?
Mr. G. W. HOPE said that the character of the Noble
Lord who was at the head of the Colonial Department had
been attacked on the other night, when the motion on the sub-
ject of New Zealand had been brought forward. A charge
had been brought against him by the Hon. Member for Lis-
keard. Now he was desirous of defending the conduct of
the Noble Lord, and he wished to introduce a motion fur
papers, for the purpose of having that opportunity.
Mr. HUME asked if those papers. furnished a specific an-
swer to the charge against the Noble Lord ? Ile should wish
to know what was the specific charge made against the Nsb!e
Lord, from which the Hon. Gentleman wi-hed to defend him.
Mr. G. W. HOPE understood that the charge brought
against the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Depart-
ment was, that he had produced one set of instructions to the
New Zealand Company, as the instructions which he had given
to the Governor who had been sent out, and that he had given
another set of instructions to the Governor inconsistent with
those shown to the Company. and which he (lid not produce
to them. And that, thereby, the Noble Lord's governor or
agent in the colony was not in possession of instructions, or
rather his instructions were not such as to enable him to carry
out the arrangement originally made by the Noble Lord with
the Company.
Sir H. INGLIS said, that as the House would have no
means of investigating the charge unless it had time to read
the papers, he would suggest that it would be better to post-
pone the question till after the recess; they would then have
been able to consider the documents. lie did not see the Hon.
Member for Liskeard in the House, or he was sure he would
consent to postpone his motion till after the recess.
Mr. 11 A NGLEtt.; said, as the Noble Lord ,Lord J. Russell)
and the Right lion. Baronet the Member for the University of
Oxford had prolonged the discussion, and the Hon. Under
Secretary for the Colories had been allowed to speak twice,
he did not understand why he should have been considered out
of order. If the lion. Gentleman the Under Secretary for
the Colonies imagined there was any disposition on the part
of the New Zealand Company to shrink from ingoiry with
respect to the charge made against the Colonial Department
in general, and Lord Stanley in particular, he was mistaken.
The Hon. Gentleman need be under no apprehension but
that he would have a full discussion of the whole matter.
With respect to what the Hon. Gentleman had said of a pe-
tition in course of signature in the City, he might depend on
it the merchants and traders of the City were not the per-
sons to be influenced to sign a petition containing charges
against the Colonial Department, or any other department of
the Government, unless they were convinced of the justice of
the charges. If he supposed the Colonial-office stood well
with the country, the Hon. Gentleman was under a delusion ;
if he thought the Colonial-office was not reprobated by the
whole country, and considered as a plague and a nuisance, he
believed the Hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary, and the
Noble Lord at the head of the department, were the only per-

sons who held that opinion.
Sir R. INGLIS said, the intention to press tie charge had
now been stated in terms about which there could be no mis-
take. His Hon. Friend, therefore, should not be content to
take the discussion on a motion on which the House could
express no opinion. He should frame his motion in such a
manner as to elicit the opinions of the House. It would then
appear whether it was true, as alleged by the Hon. Member
who spoke last, that the Colonial Government was reprobated
by every individual in the country, except the Noble Lord at
the head of the department, and the Hon. Under Secretary.
He ( Sir R. Inglis) believed it would appear by a large and
unanimous majority of that Ilouse—(Cries of " Order")—he
was perfectly in order ; he believed it would appear by a ma-
jority of that House, and what was no less important, by the
opinion of the majority of the country that such was not the
general opinion of it.
Lord EIOWICK thought, after what had passed, that the
policy that had been adopted by the Government with respect
to New Zealand ought to be brought before the consideration
of the House.
Sir 11. PEEL felt that he was bound to say something on
this question. He was certain that the course pursued by the
Noble Lord opposite would never answer the purposes he had
in view. But, besides the general question, there was another
question in which Noble Friend was distinctly charged
with bad faith—a charge brought forward at the close
of the discussion the other night, after both his Right Hon.
Friend and himself had addressed the House. His Noble
Friend was most anxious that they should not separate
for the holidays without having an opportunity of dis-
tinctly explaining his conduct by referring to the documents,
and showing, as he (Sir 11. Peel) thought he could conclu-
sively show, that the accusation of want oF good faith in his
transactions with the New Zealand Company was without
foundation. He did not apprehend that his Noble
Friend wanted to cal on the House for any expression of opi-
nion on the general question, but his Hon. Friend, as the re-
presentative of his Noble Friend, was most anxious in a matter
that need not necessarily provoke any discussion on the ge-
neral policy, but on a matter in which his personal conduct was
involved, and an accusation of want of good faith made, that an
opportunity for explanation should be given.—( Hear, hear.)
His Noble Friend, feeling as a man of honour on this subject,
did not wish the /1. ‘use would separate without such an oppor-
tunity being afforded.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. A GLIONBY was glad that the Right lion. Baronet
had spoken nut in the way he did, feeling that any person whose
public conduct was atraigned should have an opportunity
of offering an explan tion to the House. And if
the Hon. Secretary for the Colonies had taken the same
course, he believed that. this discussion would have been termi-
nated before. Those who took part in the former debate, com-
plained that no notice had been given to them. The lion. Se-
cretary for the Colonies had given notice, indeed, five minutes
ago behind the Speaker's chair.—( Hear, hear.) But was that
an intimation which ought to receive Parham ntary sanction?
—( Hear, hear.) The Committee who sat last year took an in-
terest in this discussion. Was any intimation given to them
that this question was about to be raises!? If he understood
the Hon. Gentleman, he intimated his intention of bringing
before the House, for discussion and division, the whole ques-
tion of the complaints made by the New Zealand Company
against the Colonial-office, and the demand for reparation.
But he begged to tell the Hon. Under Secretary. that he could
not drag on a discussion when he pleased. The H. n. Baronet
had correctly stated his (Mr. Aglionhy's) views the other night.
He did nut think that debate would take the angry turn it af-
terwards did, and he certainly did not intend to bring
on the New Zealand question except as a Bernier resort.
He would tell the Right lion. Baronet that the petition to
which reference had been made was one to which the atten-
tion of Hon. Members was particularly requested. Great con-
sideration had been given to the wording of it, and they only
made application in it to the justice of the Government. The
petition was not yet ready, and it was doubtful whether it
might be presented, and a motion founded upon it, before
Easter. Until ths: facts produced before the house were ex-
hibited in a condensed form, it would lie useless to expect Hon.
Members to enter into a discussion upon ,he subject. There
existed a feeling in the minds of Hon. Members prejudicial
to the interests of the New Zealand Company and in favour of
the Government. Ile had many striking facts to show that
the New Zealand Company had endeavoured to de a great
public good, but they hail been thwarted by the Government:
He could not think that the Right lion. Baronet had entmed
into the merits of this case. If the claims of the New Zealand
Company could be shown to be just, and if their interests
were injured by the proceedings of the Colonial Government,
if their hopes were protracted, surely it was but rea•onable
that the Hou-e should pay some attention to their claims. He
did think that the recent appeal to the House might be useful.
The Company appeared before the House as claimants for
justice. Ile did not object to state all the reference that had
been made to Lord Stanley in the petition which was in course
of signature, and if he entered upon the subject somewhat
lengthily, he hoped the House would excuse him. lie had not
expected that the discussion on the other evening would have
degenerated into these personalities. He (Mr. Aglionby) had
then objected to the ward instructions." He was ab tut to
object to the word " instruction," and to have substit.tted for it
the word " order," but he would now allude to another point
before he did so. He had heard of very hostile and angry letters
that had been written and passed between Lord Stanley
and Captain Fitzroy upon this subject ; but he could not
further allude to them, as he understood they had been
withdrawn. However it might be said that the New Zealand
Company should make out their case, and then it would
devolve upon Lord Stanley to make good his objection to it.
It had been further said that that had been done, and that the
Colonial-office had sanctioned the explanation ; and therefore
he (Mr. Aglionby) would say that this was an agreement,
though Hon. Gentlemen opposite might say it was only " a
document." 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's Aglionby) up to that
time had never heard of those letters, though he 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 Hon.
Member that he ought to confine himself to his arguments, and
not assume the contents of a letter.

Mr. A GLIONIIY—EIe 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.—
He could not understand how these letters had been kept
secret. If he 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 he able to meet that Noble Lord with anything :Ike
good faith.
Mr. HUTT could not see how the subject could be brought
before the House on Tuesday. Many motions of considerable
importance stood on the paper for that day, and he therefore
could not see how the question could b.l brought forward. He
did not think that the Hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary
for the Colonies would have displayed so lunch zeal to have
the matter discussed on Tuesday, had he not been aware that
it was quite impossible that it could be brought forward.
Mr. HUME said there was a charge made against the
Noble Lord, 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
take the one on an order day, when they could command time
and pst pone the personal charge until another occasion ? The
first question might be taken on Monday or Wednesday, but
he thought Monday the pri ferable day.
Sir H. 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 p-rsonal charge against the
Noble Lord from that question which related to the govern-
ment 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 Noble 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 20,000
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 goad spirit, but he hoped when the matter was brought
forward it would be discussed with more calmness.

Mr. HOPE said several of the important motions which
stool (or Tuesday had been withdrawn, and he certainly enter-
tained the idea of being eLab!ed to bring the question forward
on that &iv.
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.

eumstances totally unprecedented in the history of commercial
legislation. Last year they had passed a 13i11, fixing the duties
up to the month of July.
Au Hos. Al stmlint—No: June.

Mr. LAI3OUCH ELIE—WeII, 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 calcula'ed, and on which they had relied. They had a right
to conduct their commerce in accordance with the principle
of that Act, ar d it w oull 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 t venings, 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. He had stated last year,
and he repeated again, that if the Government had settled the
question during the last session, they would have been spared
the difficulty r&f their present position. If they had settled the
property-tax also last sevion, they would also have avoided the
difficulties arid perplexities which now attended that question.
How would this proposed measure affect the holders of sugar in
bond? They had 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 Bight
Bon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said
that if Government granted this boon, it would be a departure
from e tablished rule, and would furnish a dargerous prece-
dent. But he (Vr. 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 Paz !lament 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
loses which they might sustain by such a change in the
sugar duties. The Honourable Alember 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 6,000/. Was it fair or
just 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 ( hancellor of the
Exchequer, but he greatly doubted the propriety of the answer
returned Ly 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 hard hips to which the sugar mer-
chants would be exposed by the alteration.
Sir H. DOUGLAS said that he 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
tain, that not one of tho sugar refiners signed that memorial.

Ile 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
rote in favour of the motion.

Mr. A GLIONBY was anxious that some indulgence should
be extended to those smaller merchants who took sugar out of
the Quern's warehouses, to supply the present demand. Those
who had large funds could afford to purchase 1-rge stocks, and
to leave them in the Queen's warehouses for an indcfin'.te 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 should
not have the same advantage as the other and more favoured
class.—( Hear. )
Mr. CARDWELL considered that the Government, in pro-
posing the Act of last session, for one year, did not pledge
themselves that no further alteration would take place until
that period were expired. They had been told in the me-
morial that the Act of last year had been passed for twelve
months, and that upon the faith of no change being male in it
merchants were induced to make large purchases. But every
body knew that some further alteration was intended.

Mr. F. BARING said he did not wish to trespass long upon
the time r,f 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, he
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 Hon. 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.) Pe (Mr. Baring) had been told that
the required relief would be found in the reduced prices of
sugar that would follow the proposed alterations ; but he
very much feared that no such result would follow.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said he did not rise for the
purpose of defending the charges made against the Govern-
ment upon this question ; but he begged to assure Hon.
Members opposite, that the dental 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 Hon. 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. M. tabor for Montrose, and others
who were the great advocates of economy, and always so care-
ful of the public purse, should recommend this sacrifice of the
revenue.

Mr. H UME 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 from 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 had ♦ery 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 aberation in the law in July were now taken by sur-
prise.—( Hear, hear.) He agreed with his Right Hon. 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 ebli regard to sugr alone, but every other exciseable
stock now on hand. If the Chanc.llor of the Exchequer
should read in the newspapers to-morrow what be 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 front Liverpool, Lon-
don, and other places, and he appealed to the Hon. Members
who accom;•anied 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 than a desire for
the public interest.—( Hear, hear.) In the case which Ind
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 be a great loss to indi-
viduals, which they regretted.—( Hear.) He 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 teat the late Chancel:or 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 ease of the Danish Claims; and, or. 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 with pressure in these Hear, bear.) He 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 }Aid
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.) He 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 Commons 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, bet 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 I.e enabled not to restore
the whole amount of duty to those particular parties, but to
make them such compensation as would be equivalent to the
whole of the loss sustained by them ; that loss being estimated
to the period when the reduction was to be made. —( Hear. )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that no person could suppose
the Government were actuated by any other motive or wish
than the protection of the public revenue. He thought that
case which the Right Hon. Baronet 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 of extending the time to the period con-
templated by the former Aet, and secondly in the certainty
that no fraud could be committed, and he understood that the
Right Hon. Gentleman, taking the circumstances 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 corn; ensation. Such
being the case, he thought his Hen. Friend the Member for
Lambeth could not do better than withdraw his resolution,
and leave the matter in the hands of the Government. He sup-
posed that these 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 cireumstaeces with regard te their case were
not fully considered, to make representations of those circum•
stances to the Government.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHREY was rejoiced that persons
who hail paid the duty on sugar in those circumstances had
the assurance 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 course 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 remained in the
Queen's stores, he thought that in justice he was bound to
cares, out the principle, and deal in the sane manner towards
those who had paid the duty, and removed the sugar to their
own warehouse's, 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 laid he did

not think that the Hon. 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
bron 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 ether 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 Hon. Gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that the refiners
could take case 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 tons 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 t` .e 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 say that he would state on Monday what he would do.
The case cf the refiners was somewhat different from the other
case ; but he held in his hand a return, from which it ap-
peared that forty-fire thousand three hundred cwt. of
brown sugar and 1,000 cwt. of refined sugar was exported from
London, the drawba:k on which was received by the refiners.
If the House would allow him till Monday he would inquire
inte 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. lIUME 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 afforded for
the consideration of those matters, he trusted that some infor-
mation would be given with respect to the exports. The
Right Hon. Baronet had stated that he was anxious to bring
about those changes with as little loss and unpleasantry to
individuals as possible ; and this, he thought, ought to be sa-
tisfactory through all the country.
SUGAR DUTIES.

The House then went into Committee on the Sugar Duties,
and on the clause for levying the duty on refined sugars,
Mr. HUME said that he wished to ask the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, whether, as they were desirous that the colonies
should enjoy the advantage of protection, why they subjected
sugar which was introduced into this country from the East
Indies of the same quality as refined to a greater imposition
than that which was laid on refined ? By th:s imposition there
was a duty of 2s. 4d. against the colonies. Now as the co-
lonies were a charge on the revenue of this country he could
not see any reason why there should be this imposition laid
upon that produce which ought to support the colonies ; he
could not see why this 2s. 4d. should be retained. He thought
the better plan would be to give two years after the 14th
March, when the new duties were to come into operation,
and then to alter the duty by the amount stated; so as to make
the duty upon sugar refined, but only equal to clayed sugar, the
same as that on elayed sugar. Fie wished to protect the public
against any combination of the sugar refiners, for he thought
that such a combination might very easily be en'ered into ; but
of the fifty-two sugar dealers in Landon he believed there were
twenty-four who were very large holders of stock. He could not
see wlsy the growers of the East and West Inslies were unable
to introduce any sugar in a refined state Into this country.
He could not see why they should not avail themselves of the
advantages they possessed for refining, and so introduce it into
the country in a refined state, He knew it was the policy t 3
protect the manufactures of England ; but he thought that, in
the present in'tance, such a deviation from the usual policy
was for the benefit of England as well as of the colonies; and he
should, therefore, propose that instead of lies. Bd. the duty at
the end of two years, the duty on refined sugar equal to elayed
sugar should be 16s. 4d., and that these words should be in-
serted after 18s. Bd. in the clause.
On the amendment being put,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
lion. Gentleman was proposing an amendment in 1845 which
would not come into operation till 1547. The fact was, that
refined sugar was introduced at the same . ate as Muscovado.
Mr. HUME said that perhaps it would be better to alter the
time front two years to six months; but he saw a difi'culty, and
he would, if permitted, witl;draw the motion.
The amendment was accordingly withdrawn.
On the 3d clause, which directs the imposition of classified
duties,

Mr. HAWES said that he had hoped that this system of
classification would not have been persisted in. He was certain
that the plan was so objectionable that he hoped the trade
would have influenced the decision of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and led him to withdraw
this plan altogether. He held a letter in his hand from a per-
son very largely engaged in the sugar trade, who stated that it
w as utterly impossible todistinguish the several classes of sugar.
He could not, in fact, understand the motives for the imposi-
tion of these extra duties on foreign sugars, buthe now thought
he saw the reason for them. The fact was, that foreign sugar,
generally speaking, was of a higher quality than colonial
sugar, and it was in order to prevent it coming into competition
with colonial sugars, that this duty was imposed. He thought it
was unfair that the consumer should be made to pay simply for
the sake of giving advantage to the colonists, and he should feel
it his duty to take the sense of the House on the insertion of
this clause. He had lately had a communication from Amster-
dam, where they bad got experience in the sugar trade, and it
stated positively that it was utterly impossible to distinguish
the qualities of sugars, for it very often happened that
sugars of an inferior sort were sold at higher prices
than these which were obtained for qualities rated as of a
superior description. At Liverpool a great sugar business was
done, and a friend from that place had written to him to say,
that if these elastdfication duties were brought into play every
different parcel of sugar would have to pay a different duty,
and that many would have to employ a Custom-house officer
for every hogshead of sugar that was opened. The Govern-
ment ; roposed to procure sample tests or standard samples, as
they called them, by steam and railroad, so as to rectify the
mistakes of provincial officers. But he woul I tell them the
quality of those samples would alter every day. He had hoped
to have had the assistance of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Beverley (Mr. Hogg) on this occasion. lie had bad it on the
discussion of the duty on East India sugar, and he could not
understand on what princip'e he did not vote on this occasion.
Much had been said about the American tariff. He held in
his hand a copy of that tariff, and he could assure the blouse
that there was no country in which sugar was introduced at
such low rates as in America ; and he, therefore, hoped that
this clasification of duty would not be retained. The Hon.
Member concluded by moving the omission of the clause.
The CH a NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that had
the lion. Member for Lambeth been present at the discussion
of the duty on East India sugar he would have been
aware that every point to which he had addressed
himself had been very fully considered.— ( Hear, hear.)
When the sugar trade was in its regular state the difficulty ap-
prehended by the Hon. Gentleman would not arise. The
sugars were sampled as delivered out of the ships for the pur-
poses of trade. After the immediate difficulty arising from the
first rush into the market, no difficulty would exist. The Hon.
Gentleman said he had received letters condemnatory of the
Proposed plan. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had
received letters some condemning and some approving of thq
plan, but many of the reasons alleged against the plan were in
reality strong reasons in its favour.
Mr. BRIGHT said he had had an opportunity of conversing
with a wholesale grocer, who had been present at the first sale
of Manilla sugar, and this person told him that great difficulty
arose from this classification. The reason assigned for this was
that it was felt impossible to tell what amount
of duty the sugar would be liable to under the new classifica-
tion. This individual expressed his conviction that this classi-
fication would be the source of endless difficulties to the trade.
If the Hon. Member divided the House, he should certainly
divide with him.
The clause was agreed to without a division.
Clauses 4 to 12 inclusive, were then agreed to.
On clause 13 being proposed,
Mr. HAWES complained of the clause as a departure from
the Warehousing Act.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the
clause was not such an infringement of that Act as would justify
the House in rejecting it. On inquiry, he bad found that the
re-weighing cost the Government 8,0001. a year ; whilst, the
variation was found to be only 14 lb. in 1,503 cwt. of sugar.
Mr. HUME said, the proper course for the Government to
pursue, was to levy the duty on all the sugar that actually
went into consumption and no more. Why could not the
Chancellor of the Exchequer take an average of the quantity
of sugar in different warehouses, and make an allowance of
one per cent. ?
Alderman HUNIPHREY said, the proposition of the Go-
vernment would be a premium for fraud.
Mr. FOSTER said it would cause great injustice, and no
individual would be satisfied.
Mr. HAWES said, the Government was undoing what
had been done by former Acts of Parliament. The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer said it would effect a saving of 8,0001.
a year; but he thought it was a very large estimate. He
trusted Hon. Members had beard enough to justify them in
voting for the omission of the clause.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Corn.
mittee divided, when the numbers were,
For the amendment .........
Against it
Majority for the clause
beints --

On the gallery being re-openen,
Mr. HUME was addressing the Committee. He wanted
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to explain how the proposi-
tion could be said to he 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.
Dr. BOW RING said, for the sake of saving 8,000!. 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
goods, and they had seemed so equitable in principle, that they
had again and again been conceded.
Alderman HUMPHREYS could not see the use of having
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. HAWES said it appeared to him that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer was putting his authority against that of Mr.
Huskisson ; and he (Mr. Hawes) would ask, Which was the
House to be led by ! What was the object of warehousing
sugar at all? It was, in fact, only making men pay a duty on
waste, while the object was to prevent fraud, by compelling them
to pay duty on first-class sugar, and thus increase the revenue.
Now he did not think this should be persevered in ; and if it
should, he now would give notice that on bringing up the re-
port he would move for the omission of the clause.
Mr. HU%IE 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 for that. If the Bill were to pass
with these imperfections, he would say it was a mode of retro-
grading that would 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 Blur-hook, and, therefore, he passed a quan-
tity of sugar a quarter of a cwt. short, then the Crown would
be defrauded by employing such officers, and yet such were not
unfrequent.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON begged to draw attention to a
fret which this Bill presented. He understood by it that mo-
lasses here to be admitted at a duty of Ss. 9d. from all foreign
countries from which sugar should be admissible. Now, the
6th clause gave a power to admit sugar at a duty of °Ss 9d.
from countries under reciprocity treaties, but there was no
provision for admitting molasses from these countries.
The clause was then agreed to ; and clauses 14 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 :aid that

the Bill contained :a provision for renewing the sample from
time to time.
Mr. M. GIBSON could not see why the preen- hie 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 question was now better
understood in the country than it had ever been before. lion.
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.
mined opposition would be made to the passing of this measure,
and he trusted that the opposition would lie backed by an in-
crease of public opinion. He hoped that Hon. Gentlemen
opposite would take warning and cultivate their estates to the
utmost possible extent. lie entered his protest against this
Bill; as one that was altogether unjust.
Mr. I3ORTH WICK c-ntended that protection to the Weit
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 had addressed the House on a
former occasion. He alluded to emigration to the West Indira
and to the Mauritius. This country, which had done so much
(or 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 Government 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. He wished to
know «hether it was really intended to introduce any Bill on
the subject?
Sir W. JAMES denied that a single 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 follow.
Mr. HOPE said he could assure the Noble Lord there were
no grounds whatever for his apprehension. It was an erro-
neous supposition that there was not now sufficient work for
the emigrants in the Mauritius and West Indian colonies.
Since the Government had taken up the system, there was
abundance of employment. Some might be unemployed there,
but they were persons unfit for agricultural labour. The Go-
vernment would have no hesitation in producing all the papers.
Lord HOWICK said that he had no desire that emigration,
however desirable in other respects, should be carried on by
means of these loans.
Mr. HOPE said that there was no report from Antigua.
Mr. P. M. STEWART said that all the West Indies re•
quired was a sufficiency of labour. They were told that there
was a sufficiency oflahourers to be obtained at Penang and Sin-
gapore, and that they could be obtained in any numbers; but
in the present state of the West Indies, he did riot think that it
would be advisable to act upon the lie races. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Durham (Mr. Bright) had said that it was a good plan
to kick a man when he was down, but he would beg to tell
the I on. Member that they 3et retained sufficient vitality in
them to resist any attack that they could bring. The Hon.
Member for Northumberland said that there was no want of
labourers in the West Indies, but he would ask the Hon. Mem-
ber what would he 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 beat slave-grown sugar
out of the market.
Mr. HOPE believed that all the papers which contained the
instructions had been sent cut for the transmission of la-
bourers to the West Indies. lie 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 or, their
arrival at the island the.shipping agent did not 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
on Monday next.
On the inquiry of an HON. MEMBER,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
Customs' Putiss Bill would be taken the first thing on Monday.
NEW ZEALAND.
Lord EBRINGTON wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet
at the head of the Government when the discussion on the New
Zealand business would take place ?
Sir R. PEEL replied, that though it was inconvenient to
say on what day the discussion would be taken, in eonsequenci
of the indisposition of his Noble Friend, yet he would, for the"
present, appoint Tuesday.
COTTON DUTIES.
Mr. THORNELY said that he did not know whether the
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government was aware
of the quantity of cotton now waiting for the decision respecting
the duty. He believed there was as much as 300,000 bales
cow in the country, and he should be glad therefore to know
on what day the consideration of the duties would be
brought on.
Sir R. PEEL said that it should be brouebt on as soon as
possible, but it was evidently clear that it was out of his power
to force the business of the country. The House sat frequently
from twelve at noon till twelve at night, with little intermis-
sion, but the cotton duties should be brought on as soon as an
opportunity could be provided.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.

After frequent calls from the Opposition benches,
Mr. MILES said that he would not interrupt the Com-
mittee.—( Hear, hear, and cries of "Go on," "Go on.") He
thought that it was at his own option whether he went on or
not, and he would not go on at that time of the night. Great
aspersions had gone abroad, the most gross calumnies, that the
friends with whom he acted were only going into a sham
battle—( Ironical cheers for some moments)—now what they de-
sired wcs a fair, stand up fight, and they wished to show that
the distress among the agriculturists was deep and widely sprees!.
Mr. HUME wished much to know what the fight was to
be about.
Mr. FERRAND said he would tell ate Hon. Member for
Montrose what it was to be about. The Right Hon. Baronet
the Seeretai y for the Home Department had stated the other
night that distress was prevalent end serious among the agri-
cultural labourers, that it could be no longer neglected. Now
he (Mr. Ferrand) would tell the Right Hon. Baronet that not
only was the distress great among the labourers, but that
thousands and thousands of farmers in England were at this
moment insolvent and ruined by the measures of the present
Government since the canoe into office.—( Hear, hear)
—and the fight was to show that this was the case. If the
Right Hon. Baronet was sincere in his regard for the
labourer, why did he not allow the Committee—( Hear, hear)
—asked fur by the Hon. Member for Stockport (Mr.Cobden)?
Why did he not meet the challenge which that Hon. Me sober
threw out to him ?—( Hear, hear.) In saying this he would
tell them why he did not vote >for that Committee. He
did not vote because he was for the protection of the agricul-
turist and not for his destruction.—( Hear, hear.)
The motion of his Honourable Friend was intended to
protect the agriculturist, and he hoped he would persevere.
Her Majesty's Government had forfeited—and forfeited de-
servedly, the confidence of the agricultural interests. They
obtained power by making the agricultural interests believe
that they were their best friends. They had the confidence of
those who sat behind them, and his firm conviction was, that
if another dissolution of Parliament should take place they
might rest assured that instead of a majority of ninety, they
would be in s minority of two nineties.
Mr. P: BORTHWI CK said, that the Hon. Member for
Knaresborough had risen to answer a question put by the
Hon. Member for Montrose, but he had not done so in the
manner the lion. Gentleman had expected.—( Hear, hear. )
They could all affirm the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Somersetshire ; but what, under Heaven, did his proposition
amount to? They all were agreed that the interests of all
classes ought to be r'ghtly considered. He trusted that the
agricultural section of the House would set up some real anti
not abstract principle. He had heard from those (the Tory)
benches that restrictions in trade were owing to the Whig
Lord—(Laughter)—and the aristocracy of England—
( Laughter)—and he had heard from the opposite benches
that the truest and the best friends were the free-traders. But
the lion. Member for Somersetshire bad put a proposition
which might be equally coincided in by the Hon. Member
himself, and by the Hon. Member for Stockport. Why if
they carried the resolution it only affirmed that the House
thought the agricultural interests deserving of consideration.
Whatever intention the lion. Member had in bringing for-
ward the subject, the result was, that it served only to mystify
and delude the farmers of England. The free-traders called
themselves the farmers' friends, the Hon. Member for Somer-
setshire, called himself the farmers' friend, and the Government
called themselves the farmers' friends, and among them the far-
mer were suffering most intensely from the proceedings of their
friends.—( Laughter. )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would not trouble the House at
all at this time, but as the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Miles) had
put off to Monday next the motion of which he had given
notice for to-night, he thought the Hon. Gentleman ought to
let the House know what were the particular taxes
which ho would promise to be remitted.—( Hear.) As
he was on his legs he would take the opportunity of
observing that the Right Hon. Baronet opposite had stated
that he would go through as much of the Committee of Sup-
ply before Easter as would enable the House to agree to the
Mutiny Act. But as the questions in supply would of neces-
sity give rise to prolonged discussions, he thought the Right
Hon. Gentleman had better postpone them until after
Easter.
Sir R. PEEL said that he did not intend to propose any
other estimates before Easter, but those that were necessary
for the public service, such as the half-ray list, &c. He would
take that opportunity of saying, that he could not put upon the
motion of the lion. Member for Somerset the same construc-
tion that had been put upon it by the Hon. Member behind
him (Mr. Borthwiek. ) He thought it would be impossible
for the House to affirm that resolution without indirectly
pledging itself to the remission of some tax or other that
pressed upon agriculture. As he was not prepared to acquiesce
in such a pledge he could not agree to the motion.
Mr. MILES would not refuse to answer the question of the
Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell). His motion would apply to
the reduction of the county rates, assd other burdens upon
land, to the amount of about 400,000/.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet when
it was his intention to put an end to the anxiety which vre-
railed on the subject of the cotton duties? With an omnipo-
tent Government—( A laugh)—the question could be settled in
five minutes. There was at present great difficulty in the
manufacturing districts, in consequence of cotton being with-
held from the market, in the prospect of the duty being
speedily taken off.
Sir R. PEEL said that he would bring on the Committee as
soon as possible.
The House then proceeded to the other orders of the day.
The rlastardo Bill was read a third time, and passed.
NEW ZEALAND—LORD STANLEY.
Lord EBRINGTON said that the Noble Lord the Secretary
for. the Colonies stood accused, for nearly a year and a half,
under grave charges, brought by the New Zealand Company,
and he wished to ask whether any answer was intended to be
given to those charges?
Mr. HOPE said that the charge against Lord Stanley had
been made in that House only two or three days ago, and the
House might be assured that it would be fully answered.
The Infeftments Bill (Scotland) was read a a second time'
and ordered to be reported.
ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAY.
Mr. SHAW said that at that late hour of the night he did
not mean to occupy the time of the House in asking for
a select committee to inquire into the principle of
of the Committee principally on the ground the atmospheric railway. lie asked for thde
oafppaoinrtempeonrit
of the Board of Trade, which stated that the atmospheric sys-
tem bad succeeded in a mechanical point of view, but
Now
its
success in a commercial
point v
eri of
on view
tliat wasgr
oduuitinbitfulit
Is;adowbesh.nc'
would ask for a
Committee:tried in the Dublin and Dalkey line, and was found to answer;
e
and it was about to be established in two lines in England. He
thought that it was most important to decide the question at
this important period of railway speculation.