The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-11 00:00:00

11(1
-11*
tk.

;.. LONBON, TUESDAY, J UI4 2. 11, 1844.

_ the. House of Lords, last night,. some routine
POinpss.was advanced a stage or two.
!,,Thelifitrquis ofLANspowsE, in consequence of the
•• -Iteliorr of the, Select Committee on the ,Holyhead
• —Harhonitill•not being yet before their Lordships,
fostponed till the end ,of the week his motion re-
* ' • *cling the Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill.
-Lard: /SloprrE*Gt.r. and the Earl of W.rcicLow
:?..thitughtthese repeated postponements very hard upon
. .....cv.4l4*quoters of the Bill, which ought to be allowed
sa;a b
Larasiri, Tr",nrl of DA.i.noustE announced it to be the in-
It4iasAtliin.;Otprovernment, in the event of a direct line of
rral-r;ll4.f!_a_inniunicittion being established between London and
Rayhead, to make a grant for the improvement of
eTd -10 T3/4,10,,,t-r,
.1/ .
rt.irshet, • -
r.;•!wttit 11,UIS %4Irft'SRICAIIDE thought whole
• vo,int to, be -referred to a Select Committee,
t
, he' adopted; in order that its
'dstsiis=tt►igt._ tie thoroughly investigated. It was
414 immediate add efficient provision should
-be made for the- formStio of
be .proper' harbour at
Halyheakand the, Company tab: bound to con-
Struct a good bridge across the 1111enai.
Lord RAYLEIGII said the Company intended to

apply to Parliament for leave to build such a bridge.
Lord BROUGHAM was averse to any departure from
their Lordships' standing orders, in the case of a
private Bill ; and thought it would be highly credit-
able to the House of Commons if that House of the
Legislature would adopt those orders.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was also averse
(though friendly to the progress of the Eill) to any
such infraction of the orders of the House. •
'The Duke of WELLINGTON, after briefly repenting
the stages through which the Bill had passed, said
that the Committee of the Bill, having reported that the
line must be carried over the Menai, which could not
be done by the present bridge, no special instruction
to that Committee was requisite in respect of the
new bridge which must be built.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE denied that there
was any obligation on the Company, as the Bill now
stood, to build a new bridge at all.

The Bill, ultimately, was read a second time and
ordered to be committed.

The " Law of Libel Amendment " Bill was passed
through a Committee and reported, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.

In the House of Commons a variety of petitions
were presented for and against the Dissenters' Chapels
Bill—against the monopoly at present enjoyed by the
Bank of Ireland, and praying for the adoption in Ire-
land of the Scotch system of banking, &c., &c.
Lord JOHN MhavziEtts presented a petition, signed
by several Members of the Established Church, for
the convening of the convocation of the clergy.

On the motion of the Casaiciai.ou of the EXCIM.
QUER, the second reading of the Bank of England
Charter (Renewal) Bill was postponed till Thursday
next.

Sir J. GRAHAM, in answer to a question from Sir
GEORGIi GREY, said it was the intention of Ministers
to proceed with the Committee on the Ecclesiastical
Courts Bill to-morrow.

Mr. PETER BORTHWICK gave notice of a motion,
to be brought forward at the earliest open day, for the
production of any correspondence between Don
CARLOS and her MAJESTY'S Government in this
country, and Don CARLOS and the Government of
France, having for its object the pacification of Spain.
Mr. VERNON SMITH, Sir J. GRAHAM, Mr. T.
DuNcosins, and Sir R. Pim., offered several re-
marks on the Irish Registration Bill. Sir ROBERT
declared that her Majesty's Government were very
anxious to take the sense of the House upon it; and
he would to-morrow fix a day for that purpose. He
could not, at present, resolve the question of another
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL), as to
when the remaining Irish Estimates (two only in
number) could be brought on for discussion.
Mr. M. GinsoN gave notice of an amendment he
meant to bring forward on the reading of the pre-
amble to the Sugar Duties Bill, for abolishing all
destinctive and differential duties imposed on sugars
of various growths. _ _ _

Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question from Mr.
BORTHWICK, stated that propositions, but of an in-
direct and informal character certainly, had reached
the British Government, with respect to certain pro-
posals of Don CARLOS, touching the Queen of SPAIN.
Their substance was, that the latter should marry the
son of the former. Although these propositions
had been but indistinctly put, Don CARLOS
in making- them had not abandoned for
himself and his son a claim to the throne of Spain.
Our Government had immediately communicated his
propositions to the Government of Spain.

_
•At the close of a conversation of some interest, in
which Sir R. PEEL, Lord PALMERSTON, and Lord J.
ALS:NEES took part, Mr. .13ouTuwicx said that, after
all which had passed, he should continue on the book
the terms of his motion on the subject.
On the motion for the House resolving itself into a
Committee on the Sugar Duties Bill,

Mr. JANins contended that the Bill had not been
sufficiently discussed on the second reading, for the
due information of the House upon its effects and
tendencies." As one of '" those unfortunate beings
called West India planters," the Hon. Gentleman en-
tered upon a history of the hardships to which that body
had been subjected, and the inequitable manner in
which their property had been treated by successive
Governments, in their desire to give effect to the rash
projects of free traders and upstart abolitionists. He
feared the case of the West India owners was all but
hopeless.
Mr. EWART vindicated the policy which had been
pursued in respect to what his Hon. Friend called the
"rash projects" which he (Mr. EWART) had advo-
cated. The Honourable Gentleman concluded by
moving, as an amendment, the-abolition of the diffe-
rential duties, or the equalising all duties on imported
sugars, without reference to the country where they
have been produced.
Mr. M. GIBsoN supported the amendment.

Mr. Ilumn and Mr. LABoUCHRRB, though friendly
to its principle, entreated the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman not to press his amendment at present.
Mr. VILLIERS and Mr. BRIGHT supported the
amendment, and insisted that Government ought
boldly to assign the-reasons upon which they pro-
posed to confer this invidious favour on the West
India interest--for such it was meant to be—of pro-
tecting their sugars by such a scheme of duties ?

- . -
Mr. P. M. STEWART and Mr. GLADSTONB vindi-
cated the claims of the West India interest and the
policy of the Government in regard to them.
Mr. COBDEN, in an able and argumentative speech,
supported•the amendment.
Mr. BERNAL, Lord Viscount SANDON, Mr. WAR-
BURTON,. and Mr. MACLEAN, having severally ad-
dressed the House, the Committee divided, and the
amendment- was lost. Ayes, 56 ; noes, 259. Ma-
jority, 203...

The Bill then went into Committee, pro forma.
After which, a great amount of other business on the
paper for the night was proceeded with, and at One
o'clock, ?,here not being forty Members present, the
House adjourned.:;

It ough to surprise no one it the infection of
sl av ery -44161 k, withal degrai:lo condition of exist-
ence is-permitted: atnong -anyt,.ci,vilised and Christian
nations—should be 'found still to pollute their most
friendly intercourse with doubts and jealousies, fears,
and suspicions. Perplexity and misgiving are' the
symptomS which bespeak the presence of this infection ;
and the CHANCELLOR of the ExcliEQuEa's new
Scheme of sugar duties is the test which has detected

them. This scheme, our readers are aware, comprises
two resolutions; whereof, the first provides that
from and after the 10th November next there
shall be charged on-, brown, Muscovado, or
clayed sugar,'" certified to be" the growth of China,
Java, or Manilla, or of any other foreign country,
the sugar of which her MAJESTY in Council shall
have declared to be admissible, "as not being the pro-
duce of slave Ipbour, per the-hundred-weight, 11. 145.,
together with an additional duty. of 51. per centum on
that rate." The second authorises her MAJESTY, from
and after same date, to give effect, by Order in
COuncil, to. the provisions of any treaty now in force
which binds her MAJESTY to admit sugars the pro.
ducs Of a foreign country " at the same duties
as are imposed on sugar the produce of
`the most favoured „Countries." As to foreign-
grown sugars, this altered and much dimi-
nished duty is assuredly equivalent to a large re-
duction of price ; and everybody must concede to the
'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER the' truth of his
statement—" that sugar has almost become a neces-
sary of life in this country.; that at all events it is
essential to the health and comfort of a large portion
of the people—and that it is, therefore, expedient
that an ample supply of this commodity should be
kept up." It must also be allowed, that whereas the
maintenance of this ample supply was formerly se-
cured by legislative measures, from time to time
paSsed for that purpose, previously to the emanci-
pation of the negroes in 1834—that emancipation
has since so crippled it that the supply
has become altogether inadequate, even in those very
West Indian islands and colonies of ours, which used
to produce so much more sugar than was equal to the
consumption of these kingdoms, that we had annually
a surplus of about one-third of the year's growth for
exportation to foreign States, after fully providing.
for , our home market. Thus, we had the further
benefit of keeping the prices of sugar here on a level
with those it commanded in the foreign markets, into
which our surplus importation had been annually
poured. But, with the consequences of emancipation,
this productiveness declined, and prices advanced
here ; notwithstanding that, in the interval, an-
ticipating the diminished crops which, in the
beginning of such an experiment, free labour

was likely to raise, Parliament . had largely
approximated, by an extensive reduction of the
duty on sugar the growth of the East Indies, the
price of that sugar to the price of sugar imported
from our West Indian possessions. Still, the whole
supply of sugar received into this country has
proved insufficient, and the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER therefore is no doubt justified in his
anxiety to supply the vacuum (we should have called it
" deficit"), by admitting sugar the growth of foreign
colonies, on such terms as may enable the English
consumer to obtain an adequate supply (at prices not
so much dearer than those paid in all other European
markets, as he is at present subjected to) of this im-
portant article. The great qualification which it has
been the Right Hon. Gentleman's endeavour to secure,
is—that such sugar shall be the produce of free labour.
Believing ourselves, with Lord J. RUSSELL and Mr.
EWART, that it is not possible to exclude altogether
slave-grown sugar from a market once opened to the
produce of foreign colonies—(on the principle, that,
were the United States, for example, to supply us with
50,000 cwt. of " certified free-labour grown" sugars,
they would replace that amount by importing, or by
raising, for their own consumption, so much of slave-
grown sugar) ;—still we do think that the CHANCEL-
LOR of the EXCHEQUER'S proposition is an advance in
the right course. We shall not be accused (we trust)
of estimating lightly the crime, the suicidal impolicy
of slavery. It is an outrage on human nature, and its
first and most sacred rights, against which we shall
ever solemnly and indignantly protest, wherever and
under whatever circumstances we may encounter it.
But the application of slave labour to the cultivation of
sugar is an usage so long established,: so widely
diffused, so unremittingly persisted in by various
nations that it were romantic to hope, by any mere
fiscal devices—any mere tariff of discriminating or
differential duties—to put it down. We fear that
that happy and most desirable consummation must be
left to the influences of civilisation and the operation
of time. We fear that our satisfaction at the results
of our own efforts at its extinction—noble and mu-
nificent as they have been—must now be limited to
the proud consciousness of having discharged our own
duty, at sacrifices costly enough to attest the national
sincerity.
Since the commodity, then, will continue to be
raised, in defiance of our own legal restrictions, in
other countries whose practices we cannot control—
since the quantity raised in our own colonies, under
the restrictions against all slave labour imposed by
our own Legislature, is obviously inadequate to the
supply of these kingdoms—and since the article itself
is either a necessary of life, or a luxury almost indis-
pensable to the comforts of all classes—surely the
CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER is justified in. a pro-
position for reducing the duties on its foreign pro-
duce, where grown by free labour, xfoa in thus pro-
viding for the adequate supply of our own markets.
It is curious, however, and instructive moreover,
to observe at how serious a sacrifice of principle this
apparently simple operation must be performed. Mr.
EWART'S proposition amounted, as the CHANCELLOR
of the EXCHEQUER stated, to the- discontinuance of
any distinction of duty whatever, between English
colonial and foreign sugars, imported for the supply
of the British consumers. But this would be too ex-
tensive a jump for free trade, it seems, to be permitted
to take at once ! And yet, if the CHANCELLOR'S
modified application of Mr. EWART'S principle be
good, the principle itself, unmodified, must be better ?
lint Mr. MILES is prepared to show, not only that such
principle could not be adopted coincidently
with the longer existence of our West Indian inte-
rest and its relations, but that the protecting duty of
10s. per cwt., still retained by the CHANCELLOR in
their favour, is altogether insufficient; and ,that, if
the foreign sugars are to be admitted at 345., our
own sugars should come in at a reduced dut" of 20e.,
to insure them a more equitable preference ,or, priority
of the home market. Mr. GOULBURN an Sir Ro-
-11/31a PEEL, intimating their decided opposition
to any such reduction, yet broadly admit that
the resolutions of the former, in favour of foreign
sugars, are caleulated to work a great, but
an unavoidable hardship, on the British! West
Indian interest. Finally, Lord J. RUSSELL happily
enforces the folly of persevering in any such futile
attempts to discriminate between foreign slave-
grown sugar, and foreign sugar the produce of
free labour. He is sarcastically sceptical about the
genuineness of American "certificates." He appre-
hends
that the Right Hon. Gentleman's scheme could
only be carried into practical execution by converting
Custom-house officers into office-bearers of Dissenting
congregations, or tide-waiters into waiters on Pao-
VIDENCE. And the House concurs, apparently, in
the justice of his Lordship's reasoning, though it re-
jects his amendment. We ourselves may think that
the Noble Lord was tempted to handle his subject with
somewhat too much of levity ; but he did his bidding
very ably ; and we can make large allowances for his
vigorous perception of the absurdities into which the
trammels of our colonial policy are -continually
plunging us. But the resulting truth is, we must be
content to take, thankfully, the portion of good which
the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER can spare us in
this matter ; and we honestly believe that he would
have given more, but for the disabilities, under which
any statesman labours who has to deal with interests
—however important to the empire, its one of its in-
tegral bodies—that have once been tainted in their
elements and relations with the guilt of slavery.

We quote the following paragraph from a Morning
Contemporary :—" As the Emperor of RUSSIA was
thAing through Trafalgar-square the Other day on a
visit to Sir ROBERT PEEL, he observed the unfinished
and dreary appearance which the tardily erected Me-
morial to the immortal NELSON' ,still presents to the
eye. Inquiring the cause, his Imperial NlAJasry Was
informed that a want of the necessary funds was the
only obstacle to its completion. The Emperor imme-
diately directed Chevalier BENEHAUSEN. tqut down
his name ?or a considerable sum, the' amd of
' which, however, has not yet transpired. This is a
species of liberality which • none can fail
to admire, and must have the effect of ren
dering the EmrEacos extremely popular with all
those persons desirous to see the national testimonial
to our greatest naval hero promptly and satisfacterily
completed." His Imperial MAJESTY certainly deserves
the public thanks for the liberality which prompted
his subscription to the NELSON column, nor are' the
tact and sagacity of his munificence less to be ad-
mired; but how discreditable is it to our upper and
middle classes, who monopolise among them almost the
entire wealth of the country, thiit. they- should not
long before this have advanced, of-their own accord,
without solicitation, the sums necessary for the com-
pletion of the memorial in question? To our think-
ing, it reflects infinite disgrace on them as English
citizens--who, one would have naturally supposed,
'would be sensitively alive to the honour of their
country—that they should permit a,. Russian Em-
peror, the representative of the . despoliq principle in
Europe, to furnish that subseription which it
should have been their pride to have furnished
themselves unhesitatingly months since Hence-,
forth no Englishman will ever be able to ;look'
on the NELSON column without reflecting•
With a blush of shame and indignation, that it Most
probably would never 'have been completed; had it
not been for the sagacious and spontaneous liberality
of a Russian Czar. Were the truth to be spoken, it
should be recorded on the monument of the greatest
naval hero that this or any other country ever pro-
duced, that its completion was solely owing to the,
lucky visit of the Emperor NICHOLAS to London, who,
seeing that the work was unfinished, and shrewdly
anticipating that it was likely to remain so—bearing
in mind the extreme poverty of the aristocratic and
commercial community, which he mtikti daily have
witnessed daring his brief stay in the 'Metropolis—.
gave orders that the column should be
finished, nearly if not quite, at his own expense.
We are always boasting of our naval supremacy, yet
to the memory of the man who ensured us that su-
premacy—who preserved our laws, our liberties, our
wealth, our lives, everything, in short, which we hold
most dear, when they were placed in imminent peril
by the Emperor NAPOLEON, at that time theVictator
of Europe,—to the man who conferred on us these
inestimable benefits, and to whose indomitable courage
and disinterested patriotism we have such lasting cause
to be grateful,,a e cannot find it in our hearts to sub-
scribe a fevi, paltry hundred pounds,-by way of mark-
ing
our due appreciation of his services'! Yet though
our "respectable" classes—as they are so fond of j
calling themselves—are too poorto subscribe the neces •
sary sums for the completion of a NELSON testimonial, .