The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-20 00:00:00

matter of course, and it was only
,when the magistrates
felt it Their duty to interfere, that the overseers went to
make inquiries, the result of which led to the passing of
the resolution.

Mr. Drummond said. he had no doubt the bench had
been actuated by the most humane motives, but he sub-
mitted the law did not give them the power to make
such a resolution. If the boy was over-worked or ill-
treated in any other manner he would have a remedy by
applying to the magistrates.
Mr. REID, the Chairman of the bench, expressed his
opinion that the bench had not the power to carry out
the resolution they had come to.
Mr. ADAMS said the magistrates on the former occa•
sion had acted under the advice of their clerk, who was
their professional adviser, and he was quite prepared to
adhere to that resolution. If there was really a doubt,
whether the law gave them power to make such a regu •
lation, it would be necessary that they should consider
the point, or the parish might, if they pleased, apply for
a mandamus.

After some further discussion the bench took time to
consider the question, and in the meantime the matter
was ordered to stand over.

THE SUGAR DUTIES.
(From the Manchester Guardian.)
The Administration of Sir Robert Peel, which was re-
cently placed in a situation of great difficulty during the dis-
cussions on the Factory Bill, has received another, and, we
think, a ruder shock, by an adverse decision of the House of
Commons, upon the Ministerial resolution fixing the future
amount of the sugar duties. It will be seen from our report
of the debates in the House of Commons on Friday night,
that Sir Robert Peel, in accordance with the intimation con-
tained in his speech on the budget, moved a resolution to the
effect that; from and after the 10th November next, the duty
on sugar from British possessions should be 245., and on the
produce of Java, Manilla, China, and such other countries as
Government might hereafter declare, 345. per cwt. On this
resolution, Mr. Philip Miles, one of the Members for Bristol,
and a large West India proprietor, moved an amendment, to
the effect that the duty on British sugar should be 20s. per
cwt., and on foreign 305., with the exception of white clayed
sugars, on which he proposed a duty of 345. per cwt.
At the first sight, it may probably appear to some of our
readers, that the principal difference between these two pro-
positions is a reduction of duty, by that of Mr. Miles, to the
extent of 4s. per cwt. below the rates proposed by Govern-
ment. Now if this had been the real state of the case, we
think few of our readers would doubt as to which of them
ought to have had the support of the Liberals and free traders
in the House. Fully believing, as we do, that the present
sugar duties are too high, and that a substantial diminution
of them would be highly beheficial to the country, and, even-
tually, by no means injurious to the revenue, we should have
been exceedingly glad to witness the triumph of Mr. Miles's
amendment, and the consequent adoption of duties of 20s.
and 305., in lieu of 245. and 34s.per cwt. on British and
foreign sugars respectively.
But a mere general lowering of the duty was by no means
the object of Mr. Miles, and the members of the West India
interest, who supported his amendment. They were per-
fectly well aware that the whole, or very nearly the whole,
of the foreign free-labour sugar, which, under the proposed
change in the law, can be introduced into this coun-
try (though not more valuable than good West
India brown Museovade sugar), is exported from Java
and Manilla in the state of white clayed sugar, on which
Mr. Miles sought to place a discriminating duty of
14s. per cwt. instead of 10s. In other words, the object of
that gentleman was really to obtain for the growers of sugar
in British possessions an additional protection of 4s. per cwt.;
and the proposed reduction of duty to 20s and 30s. (on brown
sugars) was neither more nor less than a cunning trap to
catch the votes of those who might think the duties proposed
by Sir Robert Peel were too high. Into this trap, we regret
to say, nearly the whole of the Liberal Members, including
Lord John Russell, Mr. Labouchere, and other leaders of the
Liberal and.free-trade party, rushed with inconsiderate steps,
and thus placed themselves in the very false position of vot-
ing, by implication, for an additional protection to the Bri-
tish colonial sugar-growers. We say by implication, because
the formal effect of the vote was merely to negative the pro-
posal of the Government; but, as the choice really lay be-
tween that and the amendment of Mr. Miles, to vote against
the one was, in effect, to vote in favour of the other.
To the general error of the party who took this false step,
the conduct of Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Mr. Milner Gibson,
and about twelve more of the free traders, formed a very cre-
ditable exception. They saw and pointed out the hollowness
of the pretext under which Mr. Miles sought their votes,
and supported the Ministerial proposition; but the result
was, that Sir Robert Peel's resolution was negatived by a ma-
jority of 20 ; the numbers being, for it, 221; against it, 241.
Of course this defeat, coming so soon after the previous
defeats on the Factory Bill in the House of Commons, and
on the Welsh Bishopric Bill in the House of Lords, caused a
very great sensation in London ; and reports were exceed-
ingly rife, to the effect that Ministers had either tendered, or
determined to tender, their resignations. Whether there was
any foundation for these rumours, we are quite unable to
say; but it is clear from the result, that, if Sir Robert Peel
and his coadjutors ever thought of resigning, they aban-
doned their intention, and determined to try the chance of
another appeal to their supporters in the House of Commons.
This they made on Monday evening, when Sir Robert Peel,
after explaining at great length his views upon the subject,
declared his intention of moving upon Mr. Miles's resolution
(which had then become the original motion before the
HouSe) an amendment, the effect of which was to substitute
his own scale of duties in lieu of that which Mr. Miles had
proposed ; and he intimated pretty plainly, that, in the event
of being defeated on that amendment, he should decline to
continue in office. A very long and interesting debate
ensued, in the course of which Lord John Russell and some
other Members of the Liberal party. declared their intention
of adhering to the principle of their former votes, by sup-
porting Mr. Miles's resolution, but intimated that they
should endeavour to extend the discriminating duty on
clayed sugars to those from British possessions. This inti-
mation was, no doubt, intended to remove the appearance of
a vote in favour of additional protection ; but, if they could
have carried out their views on this point, they would not
thereby have removed the objection, seeing that the discri-
minating duty would have applied to nearly all the foreign
andto little or none of the West India sugar to be imported.
We are glad to say, however, that, on a division, Mr.
Miles's proposal was negatived by a majority of 22 ; the
numbers being 233 for, and 255 against it. Sir Robert Peel's
amendment was afterwards carried without opposition ; and,
though not yet entirely out of danger we hope it will
speedily become the law of the land. It is, as the recent
division clearly shows, the best measure which we are likely
to obtain in the present composition of the House of Com-
mons ; and, in addition to its intrinsic value, it has the im-
portant extrinsic advantage, that it must very speedily bring
about further and more beneficial changes.
Of course, on an occasion like the one which we have been
describing, there are many curious changes of opinion, and
some which will expose the parties concerned to severe
animadversion. Amongst the votes which have excited
the greatest amount of astonishment amongst certain
classes in this neighbourhood, is that of Mr. En-
twisle, the newly-elected Member for South Lanca-
shire. When it became known here that his name was
included in the list of the majority against Ministers,
his Tory friends stoood perfectly aghast ; no doubt recall-
ing to mind his declaration that he was going to Parliament
as a staunch supporter of Sir Robert Peel. 'To us, however,
Mr. Entwisle's conduct caused no surprise at all. We knew
pretty well, that, in case of a difference of opinion between Sir
Robert and the thorough going monopolists in the House,
Mr. Entwisle was pretty sure to fling overboard his allegi-
ance to the Premier, and to go to the utmost extent in favour
of monopoly. This opinion we publicly expressed at the
time of the late election; and Mr. Entwisle has very soon
verified our prediction. He gave his vote against Ministers
on Friday, on the ground, as declared by himself on Monday,
that he wished to give further protection to the West India
interest. Having, however, as we suspect, received some
earnest remonstrances from his friends on the vote ho had
given, the Hon. Gentleman announced that he should abstain
from voting on Monday, and he retired from the House before
the division. We imagine that some of his mercantile sup-
porters will begin to be of opinion, that they have got a very
pretty bargain in their new representative.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.