The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-25 00:00:00

EXTRAORDINARY SCENE.

ROCHESTER, JULY 22.—Yesterday the Rev. George
Davis, Captain Thos. Baker, and James Smith, Esq.,
County Magistrates, assembled in Petty Sessions, when
the case of Henry Woolmer, alias Spriggs, who appeared
on a charge of cruelly ill-treating a dog on the 7th inst.
at Halling, near Rochester, the property of Mr. Solomon
Brice, lime-burner, was gone into. The defendant was
agamekeeper to the Rev. Mr. Formby, of Windsbury, one
of the County Magistrates of this division, who took his
seat on the bench. The defendant, in conjunction with
another man, named John Gammon, had been previously
served with an information for the same offence, and
were to have appeared on Friday last to answer the
charge. Gammon did appear, and was fined 205., and
costs 15s. 6d. The defendant did not appear, as he was
summoned in a wrong name, and consequently another
summons was issued in another name, and on the de-
fendant being called on to plead,
The Rev. George Davis, the Chairman, with a degree
of warmth of expression, said to the defendant, " What
is your name?" Answer—Woolmer.
Did you ever go by the name of Spriggs ? Answer
—My name is Wooliner.
The Rev. Chairman—Answer my question, Sir, and
don't treat the magistrates with impertinence.
The Rev. Mr. Formby rose, and said, " I think the
man has given a very proper answer, and submit that he
is not to be treated with such harshness. He is here to
answer a complaint." . .

The Rev. Chairman, finding himself thus interrupted,
took hi:; hat and said he should leave the bench.

The Rev. Mr. Formby observed, the sooner the better.
Captain Baker told Mr. Formby that it was his
opinion, as well as his brother magistrate's, Mr. Smith's,
that his observations were extremely discourteous and
uncalled for towards their worthy Chairman, who had
filled the situation of Chairman of this Bench for the
last twenty years, and considered that Mr. Formby
ought in justice to express regret for what he had done.
This Mr. Formby refused. Mr. Baker remarked that
during the twenty years' servitude of their Chairman
he had given great satisfaction. This Mr. Formby
doubted, for he had heard with deep regret that in
almost every case brought to this office the Rev. Chair-
man had most shamefully browbeaten both men and
women. When a man or woman came to the Court
their feolirgs were naturally embarrassed, being strangers
to the course of law; and because of that were they to be
treated with insult.

Captain Baker inquired of the Rev. Mr. Formby
whether he intended to sit on the bench as a magistrate
in the case, because that would depend on their Rev.
Chairman returning to the Court.
The Rev. Mr. Formby said he did not intend to sit as
a magistrate. He had employed Mr. I'rall, the solicitor,
to attend on his servant's behalf ; and the cause that in-
duced him to make a remark on the conduct of the Chair-
man, was the manner in which he spoke to his servant,
and was compelled to say that he would not have spoken
with that harshness to a dog. . _

After several angry expressions had passed between
the magistrates, impugning each other's characters as
gentlemen, the Rev. Chairman entered the Court again,
when another animated discussion ensued between the
bench and the solicitor, Mr. Frail, who contended that
the Court was not in a condition to proceed with the
case, and said he should advise his client to leave the
Court at once, the magistrates contending that, as the
defendant was before the Gnat, they dared him to leave
it. On this the Rev. Mr. Formby rose from his seat and
took his servant out of the Court, and they were followed
by the solicitor.
The case, without the defendant's appearance, was
gone into, and as there was not sufficient proof to sup-
port the information, the case was dismissed.

DOG STEALING. —CAUTION TO ADVERTISERS.—
Yesterday the Act of Parliament, which came into operation on
Monday last, when it received the royal assent, was printed, inti-
tuled "An Act for the further Prevention of Dog Stealing." It
is now provided that two or more justices, for a first offence of
dog-stealing, may either commit for a period not exceeding six
months to the common gaol or house of correction, or fine the
offender a sum not exceeding 201. above the value of the dog. For
a second offence the party may be indicted, and suffer fine or im-
prisonment, or both, such imprisonment with or without hard
labour, not to exceed eighteen months. Offenders may be at once
apprehended without warrant, and taken before a magistrate. The
following provision in the Ac; requires to be generally known :
" And be it enacted, that if any person shall publicly advertise, or
offer a reward for the return or recovery of any dog which shall
have been stolen or lost, and shall in such advertisement use any
words purporting that no questions will be asked, or shall make
use of any words in any public advertisement purporting that a re-
ward will be given or paid for any dog which shall have been
stolen or lost without seizing or making any inquiry after the per-
son producing such dog, every such person shall forfeit the sum of
251. for every such offence to any person who will sue for the same
by action of debt, to be recovered with full costs of suit."

THE REPEALED DUTIES.—The Commissioners of
the Customs have had under notice the list of articles annexed to
their minute of December 31, 1833, which were required to be
deposited in warehouses, approved of as special security, or in
specially and approved vaults or floors at the legal quays ; and as
many of these articles are now free of duty, or subject to low
duties only, the Board have considered it advisable to amend such
list, and have therefore resolved that the following list of articles,
to be in future warehoused at the legal quays on the banks of the
river, in warehouses of special security, or in specially approved
rooms, floors, or vaults only, ba substituted for that contained in the
minute above quoted—viz., agates (set), almond paste, bead,
of all sorts, cambrics, candles (spermaceti and wax), playing_
cards, carmine, china ware or porcelain, crystal (cut or manufac
tured). cinnamon, clocks, cloves, coffee, corks (made), dice, enamel
essences of all sorts, extracts of all sorts, feathers (ostrich) dressed,
feathers (all. dressed), flowers (artificial), garnets (set), gauze of,
all sorts, ginger (preserved), glass manufactures (all excepting
bottles covered with wicker, or of green or common glass), hats and
bonnets of all sorts, jewels, pearls, and precious stones (set), inkle
(wrought), lace of all sorts, mace, mercury, mead, or metheglln,
musical-boxes, nutmegs, opium, oil (chymical, essential, or per.
firmed of all sorts), paper (all sorts, excepting brown), pepper of
all sorts, plate of gold or silver, platting (of bast, cane, horsehair,
and straw), powder (brass), ditto (bronze), quinine (sulphate of),
Naples soap, silk manufactures, or millinery and silk, and other
materials; spirits, cordials, and strong waters of all sorts, succades,
and confectionary, sugar (refined), (cigars, snuff, tea, and tobacco,
in places specially sanctioned by the Board for that purpose), thread
of all kinds, truffles, vanillas, vellum, watches, Cologne water, and
wine of all sorts ; in addition to all goods warehoused " for exports.
tion only," and all goods subject to ad valorem duties of 15/. per
cent. or upwards. This order is to take effect from the present
time, and is of vary considerable importance to the proprietorsthoef
bonding warehouses on the banks of the river,
privileges
d alsoa n to
of
thehousinge v
goodsill
sea 1 dock companies,
much mre
whonl en
hdi whosetthh:rnt ta%l. now
be,had
the
thepe ed list.risrielyeigseofhousing under bond many of the articleso regard
includedo
_T y Few things have
A KNIFE AND FORK UR •
pleased us more than the
the verdict of acquittal of 'Cord Viscountannouncement thpaitlio"hsaot utnheexspuercrteeyd
sue'ass.
sions," in the turnpike case, that after the discharge of tliejur
soli-
citor, proceeded
" twelve
the gentlemen, at the instigation of his Lordship's
ded to a neighbouring tavern, where they were most
liberally treated." We are delighted to hear it, The fact proves
that there is gratitude in law ; that attorneys have bowels. We
think
h that
examplethexceeding
e sowiselyset by Lord Dillon's solicitor
might comfort of all men summoned
on juries. We would propose that, in all civil actions, the two
te followed,
weed, t o
parties should each send in to the juri.box a bill of fare, to be
served up for dinner by the winning party. Thus, instead of the
jury being compelled to listen to the witnesses, and to the shock-
ing sophistications of counsel on both sides, they would only have
to judge of the relative excellence of the feast prorpised by either
party, and to return their verdict accordingly. Whereupon they
might retire to a neighbouring tavern, and, like Lord pillows
jury—drink the glorious institution of " Trial by Roast and Boiled."

~~

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 24.

(Continued from cur Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
After some observations from Lord R. Grosvenor, Mr. B.
Escott, Sir G. Clerk, Mr. Tufnell, and Mr. Waklcy,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the motion -17
The motion was consequently lost.
Mr. WAKLEY congratulated the Noble Lord (Lincoln)
that he had not made the tax tid., and the period of its
duration fifty, instead of seventeen, years, because he was con-
vinced that in both cases the House would have adopted it.
Mr. HUME thought that measures like the present ought
not to be brought forward at the morning sittings. It ap-
peared to him that the course that had been adopted was a most
shameful uay of conducting the business of the House. He
was determined to divide the House on the question that the
Bill do pass.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no division
took place, and the Bill passed.
SMALL DEBTS BILL.
_ _

The Small Debts (No. 3) Bill was reported, several clauses
were added, the Bill wss ordered to be engrossed, and read a
third time en Monday.

CHURCH BUILDING ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The House then went into Committee on the Church
Building Act Amendment Bill.

Mr. HAWES objected to the Bill. It contained no pre-
vision whatever for the protection of the laity. It was still
more objectionable in another point of view, for it gave
power to the Commissioners to appoint the church-
wardens, which was in effect giving them the power of making
church-rates, fur, ace,. riling to the opinion of Lord Chief Justice
Tindal, churchwardens had the power to make rates when
the inhabitants refused to do so. Under these circumstances,
he thought the Bill ought not to proceed there were
already no less than forty-eight Ecclesiastical 131;ls on the statute
book, and 40) orders in Council. The House ought not, there-
fore, to add another Bill, but try to consolidate the present
Bills.

Mr. S. HERBERT said that the arguments of the Hon.
Member for Lambeth against this Bill were the strangest he
had ever heard ; because there was a large number of Acts of
Parliament in existence, and the law was in an anomalous
state, therefore they were not to proceed to amend
the state of the law by any act of legislation. With
regard to church-rates, nothing had been introduced in the
Bill which would at all affect that question.
The clauses were agreed to with some amendments, and the
report was ordered to be received to-morrow.
The Lords' amendments to the Westminster Improvement
(No. 2) Bill were agreed to.
The Lords' amendments to the Bermondsey Improvement
Bill were agreed to.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendments to this Bill were agreed to.
SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to this Bill were agreed to.
DUNDEE AND PERTH RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendments to this Bill were agreed to.
ABERDEEN RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendments to this Bill were agreed to.
GRIMSBY DOCKS.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LIVERPOOL AND BURY (BOLTON AND WIGAN

AND LIVERPOOL) RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to this 13i11 were agreed to.
The South-Eastern Railway (branch to Deal and extension
of the South-Eastern, Canterbury, Ramsgate, and Margate
Railway) Bill was read a third time, and the further proceeding
on the third reading adjourned till to-morrow (th s day).
On the motion that the Bolton and Leigh, Kenyon and
Leigh Junction, North Union, Liverpool and Manchester and
Grand Junction Railway Companies Amalgamation Bill, be
read a third time,
Mr. WILSON PATTEN moved the amendments of which
he had given notice.
Mr. ESTCOTT doubted the propriety of suspending the
standing orders.
Mr. PATTEN said that his only object was to prevent the
Bill from being thrown out for the session. The amendments
were not of a very important character.
After a few words from Mr. BROTHERTON,
Mr. DUNCOMBE said he objected to the motion being
withdrawn, and he hoped the Committee on Standing Orders
would not sanction such a proceeding. It would be better to
throw the Bill overboard altogether.
Dr. BOWRING would have no objection to the motion,
provided it would not have the effect of causing the Bill any
risk ; but it would be a very serious step to take if it would
have the effect of throwing out the Bill altogether.
After a few words from Mr. STEWART WORTLEY and Lord
G. SOMERSET the motion was withdrawn, and the third read-
ing of the Bill ordered to be resumed to-morrow.
COMMITTEE—GROUP X.
Mr. B. DENISON said he begged to move that it be an in-
struction to the Committee upon Group X of Railway Bills,
that they have power to divide the London and York Railway
Bill into two or more Bills, if they think fit.
Mr. ASTELL said he would second the motion.
Mr. WARD asked a question of the Chairman of the Com-
mittee in reference to Sheffield and Wakefield being left out
in the decision on the preamble of the Bill.
Viscount COURTENAY said it was desirable that he should
state the particular circumstances under which the preamble
of the Bill had been passed by the Committee. In
the exercise of their discretion they had left out
Sheffield and Wakefield, as there were other parties
who had competing lines to that portion of the London and
York that accommodated these parties. They (the Committee)
did so, on the grounds that having heard the evidence on the
one side, it would not be fair to decide until evidence was also
heard on behalf of those who had competing lines to
propose. They considered it was but fair that they should
give these parties the chance of being heard, and, accordingly,
they thought the best course to pursue was to postpone that
portion of the Bill which related to those towns, and come to
a decision on the main point. They therefore decided that the
preamble of the Bill was proved, omitting Sheffield and Wake.
field. They how ever gave noopinion on the merits of the branches.
They purposely avoided doing so. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Ward) seemed to object to their deciding only on a part. In
doing so the Committee thought it was the best course to
pursue under the circumstances. If that was not satisfactory,
the only way would be for the House to refer the portion of
the Bill omitted to the Committee, so that they might decide
on that as well as the other parts of the case. If the House
could suggest any course to take in the matter the Committee
would be satisfied to follow it out.

After a few words from Mr. DARBY in explanation,
Mr. P. M. STEWART said that it was sufficiently evident
that the Committee ought to have applied for leave to divide
the Bill, and after thus disposing of the branches they might
have gone on with the trunk line. The House could knew
nothing of what the Committee had done, but from their own
confessions now, and therefore the House was not competent to
decide on what the Committee had yet done.
The SPEAKER was supposed to say that they were irre-
gular, in that they had no power to strike any portion out of
the preamble of the Bill ; but, as the Honse was in so many
cases out of order, he supposed that this must also be passed
over.—(Laughter.)
The motion was agreed to.
THE CIRCUITS.
The Hon. Mr. VESEY presented petitions from several
places in Ireland, praying fur the equalising of the time of
going circuit.
MA LTESE CURRENCY.
Dr. BOWRING begged to inquire into the cause of the
omissions of important correspondence in the papers on the
Maltese currency?
Mr. CARDWELL raid the correspondence would be forth-
coming.

STOCK-IN-TRADE BILL.
Sir J. GRAHAM moved the second reading of the Stock.
in-Trade Bill.
Sir R. INGLIS presented two petitions against this Bill.
Be hoped the House would not suppose that he was giving any
unnecessary trouble in making a few observations upon this
Bill, which was one that had been renewed every year for the
last five or six years, and had the effect of altering the existing
law in reference to the mode of taxing property for the relief
of the poor. The object of the Bill was to suspend the opera-
tion of the law. He thought it better that, instead of bring-
ing in a Bill every year on this subject, they should at once in-
troduce a Bill which would effectually decide the question. The
general question of rateability should be entered into. He
thought that the title of the Bill was very inadequate to ex-
press the objects of the Bill, as it merely affected the interest*
of tithe owners.

Sir J. GRAHAM was sorry to occupy the House on a
matter of so much difficulty. He had paid the utmo►t atten-
tion to the case which his Right Hon. Friend had brought for-
ward. His Right Hon. Friend had still more confused ills ques-
tion, by mixing with it another equally abstruse and complicated.
He recollected some instances in which this question was raised
before a judicial authority, arid a decision was called for upon
the question as to whether stock in trade should be taxed ; and
that decision was against taxing that description of property,
and it was after that that an Act of Parliament was deemed ne-
cessary to be passed, protecting stock in trade from being as-
sessed from one year to another. His Hon. Friend had stated
that the Bill was objectionable, as one that was to be renewed
from year to year. That objection might apply as a general
observation, but in this particular it did not ; for in fact it
would not bejust to tax such property. As to the question of
his Hon. Friend, namely, whether this annual renewal of this
Biil was to be continued, he (Sir James Graham) had already
said that his own opinion was that the whole system of taxa-
tion would require revision, but with regard to the manner in
which the clergy were affected by it, he was not now prepared
to say to what extent a special remedy was to be applied in re-
ference to the clergy, or that they should be exempted.
Lord J. MANNERS said he was glad to hear the Hon. Ba.
ronet say that the system of rating generally required revision,
and that it was likely to be done.
The Bill was then read a second time.
SLAVE TRADE (BRAZIL) BILL.
Upon the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair, and
that the House do go into Committee on the Slave Trade (Bra-
zil) Bill,

Mr. M. GIBSON said, that from the correspondence that
had been laid upon the table of that House, as having passed
between this Government and the Government of Brazil on
this subject, he was led to apprehend that there still remained.
'store
tgurreea tde
agreeda l fotro tahne
All:taws eh to
co
hb ewionufol
would,
ne informed
fparliivaLeer.sw,itht.c:
before
e thethe
e effect
of
creating hostilities between this country and Brazil. Thsa
detain
inpropanosded
steoarcghive
which the captains of them might suspect to be trading in
all letters
ves vessels theyarq e
mayto
inat present existed
slaves; and the result of that would be to create a great deal
of inconvenience and annoyance. There
between this country and Brazil,regard to the slave-
trade, a sort of conventional treaty which would now very soon
expire , • but before this present Bill should be passed into a
law, he did think it would be but wise and prudent fee the
House to ascertain first whether the Brazilian Government
would comply with that treaty. When a Bill similar to this
was introduced into the Lords, on a former occasion, the Noble
Viscount the Member for Tiverton protested against the Bill in
words to which he would now call the attention of the House
The Hon. Member then read an extract from the protest.
He understood, when they entered into this treaty that it.
should be reciprocal, that 'British subjects should be 'tried by
The treaty to which he referred was the Slave Trade Consoli..
British tribunals, and Brazilian subjects by Brazilian trihunalsll
dation
,Athcet.
Executive
titvhee
fsl aßvreaztirlacdoeulwdansoot nAectinaswiht
could wish,
no be ad.
no more than the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her
Majesty's Government could act independently on the subject
of the corn-laws. The interests of the lords of the soil, and
the passions of the people, all interfered with the course of
the Brazilian Government in putting down the slave trade.
They should, therefore, make considerable allowance for the
short comings of that Government. He knew of no dispo.
sition on the part of the Brazilian Government not to put an
end to the slave trade, for in August, 1841, the Brazilian
Minister made a distinct proposal to put an end to the slave
trade. The negotiation entered into was suddenly brokeB off
by the orders of this Government, and a different course was
entered into, involving a line of commercial policy fatal to the
best interests of the trade between this country and Brazil.
If the Government was prepared to take a hasty and hostile
course, he was not prepared to share the responsibility. Let
them send out their cruisers and seize the ships of Brazil, and
let them come down next session, and if they could make out a
proper case they would get an indemnity; but do not let then
call upon.Hon,Members, such as himself, to give theiusdberenc•

esses.....—ieeeeseseessiesseeies........, seiessesesseeses -
to their measures in a blindfolded manner. The Bill itself • the law of nations. The French Government passed a similar
/er•Ces • •'s: House was not consistent will the dispatches of '
concurrent Act. But the Brazilian Government had
1. • ' .13ercieen, which declared that e ersiee sliond be ' not taken such a course. It was true they had announced
''assesd eat against the Brazilian traders .. tit' teen, e euseble their intention of agreeing to the proposition, but ne specific
eitent. There was one arneniiment introduced lute rids Biil law had been passed, and the measure, if new carrie ', would
which, was very important—it es-3, that the tonnage and ships 'in reality be no more binding than if the Minister of
ti:e Crown
of Brazil which fell into the hands of the cruisers of this coun- suggested an Act to the Sovereign which was not serried out
try should be appropriated to the benefit of those who seized by the force of law. The Executive roust always come to the
them W . hy, it would be reeoliected, that in the vote on the assistance of the Legislature, but, even if such ha i been the
Consolidated Fund, there had been 35,0001. voted to reward case in Brazil, he should have denied the power .e the Bra-
the men and officers of these very cruisers. Such a Bill, he zilian Government to enter into the treaty with that of England
was sure, would excite the worst feelings in the minds of the to make the sale of negroes piracy.
people of Brazil against this country. Then with respect to The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that his Hon. and
the slaves seized by these cruisers, they were quite as badly Learned Friend was as well aware as he was, that Brazil was
treated after they were taken from the slave ships, as they I peculiarly circumstanced as regarded the slave treaties. He
were during the Middle Passage. The Hon. Gentleman here knew that she had become a party to the slave treaty of 1817,
read an extract from a letter to Lord Aberdeen, from the West and though Brazil said, that now the mixed commission was at
Indies, showing the evils to which the negroes were subjected ian end, and that the slave-trade was abolished in her do-
after being seized in the slave ships. He should like to know i minions, it was admitted that Brazil had passed no law, ex-
what would England have thought, when it was a slave trading pressive of an abolition of the slave-trade, but she contended
country, to have been treated in the same manner as they had that the fact of her declaring the slave-trade to be piracy,
recently treated Vrazil. He was sure, from the bench of bishops amply sufficed to show that she held the principle that slavery
downwards, it would have excited a general feeling of indigna- was extinct in her dominions. Now the question was, in what
tion. He considered the policy of the Hon. Member for Hull ( Mr. mode this matter should be dealt with. His Honourable and
Hutt ), at present, however well intended, was a very impolitic Learned Friend said that the Courts of Admiralty and Vice-
course. Should that lion. Gentleman introduce a motion next Admiralty ' had no power of dealing with Brazilian slaves as
session for a committee of inquiry, he (Mr. Gibson) would pirates, but with all deference to his Hon. and Learned
willingly support him. Before sitting down, however, he Friend, he thought he was in this case in error, for
begged the Government to furnish the House with Mr. Ellice's if the Brazilian Government had, by the convention
dispatches, that they might show the true nature of the pro- acknowledged that they recognised the carrying
teedings in which that Gentleman hail been engaged. Brazil on the African slave trade as piracy, then surely they were
said she would not put this duty on British manufactures if we justified by the article of that convention in dealing with them
ceased to tax her sugar. He must refuse his assent to the as pirates. Therefore, with regard to the first part of the
Bill, and would not share in the grave respoesibiliry of sanction- clause, he ventured to differ from his Hon. and Learned
ing it. It was their own policy which forced them to carry Friend, and he was not prepared to abandon, without very
out the law of 1826 in this hostile spirit. ihe passions of the serious consideration, the stipulations contained in the latter
Brazilian people would be roused against this country by this part of the clause.
line of policy, and supposine they might make the condition Sir T. WILDE would ask how the Executive Government
of a few slaves a little better, would that counterbalance the could proceed against the subjects of foreign countries as
dangers which Britlit subjects resident in the Brazils must criminals under circumstances in which they could nut proceed
continually incur ? How long were the great trading interests against their own.—( Hear, hear.) They could indeed pass
of this country to be trifled with, to satisfy small sections of the laws enacting that any aggression by the subjects of a foreign
anti-slavery party? The great majority of the anti-slavery party nation upon the subjects of England, could be punished as
• were averse to any hostile policy on the part of the Govern- piracy, but they could not so proceed against the subjects of a
ment. It was the monopolists of this country who by their third nation.—( Hear, hear. )
influence on the Executive brought about this state of things, Sir R. PEEL said there were two things to be considered—
and interrupted the amity and good feeling which would be an offence against the Brazilian subject, and an offence against
productive of such beneficial results to Great Britain and Brazilian property. He apprehended that in this case the Act
Brazil.' applied to the property and not to the subject, and, therefore,
• Sir R. PEEL said he would state to the House, as shortly as he thought the position of the Hon. and Learned Member was
he could, what the objects of the Bill were, which had been confirmed. He would take care that before the third reading
' sent down from the House of Lords, and which he now sub- of the Bill, the clause should undergo further consideration, and
mitted for their consideration. The international engage- in the event of its being found that some alteration was ne-
ments between Brazil and this country would be seen in a re- cessary, the Committee might rely upon its being made.
solution on the subject of the slave trade, recited in the Con- Mr. M. GIBSON must take the liberty of asking some
vention of 1826. By the first article of that Convention it further explanation as to this Bill. The Right Hon. Baronet
was provided that no subject of Brazil should engage in the had stated that this Bill would not interfere with Brazilian sub-
African slave trade on any pretence or pretext whatsoever, and jects. Now, how could the Right Hon. Baronet reconcile this
that if any such subjects were found carrying it on they should with a dispatch which had just been sent out to Brazil by Lord
be treated as pirates. There was, therefore, an international Aberdeen, which stated that all Brazilian subjects found en-
agreement. Subsequently, in the same year, there was a supple- gaged in the slave-trade were to be treated as pirates?
mental treaty by which the right of search was mutually este- Sir ROBERT PEEL replied that the treaty of 1826 gave
blished. A mixed Commission was agreed upon to determine the power to deal both with the person and property of Bra-
the Offences. Brazil had the power of terminating the supple- zilian subjects found engaged in the slave-trade, but within
mental treaty 16 years from that date, but the original treaty the last thirty years the power had only been applied to sub-
remained in full force and effect. Accordingly, in jects, and they did not intend to change that system by the
1841, Brazil gave notice that she wished to ter- present Bill.
minate it, and it was terminated accordingly. Captain PECHELL remarked that the treaty of 1826 only
The Hen. Gentleman had observed that foreign countries did gave this country power to deal with property and ships
not seem very confident in the good faith of this country re- actually engaged in the slave trade ; but by this Bill Govern-
specting her wish to put down the slave trade. No doubt im- ment proposed to deal with vessels which were only equipped
putations had been thrown out, but when the sacrifices which for the trade. The treaty, moreover, only gave them power
England had made in the cause of the slave were remembered, to destroy, and not to sell vessels which might be captured
he thought she might set at defiance all such unworthy sue- while engaged in the slave-trade.
picions.—( Hear, hear.) The bishops in the other House of Sir R. PEEL said they had exercised the power of seizing
Parliament might, or might not, have advocated the con- vessels which were only equipped for the slave-trade for the
• • tinuance of the slave trade, but that was not the question. The last thirty years, and he could see no objection to their con-
question was—was this country prepared to abandon her former tinuing to do so.
line of policy—was she prepared to retrace her steps, and ren- After some farther discussion the clause was agreed to, as
der her former exertions fruitless ? He would not deny that were also 4 and 5.
• the Government had not come to the resolution of presenting Clauses 6 and 7 were agreed to, after a short discussion, as
this Bill to Parliament without great deliberation and great was also clause 8.
regret.—( Hear, hear.) Every means had been taken Mr. HUTT said he did not much approve of the measure, as
to prevail upon the Brazilian Government to act upon it was one which involved a great deal of expense.
the terms of the convention of 1826, but they were fruitless. The other clauses were then agreed to, and the House
The Government had, then, no alternative but to bring for- resumed.
ward the present measure, and act independently on their part,
or allow the slave trade on the coast of Africa to be carried on,
as formerly, by Brazilian subjects. It was the opinion
of Sir William Follett, whose name he could not
mention without exciting a respect for the memory of
that distinguished man, that in case Brazil refused to
act upon the treaty of 1841, England was fully justified
in exercising the right of search upon Brazilian vessels.
That was a right they had exercised up to the present time.
Then, with respect to the production of papers which might be
rendered necessary for various purposes connected with the
public service, the Hon. Gentleman could not say that he had
ever refused to produce them, where such a course would pro-
mote, instead of injure, the public service. It was necessary,
for the promotion of the interests of this country, that this
measure should be passed into a law, but if Brazil would enter
into a treaty with them, not for the suppression of the slave
trade, but into new engagements, for the purpose of giving
effect to the original agreement of 1826, they would not proceed
with it. But it had been rendered necessary by the conduct of
Brazil for a long series of years, during which they
bad implored that country to take measures other
than those of a temporary nature. The Honour-
able Gentleman said that the measure was imperfect,
because alterations of which he did not approve were made
when it passed through Committee pro forma. These altera-
tions were not, however, of such a nature as to alter
the objects which the Bill had in view in any material
degree, and had reference to the continuance
of the mixed Commission for a period of six months.
There was another alteration, giving a part of the
proceeds of 'a slave vessel and of its cargo to those who had
aided in capturing it. He hoped, therefore, that he had fully
explained away the charge which had been brought against the
. Government that the measure was imperfectly constructed, and
had been hurriedly introduced. He did not think that any
good object would be attained by producing the correspondence
or the instructions to which the motion referred.
Mr. HUTT said, if they passed this Bill, as he had every
reason to believe they would, in two years they would find
their trade with Brazil utterly destroyed. The trade between
this country and Portugal was of the greatest importance, and
anything tending to its injury, as he apprehended this measure
would, could not be too much deprecated. Then they should re-
collect that other countries were anxious to enter into engage-
ments of a more beneficial nature with Portugal than we could
offer. The slave trade was not now carried on as formerly
under the Portuguese flag, although in other countries—under
the flag of the United States, for instance—it had greatly
augmented. But if the Brazilian flag did not afford the same
facilities as formerly for carrying on the slave trade, it was too
lucrative to be entirely got rid of; so that they would only
drive it into other channels offering facilities for carrying it on.
Lord PALMERSTON did not concur in the views which
wete entertained by some of his Hon. Friends with respect to
the measure before them. indeed ho could not pursue any
other course, as he was the first to suggest the adoption of the
course which the Government were now pursuing. The
question which the House had to consider was whether the
treaty of 1826 was to be tendered null and void, or whether
they should adopt measures to enable the Crown to carry it
into execution. He was of opinion that if this country
entered into treaties with other countries and did
not enforce them, when any country became reluctant to carry
them out, that they would bring disgrace upon themselves by
their negligence, and want of national honour. The Govern-
ment of which he was a Member during the ten years they
were in office, used every argument in their power to induce
the Government of Brazil to carry out the engagements which
they had bound themselves to, but like their successors they
bad not succeeded in their object. Every time the question
of the slave trade was discussed, that treaty formed a promi-
nent portion of it. Were they then to be permitted to carry
on their traffic in slaves with perfect impunity, and were they
not to take those means which the treaty with Brazil placed in
their power? In that case he was ready to bear his share in
any responsibility which might ensue. If the Government
had not taken the course with Brazil which they did with re-
spect to the sugar duties—( Hear, hear)—if they had
taken the proper course, they should not have found
themselves in the position they now hell, and would tot have
occasioned that irritation in Brazil which threatened to put an
end to the treaty of 1817. When they asked 13,azil to fulfil
her engagements they asked no more than they would perform
what they had agreed to do by treaty. He was
much afraid, however, that the measure would not put an end
to the slave trade, as it would be driven to other portions of
the globe, offering facilities for carrying it on. The slave
trade of Brazil would be carried on under the flag of France
and of the United States. He took that opportunity of calling
the attention of the Government to the slave trade carried on
between Muscat and the Isle of Borneo, in the hope of its
receiving their attention during the recess. He did,
therefore, hope that her Majesty's Government would
make those representations to the French Government, which
would induce them to recal that ordinance. Slavet y did not
exist in the Mauritius, and there was, therefore, an opportu-
nity of checking the importation of negroes, but it did exist in
the Isle of Bourbon, and he was afraid that a means might be
afforded for promoting the slave trade in the interior of Africa.
He trusted the Government would urge upon the Imaum of
Muscat to take all steps for stopping the trade within his domi-
nions. The Governor of Cuba had sent back the negroes
which had been introduced into his island. The negroes in
Cuba became forfeited to the Crown. and the consequence was
their liberty. The Dutch Governor had purchased these
negroes illegally, and he should say that as the Dutch Govern-
ment had no right to retain British sut.jccts in bondege,
he hoped, therefore, that the Government would interfere to
set them at liberty. Then, again, no progress whatever had
. been made in giving liberty to the Einancipadoes, and he
hoped the Government would insist on the liberation of thoise
• men. By national law and by treaty we were entitled to demand
it. Those who were to be set at liberty were entitled to
the protection of the country, and he was quite sure that if
this point was pressed upon the Spanish Government, it would
go further than any other. He trusted that the papers of
next year would be more satisfactory than those of this year. i
When tt.e Government talked, no men could speak more
fairly, but when they came to act he was sorry nothing could
be seen, and their acts fell far short of their words. He
thought that the return which he had moved for last year
might have been ready by this time.
Sir R. PEEL said, that in explanation he might assure the
Noble Lord, that if he would appoint a time, he would request
Mr. Barry, in the Foreign Department, to show him that it
was no indisposition or negligence, but a real difficulty in
making out the return which prevented its being furnished.
Mr. M. GIBSON only wished to explain that it was not
competent for the House to make a law which should bind
Brazilian subjects. The circumstance of the executive having
declared the slave trade to be piracy, did not make it piracy, and
therefore they ought to be very careful how they legislated on
raise grounds.
The House then went into ,Committee on the Bill, and on
e. the first clause being proposed,
Capt. PECHELL inquired whether the Admiralty had re-
ceived any account of the gallant conduct of Lieut. streport, in
the capture of a slaver, and of the sufferings of Lieut. Wilson,
of the Star, and several of the crew on a raft ?
Sir G. COCKBURN replied that as yet they had received
no official communication.
Mr. HAWES thought the House should be put in posses-
sion of the negotiations by which the ruptures in the Brazilian
colonies had been caused, and which were issued between the
two Governments in the final arrangement of the stipulations
of the treaty.
Sir R. PEEL considered that the production of such papers
would tend to irritate rather than cement those differences
which all must deplore ; at the same time that they would not
afford any information respecting the policy of the Govern-
ment, and therefore he must oppose their production.
• Air. M. GIBSON thought they were legislating in the dar,
and with blinded eyes, unless the correspondence which led to
the ruptures first, and this Bill eventually, were freely laid be-
fore -the House.
Mr. HAWES considered that the whole difficulties in re-
spect of legislating for the Brazil, and preserving concord in
• •
the colony, was the fallacious and inconsistent course pursued
by Government in making a difference between tree and slave-
grown sugar.
. Lord PALMERSTON said he had always imagined that the
, favourable reception of the sugar of Brazil was a sine qua non
es in the negotiations between this and the Brazilian Government.
The clause, as well as the second, were then agreed to.
. On the third clause being put from the chair,
• Sir-THOMAS WILDE said that the Government had no
power whatever to make any conduct an act of piracy, unless by

REMOVAL OF PAUPERS BILL.

The House then went into Committee on the Removal of
Paupers Bill.
Captain JONES suggested an amendment in the 4th clause,
to which

Sir J. GRAHAM objected, upon the ground that the
amendment would have the effect of repealing the power of
removing paupers altogether. The clause only gave the power
of landing paupers at the port nearest their native place, and
then of being sent on to that place, instead of being landed at
Cork, for instance, which might he the place farthest from their
native places.
After a few words from Sir R. FERGUSON, the clause
was agreed to.
Clause 5 was next proposed, and, after a few words from Mr.
G. Palmer, Sir J. Grahapx, and Mr. Darby, agreed to.
The remaining clauses were disposed of and the House re-
sumed, and the Bill was ordered to be reported to-morrow at
twelve o'clock.
TAXING MASTERS' COURT OF CHANCERY

(IRELAND) BILL.
Upon the motion that the House go into Committee upon this
Bill,

Sir R. FERGUSON wished that it might be an instruction
to the Committee that some compensation might be given to
certain officers of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, who would
be aggrieved by this Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would
not consent that any such instruction should be given to the
Committee.

Mr. HAMILTON said he had a petition from certain
solicitors in Ireland, who prayed that they might be appointed
as taxing masters, they being the most competent persons. He
would suggest an amendment to the effect that solicitors of the
Court of Chancery7of twelve years' standing should be chosen
for the office of taxing master.
Mr. T. B. C. SMITH opposed the amendment. The effect
of the amendment would be to exclude barristers and many
attorneys of great talents and abilities who did not practice in
the Court of Chancery. He objected to this principle of ex-
clusion, and thought it would be unfair in its operation.
The remaining clauses and the preamble were then agreed
to, and the Bill was ordered to be reported to-morrow.
TURNPIKE-ROADS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee—report on Monday.