The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-16 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 15.

Their Lordships met shortly after Five o'clock.
The High Constables Bill passed through Committee, and
was ordered to be read a third time on Thursday.
The Constables Works (Ireland) Bill also went through
Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time on
Thursday.
LANDLORD AND TENANTS BILL.
Lord MONTEAGLE wished to ask what were the inten-
tions of the Government in respect to the Landlord and Tenants
(Ireland) Bill, new before a Select Committee of their Lord-
ships' House?
Lord STANLEY replied that, in pursuance of a recom-
mendation which would be made by . the Select Committee, it
was the intention of Government to introduce several amend-
ments into the Bill, and he hoped to lay the Bill so amended on
the tab!e of the House, but he did not intend to press it
through its stages in the present session.
PRI VILEGE.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mr. Harlow,
a tobacconist, of Leicester-square, complaining that he was not
aware in bringing the action against Mr. Baker, for words
spoken before a Committee of their Lordships' House that he
was committing a breach of privilege, and therefore he humbly
expressed his extreme regret in having committed the breach,
and humbly prayed that their Lordships would be pleased to
pardon the offence and order his discharge. No greater con-
trition could be expressed by any person. He did not know
what the privileges of the House were, and, being ignorant of
them as•well as themselves, he fell into the offence of breaking
the unknown law. He had taken the proper course by express•
ing contrition, by discontinuing the action, and he had, there-
fore, to move that he be discharged, on payment of the fees.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was not aware that his Noble
and Learned Friend was acting as counsel for the person whose
petition he had presented. He was in favour of granting the
prayer of the petition.
Lord CAMPBELL took the same view of the subject as the
Noble and Learned Lord. It would be hard to make the peti-
tioner responsible for the sarcasms of his Noble and Learned
Friend.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the motion, and it
having been carried, John Harlow was called to the bar. The
Noble and Learned Lord then said—You have been guilty of a
breach of the acknowledged privileges of this House in bringing
an action against Thomas Baker, for words which were spoken
by him in the course of giving evidence before one of the Corn-
mitties of this House. For that offence you have been com-
mitted to custody. You have presented a petition in what you have
expressed contrition, and have given orders to discontinue the
action. Their Lordships are disposed to deal leniently with
you, and it is therefore ordered that you be discharged out of
custody upon paying the fees.
The prisoner was then discharged.
Lord BROUGHAM said, a junior Law Lord and a jun:or
Peer having, like a young recruit, reproved him for his sar-
casms. he would take care not to fall into the same error now.
The Noble and Learned Lord then read a petition to the same
effect from Peter Tate Harbin, and concluded by a similar
motion, which was carried, and the prisoner was called in and
discharged after a similar admonition.
Lord CAMPBELL gave notice that, early in the ensuing
session, he should bring in a Bill to facilitate the stopping of
actions arising out of the privileges of the House.
LOTTERIES BILL. _

On the motion of Lord STANLEY, this Bill passed
through Committee.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Lord BROUGHAM
an address to her Majesty, with respect to getting into the new
Houses of Parliament next session.
SPANISH TREATIES.

'oDn ON
whichsai dh that
di n
tails
e kinghor,tohueri r Lto ords
proposehips
to assure their Lordships, and more
it
to
wTe
oah
enEuearereil
i:CyeL
rfAoe
rsßo N
mt
particularly the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that
he was not interested by any party motive. He thought that
his Noble Friend himself would do him the justice to be-
lieve that no consideration whatever, and no expec-
tation of any political advantage, however well
founded, would induce him to treat this question with a
spirit of partiality. Whatever may be their political
differences, they were equally concerned in advancing the inte-
rests and upholding the dignity, and maintaining the honour of
their country. He need not remind their Lordships that by a
treaty the honour of a country was deliberately pledged. They
need not be reminded that treaties were the only means by
which they could effect their great international objects. The
Spanish Minister claimed that the sugars of Cuba and Porto
Rico should be put on the same footing as the productions of
the United States. In one portion of his Noble Friend's
reply to the Duke of Sotomayor, he had the good fortune to
concur. He thought that his Noble Friend was justifie lin
saying, that the course which her Majesty's Government pur-
sued with reference to the United States, showed that there
was no desire to limit the operation of their commercial en-
gagements, er to invade the treaty. He regretted, neverthe-
less, that the rejection of Spanish sugar should be founded upon
arguments so weak. The Noble Lord (Lord Clarendon) then
read the treaty of 1670, which stated that the produce of
Spain should be treated in the same way as that of any other
nation in favour with this country. No treaty being made
since, it was perfectly plain, that treaty remained unchanged.
During the whole of the last century we carried on this inter-
national trade, notwithstanding our own navigation laws were
de jwe existing. We had consuls and vice-consule at Cuba
and Porto Rico. We had exports from there of upwards of
9,000,000 of dollars, which was double the exports from the
United States. From 400 to 500 British ships were now en-
gaged in this trade. For upwards of five years eleven thousand
tons of British shipping had been occupied in it, and that
amount had been subsequently increased. During the last
twenty-two years it had been perfectly lawful for British and
Spanish subjects in Spanish ships to transport the proceeds of
that country. With respect to copper, we imposed no restric-
tion or differential duties, because we wanted it, although the
procuring of it was attended with ten times more destruction
to the slave than the obtaining of any other article
of produce, and yet we refused to admit slave-grown sugar
from that quarter. It was inadmissible for the purpose of trade,
for the produce of Germany and France were purchased with it.
It was, however, useless, as it had been stated, for the purposes
of home consumption, The treaty was now reckoned upon in
order to prevent her Majesty's subjects from taking the sugar.
A portion of the treaty was 170 years old, to argue under
which that the general products of the country were admissible
while particular products were refused, was a species of reason-
ing that would not be listened to in any court of equity or honour.
In 1814 this country entered into a treaty with Spain, by
which it was stipulated that whenever this country conferred
privileges upon any other foreign country, they were bound to
do the same with respect to Spain, and yet the Noble Lord
opposite, the Secretary for the Colonies, argued that
they had no right to trade with Spain upon the
same terms that they did with the United States.
And although his Noble Friend spoke of the decree
slightingly, as an ea post facto decree, and after the
South American possessions had passed away from
Spain, yet it appeared that it did not apply to Cuba
and Porto Rico. These had not passed away, and a
Spanish King had the power to withhold from them any inter-
course if he pleased ; but he did not do so. He granted them
permission. His Noble Friend, however, would not hear of
that. He would pass over what led to that recognition, but,
indeed, there was no doubt, long before the States had sepa-
rated, the c enplete go-by had been given to the treaty of
1670. He would now come to the state of things that existed
in 1820. The Noble Lord then read an extract from a memo-
randum of a negotiation entered into at that time by Mr. Can-
ning. Now, notwithstanding they had obtained permission, in
1810, to trade with the Spanish possessions—notwith-
standing they had embarked a large amount of capital in
that trade, and notwithstanding they had appointed a consul to
protect that trade, agreeably to the permission so granted, let
in the face of all this his Noble Friend alleged that no reci-
procal obligation was incurred on the part of the British Crown.
He would ask, was it just--was it right—was it fitting conduct
fur a country that had been always foremost in proclaiming its
own liberality to act in that manner? His Noble Friend then
referred to an order in council of 1828, and asserted that this
did nothing more than sanction a trade between the colonies of
Spain and Great Britain. He was doubtful, however, whether
such a construction could be put upon that order. He should
have thought that the practice between the two countries
would have prevented such conduct towards Spain, for by their
acts they had brought incredible disgrace on this country.
Wines were formerly admitted into Spain, and were placed on
the same footing as the goods of this country. If they reduced
the duty on the wines and other produce of the countries on the
continent, he would ask if such conduct was fair and honourable
They committed a great act of injustice towards Spain in re-
spect to the treaties into which they entered with that coon.
try. Spain, too, had been regardless of her own interests.
In the treaty it was stated that Spain, in regard to her pro-
ducts, would be placed on the footing of the most favoured
nation. Was the Noble Lord prepared to tell British
pmer-
chants that their produce was placed on a proper footing by
the treaty of Utrecht? In their whole policy it would appear
that they had one law for the weak and another for the
powerful. Spain claimed the same right and the same power
as other nations. If he had not made his opinions manifest to
their Lordships—( Hear, hear)—and did not induce them to
form the opinions which he entertained, he could only ascribe
it to his own inability. We were endeavouring by treaties with
other nations to satisfy the daily increasing wants of our
people by opening fresh markets. God knew, to all these
objects there were obbtaeles enough without adding to them