The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-18 00:00:00

I
free trade—(Hear, hear
them
the sustainnient
themselves on the hustings, and join the advccaonil
Right Hon. Gentleman in office was thought by teg7o
sufficient excuse for this desertion. But they svere,P.,,,
called upon not only to abandon those Princect
upon which they formerly acted, but the !Zoe
recent convictions of their own mind. I repeat,
never were harder terms imposed on any
those which the Right Hon. Gentleman imposed on
of
The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the proposition
the Hon. Member was the effect of political combinstn
of some of their own supporters, and of others opp:r1;
to him. The Noble Lord then explained, in
show that there was no preconcerted plan between In
self and the Right Hon. Gentleman the late PresidenVe
the Board of Trade ; in fact, seeing Mr. Miles rut&
was quite accidental, his Right Honourable Fop
as soon as he heard the nature of the in"in,
which Mr. Miles had originally made, and which he
subsequently altered, announced his determination d the
to support that motion, but at the same time stated supporters try
nature of the'proposition which he (Mr. Labouc
could support, and if the Hon. Member framed )iis?nhe
tion so as to obtain that support, it surely could not
eis
called combination. Ido not see (said the Noble 1.0„,,u_i
how the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of thLtichui
vernment can, after the open declaration of n 37 irs of
Hon. Friend in this House, term our votes the resuets.
a "constructive conspiracy.—(Laughter, and crie tae
" Hear, hear.") non. Members on this side
House, remarkable for their advocacy of free trade
ciples, voted for the Government. If there has been
combination or conspiracy it is surely among tke‘sioit
nary supporters of Government.—(Hear, hear.) 11'00
those Hon. Members on this side of the House who V
with the Government will find it difficult to reconvA
their objections against a duty of 345. and 245 e .0,
their support of a duty of 63s.—(Hear, hear, and lunge,
ter.) Perhaps they think the Right Hon. GentleM;
after all the most effectual promoter of free trade •
ciples. Well, now with respect to the former part traded
Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, I do not think ..
necessary to advert in this debate. I do not me di,
enter into the question which was so fully the
cussed on my proposition with respect
duty on free-labour and slave-grown sugar. leo
respect to the income-tax I do not wish to 11);bt
the Right Hon. Gentleman at any length. The 11'45S
MIL Gentleman said that the reduction of the int'eb,
on the Three-and-a-Half per Cents. was one greutt` cis
jection to the re-imposition of the income-tax. But at
reduction was decided on in March, and we need I) of
have waited until after Easter for the considerationt
these subjects. The Right Hon. Baronet says °aro
great many legislative measures h: vs been passed• at
doubt there was the Bank Chart r, a most import jr
measure, but we had also several c. her measures of
gislation which were not of so much imp •-tance. Ifitio
take, for instance, the Ecclesiastic. 1 C iurts Bill, „0.
Irish Registration Bill, and other Bil e, w ich the Y:b.
1845 would have been quite seen enu gla to have seae
mitted to the consideration of the Hou e. I it
thiu,re
Right Hon. Gentleman might fiirly have said, “ft,;ecl
are great questions relative to finance—we have red ae
the interest on the Three-and-a-Half per Cents., end jai
have now to bring before you questions of comMercia.
policy, and the question of the continuance of Would
come-tax." I think that the House in that case lv .0
have felt that it was desirable to turn all their attentlot
to those great subjects. I should have distinctly s,, tarea
that any loss to the revenue would be met better 'prod
years than it could he met in two years, and I 5100
have proposed the continuance of the income-tax
ked
the next year. Now, the Right Hon. Gentleman t'",se
much about the disadvantage of making a presPecilo
reduction in November, but I cannot understand eit'a,
from him or from the Right Hon. Gentleman the 9111'1,
cellor of the Exchequer, how that proposition, wmcos,
so beneficial with respect to foreign free-labour
can be so very injurious to cob nial sugar.—(•be„enite
But that, in many respects, it is injurious. I tun 'roe
ready to admit. But the Right Hon. Gentleman lug
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the other night, in arguer,l
that question, and putting the case of colonial Sao
said, " Nobody will be ready to buy bueause of tbePl.o.
posed reduction :" but when he came to his own Pr°rse
sition, he said " Everybody will be ready to sell beoun_e
they will be glad to get rid of an article on which dial
will be a reduction in November." It, therefore, as
not
understood him, must be beneficial in one sense, and to
in another.—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, with reel:lee:4s,
the imp irtant part of this subject, the reduction be
I own that it does seem to me, generally speaking, to b,
a fair prorosition that the raw article should not be s,bat
jetted - supposing both are the subjects of duty-lth
the raw article should not be subjected to competiti'll° jo
the manufactured article at exactly the same duty ens
therefore, therefore, does not seem to me to be a fair principle(- Wirt
the Hon. Gentleman is proceeding. But, on the °tenet
hand, if that proposition should be adopted, I think th'gre
if there is a distinction with regard to foreign sugar' ja.
ought to make a similar distinction with regard to °ler,
nial sugar. It appears that such was the opinion a Pt.
Deacon Hume, and that appears. from a letter in
newspapers, to he the opinion of Mr. Gladstone. He
newspapers,
proposed a duty of ss. additional in case of colonial:,
sugar, and is. 6d. in regard to foreign sugar. I thine'
we have the practice in the United States and Haag r
in favour of that example. I should be glad to hello
from the Hon. Member for Bristol, when he comes 1"
t,
that part of the proposition, why it is that he tbinke
absolutely necessary to entertain a duty of 346'
or what objection he can have to a 245. dutfi,
in the case of colonial sugar? But, Sir, this is matter °
detail in regatel to the Hen. Member's propositit
What the Right Hon. Gentleman now prorp-ses is,
the House should agree to that which they negati‘"`:
the other night—that they should po,itively affirm Ills'
as expedient which they then declared to be inexp.clien‘
The Right Hon. Gentleman, as I understand him, does
this as much on political as on commercial greundse-'
(Cheers.) He declares that it is necessary to him !;'t
have that confidence from his supporters that they Wt
be ready to agree with him in this proposition.
say, as I commenced by observitw, that it would to"
melancholy proof of their own subserviency.—(Cheerl '
That question has been fully argued, and in that
argument, and by the number of twenty in a full H°ush;
the Committee decided against the proposition of
Government. Again I say. that I see no reason for the
_
majorty to change their votes. But let me tell thos*
who voted the other night, that if the', now agrer 11;
the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the lbg
Hon. Gentleman will treat them with the same dis,„re;
gard in future—will treat their opinion in the su''n
overbearing manner.—(Cheers.) Let them depend a•
it, that however they may consider themselves as a ;15
jority of the House of Commons, that their opinions the
their views will hereafter have no weight ; that
Right Hon. Gentleman being once es-slued of their Or
port, would be enabled to make propositions which they
might think most injurious to the country ; but "luring
given this proof of subserviency, they
will find them'selves unable to recover their independence. ulliched
gone at once and for ever.—(The Noble Lord rcstll
his seat amidst loud cheerin...)
Mr. M,LES—I trust, Sir, that I shall net: be tresnar.,i4,.
on the time of the Committee if I now make a few obserg,
tions. The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of thl ceo
vernment told us that he thought some conspiracy 158 b- L
entered into with the other side of the House. That,
beg to deny in Coto.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord, the 1%1%e
bee for the City of London, has correctly stated the rev wft
why I altered the motion of which I originally gave notice.
00
is quite true that I gave notice for a reduction of the dielcfroer
245. to 20s. in the first instance on sugar, the p.,:edure 0. -00
colonic'possessions. In the first debate which- :took ° Pla„ce,. f
that question the Right Hon. Gentleman, the .Chance a.
the Exchequsr, asked me what hope I could las .ve of Pepii-ahat
neatly maintaining that duty. In that same de Se to tbe o
Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Taunton said, as I u-c;eos•
stood him, that he would support a reduction (If dot tO e r
and 305., and he also seemed to say, from what 1: cad ga`
frm him, that he I
also would
reb e incli li
ned to t 30'
croiminating duty.
he
let
iea A io
collect that the I krobrreer
1841, proposed a discriminating duty of 6s. I elope "treat
Majesty's Government will give the West India . bod,YA tboo
for having gone to them on several occasions, at id of
that they considered that this measure, in the ,pe event ! -teoed
the West Indian colonies, would amount to alms ist re tioa
that it ought not to be proposed until after a tare, e itier°,4::fity'e
of Coollie labour had taken place. But, Sir, j het ,b 1,8•!: that
.
Government refused to listen to them, and it vree,'°;ited
reason that they framed this measure, which weeealeuLtion
to give them a larger amount of protection than tlal ' Pr°P-heerti
of her Majesty's Government. I confess. Sir, eat I tbet
with regret the declaration of the Right Hon. Go a!ettleilkat it
he intends to persevere in his Bill. I think, Sir,. t:,tyof
would only have been paving a due deference to the • rfor'' (her
this House for him to have postponed his measure is se°f his
session; he would not then have placed a large beclY .°0 of
supporters on this side of the House in the painful pos' the
either supporting him or withdrawing altogethe r frct the
House. I have undertaken C.e responsibility of ad' ioerti,f,l to
cause of the West Indian body, and Ido not new i° iii
shrink from that duty.—(Loud cheers.) I can a 111.1' 012
addition, that I will certainly take the sense of that "°;--Tb°
the amendment which I have proposed,—( Chet g.'sditssi'
Noble Lord opposite put a question to me about tb' e u,!„ west
nating duty; I can answer that I think the whole d • tu- duty
India body would have no objection to a discrimis atinso, to
of 4s. on colonial sugar, but there is a very great op °°,l,iy sal
'
it from the East India body.—( Hear, hear.) I can e5,.,'",;e4,.
that I myself have r.o objection to a discriminating d
I now, Sir, move the amendment which has been 1)""'
your hand. 241,
Sir R. PEEL moved that the blank be filled 's!) with bode.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Greene) said-he &pest eo tasks
that the course they would have to pursue would bee ttbit the
amendments in the proposition as they went on, and
proposition should then be put as amended. tk bad
.ey
Lord HOWICK wished to know whether, after ke sof
discussed the question of amount of duty, they could mu
,ncey
alteration as to the time at which the duty-should comes' d the
The CHAIRMAN apprehended that they must antes
proposition as they went on. •
importan I vie"
Mr. BERNAL said, there were two very rablo
for their consideration. He entertained very eon" toe,
doubt himself as to whether in a CoMmittee of a fiscal asst 24,.
the Committee having determined that the duty
5.r....„. a 01
should not be imposed, they could. reconsider the inn)? o
'7 any
the same duty.—(Hear, hear.) He had not exanutt?ea?
precedents on the subject, but it was his opinion, b `,Ol.
journment of a former Committee on the B 11. In.
at
_roc 0,
could nut reconsider that question. That Cot:mites Who: roo
of the former Committee, they rejected
should
,tr, ed
anion originally introduced, that 245. duty should ne l r_ top
on a cwt. of sugar. That was rejected, and whenthem
a; _Ol
of his Hon. Friend was brought forward to reduce thateopen ',he
duty, le'
bad
tichuaersgtieononof thehe psu4bs.lidc,utyit. waTshhiselwclksthaitoteheoyhjceocutlidonr
be
make. The second was that the 20s. being the lower
mitted.—( Hear, hear.) t the question'
ohueghrte
jteochteedfirtshtepnut
tthoothheigCohomr mdiottttyeeo,fan2d4st.hasthoioltditatheshoseo.b.li
The CHAIRMAN was understood to say, the
of a 245. duty could be reconsidered as part of the pope! !ouviyet.
The
duty H
must on. Gen
be tleman
put was right in saying th t
first, and the quesa
tio
thereforesira .
PEELhe, that
apprehended
etent for
had been negatived by the Committee, it was comp
them to propose the 245. duty as a substitute.
gallery, Mr. Roebuck, which were inaudible in the by the
Sir G. GREY said that the Rht Hon. Gentleman, bar
art
tt
asof tthheedPurtYP:flitthi°rnee. guineas'
After a few words from Lord J. Russell, Mr. Home, antil
present amendment, proposed to adopt pro
.tan
which were negatived the other night. He ( Sir G. CY )
vote to be carried, the Bight Hon. Gentleman
to ask, before they came to a vote, whether.,nstuenpdpeods.inog
ptryLis