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

ST. MARGARET'S CHURCH.

Sir C. BURRELL presented a petition from the
parish of St. Margaret's, Westminster, praying that
as the Church had been made the Church of the
House of Commons, it would be pleased to contribute
something towards the repair of the fabric. The
Hon. Member wished the petition to be printed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said he could not decide on the prayer of the petition,
as it would be a matter for the decision of the House,;
he would, however, consent to the petition being
printed.
LORD LIEUTENANT OF IRELAND.

Capt. LAYAItD, seeing the Noble Lord the Se-
cretary for Ireland in his place, wished to ask whe-
ther there was any truth in the rumour generally
circulated, of the resignation of Earl Deprey ?

Lord ELIOT said—the Hon. and Gallant Member
had better put the question to the Right Hon. Baro-
net the First Lord of the Treasury.

SCILLYJSLAI'ThS.

Captain PECHELL asked-the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, whether he had any Objectionoto produce
the correspondence that had taken placelvith refer-
ence to sending the mails to Scilly.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the arrangements were not completed, but when they
were there Would be no objection to producing the
correspondence.
THE LORD-LIEUTENANT OF IRELAND.
Sir R. PEEL having entered the House,

Captain LAYARD repeated to him the question
that he had put to Lord Eliot, whether there was any
truth in the report of theresignation of Earl De Grey ?
Sir R. PEEL said there was no truth whatever in
the rumour.—(Hear, hear.) Still he must say that
the state cif Earl De Grey's health had for some time
been such as to make him very anxious to be relieved
from the burdens of office ; but he certainly had not
resigned.
MEDITERRANEAN FLEET.

Sir C. NAPIER wished to ask the First Lord of
the Admiralty a question—lf it was true that the
Commander-in-Chief in the Mediterranean had dis-
placed the ward-room officers, and taken possession
of the ward-room for his own accommodation ?
He wished to know if the Admiralty had any infor-
mation on the subject, and if they had, whether they
approved of it?
Sir G. COCKBURN said there was no official re-
port of the circumstance, but he believed such a thing
had been done when the ship was taking out the
Governor-General.

—Sir C. NAPIER said he thought the Right Hon.
Baronet had misunderstood him. He had asked for
information, and that was the only place where he
could attain it. If he applied to the Admiralty he
could not obtain the information he wanted.
Sir G. COCKBURN said he must observe that the
Gallant Officer had no right to make that remark.—
(Hear, hear.) He often came to the Admiralty and
found no difficulty in obtaining information.—(Hear.)
Captain PECHELL said the latter part of the
Gallant Commodore's question had not been answered.
He would himself ask the Gallant Admiral opposite
whether such a practice as that of taking away the
wardroom from lieutenants and captains of marines
had ever been known in any other case.
Sir G. COCKBURN said it had been done by
himself in the Romney, when he went out with
the broad pennant.—(Ministerial cheers.)
Dr. 'BOWRING wished to know when the papers
connected with improvement in the public accounts
were likely to be laid on the table ?
Sir G. CLERK said they were laid on the table on
Friday last.
On the order of the day for going into Committee
on the Sugar Duties being read,
Sir C. NAPIER said something had fallen from
his Gallant Friend, the Member for Greenwich,
which he could not pass by without notice. When
he asked the Gallant Admiral a question in reference
to what had occurred in the Mediterranean, he replied
that there had been a similar occurrence when a Go-
vernor-General went out to India. That might be
perfectly correct, but an Admiral was not a Go-
vernor-General of India. There was not a case on
record, in which an officer on a foreign station had
turned all the officers out of their room for his own
convenience. It was contrary, he believed, to all the
rules of the navy.—(Hear, hear.) The Gallant
Admiral reminded him that, when he had visited the
Admiralty, he had never been refused information ;
but then it had always been given with the under-
standing that the communication was private. That
was the reason why he had asked the question.
Mr. SHEIL gave notice, that to-morrow he would
ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Ma-
jesty's Government, whether he had issued any direc-
tions respecting the distribution of Church patronage
in Ireland to the Education Commission ?
SUGAR DUTIES.

The House then went into Committee on the Sugar
Duties Bill.

Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to know whether
the enactments of the Bill were directed against slave
labour sugar or not ?

--Mr. GLADSTONE said that they certainly was
not.

Sir. R. PEEL said it was impossible to make any
arrangement by which all parties would be satisfied. -
Mr. VERNON SMITH thought that the Hon.
Gentleman was bound to show to the House the
reasons for the course he had adopted ; he could not
see any reason why the measure that had been pro-
posed should be further considered.
Mr. GLADSTONE defended the course adopted
by the Government. The slavery of Java was in its
character quite distinct from that of Brazil.—(Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said, that •whether the ex-
pression used by his Right Hon. Friend near him had
been properly understood or not, was of little im-
portance. It was of no use to discuss the motives of
Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite. They were
the best judges of their own motives.—(Hear, and
cheers.) But, without discussing motives, he must say
that the course which the Government was taking
was the most devious, circuitous, and tortuous they
could have chosen—(Cheers)—and a devious course
was always the most difficult.—(Cheers.) Her Ma-
jesty's Government had formerly stated that their
object was to put down slavery ; but now their object
was to put down only the slave trade.—(Cheers.)
They had no objection to favour countries in which
domestic slavery existed—it was only to agricultural
slavery they objected.—(Hear.) Why, in that state-
ment they gave up one of the most important of their
own principles; for where domestic slavery existed
there must be a supply of slaves, and there must be a
slave trade.—(Hear, hear.) Look to our own Orien-
tal possessions, in which domestic slavery existed—
Mr. GLADSTONE said that the Noble Lord
ought to confine himself to Java.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON continued—The Right
Hon. Gentleman wished to confine him to Java.—
(Laughter.) But he would insist that wherever
slavery existed, the slave trade must be carried on.
Ile would not call it hypocrisy, because hypocrisy
implied some pretence ; but he' would say that a more
barefaced inconsistency, one more obvious to the
meanest capacity, than the one contained in this
clause had never been proposed to Parliament. When
they had withdrawn all the free labour sugar from
the market of Europe, of course the deficiency
thus created in that market would be sup-
plied by slave labour sugar. This was one
invincible objection which he entertained to the
measure. There was, moreover, a constitutional
objection to the clause. By that clause the Govern-
ment took to themselves the power of opening the
market by deciding upon the laws, constitutions, and
customs 'of other Governments. 'When Parliament
invested Government with powers of that nature,
they should lay down rules clearly defining the
principle by which the Government was to be guided,
so that if the Government departed from that principle
they might be subject to the disapprobation of Parlia-
ment. The Right lion. Gentleman took upon him-
self to decide upon all the different degrees of servi-
tude, from the slavery of Cuba and Brazil to a state of
mere serfdom. The Government thus took upon
themselves to judge of the different laws
and customs of other countries, and were allowed
to open the market to the produce of any country
which they might determine to be sufficiently tinged
with freedom.—(Hear, hear.) Now that was not a
very intelligible principle. If, instead of that, the
clause had enacted that the British market should be
open to sugar the produce of all countries in which

r the slave trade was not' carried on, t`: at distinction
would have been at least intelligible. Ile might think
that it would not be advisable. to introchice such
a distinction, but at all events it would be an intelli-
gible one. At present there was no intelligible dis-
tinction, and he thought the clause altogether so ob-
jectionable, that he felt bound to vote against it.
Sir J. HANMER wished to call the attention of
his Right Hon. Friend the President of the Board of
Trade to the fact that a considerable proportion of
the trade between the Philippine Islands and the
Manilla was carried on in Spanish bottoms. He
• trusted that this matter would not escape the atten-
tion of her Majesty's Government. He also wished
to know why" the island of Porto Rico should not be
enumerated among the places from which free-labour
sugar was to be introduced.
Mr. GLADSTONE said there was a very consi-
derable proportion of free labour in Porto Rico, but
at the same time there was a great deal of slave
labour employed in that island, and it was imprac-
ticable to draw any distinction in the case of that
island.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) The matter
alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman was one of much
importance. The Hon. Gentleman had accurately
stated that differential duties were still in ex-
istence, and no treaty had been entered into with
Holland relating to the intercourse with Java.
With respect to Manilla the same practice also pre-
vailed. The long voyages from the Philippine Islands
were not performed by Spanish vessels, but chiefly
by British ; and with regard to the export duties
levied at Manilla, the difference was so slight as to
be scarcely worthy of consideration.
Mr. HUME said it was the object of Parliament,
in legislating on these matters, to lay down certain
principles in a bill, and then to lay down such rules as
should prevent any deviation from it. They now
began to find out the difficulties which encompassed
the plan of her Majesty's Government.—(Hear, hear.)
He wanted to know if Government could and would
define what the law was. If they could not define it
now, how could they hope to define it hereafter ?
(Hear, hear.) The fact was, the only conclusion the
House could come to was that the Government itself
did not know what the clause meant.—(Cheers.)
Now, he would ask them this question—Was Egyp
tian sugar admissible under this Bill ? They would
not tell him—(Cheers)—and if they would not tell,
how could foreign Governments know in what way
to advise these people to regulate their trade with
this country. He had never seen the Right Hon.
Baronet so anxious to get rid of a question as he was
that night, and really he was not surprised at it.
St.ll he should be sorry to see the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet go out at the present moment—though the di-
vision on Monday night was carried by the free
traders, par excellence—(Laughter)—still he could not
conceive, after the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet,
that he would have remained in office had the
majority been against him.—(Hear.) But this
was no matter.—(Laughter.) It was possible that
this Bill would have to be carried out by another Go-
vernment, and they ought to lay down certain prin-
ciples which could be understOod by the general in-
terpretation of the words.' How would they deal
with the sugar of Louisana?
Lord STANLEY—That is under treaty.
Mr. HUME—But suppose the treaty should
cease ?—(Hear, hear.) . Acts of Parliament ought
not to be intelligible only to Ministers of State ; they
ought to be intelligible to men of ordinary under-
standing. They ought to lay down a distinction
between slave-grown sugar and free sugar, and after
the new interpretation that had been given by the'
Right Honourable Gentleman, he thought the
House ought to have another opportunity of express-
ing its opinion. He moved that the further considera-
tion of this clause be deferred.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said the opportunity de-
sired by the Honourable Gentleman had been sug-
gested to him from his own Parliamentary know-
ledge in the motion, he had just made, and he
hoped the House would express their opinion upon it.
The" Noble Lord had proposed that the discriminating
duty of 10s. should be applied to sugar, the produce of
slave labour, equally with sugar the produce of
free labour. The House had decided against the
Noble Lord's proposition ; arid if he were not satisfied
with their decision, he would have an opportunity of
again raising the question on the bringing up of the
report. He did not think the Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site had a right to call'upon the Government to an-
swer a variety of hypothetical cases. As only a year
would elapse before the treaty with the United States
would expire, it was hardly necessary to discuss the
question.
Mr. LABOUCHERE hoped the Hon. Gentleman
would comply with the Right Hon. Baronet's sug-
gestion ; because he was not without hopes that
when they had gone through the clauses of the Bill it
would be so clear that the people, of this country were
called upon to make all these sacrifices for no
practical benefit ; that they were exhibiting
themselves in the eyes of the world as people who
were unable to carry their own principles into
effect; that they were introducin g a system of
extensive fraud in the commercial world, that the
House upon the report would be induced to reverse
their decision.—(Cheers.) The more they discussed
the question, the more evident it would be, that it was
not advisable to attempt to draw a distinction between
the two classes of foreign sugar:—(Cheers.)
Mr. GLADSTONE rose, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)