The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-04 00:00:00

the measure asked for by the Society. What they asked for
was that .free labour sugar should be admitted without any
diAcrimin.ating duty. It appeared to him, therefore, that
there We're valid reasons for maintaining fiscal regulations in
favour of free labour, and that the arguments used against it
were of no validity. It was admitted on all sides that the
admission of slave labour produce would stimulate slavery
and the slave trade, and this would be uncompensated for by
anything whatever. " But it was contended that the adop-
tion of free trade was in fact the shortest and surest course
for doing away with slavery. He was sorry to be'obliged to
say to that—not proven. It was said that the force,of anti-
lavery opinion.would reach the Brazils if we took the sugars.
IVhv, it did not even pervade England. Shackles were made
in ilinningliam—cotton in Glasgow—the Zuluetas char-
tered vessels to Africa. The trade in cotton with England
had doomed Texas to slavery. Texan slavery was the
spawn of free trade. Unrestrict6d commerce never had freed
the slave, and never would. Bringing happiness and pros-
perity where labour was free, it • brought misery, wretched-
ness, and destruction to the slave—unrestricted trade. Let
the thief expose his plunder for sale in the streets—let slave
ships again go forth from our ports, and the trade in man
be as free as any other. No ! [rade must have its restric-
tions. • lie begged to move the following resolution
That in the judgment of this meeting, that portion of the
fourth rule of the Society, which requires it to promote the
adoption of fiscal regulations in favour of free labour' ought
to be confirnied." _ _ _

Mr. J. J. GURNEY seconded the resolution. HO doubted
whether it was competent to change the fundamental com-
pact in which they were united, and he considered that.
the discussion at the last meeting was out of order. He
doubted whether it was competent to them to alter the con
stitution of the Society without the unanimous consent of
the general body. Any alteration would bring in a certain
amount of sugar front:Cuba- tmd Brazil, and that would re-
present a certain amount of the blood and sufferings of our
i'ellow-creatures. Ile had seen the sufferings of the slaves in
the Barracoons of Cuba, where the planter would take the
stronger animal to his estate and work him to. death. Their
duty was plain—it was to do all they could to discourage
slavery, and therefore to support fiscal regulations in favour
of foreign produce. It was not a question of free trade, but
of morality.and religion. He would leave the Committee if
the resolution was not carried. _ _ _

Mr. SMITH, of Sheffield, rose to address the meeting. If
he could have pinned his faith upon any set of men, it would
have been upon his friends on the platform; but, having
carefully considered the subject, he had come to a diametri-
cally opposite conclusion. This question involved the exer-
cise of the right of private judgment. The question was as
to the best mode of carrying out the anti-slavery prin-
ciple. The adopting fiscal regulations involved the principle
of applying to Government to inflict a pecuniary penalty
upon those who differed with them in opinion. They had
no right to do this. He held it was not the best course for
any philanthropic body to apply to Government to carry out
its views. The society which sought such aid fettered their
operations and became mixed up with political parties.
Where was the principle to end? Was it the province of
Government to interfere in this way? No! They had too
much Government meddling already. If they had a right to
go to Government to carry out their views, so had any other
body a fig-ht to ask for the imposition of a tax to carry out their
views. They were establishing .a dangerous precedent, and by
thus acting they were placing the anti-slavery principle at issue
with other great principles.—(Cheers.) Free trade was phi-
lanthropy upon its noblest basis. It was said it was a diffi-
cult thing to ask Government to maintain existing duties
and to impose fresh duties. The principle was the same. He
denied the existence of any such distinction as that now
sought to be established.—(dear.) He did not hesitate to
say that if they succeeded in their non-intercourse with
Brazil, they would inflict upon the population of Sheffield
and Manchester a degree of suffering of which
they had no idea. Sheffield was reduced almost
to a state of desolation by these fiscal regulations.
If they ceased to buy, they must cease to sell, and by re-
fusing to buy Brazilian sugar they tied up the hands of the
Sheffield workman, and prevented him earning his living by
his labour. These men thought the sympathies of the
Society should not be carried to the other side of the water
only. They demanded their sympathy—not their alms,
but their assistance—to enable them to earn their
own living. He considered that their plan was
ineffectual for the suppression of slavery in the Brazils, be-
cause nothing was more delusive than certificates of origin.
They would continually have forged certificates, and a re-
gular system would arise of defeating the law. Now, accord-
ing to our treaty with America, we should be bound to take
the slave-grown sugar of Louisiana on the most favourable
terms. It was true that Louisiana did not produce more
than enough for its own consumption ; but Cuba sugar
might be imported into Louisiana, and the whole of the Louis-
iana sugar might find its way into this country. Would you
take stolen goods? it was said. He knew no difference be-
tween the receiver and the thief; and he could not make any
difference between the man who took Russian tallow, know-
ing that it was purchased by Brazilian sugar, or he who wore
American cotton and the man who received Brazilian sugar
directly. But then it was admitted that all that was wrong ;
but they wished not to do any more wrong. Let them first
take the mote out of their own eye before they attempted to
takethe beam out of their brother's eye. They were not in a
position to go to the Government and ask them to impose a
pecuniary fine upon those who differed with them in opinion.
He should therefore move, as an.amendment, that the clause
in question be annulled. _ .
_ _

kr. Jorix BRIGHT, M.P., rose to second the amend-
inent. It would be observed that with respect to this question
there were many points on which they were agreed. They
were all agreed in opinion as to their detestation of the
horrors of slavery and the slave trade. They were all agreed
that prima facie it would be better to have a free impor-
tation of sugar and of every other commodity. It would be
admitted that freedom of trade conduced to maintain the
peace of the world, and that restriction produced
first the war of tariffs, and then the war of force;
but it was said that this was an exception. If
they refused to hold intercourse with nations holding slaves,
they ought also to refuse to hold intercourse with nations
committing crimes of other kinds. Now, that was an un-
tenable principle. If they refused the produce ofßrazil, they
should adopt tLe same rule with respect to Russian and
Egyptian produce. The produce of land which was stolen,
was as much stolen goods as the produce of labour which was
stolen ; therefore they ought to refuse the produce of our West
Indian Islands, and of the United States. He considered the
Wrinciple absurd, but if they adopted it they should carry it out.
hey were told they were increasing national guilt. Who
were to be the judges of national guilt? He denied that we
were increasing national guilt, or the right of any body of
men to call on the Government to interfere to make them
nationally moral in that respect. Everybody was anxious
to send more of our cutlery to Brazil. We exported large
quantities of goods to the Brazils, and received in
return sugar, a portion of which was refined
in bond, and a portion taken to foreign countries.
Our ships took sugar from Brazil to Russia, and purchased
leather, and tallow, and flax, and brought them to this coun-
try. Did not the gentleman, therefore, who lit his candle,
or wore his shoes, or put on his shirt, incur the same amount
of guilt as if he used .Brazilian sugar?—(Loud cheers.)
There was no guilt in either. Then came the question of the
stimulus to the slave trade. Now he did not admit that the
total abolition of all discriminating duties would stimulate
slavery, although he was willing to admit it for the sake of
argument. The Committee admitted that they petitioned Go-
vernment in favour of the admission of free-labour sugar.
Now that would give quite as great a stimulus to slavery as
the admission of all sugar, without distinction. There was no
essential difference between the effect on slavery of the pro-
position made by the Committee and that of the free traders.
The free-labour sugar of Java was in the markets of the
world competing with Brazilian sugar, and selling at the
same price. It was absurd to say that ours was a better
market than any other—we did not give a higher price than
any other parties ; it was clear that the price here must be re-
gulated by that Arced. The free-labour sugar which
now went to Germany would come here, and Its place
there would be supplied by slave-labour sugar. 'With
regard to Lousianian sugar it should be remembered,
that every Lousianian planter exporting a hogshead of
sugar was entitled to receive a hogshead of Cuba sugar free
of duty; that would set free the whole of the Louisianian
sugar, which we were bound to take by treaty at the lowest
rate of duty. Let them see the argument which they were
giving to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a planter, and
the President of the Board of Trade, a planter; they were
giving them every inducement to continue slavery in Brazil,
in order to keep up their own monopoly, which would of
coarse fall whenever slavery should fall in the Brazils.
They made the Government odious abroad. The Brazils
knew that the Government was not sincere, and therefore they
viewed them in the light of hypocrites. It was no light mat-
ter for the Committee to weaken the exertions of the friends
of the anti-slavery cause in this country, by dividing it upon
this question. It was giving a weapon to monopoly, and
monopoly was but a milder form of slavery. They were
abetting a crime of precisely the. same nature as that which
they warred against, although it might not come in so hide-
ous a form. At the' late meeting there was manifested a
strong feeling in favour of the abrogation of that clause; and
the Committee should recollect, that however conscientious
and honest might be their scruples, those scruples were not
participated in by the bulk of those classes who had been the
very backbone of the anti-slavery movement in this country.
They had no right to inflict upon the poorer class t
of this
country the sufferings which they were inflicting onhem by
the course they were pursuing. If they persisted in carrying
out this most unreasonable proposition there was scarcely an
individual in the counties of York or Lancaster who could
give the Society his cordial support. Throughout the king-
dom there was a difference of opinion with the Committee.
It was not essential, and why, therefore, should they alai_
nately adhere to it. He was sorry to hear from 402epti John
Gurney, as be had from others, that they would with_
draw unless this resolution were carried. He doubted
whether the present was the sort of meeting in
which the question ought to be discussed. The question lag
been carried by a large majority in Exeter Hall against the
resolution. The Government were making of the Coin •
mittee: as their tools merely—.had no sort of affection for
them—and would throw them oft as soon as it might suit
their purpose,
Mr. LEFROY conSi4eied that the admissiop, a slave-
labour sugar would effect the repeal of all the
laws which they had passed for floe abolition of slavery.
Mr. Bright said that this metter would interfere with the
commercial policy of the country ; but if that gentleman
thought so, surely the best means would ho to apply f6r a
remedy for this evil to the Legislature, and not impede the
great Christian movement for the abolition of the slave trade,
Ile would trouble the meeting no further than by protAtieg
strongly against any measure that would present auy obstruc-
tion to the negotiations which the Society might enter into
with the Government.—(Cheers.)
A long discussion hezfo rasa upon the proposition of ad-
journing t.4Q l'lli.'ettug until four o'clock, which was support:4
fly Ali. [Wage Thompson, Mr. Bright, and the majoriii of the
meeting, and eventually carried.

The meeting resumed at half-past three o'clock, although
it was understood to have been adjourned for an hour from
three o'clock,
After a few words from Mr. Atxx.onaxn,
Mr. G. Ttioawsox said he *it assured that slavery, in its
most odious form, existed In the production of other articles
of trade; but they now sought to induce the meeting to be—
lieve that the Government ought to discriminate the partica-
laiarticlee which should be consumed by the great mass of

p_,--a/-6/2
..,_.,,...7% • v
/
. / -------4/e
-- • ---e___,-e-/-st,
A.zi.c.„J" TsiTss It"
-. • • . ssr ~,,,.4%, A
the people. He thought their conduct 'can ' e s seettel_ , ...,;,...e
inconsistent,: for they made efforts to do . . - . - s'''' Lrevei• ii-sr4:. es
serfdom of Russia, ' or the galling slaver •• •• •s‘. es is ''f. 747' s.epss: Pc,
veiled in Egypt. But they, never protestt e',•ssi‘• - :s:7eif,ily
....„. tr
niercial relations with those countries. - .4.' 112 .z.7.--7--:-_,-,:i-,:y
all legislation upon* this suljeet was wrongs .-. ImT, '""'......,
mere only a minority, and consequently lieMtilltlalite
- mdaslis a jer
coerce the great majority by legislation.
,They 4. inlet.
all appeal to force, yet they sought, for tiie tlovernment
force, which was nothing more than physical ; and hethought
it was a wicked prostitution of the powers of Government
to prevent a population of twentv-six millions from trading
with the Brazils or Cuba. The great mass of the people
were opposed to such a course ; and they never
committed . power into the hands of - Government
for any such purpose. No justification could. be given for
limiting free trade, or preventing the people from purchasing
this sugar while. there were so many other slave-grown ar-
ticles in consumption in this country. He regretted to hear
some of his friends pronounce those to be new tangled doc-
trines and suggested that'they should go hack to the days of
Wilberforce. He thought that for the protection of liberty and
philantroplis; the Government was called upon to interfere
with such fiscal regulations as' would discourage the slave
trade.—(Cheers.) -
Mr. S. BOWLING thought that it was not right to attribute
error or sin to others because their conduct might be contrary
' to the views of the objectors., He denied that the effect
would press so heavily upon the artisans of Leeds and other
' large manufacturing towns, as had been represented by his
i friends, Messrs. Bright and Thompson. He could not under-
stand why the minority now—supposin it to be a minority
—had not quite as much
.right to appe.l to the Government
now•a-e Clarkeon had to appeal almost unsupported for the
abolition of slavery. •
Mr. SAMUEL GURNEY did not believe that the majority of
the people of England, if they knew the case thoroughly,
would agree to a free admission of all descriptions of
sugar. He had too high an idea of the people of England
to believe that. The general prosperity of Cuba would he
considered be materially and rapidly increased if slavery
were abolished in that country, although some planters and
even persons in authority there might think otherwise. Ha
shodld 'next allude to the consequences that arose from the free
inliniseion of sugar from Brazil and Cuba to this country.
The measure proposed to Parliament by Sir R. Peel did not
in any way emanate from the anti-slivery party ; at the
same time lie (Mr. Gurney) would assert that it would
cause the admission of but a very small portion of slave..
grown sugar, although it might cause some increase of con-
sumption upon the continent of Europe. He hoped that the
Anti-Slavery Society would at all times use their influence,
and that influence was great with the Government, to adopt.
such meastires as would put an end to slavery.(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY regretted to see so small a meeting. After
reflecting upon the matter with much attention he felt bound
to say that his conscience compelled -him to vote for the • .
amendment. With respect to discouraging slave-grown pro- • - -••• s, -
duce by abstaining from the ute of it, he for one'-could be "ate : .
most anxious to adopt any practical mode for carrying it into l'..
effect.
Mr. Brstrn said he considered it to be the duty of Govern -
ment to discriminate between the dishonest and the honest
man ; between the man who raises his produce by slave
labour and him who does it by free labour.
After a few words from Mr. J. STURGE, in support of the
original motion,
Captain STUART contended that commercial slavery would
not exist without there were consumers of the slave-grown
articles, who acted as employers of the slave traders. He
entreated the meeting to disregard what had fallen from
Mr. Thompson, and recollect the final account they would
hands
aa
The
set oue.
erirete,nt
idhmeei
idAo
uNf
p pitheirnuti
tetsohfneadvi
aoicumtre.i nt encouragingamendment,
ltnext
whenptit slavery.th only
oriBB ,
i, v
en
original
motion, in favour of which 82 persons voted:
After the Chairman declared the original motion to be
carried, a vote of thanks was passed to him, and the meet-
ing separated. •

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The prison doors have closed upon O'Connell,
and upon those who took a prominent part with him in the
repeal agitation. Pending the decision of the House of .
Lords on the writ of error which is to come immediately
before it—and which may even pronounce illegal the very
judgment by which the parties are suffering—it might
be deemed impertinent, if not presumptuous, in us to
raise an argument upon the points which await the deci-
sion of such a tribunal. The attention of the legal
profession in both countries will be fastened upon the
pmceedings in error ; and the people of those countrie.s,
but especially those of Ireland, will await, with breathless
anxiety, the decision which will reverse, or affirm, the judg-
ment pronounced by the Court of Queen's Bench in that
country. The doubt that still rests on the legal validity of
the proceedings in no respect diminishes the responsibility of
the Government to public opinion, nor exonerates it from the
censure which it has justly incurred by the prosecution. The
former is solemn ; the latter is severe. At no period of the
agitation whence the Government affected to apprehend
danger—which, had it really felt, would have led to an
earlier interference with the " monster meetings"—was the
peace of Ireland so fearfully perilled as when O'Connell was
conducted from the bar of the Court to the prison to which
he, with his coadjutors, was doomed for taking part its
those meetings. Whether the law was really stretched
beyond its due limits to reach the leaders of the Re-
peal movement, or whether it was merely extended to
its utmost length, in order that it alight reach them, we
will not now argue. One thing is certain—the ingenuity of
the most skilful sophists has been tried, and has not pre-
vailed, to mystify the long-delayed interference of the Go-
vernment,or to avert the conclusion which flows from it. The
meetings were spread over a period of several month& They
amounted to forty-nine in number. No interference on the
part of the Executive gave notice of any apprehension of dan-
ger to the public peace, or of desire on the part of the autho-
rities that they should be discontinued. The legality of the
object for which the meetings were held was admitted. The
constitutional right of meeting was unquestioned, and un-
questionable. If the mere question of numbers diminished or
vitiated the right, the Government was bound to ad-
monish, to warn, and—if in its dscretion it thought pro-
per to proceed • to that extent—te prohibit, the meetings,
Not a single breach of the peace had occurred at, or
had arisen out of, any one of the numerous meetings, No
sooner did the authorities intimate their will and I,leseure
that the "monster meetings" should cease to be held, and is-
sued a proclamation to that effect, than it was obeyed. With
a promptitude that deserves to be mentioned to his honour—
with an earnestness which attested his anxiety, O'Connell
exhorted and commanded the masses over whom be ex-
exercised an absolute control, to return every man to his
own home. The implicit obedience yielded to the proclama-
tion, by which the Clontarf meeting was prevented, is the
best possible proof that had a similar interference on the
part of the Government been deemed necessary at an
earlier period, a shriller submission to the constituted au-
thorities would have been shown. The public tranquillity
was placed in much more peril by the imprudent, if not
preconcerted, lateness of the hour at which the procla-
mation was issued—allowing of scarcely an opportunity of
preventing the coming multitudes from reaching the ap-
pointed rendezvous—than by any or even all the meetings
that had preceded it. Whatever had been the calamitous
consequences of an accidental collision between the military
and a part of the people, coming—as they had been wont
to come,' without expectation of interruption, and with-
out intention of harm—the Government would have
been the direct occasion of the calamity. Not a single overt
act alleged against O'Connell, in support of the conspiracy
charged upon him and his coadjutors, bears so suspicious an
appearance as the issuing of the proclamation, at the late hour
at which it appeared, does against the Irish Government. But
for the promptitude and energy with which its manifest ten-
dencies wore counteracted by the address that O'Connell drew
up, printed, and dispersed among the multitudes when on
their way to the meeting, the plains of Clontarf might have
become an Aceldama, and the history of that day's doings
have been written in blood. On the head of the Government
must rest the blame of the long-continued agitation. History
will pronounce upon the character of the policy by which the
Government has sought to sustain itself in 'lreland, if the
immediate consequences of that policy do not show how ill-
suited were its measures to establish order among ita
inhabitants,
STANDARD.—The debate of Friday night suggests two
considerations. First, whether it IS proper to protect public
worship from outrage by offe..nces less than breach of the
peace. Secondly, whether better and cheaper tribunals for
causes testamentary than the ecclesiastical courts can be
found, for it will not be enough to show that those courts
have faults, except some means of amending these faults be
proposed, and some better courts substituted. Now, with
reference to the first point, it will not be disputed that public
worship may be scandalised and interrupted by many things
short of breach of' the peace, by many things that constitute
no common law offence. Is there to be no protection against
such scandals and offences, or if it is proposed to guard against,
them, will it be quite safe to enlarge the present Juris-
diction of the lay tribunals, as to the construction of what is
decorous or indecorous in public worship—to refer the matter.
for example, to police magistrates. We very much doubt
whether this would be a step in forewent libertatis. As to the
causes testamentary, we know not what tribunal can be substi-
tuted for the ecclesiastical courts in such cases, except the
courts of equity. Causes testamentary are precisely of that
kind which the ordinary tribunals of the country cannot
entertain, because they have not the necessary mathinery,
of anda adrie, ffeirnenatlikriensdpeocfts,qufreastmioensd
.wiEthvearyvitehwingto, tinhefitleitigtoatiobne
properly the object of a common-law suit, must be reduced
ftaoe
, one
or or
essi buy
i a
moreboth; distinctbot definite issues,
cwahuseetshercannof
elatwi):erLe
duced to such distinct issue or issues. Even were wills
tof
always written in strict legal language, which they are not,
they give rise to a multitude of contingent and compliesteA
analogous to that of the Roman law, and of Courts of
eq,uluesity. questions,
bwohlisiell:thceanjurbisedicdteioanitwith onlye of the c
l courts
in testamentary cases, and you send every cause to
suit. uea
London to be made the subject of a Chaavt%
That is,
at the very time when you are bringing t e common law
home to every man's door by the establishment of local
courts, you destroy thirty4v local courts of equity in
order to centralise •tile
ojectof their" • •
jumsdiction in
London, at an enormous addition of expense to.
the unhappy parties compelled to resort to them.
Does UOt this look very like foldand y contradiction? One
word upon the question of costs, Why are the costs so heavy ?
The Legislature ,has abandoned its charges upon suitors, by
the remission of stuup duties; the judges, we believe, are
seriously deairona to reduce the amount of costs ; the bar
has surrendered a-great deal of its profits ; still costs have
'ilti4rgone no sensible diminution, if they have not
rather increased. This it' a riddle which we believe
every unprofessional man wishes to see solved, but which, as
we have reason to know,riven eminent lawyers cannot solve.
The late chief Baron Abinger having, about two or three
yeare age, declared from the 'bench, that it was impossible to
run up the costs of writ, declaration, and interlocutory
judgement beyond live pounds, a friend, the protector of
a poor man persecuted by a shark, assured the Noble
Baron, 'whom he met the next dayat dinner, that these costs
lied been, in a very simple case, run up to ten pounds. Lord
Abinger expressed his disbelief. On a subsequent day.
however, the hill of costs, regularly taxed at 101. 11s, 4ci.,
was presented to him : he examined the items, shook hia
head, and came to the conclusion that until the whole
system of costs is changed, so as to make excessive charge
penal, the Legislature and the Bench must labour in vain.

llxv
Pncuric
has a hive of bees in Eh.—Miss
gtsdsen,iltihririchs°n' cast oafswßarniai omfollneda;
on the 13th of May, another on the 22d, and also on one the '
24th, which are 4%44 well.—Yorkslate Gazettc
Accingsti.—On Saturday, at 19 o'clock, while
several men, employed as labourers at the New Houses of
Parliament, were engaged ou one of the scaffolds in raising
the blocks of stone for the Victoria Tower, the pulley Rave
way, and an immense mass of stone fell on the ftaeoid,
breaking the poles by which the scaffolding was supported,
and precipitating all who were on it to the ground. Four of
the workmen were so seriously hurt that it Was deemed neces-
sary to remove them to Westminster Hospital. One or two
others were slightly injured, and the rest escaped unhurt.
THE IRON TRADE,...-INCRRISE or WAGis.—We.
have much pleasure In announcing that Mr. Crawshay, the? .
Messrs. Bailey, and Sir John Guest bay( augmented tba
wages to their workmen ten per cent. We trust that of
gentlemen Who hold the just maxim " Ore and le; tivic,"
may speedily dOlikewiss.—Monmoutiakire