The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-27 00:00:00

only dealt with the political and moral view of the
question, omitting altogether any notice of the com-
mercial and financial view of it. But. it was admitted,
that in that view c f it the Government were out of coml.—
( Hear, bear.) His Right Hon. Friend took the political and
moral view of it because the financial and commercial ore was
entirely given up.—( Hear, hear. ) And his flight Hon.
Friend had not left the Government a leg to stand on, as far
as the moral aspect of the question went ; and the Right Hon.
Baronet must have felt this strongly, for he did not eaen attempt
a reply. In answer to the argument of his Noble Friend, that
the Government measure would encourage slave• grown sugar,
became the free-grown sugar, which now supplied the markets
of the world, would be attracted to this country, and its place
would be supplied with slave-grown Sugar, the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Newark said that the whole quan-
tity of free-labour sugar eyelid not be supplied by slave-labour
sugar, though he admitted the measure had that tendency.
Now he (Mr. Wood) thought that was mere quibbling
(Hear, hear.) How could he doubt but that the measures of
the Government would have that effect (Hear, hear.)
With regard to the calculation of the Righollon Baronet (Sir
-It. Peel) he said that 280,000 tons of sugar would be con-
sumed in consequence of the reduction of id, or Ihd. per lb.
Admitting that his calculation was right, it would not give
a large consumption, after all, for it would oitly be 201 b. per
head in a papulation of 28,000,000 people. That amotint was
consumed in 1831. There was nothing extravagant, there-
fore, in the calculation, supposing the price was lowered.
But would the price be brought down ? He did
not think that there would be any reduction of price
equal to the amount which the Government reckoned upon.
He considered that there would be no adequate benefit given to
the commercial interest by the c iurse that was to be pursued.
It was almost impossible to say to what particular species of
sugar the duty would apply. He believed that there was the
greatest difficulty in discovering the difference between white
aid elated sugar. 'Three •fourths of the description of sugar
upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman relied for procuring
duty vas sugar of the higher price. The flight Hon. Cantle-
man had almost relieved him from the necessity cf saying any-
thing on this subject, by statieg that the sum ly from colonial
sources would be larger than he had calculated. Of course,
in that case, a less amount of foreign sugar would come in, and
thus the loss to the revenue would also be greater than
had been anticipated. He believed that., in spite of the course
now pursued by the Government, they would in the end deal
with suffer exactly as they had done with coffee. After re-
sisting the reduction of differential duties in the ease of coffee,
they eventually came to the House and proposed that reduction
themselves; it was his firm conviction that-they would pursue
the same course with respect to sugar. Notwithstanding all
that was said on the subject of slavery, the question, stripped
of appearances, resolved itself into this—whether a heavy tax
should be imposed on the people of this country, for the bene-
fit of the West India colonies? He thought the Government
were to blame for not seizing the opportunity row afforded to
them of admitting all foreign sugar. They would, in his opinion,
have acted with more wisdom had they pursued that course.
He did not believe that the benefit to the consumer mentioned
by the Hon Member for Newark would be adequate to the
locs he would feel from the differential duty. He was sorry,
also, to hear that the income-tax was clearly settled ont hem for
three years, and that there was no indistinct prospect of the'r
having it imposed on them for a stall longer period.
Sir It. PEEL said, one complaint that had le en made by
the Noble Lord opposite was certainly unreasonable ard unjust.
The Noble Lord said that the Government hid not, on this
occasion, entered into any detailed explanation of their reso-
lutions respecting the sugar duties. Why, the wish
of the Government was to have an opportunity of
entering upon that detail, d explanation.—( Hear, hear.)
They had that day given notice for moving the. Committee of
Ways and Means. His Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor
of the Exchequer was particularly anxious that the Govern-
ment should hate an oapurtunity, in that Committee of Ways
and Means, of supplying that explanation which he ( Sir it.
Peel), in the general statement he had made, 'had omitted to
give. His Right Hon. Friend was interrupted in that inten-
tion by the Noble Lord bringing forward a motion, per:ecily
fairly he admitted, hut which at any rate prevented his Right
lion. Friend from of availing himself the opportunity he
sought. The Noble Lord, in bringing forward his motion,
, raised quite a different issue from that which would be raised in
the discussion of the details of the resolutions of the Govern-
ment ; and the Noble Lord contended that before
they entered into the Committee of Ways and Means, before
they discussed the resolutions of the Government in detail, they
should join in a discussion cf that question, which had been
more than once discussed, namely, whether or not it was poli-
tic to exclude slave-I:boor sugar ft om competition with the
produce of their own colonies. The Noble Loid avoided en-
tei ing on all the details of the subject, confining himself parti-
cularly to the subject—a g:eat and important subject—to
which his own motion referred. He said nothing about the
establishment of a discriminating duty on sugar, he said
nothing of the details of the resolution ; he (Sir R. Peel)
thought that the Noble Lord invited them to enter into the
great question whether or not there ought to be any discrimi-
nating duty on sugar the produce of slave labour. They had
followed his example, and endeavoured to imitate him. He
thought, therefore, that with respect to the complaint of the
Noble Lord that the Government had not given a detailed
statement of their intentions, that complaint was quite
without foundation.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord bad referred
them to the income-tax. Now, he ( Sir R. Peel) was cer-
tainly surprised at observing that while the Noble Lord con-
stantly attacked the income-tax, and denounced the policy of
continuing it, he yet expressed his determination to vote in
favour of it.—( Cheers and laughter.) Why, if Hon. Gentle-
men opposite d'sliked and disapproved of the income-tax, why
slid not they vote against it ?—( Cheers.) If it was such an
inquisitorial and oppressive tax, why did they concur with
him (Sir R. Peel) in the proposal for continuing it for a
longer period?—(Cheers.) And observe, it was stated that
the Government gave no sufficient guarantee that the income-
tax would cease at the end of three years. They said themselves
that they saw every probability of its continuance beyond that
period. Why, how could they reconcile this declaration with
their vehement objections to that tax—( Hear, hear)—while
they were so passively content to go on with him in its fa-
vour?—( Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman opposite said that
he (Sir R. Peel) had convinced him that there would not ac-
tually be a su.plus—nay, that at the end of two years from the
present time there would be a small deficiency, and therefore
he voted for the income-tax ; he voted for it to supply that de-
ficiency. But the Honr Gentleman contemplated (rely a
small deficiency of some 500,0001. or 600,0011., and if it was no
more than that amount, surely their fitianciaaingenutty might
supply (that without recourse to the income-tax. Why, he
(Sir Robert Peel) asked him to vote for a tax producing
5,200,0001 a-year ! and yet the Honourable Gentleman
said he was content to continue the present tax.—(Hear,
hear.) He said that at the end of one or two years there
would be a small deficiency—and, therefore, the Hon. Gen-
tleman came to the conclu,ion, not that a small tax producing
some 500,000/. or 600,000/. should be imposed, but that a
tax producing the large sum of 5,200000/. a year should be
continued in operation.—( Bear, hear.) And this, not for
three years onla, for the Hon. Gentleman said himself that
he believed it would be imposed for six. But at the end of
three years it was very pessible that the Hon. Gentleman
might he reminded elsewhere of his support of this tax, and
therefore at the beginning of 1845 he thought it prudent to
leave it on record, as it might be convenient to him at the end
of 1848, that he had in debate disapproved of this tax. The fact
was that Hon. Gentlemen opposite decidedly approved of
the proposition of her Majesty's Government.—( Cheers, and
laughter.) It was not because they saw a probability of a
small deficiency that they voted for this tax, but because they
saw that this was the proper time to try a great, and, he
would call it, a bold experiment with respect to the taxation of
the country !—(Loud cheers.) But Hota. Gentlemen opposite
said, also, that the attempt to make commercial treaties with
other countries had failed. Had he ever denied it.?—(hear,
hear.) And her Majesty's Government proposed this—that
as other countries would not enter into those treaties, at least
as far as the negotiations with respect to those treaties were
protracted for a very long time, so that the relations of com-
merce were thereby disturbed in the meantime, while in the
end the negotiations did not come to a satisfactory termination
—they proposed measures, not stipulating for any reciprocal
advantages from other countries; but believing the reductions
they proposed to make to be intrinsically good, and calculated
to promote their own interests, they were ready to make those
reductions, trusting that the efficacy of this example would ulti-
mately tell on other countries. If her Majesty's Government
' had been wrong in their attempts to make these commercial
treaties, at all events it was an error into which other Govern-
ments had also fallen. Up to the present period, every
Ministry had attempted to make commercial treaties, and
if other countries w old enter into them, it would doubtless
secure a double advantage. It would secure the great advan-
tage of carrying on a traffic with many of those countries ; it
would also be a great advantage if they induced those foreign
nations to make reductions in their -duties on the produce of
this country. But the question was, should they propose a
great beech to themselves, in the hope 'of, in time, prevailing
un those other countries to give them the benefit of reciprocal
treaties? The Noble Lord approved olthe proposition of the
Government.—(Cheers.) Then, he also approved of the
income-tax. If he did not, would the Noble Lord ask them to
remove three millions of taxation without that tax? It was
impossible that lion. Gentlemen opposite could, in the face of
the country, reconcile the votes they were giving, with their
speeches, under any other impression that would be favourable to
them,except that they approved in their hearts of the proposition
of her Majesty's Government.—( Cheere. ) Now, he must own,
after reading the resolution of the Noble Lnrd, after having
listened to a great part of the speech of the Noble Lord, he
could not understand why the Nible Lord did not, the other
evening, vote for the motion of the Hen. Member for Man-
, chester (Air. AI. Gibsori).—( Cheers.) A great part of the
speech of the Noble Lord was occupied in show ing that they
were putting money in the pockets of the West Indians, by
establishing in their favour a discriminating duty ; that that
was a great loss to the consumer in this country ; that the
State did not get the whole benefit of it; that the difference
was not divided b tweet' the consumer and the producer, and
that a large share of the reduction went into the pockets of the
producers.— (Hear, hear.) Why, if he (Sir R. Peel) had not
read the resolution of the Noble Lord, and had only listened to
a portion of his speech, he should have taken it
fur granted, that the Noble Lerd was one of the
Gentlemen who would have given their cordial support
to the preposition of the Hon. Member for Manchester. The
Noble Lord appeared to be oscillating between theta° benches
and the benches opposite.--Laughter and cheers ) For the
Noble Lord had made that excellent speech in !ariser of the
motion of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and then sai
"on account of the position of the West 'tidier; colonies, con-
sidering the great experiment they made respecting slavery—
considering that sufficient time had not elapsed to test that ex-
periment, he was exactly of his (Sir R. Peel's) opinion, that
the West Indies hod a good right to protection," The Hon.
Member for Stockport, assuming all the airs of an injured
fair one—(Laughter)--said, on a former evening, that he (Sir
itobert Peel) had jilted him.—( Great laughter.) He ( Sir
Robert Peel) felt very grateful to the Honourable ?.1i tuber
for the support to which he hail referred as having
given him, on another occasion, on the proposition of
the Honourable Member for Bristol (Mr. Miles) when he
(Sir It. Peel) had the good fortune to vote with the Hon.
Gentleman, on the only occasion on which he had ever voted
with him in Isis life. The proposition of the Hon. Member
for Bristol was, that the duty on colonial sugar 'should be re-
duced to 205., and that there should be a discriminating duty on
sugar produced by free labour, which was not sugar of British
production. That was the propcsitionof the lion. Member
for Bristol. lie (Sir R. l'ecl) slid he thought the reduction
of duty on West India sugar to 20s. would be of very 1 tale
bent fit to the geueial cat sumer, and that he thought it
was infinitely better, when they made a reduction,
that it should be such a reduction as would be
felt ; and he had held this language that unless a
discriminating duty was established as to the rro•
duce of Br.tish plantations, they should not attempt to
impose a duty on sugar the produce of free labour. 11 the
House would not sanction the imposition of a discriminating
duty on sugar the produce of British plantations, they ought
not on sugar the produce of free labour. lie thought II sit.
Gentlemen might with justice accuse the Noble Lord of
"lb rut ion." The Noble Lord, at the beginning of the preset.t
session, said that " protection" was the bane of " agriculture."
That phrase sounded remarkably well; but if the question were
t to,uutai
icile
et that the
i,
is b
aNnoeb
01 "Noble
aLgorride
uoi
touur
el i.l
put to the Noble Noble Lord that all protection to agriculture
—(Laughier, and cries of " Hear, hear.'.') The Noble. Lord
JOHN RUSSELL made an observation which was
laid down the general principle that protectiou was the bane of
it7ccr,erdimbvisedcotle.t for the et'
Sir ROBERT PEEL.:—Oh, but the Noble Lot(' said, at
iangar•:: Lorcacduilue en. the gallery.