The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-08 00:00:00

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL.

In answer to a question by Captain PECHELL,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that if the Justice of the Peace Bill
was read a second time that evening, he did'not intend going
nto Committee on it till after Easter.
RAILWAY RESOLUTIONS.

In answer to a question by an How. MEMBER,
Mr. GREENE said that some further resolutions, with re-
gard to railways, would be ready in a few days.
Mr. MILES said that he had a motion for Monday night on
the question of the Speaker leaving the chair for the purpose
of going into Committee on the property-tax, upon which he
was afraid he must occupy some of the time of the House.
He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, did not intend by his notice to interfere with that
debate.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
not his intention to interfere at all with the motion of his
Hon. Friend; but it was very important that the question of
the repeal of the export duties should be discussed. His Hon.
Friend would have another opportunity of making his motion.
Mr. M. (ARSON said that it would not take ten
minutes to repeal the duty on cotton. Why not go on with
it now ?—( Laughter. )
Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Member for Liskeard had
a very important motion on the subject of the property and
income-tax, and till that was disposed of he could not assent to
the remission of any taxes.—(Laughter.) He hoped they
would ho enabled to proceed witk the reduction of the Customs
on Wednesday.
WAYS AND MEANS.—SUGAR DUTIES.
On the question that the Srstaxxst do leave the chair, in
order that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of
Ways and Means,

sir. COBDEI,:1 rose to address the House. As they were
going to vote a certain amount of protection to the colonial
proprietors, there could be no objection, he thought, to that
amount being known as well as it could. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer calculated that they would receive 2.30,000
tens of colonial sugar. On that he granted ten guineas a ton
protection ; he then calculated on receiving 20,000 of foreign
sugar. Now, he (Mr. Cobden) thought it was evident that
before they received that amount of sugar they would have
paid the ten guineas a ton on colonial sugar.—( Hear, hear.)
Then, the amount they were able to vote in the way of protec-
tion was 2,415,000/., in fact, the tax they were about to vote
would be 3,900,0001., and the tax they voted to colonial
proprietors would be about 2,500,000/. That was an amount
which would enable the Right Hon. Gentleman to relinquish
the window and soap duties, and would leave him half a mil-
lion of surplus besides. He hoped, if there was any fallacy
in what he had stated, that it would not go uncontradicted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could net at
all acquiesce in the reasoning of the Hon. Gentlemen, or the re-
sults he had arrived at with respect to the protection of colo-
nial sugar, in contradistinction to foreign.
Lord HOWICK, whose first sentence was inaudible, said the
point ought to be cleared up. It was one of extreme import..
once. It was a clear and plain proposition, and capable of a
categorical answer—aye or ne. He understood the point put
by the Hen. Member for Stockport to be this : the Righ t Hon.
Gentleman proposed a protecting duty of ten guineas a ton on
foreign free sugar ; therefore, if it were not for this protecting
duty, the growers of this sugar could afford to sell it ten
guineas a toe cheaper than they actually will sell it under
the proposed arrangement. That was the point,
and if it was incorrectly stated, let the Right
Hon. Gentleman point out where the error was. If
foreign free sugar could be sold ten guineas a ten
cheaper, he wanted to know how it was, he repeated, if that
duty were removed, why it would not answer the grower to
sell it ten guineas a ton cheaper ? He saw no reason why it
should not be so. The only difference would be that the
Treasury would receive ten guineas a ton less. The point put
by the Hon. Member for Stockport was, that if foreign sugar
can he offered ten guiencets a ton cheaper than colonial sugar,
would not colonial sugar, if obliged to come into the market
on equal terms with foreign sugar, bo reduced in price ten
guineas a ton ?—( Hear.) And in truth was it not to prevent
the fall of colonial sugar that this protecting du' y was imposed?
He confessed, that after all the debating on the subject, he was
at a loss to understand what protecting duties were, if it were
not for this purpose. But if they did raise the price ten
guineas a ton by this arrangement, and if the quantity men-
tioned bya:the Hen. Member for Stockport would come into
the market, he wished to know where was the error of the
Hon. Gentleman in saying that they were going to
impose a tax on the consumer of 2,400,000:.?
Sir R. PEEL said, in the course of last week 3,000 quarters
of foreign corn had been brought into our markets at a duty of
20s. the quarter. The consumption of wheat was esti-
mated at not less than twenty millions of quarters, arid, with
the exception of one million of quarters, the whole of the re-
maining nineteen millions was derived from domestic supply.
lid the Noble Lord contend that, because 3,000 quarters of
wheat were brought in and paid a duty of 20s. a quarter, that
the remaining 19 millions was raised so much in price above
its nataral coat. How did the Noble Lord reconcile that with
the statement made by him the other night on this subject ? An
attempt had been made to show that, in Jersey and Guernsey,
where the trade in corn was free, the price of wheat was not
lower than it was in this country. Now did the Noble Lord
contend that a tea of 19,009,0001. had been impond upgu the

British public because 3,000 quarters of corn had been ad-
mitted last week at a duty of 205.?
Mr. HUME was surprised at hearing the statement of the
Right lien. Baronet. The Right lion. Baronet was positively
misstating the arguments of his friends.—( Hear, hear. ) His
friends had always contended that the object of the corn-laws
was to keep up the price of corn.—( Cries of "No, no," from the
Ministerial benches, answered by cheers from the Opposition. )
The Right Hon. Baronet had not answered the direct ques-
tion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stockport.—(Hear.)
His Hon. Friend had stated the exact amount and the exact
quantity, and although it was possible that the actual amount
did not all go into the packets of the West Indians—( Cheers
from the Nlinisterial benches)—yet there could be no ques•
tion but that a proportion, and a very large proportion, of
that amount did find its way into their pockets.—(Cheers. )
The question was, what was that amount ? That depended en-
tirely upon the quantity. That was the question which the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had been called upon to answer,
and to that question no answer had been given. Why, let
them take even the case of corn. There could be no doubt
but that the imposition of the duty tended to raise the price
of corn throughout the country. They might tell him that a
rise of one in twenty would not produce any perceptible
effect. It might not, but a rise of one in seven or of one in
five would produce a very great effect, and that would be suf-
ficient to show how fallacious was the argument of the Right
Hon. Beronet.—(Hea ) The Right lion. Baronet had, in
fact, shirked the 'question,.—( Cheers,) Why did he go to
corn ?—( Hear, hear.) Why did he not keep to sugar ?
( Hear. ) He had gone to corn, because he thought it would
attract more attention.—( Hear.) Sugar was the subject of
discussion at the present moment and let them keep to sugar.
—( Hear, hear.) Before he sat down he would offer a little
advice to those lion. Gentlemen opposite who were pressing
the Right lion. Baronet on this subject. He would advise
lion. Members who supported the West India interest not to
drive their pretensions too fsr, or they would make it appear
evident that that relief would not be extended to the country
from the reduction of the sugar duty which the country was
entitled to expect.—( Hear, hear.) The time was fast ap-
proaching when any protection would be entirely out of the
question. He was anxious to see the West Indians amply
supplied with labour, and to see them prospering, but if they
persist in pursuing the present course, the country would
soon consider that they were not worthy of that consideration
which had hitherto been extended to them. He wished to
see questions denuded of all that intricacy and of all that fallacy
which had been had recourse to, simply to hide the fact that
this protection imposed a heavy tax upon the country. He
wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider the
question, argue it fairly, and show what would be the real effect
of imposing this additional duty on foreign sugar.
Mr. LABOCCHERE said that the argument which had
been used by the Right Hon. Gentleman the First Lord
of the Treasury, in reply to the question of his Hon. Friend
the Member for Stockport and- to the observations of his
Noble Friend the Member for Sunderland, did appear to him
one of the most extraordinary evasions which he had ever
heard. The plan of the Government supposed a regular trade
in sugar to this country, to the amount next year of 20,000
tons of foreign sugar. His Hon. Friend had contended that
the price paid for colonial sugar would be governed by the price
of the foreign sugar. Entirely evading that argument, the
Right lion. Baronet, with what in so able a debater he must
believe could only be a desperate plunge of despair, said that
he was bringing forward a precisely analogous case in the cir-
cumstances of the corn trade. What were the circumstances
of that trade as described by the Right Hon. Baronet himself?
That there was a quantity of 3,000 quarters of corn imported
into this country, to meet 20,000,000 quarters of home-grown,
and that this 3,000 quarters of foreign corn had the
same effect on the 20,000,000 of home-grown, as
the 20,000 tons of foreign sugar would have on
the 230,000 tons of colonial sugar. But there was this
difference in the cases—the Right Hon. Baronet supposed,
when he spoke of those 3,000 quarters of foreign corn, that
its importation had been a favourable speculation to the
trader, but he believed the Right Hon. Baronet would find
that this was contrary to the facts of the ease. Had it been
under the operation of the sliding scale—( Hear, hear)—a
winning speculation ?—( Hear, hear.) Had the transaction
been of a nature to encourage the importation of corn in
future? He was astonished the Right Hon. Baronet should
have ventured to use such an argument. What was the state
of the corn trade at the present moment ? A large quantity
of foreign corn, after having been kept in warehouses for a
considerable time, at a loss to the importers, became at last FO
damaged that it was impossible it could afford to pay duty, and
rather than pay it it was thrown into the river.—(Hear,
hear.) By the operation of the sliding scale the trade in corn
was rendered a destructive one—( Hear, hear)--and the Right
Hrm. Gentleman gravely compared it to the sugar trade, which
he intended to introduce into this country—he endeavoured to
establish a perfect analogy between circumstances entirely dissi-
milar. He hoped that, however the scheme of corn duties might
have pleased the Right Hon. Gentleman, the infliction of a curse
in sugar duties, on a similar principle, would be spared to the
country. His (Mr. Labouchere's) purpose in rising was to
protest against the argument brought forward by the Right
Hon. Baronet, that a principle founded on circumstances ap-
plicable to corn would afford an argument which would equally
apply to sugar. There never was a more complete failure at
an answer than in that attempted by the Right Hon. Gentle-
enan.—( Hear, hear.) Because 3,000 quarters of foreign corn
had, forsooth, been introduced in one week—and it would he
absurd to say that that could have any effect on the price of the
corn consumed in the present season—it was attempted to
show that there was some analogy between that case and the
case of foreign and colonial sugar, as affected by the Bill in-
troduced by her Majesty's Government.
Mr. GLADSTONE said there were two questions before
the House, and there was considerable complaint on the on
side and on the other, because they had not been answered.
A question had been put by an Hon. Gentleman on the other
side, which he had no hesitation in saying did not originate in
a desire of gaining information.—(Bear, hear.) His Right
Hon. Friend, the Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel), had ob-
served to the Hon. Gentleman, that two could play at that
game, and had excited considerable irritation by his mode of
retort.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Gladstone) believed that a
fair answer was never given to such a question as that of the
Hon. Member for Stockport. One Right lion. Gentleman
opposite said it was not fair to take the small quantity of corn
which came in within a week, and tie argue from that as if it
formed an appreciable portion of the trade. He did not know
that he differed from him upon that point; but he would give
a slight modification of his Right Hon. Friend's question. In
1813, there were introduced one million, or one million two
hundred quarters (that, at least, was not an imperceptible
quantity ), and it paid about 15s. a quarter. In 1814, there
came in about eight or nine hundred thousand quarters, which
raid about 17s. a quarter. He asked Hon. Members
whether, looking at the average of wheat in 1843
and in 1844, they would hold that the pr ice of
wheat was not raised in 1843 by 15s. a quarter, and in 1844
by 175., over what it would have been without a corn-
law ? The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr Labouchere) said
that upon the 3,000 quarters money was lost. But did the
1,000,000 quarters introduced in 1843 involve a loss of money?
If so, why were another million imported? The Right Hon.
Gentleman had said, that a quantity of corn had been thrown
into the river in consequence of the prejudicial operation of
those protective duties at one time. Why, of course, if the
Right Hon. Gentleman referred to a trader in desperate cir-
cumstances for arguments of this sort, he could no doubt find
many of them. The Hon. Member had referred to a paper of
six or seven years old, and it was from that he had rend the
occurrence of a quantity of corn having been thrown into the
river; but he (Mr. Gladstone) would ask, how could a state
of things of a date so far back be made analogous to those of
the present?—(Hear, hear). On the whole, he (Mr. Glad-
stone) diet think that the proposition of his lion. Friend near
him was founded on principles consistent with justice, and
sound truth and equity.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member for
Stockport had said that it was a plain question of arithmetic,
and he argued that if the duty, say upon 200,000 tons of sugar,
was to be 10s. 6d. the cwt., that the price of the sugar to the
dealer would be the same per cwt. in addition. But he (Mr.
Gladstone) would ask, how did the Hon. Member mean to
make the sugar duties applicable to the principle on which the
duties on corn were regulated ?—( Hear, hear.) If the Hon.
Member meant to argue that, because 10s. 6d. was the duty
on sugar, 108. 6d. should be the addition to the price, let him
do so ; but ho (Mr. Gladstone) differed from him, and con-
tended that the fact was not so, and objected that such should
be assumed as the fact. Amongst the many points which
might be introduced into this subject, in order that it might be
submitted to a full and fair discussion, was this one :—Suppose
that British sugar was not worth by two-thirds what foreign
sugar was, and that the duty on British sugar was 10s. 6d.
per cwt., and that on foreign was 235., surely the 235. duty on
the more valuable article was only a fair, proportionate ad
valorem duty.—( Hear, hear.) As to the Hon. Gentleman
putting this in the form of a question, and endeavouring to get
an answer, whether it came to one million or two millions and
a half, though as a mere stratagem in debate, there might be no
objection to such a course. But as a question for information
—though he would not say it was deserving of no attention—
yet it was desirable that an answer such as that given by his
Right Hon. Friend should be given to it, who put a question to
the Hon. Gentleman, which ho hoped some Hon. Gentleman
on the other side of the House would be disposed to answer
more sat isfactorily. —( Laughter. )
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Gladstone) had said that the Hon. Member fur Stock-
port had put a foolish question, which was answered by another
foolish question of the Right Hon. Baronet.—( Hear, hear.)
But the lion. Member for Stockport put a very pertinent
qaestion, in his opinion, and it was answered with exceeding
dexterity by the Right Hon. Baronet, for he answered one part
but not the whole. The question of the lion. Member for
Stockport was a plain, clear, definite, and brief question, un-
derstandable by anybody. Nothing of that character could
be applied to the answer of the Right Hon. Gentleman.—
( Hear, hear.) The question was, "if a certain amount of
duty be placed on foreign sugar as a means of protection, what
is the less to the consumer by that protection ?" That was the
real meaning of the question. The Hon. Member said that
the loss to the community must be measured by the gain to the
planters. But that was not altogether the ease, for the loss
was derived in part from the quantity of labour and capital
thrown away, and therefore the protective duty would only
give a partial protection. The question of the Hon. Member
for Stockport was accurate enough, but when it was asked
whether the importation of '200,000 quarters of corn would in-
crease the price of corn, he did not think that was an accurate
question, because the quantity was so small, but if it
were large, it would be an accurate question.
And, therefore, the question :put by the Hen. Member for
Stockport was a question put for information sake alone. IWhat
was the protection of ten shillings put on for ? On this sub-
ject he held a letter in his hand, a letter written by a Gentle-
man named Gladstone—(llear, hear)—in the Times of that
day, in which he said they must protect the colonists—that
was, in effect, saying they were to have worse sugar at a higher
price. It was supposed they derived great benefit from the
West and East India colonies. He denied that altogether.
The value of the West India colonies was to be measured by
the exact amount of our loss. They paid them 'a large tax in
the shape of duty on sugar, and it had not been shown why this
country should pay them more than 2,000,0001. of money every
year in the shape of protection duty.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said, the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bath advanced an argument which no other lion.
Member would, he believed, be inclined to support him in—
that our West India colonies were rather a loss than an advan-
tage to us. He would not, therefore, apply himself to this
question, but rather reply to the observations of the
Member for Taunton who admitted that some; protection
ought to be extended towards our colonies, and was not satisfied
that they should enter into unlimited competition with foreign
countries. The Hon. Member for Stockport had put a specific
question, and had drawn an inference which the premises did
not justify. He presumed that because there was a differential
duty of ten guineas a ton on foreign free sugar, and the amount
imported, 230,000 tons, that the people of this country were
thereby taxed to the amount of 2,300,0001. Now, that argu-
ment was altogether irrespective of the quantity supplied by
the colonies, and the greater the colonial supply the greater the
amount of taxation on the people of this country.—(No, no. )
lie admitted that if the supply from the West Indies was in-
considerable, and that we were obliged to take our
sugar from foreign countries, the protective duty would be
very much felt. But at the present moment, when the sup-
ply imported from our foreign possessions could be [greater
than evor was consumed in a single year by the people of this
country, how could they be subjected to a tax of 200,0001. or
300,0001. ? If they were at once to remit all protective duties,
the immediate consequences might be favourable to the con-
sumer by a small reduction in the price of sugar, but would be
afterwards highly injurious even to the consuming class, for
the growers would, in most instances, give up their plants:
ticns, and its culture would be to a great extent discontinued

The colonies were entitled to protection. Legislative iat,'br;
ferenee had given them that claim. He said again th.at ;as
price of sugar in this country was not to be measured. 1101
amount of duty. Some years ago there was a differentiot, tee
of 395. against foreign sugar—would Hon. Members h ea•
the price of sugar to the consumer was thereby so inue
handed ? The facts were entirely against such a "PP°.s dal
If nineteen or twenty parts of the sugar consumed inntitf
country were imported from foreign countries at the differs' 501
duties mentioned, then the argument might apply, but sure4tios
when the case was reversed. We were now near the On" as
in which we were in 18i3, when our colonies enabled
us to
exporters of sugar. te fir
Sir WILLIAM CLAY said the speech of the sOnionsf
ronet who had just sat down was entirely beside the eue'njoi
the Hon. Member for Stockport. If their colonies fuse
a supply for exportation above what we required, then, O
J
mitted that there might be some force in the argoinen`,"reie
lion. Baronet, and that the differential duty would nel,ieat,
the price of sugar, but that was not the state of things at Pr`t
bad
The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Governoll,oefa
actually calculated upon being obliged to import a consiuuld
be
quantity of foreign sugar—( Hear, hear)—end there e°, vat°
no doubt but the differential duty enhanced the price, " t, st.
the extent mentioned by the lion. Member for Stockl.°
least toBOR T a very considerable extent. he 11'n:
Mr H WICK considered the supposition of t red it
Member for Stockport as absurd, and thought he answe
in his own statement. ee mbar I'l
Mr. C. WOOD said the question of the lion. snr-e area
Stockport related to the price of all colonial sugar, as cn-roPgreei
with foreign sugar, and he did not think the alighlest vele
had vet bat!' made towards answering it. He 11'148 pia
Member of the Government artful(' attempt to give roe°
answer to a pleat and practical question. The Gave iopese
did not deny that the effect of this measure would be /°, „ telos
a tax on the people of this country, for the benefit of tn
nial producer. The question asked by the lion. memberorabie
what was the am' tint of the tax so levied ? In that Hen.to
Member's opinion it amounted to 2,300,C,001. He °Pb,ore,
wrong in that calculation, but let him be oorrected if he
and told what the amount of this taxation really was. weer
Lord SANDON thought it would be impossible
an t°
rie, of
the question in the shape new put.—( Laughter,
,dr,:i'oB of
r` Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) But the suPP might
the Hon. Member for Stockpot t was erroneoas, to _
with as much justice he contended that we paid !i.e. tbe
ation on the 19,009,000 of home-grown corn consumed 000 of
country, the amount of taxation imposed on the /,o°`' denied
quarters of foreign corn imported here. It never weshs, the
that protection was intended for the colonies, sad t /gosh
people of this country were taxed in consequence. /gear,
hear, from the Opposition. ) Why, Hon. Itiembers u_Pribey
were to some extent protectionists themselves—et 10;01001
recognised the principle. He admitted the swore
protection ; but what he denied was that they could tioo,ll
amount of taxation in this country, in regard to pretecee goo.
the amount of differential duty. The argument of t" ads of
Member for Stockport might be very good on
Covent-garden Thea:re, but would not be admitted 'int to
House, became it was opposed to common sen'°
experience. ,
sea
Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to make only one mein
Last year it was an undoubted fact that the price of
if os
sugar in bond was 215., while the price of eolonisl suegeolia
345., and therefore 13s. was squeezed oat of th
(I)'n ye
by the system of protection.-13s. per cwt. Fa ~rotas,
the be:ass
that
average, squeezed out of the public by colonial pro nett
and, therefore, it followed that the laritis.h public era"..2.;telvei
able to the extent of ]3s. Now, they reserve to thel'nele.
the power of squeezing 10s. 6d. out of the English gee
By the late law they could squeeze 135., and tbel 5,t, need
tained the power of squeezing (Os. 6d. more than tog% etsr
cost in the markets of the world. They proposed to hi",fraca
2,300,000 guineas from the consumers of this countriskv,to
taxation upon the consumers rather) to the West ite;ool',
the colonial proprietors. They gave them, last year, 2,6/"."eteo I
with a 13s. en every cwt., and they now proposed to ' eitietd
power of charging 10s. 6d., and of giving 2,3000
The If
sjght
to the colonial proprietors, out of the Exchequer. , bad oth,
lion. Gentleman did not say it would not be so. He had
heard it stated that his lion. Friend (Mr. Cobdendentleel
proved it would be so given, but the Right Hon. etitee,
did not say it would not be so. It might be so. They tom'
Hon. Members on that (the Liberal) side of the rif,ut-irlia'
their utmost to transfer 2,300,0(30 guineas to the IV" eeterl.
and to colonial proprietors, out of the Exchequer of the coder'
Mr. BROTHERTON said that the case had been falls
stated by His Hon. Friend the Member fur Manchester,r' ,
a
the
( Mr. Brotherton) found that during the last V e
edas acid
average price of British plantation sugar was 19s* L'r,t
more than for foreign sugar.—t Hear, hear.) The "" cora
(Lord Sandon) wished to have the amount of a tax lie (fir
Bs. per quarter, supposing that duty to be insoosea• toted
Brotherton) believed that it might be roundly, 6 it, be
;00 a o•
8,000,000/. of a burden on the people. It Ica, wee e,
confessed, to know what proportioa of the duty c"-
sugar went into the pockets of the colonial planterai;s34,
the
remembered that when they were discussing, in,, elsutera
propriety of granting 20,000,0001. to the West 111046100 )
as same compensation for the emancipation of titrotbero,s
gentleman from Liverpool called upon him (Mr. '" etj
ta
and said that he might vote for that grna-roed
the country would have the whale 20,000,0001' le), 131,
its pockets in the course of a few years. Since 000,00/61
ever, they had paid a sum of 19,000,0001. or 2(1; beokit
more by this system of taxation. If four millions el into ic
weights of British colonial sugar, therefore, e„eseamet of inc'e
country every year, it was quite clear that 4,000,tr
was taken out of the pockets of the people of this ryear
Yes, England gave the colonial planters 4,06,0,0° faattl/ca
and they took in exchange 3,000,0061. of their matted g'te
That was a poor trade, he thought, that England 5h Id tee,
the colonies 4,000,0001. of money, and that theYesh nest l'10:
3,000,006/. of goods. Be thought the best and eneh'eraeloe
would be to vote a certain sum of money, and let / stag
British colonial and foreign sugar then be equalised• hit
the fact, anti he hoped the House would bear it in info the
during the last five years they had paid 20s. ra°ra
sugar than they required to do. soll'
Mr. MITCHELL said the Right Hon. Baronet tnhf;teritce'll:
her for Stamford had said, that if they took the duty ros1",0
plantation sugar it would rise the price of the fereiej Vets
But the Right Hon. Baronet forgot the fact that
sugar were raised 3s. per cwt. in that country, it' :sleds,
raised 3s. all over the continent. What they.ecu'rionla'e
was that they could not compete with foreigners in t''''fo.r tlicj
factures, because they paid in that country highefi.jedidhjejofr
sugar and their other necessaries.—( Hear, hear.) 134" re
care whether the price of sugar were lower er the C°
provided the same price was maintained through°nt'
apt
tinent. eletec`ijec'
Mr. VILLIERS said that the Right Hon. ' the at
late President of the Board of Trade, had stated the.`tb s
Member for Stockport had not put his question e, PO)
of eliciting any information. If such were his 1-11:80lite ea
wish, he certainly had been very successful.---/. sdrep
They had not yet got a specific answer to his ques° 0,0
trusted it would not go forth to the public in thatestl's
the
haps the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Ithililorelibe
vernment, or the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chaec‘er to the
n
Exchequer, could tell how much they had handed 0 ietichaoa
proprietors. Perhaps either of them could tell heee by toPtiel
country had paid out of its Exchequer to the colonte'so celons
sugar duties. There was an additional price giien, di>ye
planters for their produce. That was done by thfi'theril "est
tial duties. Now surely the Government could tale ,ttear es/
was the amount of that sum? 'f hey knew what the sed
Tbtl
in the markets. They knew what it sold for hereer'eed. sod
they would be enabled to purchase it for from au reessborci
subject had been deeply meditated during the hit ff'r as"
they were no doubt prepared, when they broug to be gets,
this measure, to say what was the price necessoAryes,..-(nerif,
on each cwt. of sugar in order to save the West Ininateefoi,
and a laugh.) lie would refer them to 11 el ef if 00
written by a gentleman connected with the id°s`ooeill't ac,
entitled " The Progress of the Nation." That geted -eel°
Mr. Porter, and his book was now read and 'l` fie w
ao/
authority upon the subject upon which it treated.„ otr'noel,
call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet te. bed P
for ori(
in that work. It said that the people in this rounS
in the year 1841, a sum more than they required tud
0,0
sugar, of 5,000,0001. Mr. Porter, of the 131341;0,0001. oert
stated that the British public paid, in 1841, sft f the fsil
than they needed to do. He said that the value °root 'bad
trade was 4,000,000/. ; and that if they
_made Pey tb9.l in
00
their trade for that year, and retained the Mc% wilitgate
given to the growers of sugar, they would geed old
p 'pekoe—Ole:lr, hear.) If that had been get the/ 1.
n't
Members on that (the Liberal) side of the Let it ea'
have been charged with extravagance• ot be
then be said that the question could n bea the).
swered, for if any person wanted to knecentectiout, ant
was paid to colonial proprietors e, in the shape of Pro had ILO'
might look in that work, and know it. 11' tt at ftal
that amount every year for sugar, which, if b°le si, ViThel
burgh or Trieste, would have been five million
from our colonial possessions cost just as wiechthei, Defeo,.
complained of this loss to the public, and that Of
enough, asked for whom they were to make,,, son 00
They asked the Government for their calculation ecasellpt
amount barely just that the House should knot*? r
amount of loss the British public sustained In
tectiori. dos°
Mr. P. BORTHWICK explained. f the 'ett'
Mr. THORNELY said they had on the tablenn'tbe'.l,o4,
parliamentary papers throwing sufficient light uPof the
both as to the quantity imported and the price_ d for tbc_
foreign sogar. He would take the papers 11/°;,,erinted I ors
Hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Hawes), an,",r,0,0 eePiejeni'
and I, C. 06
use of the House on the 2d of May, 1843, o o
had then by him. He found that the constnnl),". aril:
sugar in the year 1840, was 3,594,834 eset•hti sotsudo,lo,
column was placed the prices of muscavado, anfdrotee, lateen
prices of sugars from the Brazils. The Price
grown ljtee"
1840, was 495. per cwt., and that of 13reetonherefare' beets'
was only 21s. tid.—showing a differences:, ttraeil tot °,
the prices of British sus and the sugars I
therel°"'e °es
tent of 275. 6d. upon the cwt. It followed,
wt., /her prlrje
the quantty consumed—namely, 3,594,834. for the 40,
differences in price, owing to taxation requir
ed
tion of those coletrattee of 4,957,8751.,
guineas of five millions of money. ene°'r
After a few words from Mr. KEMBLE, ouch leoM
Mr. P. M. STEWART said there was naoLneelbfinter,
ragement for him, after hearing the opinions ne7,0,0a1 pi 0,00
Members beside him, to rise in defence of the,u..euityt: frees
But he would remind the House that the greant,aliTet Breatea.<
being
possessions competing with the slave-labour subjeesd that
the monstrous legislation to which they had
rrhno stetrsocict;
nt efthe,fgeuriitilteiro,
(Hear, hear.) The lion. Member for Salfeed
ter the enatoss/I°o
a friend from Liverpool said, that if he vot
tion of the negroes in our colonies, the aMunoy
would be repaid in a few years. Prcna
of segerrYded ptet,
calculated upon an increase in the amount. rag.
of is
inla
et I:ieosne
?
ow
periodtoood
ft itileieface,ol,/faa,:uog,}a[artat°,..Dnneneensir,l:lo,'
slaves, the colonies produced 207,00° tnnswent redee'eLet
but since the passing of that measure the am
of
the prof gr jot
duced to 107,000 tons. This reduction
or :n
,00 s
powers of the colonies was owing entirely, 0 g :irrntr e
sfe
degree, to the difficulties thrown in the wet);
thru"tleoordireo/
the Government, owing to the impedimen
colon' es/i
of those who wished to emigrate to those k If 1 01 feo
receive a fair day's wages for a fair day's vecoi,re'en 0571,00 a,
been for those difficulties there would have tons ton'
have bade
tlement of this qaestion. Instead oft.leol
wocid 11$04 bee
the exportable quantity at present, h
enabled also to export to other
0, hi,
oio
sufficient quantity ;for their own concsoyutituntPrtiie7tsolnfeeriathb:
dealt with the colonies as some I
over the cci; 01°0
Friends desired, the sooner they threw West Int'ii'lowo
better. The unfortunate proprietors in_ ten,e,
were n'neeerle,
were labouring under disadvantages which
get a sufficiency of free labourers,
w.d.crh 001riiiirtvodi
mhiesrilitoton. Friends. Let the Governmen
egulyne.teb_ealrior Affirlocot°
ment—let them take off the restrictions, t" ,
I,,sehseitrievethetymolhikiebdit—ion(su—elaret, colonistshtehgeo_iet
the °lB-d be
whence they pleased, and, above all, e .rite theta
olonista the for
the colonies. If the c . let eke
imported from
I r countriea,, co' from
off the differential duties between Brsh Bpi wer
pite
thorn have
ih-reer:par
thrown into competition with et-le what the4eriog
least have a free stage, and they would do
repute
en
4 Pbe „wive
themselves. They were at present, he I'll'r:obeli-- ,_ bad le
ill-advised legislation Let him not beillet_, etie
mean the Emancipation Act--but the dila
:e"_`:,:tb
thrown in the way of extending their trad elenotitee•_,ide:4
He would say to the Right Hon. Baronetmatter'
which
c ,cogr
take deleterious drugs or other minor Inot/eL ,hiCh o'o
13
tion ; but take up this subject in the er?,9_ 'co" rwur.`fostr/;;,
majority of the intelligent portion of the „ tar tp
view it ; he would say, let the produce of tpu_., d Oh
be admitted into England upon terms that wu