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

.k.z=43°l'llll/$

LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 1845.

The House of Lords met at Five o'clock.
The LORD CHANCELLOR brought in a Bill to relieve
members of the Jewish persuasion from certain disabili-
ties affecting them in respect to the holding of muni-
cipal offices.
The Marquis of NORMANDY then brought forward
his motion for certain returns relating to the constabulary
force in Ireland, and complained that the recommenda-
tions of the Inspector-General (Colonel MACGREGOR),
with regard to promotions in that force, had been disre-
garded by the Government, although it had been under-
stood at the time of his/appointment that all promotions
were to be at his disposal ; and although that under-
standing had received the sanction of both Houses of
Parliament, yet, notwithstanding this, Major PRIEOTLEY
had been promoted, while Mr. BROWNRIGGR, an
older officer, who had been; recommended by
the Inspector, had been passed over. He should
likewise wish to have a return of the number of the

army serving in Ireland on the Ist of January
during each of the last ten years. He would there-
fore move for a return of the appointment of the Deputy
Inspector-General since the decease of the late Major
G AnwAr, of the constabulary force in Ireland, and of any
communications from the Inspector-General respecting
the appointments that had been made, and also a return
of the number of her Majesty's army in Ireland, from
the Ist of January, 1835, to the Ist of January, 1845,
both inclusive.
The Duke of WELLINGTON contended :that the right
of appointing to the constabulary force was in the power
of the Lord-Lieut,enant,and that it was his duty to exer-
cise his discretion in making those appointments. The
Lord-Lieutenant had a right to make those appoint-
ments, and he would not consent to a motion criminat-
ing the Lord-Lieutenant for the exercise of a right
which was vested in him by law. With regard to the
return of the forces in Ireland, he did not object to it,
but he would add a return of the number of
troops sent away from Ireland during the
same period. The Noble Lord would find nothing in
these returns to commit the Government, the Secretary
at War, er any other person connected with the army ;
nor would he find anything to support his argument
that an unlimited force had been kept in Ireland.
Earl FORTESCUE supported the motion.
Lord BROUGHAM thought no slight whatever had been
put upon Colonel MACGREGOR by the Lord-Lieutenant.
He had himself, while Lord Chancellor, disregarded the
recommendations of Lord-Lieutenants of counties in
making appointments to the magistracy.
The Marquis of NORMANDY replied.
The House then divided, when there appeared, Con-
tents, 12 ; Non-contents, 32 ; majority against the mo-
tion 20. The House then adjourned.
The House of Commons met at a Quarter before Four
o'clock.

Mr. BRINSLEY SHERIDAN took the oaths, and his seat
for the borough of Shaftesbury.
Mr. DEEDES took the oaths and his seat for East
Kent.

Several private Bills were forwarded a stage.
Among the notices of motion given, was the following
by Mr. WODEHOUSE, to MOTO as an amendment to the
motion of the Hon. Member for Stockport which stood
first on the orders of the day for Thursday next, for
a Select Committee to inquire into the ope-
ration of protective duties upon the interests
of tenant-farmers, the following resolution :
That an inquiry into the operation of protective duties
on imports, as regarded the interest of tenant-farmers
and farm-labourers, was objectionable in principle,
if the purport of it was to show that they had a dis-
tinct and separate interest from that of their landlords,
or those on whose property they chose to live ; that
the condition of . tenant-farmers and farm-labourers
did indeed deserve the most serious attention of Parlia-
ment, and it was the bounden duty of the House se to
shape its deliberation, as to make known to the occupiers
and tenants of the soil the necessity for their having a
continuance of all protective duties; and that the removal
of all protective duties was averse to the general interests
of all classes of society.
Mr. STAFFORD O'ButErt also gave notice of his inten-
tion to move as an amendment, on the motion of Mr.
COBDEN, that a Select Committee be appointed to in.
quire into the extent of mortgages on landed property
in this country, and into the cause
.of agricultural
distress.

In answer to the same Hon. Gentleman,
Sir R. PEEL stated that the remission of the duty on
seeds would take place after the present sowing, and
that clover seed would not be included in the list.
In answer to Mr. S. WORTLEY,
Sir R. PEEL, on the part of the present, and Lord
PALMERSTON on the part of the late Government, denied
that there was any truth in the report that this country
had ever offered to purchase California of the Mexican
Government.
The report on the Property-tax Bill was postponed
till Monday.
On the motion that the House do resolve itself into a
Committee of Ways and Means,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS entered into a long explanation on
the subject of the motion of which he had given notice
for the preceding evening, relative to the sale of the
Hafod estate.
After a few words from Lord LINCOLN, Mr. HUME,
and Mr. MACKINNON, the subject dropped.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice that
he should propose going into. Committee on the Customs'
duties on Monday, if time would permit.
Mr. COBDEN, on the question that the Speaker do
leave the chair, said that, as they were going to vote a
certain amount of protection to the colonial proprietors.
he thought there could be no objection to that amount
being ascertained. He calculated it at 2,500,000/., an
amount that would enable Government to repeal the
soap and window duties, and leave a surplus of half a
million to devote to other purposes.
A long discussion ensued as to the accuracy of Mr.
COBDEN'S calculations. Eventually the House went
into Committee.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then proposed
his resolutions on the subject of the sugar duty.
A long conversation followed, in the course of which
Mr. Hoco expressed his concurrence in the alterations
proposed by the Government, and in the classification of
sugars proposed by them. The East India Company
were satisfied with the measure as it then stood.
Several amendments were proposed by different Hon.
Members, and withdrawn. One amendment, however
—that proposed by Sir W. CLAY—the effect of which
would have been to impose a duty of 4s. Bd. per cwt. on
sugar instead of the duty proposed by the Government,
was pressed to a division. It was negatived, the
numbers being—for the amendment 69, against it 152;
majority against the amendment 83. The remainder of
the clauses were agreed to after a short discussion. The
House rcsumod, and the report was ordered to be re-
ceived on Monday.
The House adjourned at Ono o'clock.

Mr. COBDEN last evening, in the debate on the sugar
duties, made a very simple statement, rather by way of
hypothesis and with a view to information, than as a
matter of fact. His object was to ascertain, by a proxi-
mate calculation, how much the people of this country
would be compelled to pay the West India proprietors
by the proposed resolutions of the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-
CHEQUER. " The Right Honourable Gentleman," he
said, " assumed that we should receive 230,000 tons
of colonial sugar, and were to pay 101. a ton of,
duty, the amount of foreign sugar being reckoned
at 20,000 tons. He therefore thought it was evident
before we should have 20,000 tons of foreign sugar.
we must have previously paid the UV. extra duty on the
colonial sugar. If he was right—and ho was taking
the Right Honourable Gentleman's own proposition—
then the amount which the House was about to vote in
the Crown,
the tax
which
n(1
to the they
thef way of protection would be about 2,416,000/. In
colonialw,
4e ri e 6,
ot
oo
oiv.,otae
proprietors, ams
as O
which, Oh Oe 0 1.
had
wouldt to
h
before stated, a tax of 2
have enabled the Right Honourable Gentleman to have
taken off the window-tax and the soap duty, and have
left him about half a million to spare. If there was
any fallacy in what he had stated it should not remain
uncontradicted." The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
who showed he was unable, or speaking perhaps mo-o
correctly, unwilling to tovfor the quitio, begged to