The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-18 00:00:00

NOTICES OF MOTION.

Mr. M. GIBSON gave notice that, in Committee
of Ways and Means, he should move an amendment
to the motion of the Right Honourable Gentleman
at the head of the Government, that no alteration in
the sugar duties will be satisfactory or permanent
which does rot involve the equalization of duty on
foreign and colonial sugar.
INCOME-TAX.

Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice that he should move
an amendment to the resolution for the renewal of
the income-tax ; to leave out the words, " professions,
trades, and offices."—(Cheers.)
TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY
(SCOTLAND).
Mr. WALLACE wished to ask the Lord Advo-
cate when he intended to introduce his Bill for
the purpose of facilitating the transfer of general
property in Scotland ?
the LORD ADVOCATE said the Bill had been
for some time under the consideration of the Govern-
ment, and he hoped to introduce it before the recess.
Mr. WALLACE wished al;o to know when it was
likely the decision, with respect to the Weights and
Measures Acts in Scotland, would be given ?
The LORD ADVOCATE could not exactly say
that he thought it would be before the Courts in
Scotland rose.
DUTY ON SPIRITS.

Lord SANDON presented a petition from certain
inhabitants in British Guiana, praying that molasses
might be allowed to be used in breweries in Great
Britain and Ireland, and praying that the duty on
rum might be equalised with British spirits, and that
the restrictions on sugar might be removed, so that
the petitioners might have an even supply from fo-
reign States.
THE SUGAR DUTIES. _ _ _

Mr. HASTIEWiSIed to know from the Right Hon.
Gentleman, the First Lord of the Treasury, whether
it was his intention, under the new Sugar Act, to
admit West India sugar in the same class of sugar
in which it had heretofore been admitted, namely, as
Muscovado sugar ? There were 70,000 tons expected
from the West Indies—of these 50,000 would be
clayed, so that it was important to know what was
the precise intention of the Government.
Sir R. PEEL said he had stated they meant to
make a difference between Muscovado sugar and
white and clayed sugar ; but he thought it better to
postpone all discussion on the subject till the sugar
duties were brought before the House.
Mr. GIBSON wished to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman whether, in classifying sugars into clayed and
Muscovado, and fixing the different rates of duty, he
contemplated the adoption of the ad valorem principle
of duty, and whether he meant, that the higher rate
of duty should always apply to sugar of the greatest
value ?

Sir R. PEEL said that, assuming clay sugar gene-
rally to be more valuable than Muscovado, that would
be the effect of the arrangement.
Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to know from the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) for what period
he intended to propose the continuance of the new
sugar duties ?
Sir R. PEEL said that in making so great a
change as that which he had proposed, he was not
prepared to advise that the new sugar duties, sup-
posing they were passed by Parliament, should be
continued beyond the sth of July, 1846.
Mr. EWART moved for a return of the quantity
of butter destroyed in bond in Liverpool during the
past year.—Granted.
PRINCE ALBERT.
Mr. BORTHWICK wished to ask the Right
Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury,
whether there was any truth in a rumour which had
appeared in the Morning Post and other newspapers.
The rumour itself was one upon which he did not ask
for any information, because it was sufAciently absurd
to contradict itself. The statement was :—" It is
rumoured, and, we believe, on good authority,
that the title of king Consort is about to be
bestowed on his Royal Highness Prince Al-
bert. This, we believe, is preliminary to apply-
ing to Parliament to increase the present grant."
He wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman the
question simply to afford him an opportunity of con-
tradicting a rumour, mischievous, absurd, and pre-
posterous in itself, but calculated to do very serious
injury to the object of all their loyalty and affection ?
Sir It. PEEL said it was not a good practice for
Hon. Members to ask for explanations from the Go-
vernment of newspaper reports, particularly when an
Hon. Gentleman found a rumour that was sufficiently
absurd—(Great laughter)—to be its own contradic-
tion, and wanted no explanation from him.
It was rather hard in that particular case that
the llon. Gentleman should submit him (Sir R.
Peel) to the ordeal of answering it. However, he
must leave it to the decision of Honourable Gentle-
men themselves to ask such questions or to refrain
from asking them, because he knew that inferences
were sometimes drawn from silence. On the whole,
perhaps, on the present occasion silence would be the
best; but, to guard against the possibility of any
erroneous inference, he would state, for the informa-
tion of the Hon. Gentleman, that that paragraph was
totally without foundation.—(Hear, hear.)
RAILWAY COMMITTEE.
Lord HOWICK wished to put a question with
respect to the railway department of the Board of
Trade. He observed that all the reports of that Com-
mittee were signed by all the five members of it.
Nov, he wished to know if, from that circumstance,
they were to infer that all those five gentlemen sign-
ing that report concurred in it, and whether they
were all of the same opinion? This question was of
considerable importance, because, as it was now de-
termined that those reports were not to be conclusive,
but only to be binding so far as they were consistent
with reason, it of course had a very material differ-
ence in their authority, whether they were the
unanimous opinion of those five gentlemen, or
whether they were approved only by two or
three of them. It struck him that, in a
vast number of railway projects, it was almost im-
possible to find five gentlemen of the same opinion ;
and, in point of fact, with respect to one of them, at
least, it was not so, for one of the five gentlemen did
not vote; the other four were equally divided ;
and the question was finally decided by the Chair-
man of the Committee giving his casting vote. He
hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would have no objec-
tion to state what was the fact, whether the gentle-
men signing the report all concurred in such an opi-
nion or not. He should also like to ask whether it
was the intention of the Board of Trade to
lay before the House, as an appendix to their
report, the statements of the competing
companies, on which their reports were founded ?
It was of great importance that the House should
possess the statement of each company, and the
documents which they had laid before the Board of
Trade, upon which the reports of that Board had
been founded.

Sir GEORGE CLERK said that with regard to
the first question, he believed, there was no precedent
for it. He believed that when a report was made by
any public Board, that report was to be taken as
the act of the Board collectively. It was the first
time that any question had ever been asked as to
what discussions had taken place at the Board, and
he must decline giving any answer, because, if he
were to do so, it would be establishing a dangerous
and inconvenient precedent, and he trusted that
neither the Noble Lord nor the House would draw
any inference from his silence.—(Cheers and
laughter.) With regard to the second question, he had
to state that the Board of Trade had no intention
of laying before the House the voluminous statements
which had been submitted to them by the various
parties to railway schemes. He believed there would
be no objection to laying those statements before the
House if the Noble Lord should think them necessary.
But in the future progress of those schemes no doubt
the parties interested would lay before the Committee
of that Board all the statements they had to make,
either in recommendation of their own schemes
or in oppo!ition to the schemes of their rivals ; and
the only objection he had for laying the papers before
the House was, that they were very voluminous, and
would take a long time to copy.
Mr. ROEBUCK begged to observe, with regard
to the first question put by the Noble Lord, that a
statement had been distinctly made that certain mem-
bers of the Board had voted, and their names had
been mentioned.—(Hear, hear, from Lord Howick.)
It had been stated that a casting vote had been given
by the head of the Board of Trade.—(Hear, hear,
from Lord Howick.) If a casting vote had been
given, there must have been an equal division of the
persons voting, as no person possessed two votes.
All the parties, therefore, must have voted. This led
to a most important conclusion.—(Hear, hear.) Now,
in such a state of things it would not do, now-a-days,
to shut out investigation.—(Hear.) They must
know all and everything.—(Hear, hear.) If not
suspicion would rest upon those who shut out the
light—(Hear, hear)—and, if so, such a tribunal
would not be a satisfactory one for the guidance of
Parliament, and he believed that Parliament would
utterly discard the recommendations emanating from
such a tribunal, and would proceed with their inves-
tigation as if no such reports had been made.
eollr Id r
hadintended
comeWALLACE
eaA t
down
wpwnua was not aware that the Noble
any such question, but
to the House with a
report of the Board of Tradelauhg4e.)
notice in his pocket.—
I:3etnThperinfiterdst,
table
ri
theto
and he now gave notice that
move that there should be laid on the tl
House all the documents on which that report had
been founded, so that the House might understand
what had been done.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman had said that this was an unprecedented