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

would be found the more convenient course for himself
and the House to introduce this discussion after the
Speaker had left the chair. lie (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) was, however, prepared, wiih confidence, to
advocate the measure proposed by Government, and
he was quite ready to meet the Noble Lord on the
ground he had himself laid down. He could
assure the House that he met the Noble Lord on
that ground with perfect confidence, and he hoped
that he should emulate the Noble Lord in the tone
and temper with which he had conducted that discussion,
for he considered that a question of the greatest inte-
rest to the consumer should be discussed as far as pos-
sible without any of that acrimony which was too often
exhibited on the floor of that House.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord objected to the
proposition of the Government, and he (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) therefore forbore to make
any comment on the peculiar terms of the resolution
submitted to the House. The Noble Lord did not say
one word on that objection to the proposition of Govern-
ment, because they attempted to draw a distinc-
tion between the sugars the product of free-
labour, arid those imported from what were
termed slave-holding countries. The Noble Lord dis-
claimed on this occasion all imputation,: as to the views
of Government, and he (the Chancellor of the
Fxchequer) would not refer to any such. The
Noble Lord repeated most of the arguments used on
preceding occasions, and he said that he could see no
distinction between the admission of sugar produced
by slave labour, and the admission of cotton and
other materials produced in the same manner. He
admitted that there was one common principle involved
in the admission of those articles, the produce of
slave labour ; but the Noble Lord had not ad-
vanced any new view—he had only repeated over
and over again the arguments which had been
so often urged in that House, not only in the previous
debates on this question during the present session,
but on occasions antecedent even to those ; but he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) maintained that
there was a very great distinction between the encourage-
ment given to the slave trade in the admission
of that commodity and those others to which the
Noble Lord had referred. It had often been announced
in that House that there was a great waste of
human life in the cultivation of sugar as com-
pared with the growing of coffee.—(Hear, hear.)
The great importation of slaves from the coast of Africa
to Cuba and other foreign countries was carried on, not
for the purpose of the cultivation of cotton, but of
sugar, by the aid of slave labour. There could
not be a stronger proof of this than the testi-
mony of those who were on the spot, and wit-
nessed it. He had now before him the report of the
Brazilian consul on this part of the subject, and
he would take the liberty of reading an extract from it.
The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the extract, th-
substance of which was to the effect that the slaves em-
ployed in that country in the cultivation of sugar, ave
rage about one-third of the whole number of slaves em-
ployed ; while the proportion of those employed in the
production of cotton and of coffee averaged about four-
fifths ; so that it appeared that of the Creole population
of that country four-fifths were employed in producing
coffee and cotton, while the remaining one-fifth were
slaves that had been imported into the country prior to
the year 1831. Indeed, on nearly all the sugar estates
in the interior of the country, such a thing as a recently-
imported slave was very rare to be met with ; while
upon those estates along the coasts of the country the
slaves employed upon them were slaves imported from
Africa, because they afforded greater facilities for that
trade than the interior, and received more profitable
employment. The report went on to state, that at pre-
sent the sugar estates in that country were in a state of
very little better than half cultivation, for want of slaves,
and therefore that a reduction of duty would have the
effect of increasing the profits to such an extent as to
enable the grower to import slaves, in spite of all that
the British Government could do to prevent it. The
Right Hon. Gentleman having concluded reading the
extract, resumed by saying that by that report the
House would see that in Brazil an extensive importation
of slaves would be the result of keeping up a high price
for sugar, and that therefore when the price could be
reduced to a moderate standard, by a certain reduction
of duty, the same inducements to slave importation were
not created. The Noble Lord had told them that the
soil of Brazil admitted of greater cultivation, and
that the cultivation must be extended only by importa-
tion of labour from Africa, and therefore it was that he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would adhere to the
principle recognised by Parliament, that they should
use every endeavour in their power to put down the
slave-trade, by whomsoever it might be conducted. But
the Noble Lord said that, if they did so. they would
draw away from the foreign markets an amount of free-
labour sugar at a higher price, which would be replaced
by the cheaper slave-grown sugar, but that in the mean-
time slave-grown sugar would be fraudulently introduced
through the medium of other countries with whom we
had treaties, and he referred to Venezuela. It was true
we had treaties with Venezuela, by which that country
was to import sugar into this country on a footing with
the most favoured nations. Very great ingenuity indeed
must have been exercised by those who fraudulently in-
troduced sugar from the slave-grown countries under the
name of Venezuela, when they-imported one single hogs-
head only, as if for the purpose of a basis for the Noble
Lord's argument.—(Laughter.) When he was told that
Venezuela encouraged slavery, he admitted that in the
case of that country and all others with which we had
treaties, and which used slave labour, we could not ex-
clude their sugar. But if our market were large enough
to consume thir produce, there were circumstances con-
nected with them, and with the United States, which se-
parated our receiving their produce From the charge of
encouraging slavery. In the first place they did not
continue the slave-trade, and in 1822 Venezuela passed
a law that every person born subsequent to that year
should be a freeman, so that every individual under the
age of 23 years was at the present moment free, and each
succeeding year was advancing towards the term of
human slavery. Whatever part, therefore, Venezuela
might have taken in introducing slave-labour sugar into
this country, to encourage the cultivation of sugar in that
republic was not to encourage slavery, but the contrary.
The Noble Lord had told them that the exclusion of
the sugar of Cuba and Brazil tended to aggravate the
burden of the protection on colonial sugar on the people
of this country. He confessed himself unable to wader-
stand the proposition the Noble Lord had intended to
enunciate. If there was any truth in the argument of
the Honourable Member for Manchester, which
he addressed to the House on a preceding
evening, his argument went to this, that whatever
was the amount of the protective duty, to the
extent of that duty a burden was imposed on the con-
sumers of this country. He made no distinction what-
ever between the protective duty applied to free-labour
sugar or slave-labour sugar. He said, whatever that
duty was, it was a burden on the consumers of this
couutry. Whether the protective duty of 10s. was given
to the free-labour sugar of Java, or the slave-labour
sugar of Brazil, there could be no difference in this re-
spect. Therefore, there was no ground whatever for
assuming that the burden which this protective duty
might impose on the population of this country, had any
connexion with the distinction attempted to be drawn
between slave and free-labour sugar. But when he talked
of the burdens this protective duty imposed on the
consumers hero, he must beg leave to differ from the
argument of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and
which the Noble Lord had repeated on the present occa-
sion.' He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not
coutemt to assume that the burden on the consumer of
this country depended on the differential duty alone,
which was imposed on the commodity introduced from
fiireign countries. He believed, and he thought it could
not be denied, that the price of the commodity here must
depend on the extent of the supply, compared with the
demand—(Hear, hear)—and if they could show that by
the admission of free-labour sugar from other countries,
in conjunction with the sugar of their own colonies, they
should secure such an amount of supply as would be
more than ample for the consumption, even with the
great increase of population, the West Indies would come
again to the position in which they stood previously to
the abolition of slavery, and there would be a consider,
able surplus, which, coming into competition with
foreign sugars in the foreign markets, and so regulate
the price here, that it would not greatly exceed that
which sugar obtained on the continent. Who ever, at
that period, thought of arguing that, because there was
a great protection in favour of West Indian produce, the
public were taxed to an amount equal to that differential
duty? What would have lot en thought then, had such a
statement as this been made to the Muse, that when
there was a differential duty of 245. on colonial sugar,
and 635. on foreign, that the consumer had to pay an
additional tax of 295. as a consequence?
Mr. GIBSON—It was Put as a supposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said if
the Right Hon. Gentleman would allow him to finish
his argument he would find this was no argument at
all. Who would then have thought of urging such an
argument? And why not? Because the supply then
obtained in this country was greater than the demand.
It then necessarily followed that the difference between
the protective duty was no measure of the extent of the
burden on the consumers.--L(Hear, hear.) And if, there-
fore, we admitted our own sugar from the colonies, and
free-labour sugar from the Continent, such an excess of
supply would be created in this country as would be
quite beyond the demand. We could not, under these
circumstances, in the view of relative cheapness, impose
such conditions without their being, in the end, injurious
to the consumers as well as to the producers. . That
some burdens were imposed by those differential
gat
tyl
)(Ls
nt
hde expressed
besought
abolition
nototd
ful their
slaveryiire sno
willingnesstle
?mpeaohnpal people
ioisouoaltefdr
hfipEecrenep
gteseol
°nap, dnnl
people
tfoi
naElgn: en y ; bat ha d
the Parliament to make those sacrifices?--(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord's views had undergone much alteration
since last year, but he still admitted that the colonies
were entitled to some protection. The immediate in-
troduction of Brazilian sugar into this country would
lead to immediate cheapness, to; be followed by a
gradual and excessive rise of price. They knew that
at the present moment a great number of the estates in
the West India colonies were thrown out of. cultivation,
and that the produce was reduced one-half.. If- by the
introduction 'of Brazilian sugar they were to create a
vacuum by causing the abandonment of the cultivation of
sugar in particular islands, the effect must be a rise of
price in this country, causing a severe pressure on'the
community. The wheie producer of the world, the
Noble Lord told them, amounted to only 670,000
tons, independent of what the sugar-growing parts con-
sumed themselves ; and one-third of that amount was
grown in the free British possessions. If 51-1,(100 or
60,000 of that amount were iyithdrawir, the effect would
ineyit4bly lie a great rise in price. In 1792, the island
of St. Domingo produced 40,000 or 50,000 tons of sugar
per annum, for the consumption of the world ; when, by
of the National
tatlvTisa yoCol ountuhvteer tiroo consequencense,
the repeated insurrectionsan that island, and the d?u,eea
y
from 505.
whole sugar
atsz 5 t6hs tic;
6i production
was pricec7t
sweptowf7uaa r 1