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

one word upon the-nature of the sugar cultivation, as
being in itself destructive of life. In the year 1833 there
was an extremely exaggerated notion abroad on this
subject. lie had stated so then, and he believed se. still:
but in all the speeches with which he had troulled the
House in the discussions within the last four years, he
had never said a single syllable as to, the On et upon
human life of the sugar cultivation of Brazil and Cuba.
He therefore begged to observe Alva the exceedingly
severe charge which the Eight lion. Gentlema❑ had
made was totally groundless and incapable of being sub-
stantiated.

Sir J. GRAHAM, in rising to address the House.
disclaimed any desire of elacing himself in competition
with the Right Honouruble Gentleman who had
just sat down. It would be disadvantageous for
almost any Gentleman in that House to follow a
speech so able and sa brilliant as that which had
just been delivered by the Right Hon. Gentleman.—
(Cheers.) And he could assure the House that it was
from a sense of duty alone that he rose to address them
on the present occasion. He felt more particularly im-
pelled to do so by the personal appeal which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had made to him. That appeal re-
lated to a circumstance which redeunded to the honour
of that Right Hon. Gentleman, and he (Sir James Gra-
ham) willingly bore his testimony as to the strict accu-
racy of the statement which he had made. It ref, rred to
the period when that gie at question of emancil ation
of slaves in our West India colonies was under
discussion, during the administration of Earl Grey, of
which he (Sir James Graham) was a member, a hen the
question respecting apprenticeship arose. and the Right
119 n. Gentleman, then ho'ding a piece in the Govern
went of Earl Grey, differed in opinion from the executive
Government on a material point, affecting, as he thought,
the interests of the slave, and he was anxious, by his
vote, to support a particular arrangement for the ad-
vancement of that interest. The Right lion. Gentleman
on that occasion, regardless of all personal interests, and
from a sense of duty, did piece at the disposal of the Go-
verntnent the office which he then held, in order that he
might support that principle to which he wss attached.
He (Sir James Graham) had token a part in public af-
fairs with reference to slavery and the slave trade, as
he believed a consistent One. He was a member of
the administration in which the Right Hoe. Genth man
retired. He was a colleague, and an intimate colleague,
of his Noble Friend the present Seer( tary forthe Colonies,
whose duty it was to bring forward that particular mea-
sure ; and to the best of his belief, he had given that
measure his cordial and sinekre support, and ever since
he had had a seat in Parliament, he did not think he had
omitted an opportunity of recording his vote
in favour of the emancipation of the slaves,
To the best of his belief he had given his uniform and
constant support to the measures of emancipation, which,
in his judgment, he thought conducive to the interests
of the black- population of our coltinies. Be must he
permitted to observe on the able speech which they had
just heard, that, brilliant as that speech was, connected
with one portion of the subject then under discussion,
yet he could not regard it as taking a comprehensive
view of the nature of the subject then under discussion.
The Right Hon. Gentleman commenced his speech by
observing that he would not deal with this as a commer-
cial or a financial question, that he would rather treat it
as a subject touching upon political morality. Now he
(Sir J. Graham) thought that such a great question as
that under discussion could nut be considered in
such a light, for this question could not rightly be
regarded abstractedly as a question purely of political
morality, discarding financial and commercial conside-
rations. On the contrary, he was bound to treat this
question as one involving not only a question of political
morality, but also a question of finance and commerce
of the highest moment. The Right Hon. Gentlen an
said that when he considered this question of slavery,
he took a very different view of it. With respect to the
slavery of the West Indies, in regard to political mo-
rality, and that of the slaves in the territories of other
countries not immediately concerted with our domestic
legislature, it was not for him (Sir J. Graham), occupy
ing the station which he did, to follow the Right Hon.
Gentleman into a discussion on the social institutions
of a great country with which her Majesty eat. rtained
amicable relations. At the same time, from muuy of
the private feelings entertained on this subject—he was
bound to say individually—that he could not express,
with honesty, any great difference of opinion. He was
bound to say, as a Minister of the Crown, that this ques-
tion must be looked on as a question of finance and com-
merce. He thought an abundant supply of sugar might
be obtained at a lower price, with very great advantage
to the consumer, by a reduction in the duty on sugar
imported from the British colonies and British posses-
sions.—(Hear, hear.) He could not altrgether dis-
card from his consideration the present position
of the West India colonies. He thought the Noble Lord
who had opened this discussion did discard that cen-
sideration. Although the West India planters had been
compensated by a liberal pecuniary grant, yet the means
by which their property was cultivated was almost de-
stroyed. Considerations of humanity had induced them
to impose restrictions on their obtaining free-labour as a
substitute for slave-labour. Under these circumstances,
he conceived that it was the duty of the British Govern-
ment to supply the British consumers from that merket.
He could not discard from his consideration the fact,
that in the East there was a population of 100 millions,
who were ready to consume our manufactures to an
almost unlimited extent. But they had not the
means of paying with their produce, and making
remittances. It should be remembered that there were
places tinder this Government a hose native manufac-
tures had been entirely destroyed. They had a soil
peculiarly well adapted to the growth rof sugar.
An Honourable East India Director (Mr. Hogg),
had said that the valley of the Ganges, pro-
perly. cultivated, was capable of producing a
sufficient supply of sugar for the wile le of Europe, in-
dependent of all other sources. Now under these cir-
cumstances, the question was not one purely of a moral,
but of a mixed consideration—of commerce and finance.
Would the House permit him shortly to address therm
upon what had been urged with respect to the dis-
tinction between freest:lhour and slave.-grown sugar?
The Hon. Member for Dumfries was the first in that
1-/Onso to trace that distinction. In 1840 the qm s-
tion was first raised by that Hon. Member. On that
occasion the Honourable Member said that it was
his wish to propose that the reduction of the duty should
be made in favour of free-labour sugar, only—that he
was anxious to confine the benefit of the reduction to the
manufacture of sugar not made by slaves. On that oc-
casion the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Taunton resisted the motion of the Hon. Member for
Dumfries. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Taunton, and tho NoblelLord and his colleagues opposed
that motion. Or. t hat Occasion. the Hon Member for Sheffield
(Mr. Ward) presented a petition from Sheffield, praying
that sugar, the produce of free- labour, should be ad-
mitted under such advantages as to exclude all sugar the
produce of slave labour, The Hon. MeMber for
Sheffield, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member
for
ovsn r
trr iyn. dnict
lun
the debate
expressed the opinion that this petition
w
i' fiveof the feelings of the people of this
u
which took place on that occa-
sionca 'reference was made to cotton and tobacco, which
were the products of slave labour, being admitted into
the British market. How did the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Taunton meet that case ? Why,
exactly as they (the Government) did now. In the
first place, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Taunton contended that cotton and tobacco did not enter
into competition with similar articles raised by free
labour in our own colonies.—(Cries of " Hear, bear.")
He thought, if he was not mistaken, that the expres-
sion of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member fur
Taunton was, that he was not prepared to open a flood
gate to the supply of sugar which would inundate the
British market, if the proposition of the Hon. Member
for Dumfries were carried. What was the language
used by Dr. Lushington on that occasion? He said
that the admission of slave-labour sugar was, in his
opinion, an abandonment of the whole of thtir anti-
slavery policy, and that if it was their object to main-
tain that policy, it wou'd be imeossible to admit foreign
free-labour and foreign slave-labour sugar on the same
terms. That was not only the opinion of Sir S. Lush-
ington, but of many other persons who were distin-
guished advocates of the Emancipation Act, and who
admitted that the measure proposed, if carried,
would be a di parture from the established policy
with regard to the slave trade, "and that it would
be a national disgrace, for the sake of a paltry gain, to
depart from a policy to a hich the faith of the nation was
pledged. He had voted on that occasion with the ma-
jority. He had, in 1841, edhered to the same course
which he adopted in 1831, and from that line of policy
he had not receded. The Noble Lord who brought for-
ward the present proposition had made one or two
hh
at the ad-
missions in the course of his speech, which seemed to him
(Sir J. Graham) to be almost conclusive with egard to the
he hoped
the House would arrive that eight.
West Indian proprietors were entitled
vote t e
admitted tO which t
to some protection, and that that must be given in the shape
of a discriminating duty of Bs. or 10s. He ( S'r J. Graham)
wouldintonot the foilowhißight Hon. Friend the Member fur
Newark calculations he made with regard to the effect
this would have upon the revenuo. He believed that that
could nut be effected without considerable loss to the re-
m giveean ato deny was their object) without
protective duty to the colonies
(which
venue. It was cot contended by her Majesty's Government
that i
they
it
was
p
some loss to the revenue. But it was erough that the Go.
vernment had benefited the consumer by reducing the price of
sugar by Id. or 11,4 d. per lb. Nothing was so easy as to say,
odsisdibl note to
when you enunciate some general principle, that those who did
net at once put it into practice were dishonest, but, on the other
hand, those who would do so without considering all the bearings
of such a course might be called absurd. Nothing was so dan-
gerous, when one was dealing with a great question, as to con-
sider it without reference to the circumstances which might
surround it. He was of opinion that the measure brought for-
ward by her Majesty's Government would effect great eljects,
would give to the British consumer a considerable reduction in
the price of sugar, which was an article of first necessity. Com-
bined with that reduction of price it would give to the British
colonist great relies from the difficulties of his posit ii n. It
would give great encouragement in the East Indies to the
growth of that particular product for which the soil was best
suited, and all this would be effected without stimulating the
slave trade, against which the faith and honour of the country
was pledged. He thought it would he a difficult matter to re-
concile their professions of desiring to put down the slave trade if
they opened-the British markets to the consumption of slave-la-
bour sugar. To make no distinctionbetween free-labour and slave-
labour sugar, would be to give a great stimulus to the slave-
trade. And to wake such a distinction would in his opinion
be a great discouragement to it. Any such result fostered by
the Legislature, sanctioned last year by a large majority.
would be consistent with the course they had heretofore pur-
sued, end to which the faith of ,Parliament was plighted. tie
had, therefore, no apprehension that a measure which lowered
the price of sugar to the consumer, without departing from the
anti-slave trade policy hitherto adopted, wou'd not receive the
sanction of the British community, and he could not hesitate
to give the present motion his most decided opposition.
Mr. C. WOOD said he did not feel surprised that the Right
Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, had not at all adverted
to the brilliant speech of his Right lion. Friend (Mr. Macau-
lay.) He did not attempt any reply to a speech, one the most
brilliant in language and most unanswerable in argument
which he had ever heard.—( Hear, hear.) The complaint of
the Right flop. Baronet was, that his Right lien. Friend had