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

order that by such inquiry the manner in which such illegal and
unconstitutional practices have been carried on, may be clearly
posed and brought to public shame."
Mr. HoD6KIN seconded the motion. The question was
between Sir J. Graham and Mr. Duncombe, the one a rene-
gade to his former party, the latter a straightforward gen-
tleman, who bad stood fast by his principles, and was at all
times the zealous and independent advocate of popular
rights.
The motion was carried by acclamation.
Mr. WALKER moved the next resolution:—
" Thht this meeting have rea I with inlignation the statement
made by o, r represent Ative, Mr Thomas Duncombe, in his place
in Parliamen,, that his corresponeence bas been clandestinely in.
tercepted and secretly. opened, under Government authority, at the
Poil.office that in the opinion of this meeting the only excuse for
the exercise of such pawer towards Mr. Duncombe, would be that
the Government had good reason to deem him c.pable of conduct
which, if true, would, in our opinio,, render him totally unfit to
continue the representative of a free and in, ependent constituency ;
that we therefore fed it due to ourseves, as well as to Mr. Dun.
combe, to dermna from tl e House of Commons such an investiga.
tion into the proceedings towards him a. shall either justify the
implied suspicions of the Government, or fully establish the inno.
cence "f our lcmg.Aried and faithful representative."
Mr. RoGIIIts seconded the motion, which was also sup-
ported by
Sir C. NAME; M.P., who said that whatever . excuse
mil,ht exist as to opening the letters of foreigners suspected
of plotting against their country, the Government had no
right to violate the sanctity of correspondence between a re.
presentative of the people and his constituents. Mr. Dun-
come had put to Sir James Graham a plain simple question—
" Did you opera my letters, or did you not ?" He could get
no answer. The matter was reterred• to two Committees,
but the reports were silent with respect to Mr. Duncombe;
upon that part of the case they made no report whatever.
The question for the electors of Finsbury to decide was this—
he had been suspected of carrying on a treasonable corre-
spondence with some persons in this country :—Was Mr.
Duncombe capable of high treason ? (Cheers, and cries of
" No, no.") Well, .then, you must believe either that Mr.
Duncombe Was plotting against the Government, or that Sir
.lames Graham iya4. plotting against Mr. Duncombe. Under
these circumstances, the electors of Finsbury had done right
todemand a fill inquiry into the subject.
The resolution was carried unanimously.
On the motion .of Mr. Cooi'Eu, seconded by Dr. Errs, a
petition embodying the resolutions was then adopted.
Mr. WAKLy.r, M.P., then addressed the meeting at very
great length, pledging himself to present the petition.
Mr. Ike:writ A:r. for Monmouth, promised it his best
support.
Thanks were voted to the Chairman, and the meeting se-
parated.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE. OF COMMONS, Feb. 26.
SUGAIt DUTIES.—SUPPLY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (in con
tinuatien from our Third Edition of last night.) said—
The Right Hon. Gentleman then real the extract, th
substance of which was to the effect that the sieves um
played in that country in the cultivation of sugar, ave
rage .)bout one-third of the whole number of slaves em-
ployed ; while the propertion 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 t"at country four-fifths wire 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. lade. el, 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 iaterior, and received more profitable
employment.. The report went on to state, that at pre-
sent the sugar estates in that country were in a sta.e of
very little better than halt' 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 ir. 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 there fore 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 aeltnitt, d of greater cultivation, and
that the cultieration 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
erinciple recognised by Parliament, that they should
use every endeavour in their power to put dovin the
slave-trade, by whomsoever it might be conducted. Bat
the Noble Lard said that, if they did so. they would
draw away from the foreign nvirk• is an amount of free-
labour suseer at a higher price, which would be replaced
by the cheaper Slave-grown sugar, but that in the mean-
time slave- growiesugar would be fraudulently introduced
through the medium of other countries with whom we
had treaties, and lie referred to Venezuela. It was true
we hal 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 Vent zuela, when they imported one single hogs
head only, as if for the purpeee of a basis for the Noble
Lord's argument.—(Laughter.) When he was told that
Venezuela encouraged slavery, he admitted that in the
cane 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 their product., there were circumstances con-
nect: d with them, and with the United States, which se-
parated our receiving their produce from the charge of
encouraging s'avery. In the first place they did not
continue the slave-trade, and in 1822 Venezuela passed
a law that every 'Arson born subsequent to that year
sheu:d be a freeman, so that every individual under the
age of 23 year.) 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
The Noble .Cold had told them that the exclusion of
the sugar of Cuba and Brazil tended to aggravate the
burden of the protection on colonial sugar MI the people
of this country. He confessed himself unable to uader-
stand the proposition the Noble Lord had intended to
enunciate. If thtre was any truth in the argument of
the Honourab"e ---rlientber 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. Ile 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
country. its
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
id' the burdens this protective ditty imposed on the
consumers here, he must beg leave to differ from the
argument of the 'lion. Member for Manchester, and
which the Noble Lord had rcpea'ed on the present.occa-
sion. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not
coetent to assume that the burden on the consumer of
this country depended on the differenthd duty alone,
which was imposed on the commodity introduced from
foreign countries. lie believed, and he thought it could
not be denied, that the price of the commodity here must
ilt pend 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 pepulation, 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 iii 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
obtained in this c...fosoac.
from
reynt:nt: I I_ol.,
duty? What would have been thought then, had such a
was
ur
statement as this been made to the House, 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 or 295. as a consequence?
Mr. GIBSON—It was put as a supposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said if
the Right lion. Gentleman would allow him to finish
his argument he would find this was no argument at
• ias(mn(,
;us
olteglingtaarchetsrraiuei
nrsfcar,ereotohnceumeotrol:fdurstntt.uhhih:
IcareoelynltAe,caaxtonushnittoenic
‘entdi d,xfit(o. t.cruo,
stmeitriaiesiatnernhbesoddeeu.f.
all. Who would then have thought of urging such an
d
argument? Aid why not? Because the supply
It then of eessarily followed that the diff.rence between
cisfhtirhtut)ierierrieetp‘llPeltl:man:bb.etwtooclaunco.dortutinm.:l3d;detieltgttcdbahtri"li
circumstances, in the view of relative cheapness, impose
thoseThatduties:
to the
l
wered by producers.
y ;
hu
not the people of England always expressed
their willingness to sacrifice somat'ing to the abolition
of slavery ? had not the people of England besought
the Parliament to make those sacrifices?--([Tear, hear.)
The Noble Lord's views huh 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 rile 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 whole produce of the world, the
Noble Lord told them, amounted to only 670,000
tons, independent of what the auger-growing parts con-
sinned themselves ; and oue- third of that amount was
grown in the free British possessions. If ..0,000 or
60,000 of th:.t amount were a ithdrawn, the effect would
inevitably be 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
the repeated insurrections in that island, and the decrees
of the National Convention, its whole sugar production
was swept away, the consequence was, that the price
of sugar an this country rose from 50s, to 565. 625., 715.,