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

eittlittng

LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1845.

The House of Commons met at Four o'clock.
Mr. W. P. CAREW took the oaths and his seat for
ast Cornwall.

Several Railway and other Private Bills were brought
in. Various petitions were presented.
Among the notices of motion given, was one by Sir
W. CLAY, on the order for the House going into Com-
mittee of Ways and Means, for an ad valorem duty
on sugar, and one by Mr. WILLIAMS, that the reduction
in the sugar duties should commence on the Ist of April.
This announcement was received with shouts of laughter.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated that no
allowance would be made to persons holding sugar in
bond, if it were taken out before the reduction in the
duty took place.
Mr. COLLETT gave notice that he should move for
leave to bring in a Bill to consolidate the dioceses of
Bath and Wells, and Salisbury, on the demise of the pre-
sent Bishop of BATH and WELLS.
Sir J. GRAHAM promised to inquire into the truth of
the report, that it was customary in many of the Church-
yards of the metropolis to disinter human bodies and
burn them.

On the order of the day being read for the House re-
solving itself into a Committee of Supply on the subject
of the sugar duties, after a brief explanation from Mr.
M. GIBBON, in relation to his statement on this subject
made on a furmer evening,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to move, pursuant to notice,
" That it is the opinion of this House that the plan pro-
posed by her Majesty's Government, in reference to
the sugar duties, professes to keep up a distinction
between foreign free-labour and foreign slave-labour
sugar, which is unjustifiable and illusory—aggravates
. .

the protection which is given to the colonist
at the expense of the consumer—and tends so
greatly to impair the revenue as to reader the
removal of the income and property-tax, at the
end of three years, extremely uncertain and improbable."
The Noble Lord said that, in considering the ques-

tion of the reduction of the sugar duties, the House
should take care, in the first place, not to consent to
any enactment of an inconsistent or contradictory na-
ture ; and, in the next place, that there should not be
taken off from articles of commerce a greater amount of
taxation than would be necessary for the purposes of the
revenue, and, at the same time, to give to the West
India grower such an amount of protection as may be
requisite. He objected to the proposition of the Go-
vernment, because it professed to keep up a distinction,
which he held to be impracticable, between foreign
sugar, the product of free and of slave labour. There
was no such distinction made as regarded coffee,

cotton, or copper are, the duties on all which
articles had been dealt with by the present
Government. It was impossible to keep up the dis-
tinction, for the void created by the withdrawal of free-

labour sugar from the markets of the world would be
filled up by slave•labour sugar ; besides, in consequence
of the existence of reciprocity treaties, we could not
confine our importations from foreigners to sugar, the
produce of free labour. In the case of Venezuela, this
had already happened, and it was the general opinion
that what had been imported as Venezuela sugar was,

in fact, the produce of Porto Rico, Surinam, or Brazil.
It was impossible to exclude slave-grown sugar by
Custom-house regulations. Another objection he
had to the measure was that it aggravated the
protection given to the West India Colonies,
This demand for protection was grounded on the fact

that there was in these colonies a deficiency of labourers;
but that argument only applied to Trinidad, Jamaica,
and Demerara. The measure of the Government would,

in fact, give a protection to the colonist of 14s. instead of
10s., and what was lost to the revenue could not be
gained by the consumer. There would be a gain of ss.
per cwt to the consumer, and 6s. per cwt. to the planter.
A tax of 1,100,0001. would be imposed annually for the
benefit of the planter. The Noble Lord then quoted a

letter from the Rev. Mr. KNIBB, to show that the negro

labourer would not be benefited by the proposed re-
duction. He deprecated a large immigration of African
labourers, as tending to uncivilise the existing race of
Creole negroes, and contended that the continuance of
the system of protection would, at no distant period,
produce a convulsion in the West Indies, and put off to
a distant period the general adoption of free-trade prin-
ciples. Besides, there were labourers in this country
who were entitled to consideration, and all this addi-
tional protection was afforded at their expense. The
sugar duties might be decreased without impairing the
revenue, if this protection were reduced within proper
limits. He thought the duties on cheese and butter,
and various other duties on articles of consumption,
might be advantageously reduced ; and all these reduc-
tions might be effected if the sugar duties were put
upon a proper footing. The plan of the Government
diminished the revenue, not for the benefit of the country,
but for that of a particular class, which formed only a
small part of the population of the country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER contended that
there was a great distinction between sugar and those
other slave-labeur pre.duets to which the Noble Lord
had referred, inasmuch as there was a greater waste of
human life in the production of sugar, than in that of
other commodities. At present, the sugar estates in
Brazil were only half cultivated, but a reduction of the
duty would so increase the profits as to lead
to an increased importation of slaves. He admitted
that slave labour sugar, the produce of countries
e hit which we had reciprecity treaties, could not be ex-
cluded. He denied, however, that Venezuela sugar
could be considered as the produce of slave labour. The
Noble Lord admitted that protection was necessary, and
as long as that protection was continued, the difference
in the duty between free-labour and slave-labour sugar
could. not affect the consumer, and if it could be shown,
as he contended it could, that the admission of free-
kbour sugar, in conjunction with our own colonial
sugar, would mere than meet the demand for the con-
sumption of this country, the West Indies would then
occupy the position which they had occupied before the
abolition of slave ry, when no one thought of contending
that the protection ail,,rded to them operated as a tax
upon the public. It did not so %crate then, because the
silt ply exceeded the demand. The admission of Brazilian
sugar would lead to immediate cheapness, which would
be followed by excessive rise of price. Besides, the
pt,ople of this country had always expressed their wil-
lingness to submit to the necessary sacrifices for the
abolition of slavery. The Right Hon. Gentleman then
alluded to the great increase in the importation of slaves
into our West India colonies, consequent upon the abo-
lition of slavery in St. Domingo, as a proof of
what must f“llow from doing away with the
differential duties betweu free and slave-labour produce.
It was admitted universally that some reduction ought
to take place in the sugar duties, and the measure of
last year had been merely a preparatory one. The pro-
pofal of the Government gave the consumer the benefit
of the reduction to the extent of lid. per lb. He thought
the Government proposition infinitely preferable to
a scheme of gradual reduction. He admitted
that it was impossible to foresee what might occur in
Viree years, hut still he thought that a judicious remis-
sion of duties would lead to such an increase of revenue
as to give a fair prospect of the remission of the income-
tax at tlte end (;f that period. He opposed the propo-
sition of the Noble Lord as impolitic; inexpedient, and
subversive of those principles for which they had s) long
contended.
Mr. LA.BOUCHERE considered the attempt to draw a
distinction between free-labour and slasve-labour sugar
most unsuccessful, and one which did'not conduce to
the interests of our own colonists. It would give rise to
the perpetration of all sorts of frauds, and was not
likely to be a permanent measure.
Mr. GLADSTONE, although out of office, was willing to
take his full share of the responsibility which had been
incurred with regard to this MI asure. He denied each
and
hael
given
ovi
feinf
lo islaver},
there
t tai propositionsdultve es laid down by the Noble Lord.
r 3,,
were
while,repealed,under th
stimulusae
would
be present
law, the introduction of Cuban and Brazilian
sugar could never be a paying transaction. The West
Indian planter was placed under disadvantageous circum-
stances, and was therefore entitled to protection, and if
their interests were not so injured as to interfere with
their power of production, they would eventually be ena-
bled to supply the whole of the demand of this country;