The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-02-22 00:00:00

CANADA.

Mr. HUME renewed the notice he had given to move for
copies of correspondence relating to Nova Scotia, and other
North American colonies ; and he also gave notice that, on
Wednesday, he would move for a return of the public reve-
nue of Upper Canada during the same period as the returns
he had already moved for of the same nature respecting
Lower Canada; also for a return of the expenditure during
the same period ; also for a return of the number of persons
recently imprisoned for treasonable offences, and now dis-
posed of; also for copies of the ordinances made by the go-
vernor of Lower Canada since the 24th of November, 1833 ;
also for copies of a letter addressed by Lord Aberdeen to
Lord Hill on the Ist of August, 1835, respecting a challenge
to fight a duel, sent by a Mr. Stewart, secretary to Lord
Aylmer ; and for a copy of that gentleman's appointment to
the office of Chief Justice of Quebec •; and he begged to ask
the noble lord, the secretary for the home department, when
the correspondence which had taken place beween the go-
vernment and Sir Francis Head would be laid on the table
of the house.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was understood to say that those
papers would be produced very shortly.
Mr. BARRON wished to ask the secretary cf the admiralty
whether there was any intention of doing away with the
packets on the Waterford station.
Mr. C. WOOD had not heard of any intention of that sort.

CORN LAWS.

Mr. VILLIERS, having been called upon by the speaker,
rose and said—ln accordance with the notice I have given, it
is my duty to move that certain persons who have presented
a petition to this house be allowed to establish the allegations
of that petition at the bar of this house. The petitioners
are persons who are deeply interested in the subject matter of
their petition ; they have been selected by their fellow-
citizens and by their fellow sufferers at large, at open meet-
ings assembled for the purpose, to make known, by all legiti-
mate means in their power, the nature and the extent of the
specific grievance of which they complain. And, sir, they
bring this complaint from those great districts where the
mass of the inhabitants depend for existence upon the em-
ployment of their industry,—that they expect that employ-
ment as much from people of other countries as they do
from their countrymen around. They come from Glasgow—
from Leeds—from Nottingham—from Manchester—from
Liverpool—from Birmingham—from Wolverhampton--from
Derby—and from Kendal. The places within the circle to
which I have alluded, exceed, in population, two millions in
number ; and these places will be recognised at Once as the
seats of the great staple manufactures of the country. Taking
a glance at the interests which these people represent, and
their importance to the community at large, I will only refer
to those four branches of trade which have the most reason
to apprehend alarm from the grievance of which they com-
plain ; I allude to the cotton trade, the woollen trade, the
linen trade, and the hardware trade. I find that there are
employed in the cotton trade of this country no less than
1,500,000, dependent on it for their maintenance and support;
that the:value of that trade to this country is £34,000,00.
sterling ; that of the capital employed in that trade, there is,
fixed and floating, £20,000,000 sterling ; that nearly
£17,000,000 sterling are employed in wages, and that two-
thirds of that manufacture in value, and three-fourths in
quantity, is exported from this country. The annual value
of the woollen trade is 27 millions sterling ; one-fourth of
that is exported to other countries ; the number of persons
employed is upwards of 400,000, and the manufacture con-
sumes of English wool upwards of 108 millions of pounds
annually. The annual value of the linen manufacture is
eight millions sterling, and there is spent in wages in it
£3,500,000. The hardware trade is upwards of 37 millions
sterling,
. Mr. HUME.—Is it in one year ?
Mr. VILLIERS.—The value of the raw material, capital,
wages, and every thing that constitutes it is included. There
are employed in it upwards of 300,000 persons, and thousands
of these persons depend for employment and subsistence en-
tirely on our foreign trade. These parties say they have been
obliged to observe and etperience a decided change in the
character of their dealings with those nations on whom they
were accustomed to depend for custom. They state, sir,
that those who were once our valuable friends they now find
alarming rivals ; and that such a change will have a detri-
mental effect upon the industry of this country ;—and they
further state, which reason they think gives them a claim
upon your attention, that you have done this ; they say that
the legislature has denied them the liberty of taking that
which foreign countries have alone to exchange, you have
compelled these foreign countries to find means of supplying
their own markets—you have forced them to become manu,
facturers themselves. The charge which they bring against
the _corn laws is, that they have not only turned away our
customers, but that they have actually turned our former
friends and customers into competitors. (Hear, hear.) The
petitioners are prepared to prove that this active competition
in foreign countries assumes a very alarming aspect, and that
if it should extend in such a ratio as it has within the last few
years, it must be extremely prejudicial to the community at
large, but more particularly to the industrious working
classes—(hear)—that class which is most unable to bear it.
The hon. gentleman here referred to the evidence contained
in a 1..0i k published under the 'sanction of the cotton manu -
facturer, and others of Glasgow, which embodied some ut
the report of the commissioners appointed by the crown on
the subject of the factory system. The object of these quo-
tations was to prove the great disadvantages under which the
manufacturers laboared, by reason of ti vast increased
amount of foreign competition, with its c; •acomitant evils,
caused, aa it was contended, by the operation of the present
system of corn laws. Turning from the United States, he
would refer to the case of countries on the continent of
Europe. First, there was Switzerland, with all the disadvan-
tage of her locality, 800 miles from the coast and from the
raw material. It was within the last 20 years that we ex-
ported largely to Switzerland ; but she now imported for
herself the raw material, and manufactured it, and she was
not only meeting England in the markets of Italy, and even
North America, but meeting her successfully too. Russia
was, enabled to send England her corn and timber, but
England refused to take these commodities, in return for
which they would have taken her manufactures. In the year
1820 England had exported to Russia thirteen million yards
of cotton, while in the year 1837 it was only 860,000. Ger-
many had been compelled to become a manufacturing country
from our refusal to receive her productions in exchange for
our manufactures, In the year 1833 the amount of exports
to that place had been £29,500,000 ; in 1834 it had been
£11,000,000; in 1835 it had been £10,000,000; in 1836
£7,000,000 ; in 1837, £5,800,000 ; and in 1838, only 51 mil-
lions. Why, it was certainly no consolation to that house to
hear the official documents referred to to prove that the en-
tire amount of our exports had increased, when they found
that these exports and that increase only showed .that they
furnished to other countries the means of becoming the rivals
of England.—(Cries of " hear, hear.") It was said by some
that there was no reason why the English artizan might not
successfully enter into competition with them in any branch
of trade. In reply to this assertion he would briefly allude
to the branch of hosiery. He found that in 1815 they had
the:monopoly of the world in this trade. Now, however,
the English found serious competition in Saxony. Now he
found that, while this country had increased 10 per cent. in
the power of her machinery, yet, since 1815, Saxony had
doubled every six years ; and though, of the article of hosiery
England had exported 447,391 dozen in the year 1838, it ap-
peared that Saxony had exported is the same year 1,500,000.
The hon. gentleman then read a very lengthy account of the
amount of the exports of Saxony to various parts of the
globe, and compared them with those of England during the
same period, for the purpose of proving the increase which
was alleged as having taken place in those of the former
country. He then read a communication from a manufac-
turer, from Stroud, in which it was stated that not only were
the English furnishing foreign nations with the raw material
for the manufacture of goods, but that even many thousands
of the best English workmen were sent also to other•coun-,
tries, thereby leaving no others in the home factories but the old
and the inexperienced. This the writer attributed to the pre-
sent system of the corn laws, and he concluded his letter by
observing, with Solomon, " that he that withheld corn, the

the people should curse him."—(Hear.) The same thing
could be proved by the return of the exports in the linen
trade. He then referred to several papers setting forth the
quantity of the exports in this trade in one year, some time
past, as contrasted with one of a more recent date; also
for the purpose of proving what he set forth with stat-
ing. There was, in fact, hardly any branch of trade
in which England was not exporting the raw material.
In the hardware and cutlery manufacture they were more
met by the competition of foreigners than in any other branch.
He had a letter from a factor of hardware, who had been in
the habit of sending goods to different parts of the world.
The communication, which he read at length (as well as many
other documents,) went into details of the present prospect
of that trade in Prussia and the neighbouring states ; and con-
cluded by alluding to an importation of cutlery which had
been made from thence into this country eighteen years ago.
The next document he read was a letter from Birmingham,
dated the 17th February, in which the writer was understood
to state that during a recent visit to the United States he had
seen with much regret the German cutlery preferred to that
of England. The honourable gentleman said he wished not
to enter into the general question, the social and political ar-
gument; he confined himself to the narrow ground already
stated. But if evidence were felt to be necessary, he trusted
it would not be taken in the seclusion of a select committee ;
let it be heard openly before the whole representative body.
There had been sufficient precedents. Mrs. Clarke had oc-
cupied the bar for 23 days ; let these petitioners have as ample
time. There had been a case in 1785 where the body of
bleachers and dyers had been heard by the house against an
imposition of duties. If they should refuse the present prayer,
the inference would be .that they were afraid to have the sub-
ject probed.
Mr. STRUTT seconded the motion, which he said was but
the commencement-of a greet struggle. To hear evidence
would take time ; but time could not be better occupied. And
the public would not forget, if the majority should refuse this
boon, that it was a majority composed of men who had a per-
sonal interest against it.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT thought the honourable member
who had last spoken had given a good and sufficient reason
why the house should not acquiesce in the prayer of the peti-
tion when he urged that the facts alleged in the petition were
not capable of being questioned. This statement he was not,
for one, disposed to question ; but it left so much the less ne-
cessity to resort to inquiry. At the same time he must say
that an attempt had been made to impute motives to the landed
interest as unjust and injurious as they were unfounded.
Mr. MARK PHILIPS, in supporting the motion, said the
question of the existence of the manufacturing, or of any other
portion of the community, ought not, and he trusted would
not, be looked on as of a party nature. (Hear.)
Lord Howicx, declared his own opinion of the injustice and
impolicy of the corn law, but expressed, however; his inten-
tion of opposing the desired examination. He thought it
would occasion great delay in coming to any conclusion, and
considered the facts as pretty well ascertained already. The
cross-examinations would be endless : you must hear both
sides ; you would have the currency question introduced : and
having once begun, you could not stop ; your opponents
would insist on going throughout. The noble lord adverted
to the numbers of the signatures subscribed to the petitions,
but the petitioners, he said, numerous though they might be,
were not so fit judges of what was good for them as the house,
and he trusted members were not disposed to truckle for a
little popularity.
Mr. PRYME said that having given notice of an amendment
to this motion, he wished to state the reasons why he would
not press it. He had supposed the motion would have been
for a repeal of the corn laws, and as his own amendment
would come much more properly after that question, he should
move it whenever the question arose, which he understood it
would, and hon. members might then. choose between total
and partial abolition.
Mr. WARD admitted that many facts on the subject were
familiar to members of that house ; but confiding as they did
in those facts, why did they refuse to the- supporters of the
present motion an opportunity of connecting those facts by
evidence with the existing corn laws ?
Mr. THORNELY supported the motion.
Lord WORSLEY was of opinion, that a repeal of the corn
laws would be in the highest degree detrimental to the inte-
rests of agriculture, and therefore to manufactures. Such
repeal would be decidedly injurious to the home market for
manufactures—a market which, he would contend, had pro-
tected the manufacturers of this country from the ill effects
of the distress in America. It was true enough that there
had been a rise in the prices of agricultural produce, but it
was equally true that the farmers had not derived any advan-
tage from that. He could answer for his own part of the
country, that in the present year the crop had proved so de-
fective in quality and quantity, that though the pi ices were
as high as 755., the farmers were often in other years placed
in a better condition by a price of 505., for in one case they
paid a rote of wages equal co about Bs. or 9s. a week, while
in the other they paid from 13s. 6d. to 15s.
Mr. TIORSMAN said the state of things was such that the
capital of the country yielded no profit, and all that the ca-
pitalists of the country desired was that they might be allowed
to show by evidence the modes in which their capital could
be advantageously employed in this country without carrying
it abroad to seek for better occupation. Ha should vote for
the inquiry, not with the view of courting popularity, but
from a love of justice, apd because he was not prepared to
Ault his eyes against the proof of the allegations which had
been made by, the petitioners.
Mr. G. H. HEATHCOTE should vote against the proposi-
tion for hearing evidence at the bar upon principle, because
he was opposed to any alteration in the present system of the
corn laws. (Hear.) He refused inquiry, because he denied
the existence of any grievance. (Hear.) He did not think
that any case of deterioration or depression in the manufac-
turing prosperity of the country had been made out to call
for the house to go into the question of a repeal of the corn
laws. But, evert if such a case had been submitted to them,
he should have been prepared to contend that no class in the
country had a right to say " We will benefit ourselves at the
expense of our neighbours ; we will arise out of the mire on
the shoulders of others." (Cheers and counter-cheers.) He
also objected to this motion in point of form.
Mr. IVARBCRTON said the, motion was useful in putting
the advocates of the corn laws entirely in the wrong, but
thought it mattered practically very little what proposal might
be made till the mamlacturers and the working people should
pull together, and operate on the fears of the landlords.
Mr. CAYLEY said, the hon. gentleman who had just sat
down most briefly stated, that when the working classes of
the country and their masters pulled together, then would be
the time for the house to listen to their representations.
But the hon. gentleman was utterly mistaken if he thought the
master manufacturers had so far deluded their operatives as
to induce them to pull together on this question. (Hear.)
The operatives had bitter experience during- the last twenty
years of the generous and heartfelt sympathy which the mas-
ter manufacturers felt for them. (Hear, hear.) They had
seen the deep-toned commiseration of the master manufac-
turers in behalf of the poor, emaciated, crippled, death-like
factory child (hear, hear); and when the case of the hand-
loom weavers was brought forward year after year by the
hon. gentleman then member for Lanarkshire, was the ques-
tion of hunger proclaimed as one that should guide their de-
liberations ? No ; it was said, " the power-loom and the
spinner must have the monopoly, it is impossible you can
compete with them, and therefore you must be allowed to
sink without our sympathy or assistance." (Hear, hear.)
This was no question of hunger, as had been stated ; if it
were the case of a nation stretching out its hands for food,
the landed interests would be as ready to come forward for
their relief as any other body in the state. (Cheers.) But
it was not a question of hunger, but whether the people of
this country, which had been engaged for centuries in the
production of corn, should rely on the importations of foreign
wheat. He would not now enter into the general question :
he had risen only for the purpose of repudiating the statement
that the case of the manufacturers had anything to do with
the corn laws ; and that the operative classes were pulling
together with the master manufacturers in order to insure
their repeal. (Hear.)
Mr. P. Tnomesoei asked what the possessions of the land-
lords would be worth, but for the value conferred on them by
manufactures ? Yet our manufactures were suffering, as ap-
peared from the increase in the exports of foreign countries,
which he referred to official returns to prove.
Sir H. FLEETWOOD said that Lord Stanley, in the debate
on the address, had mis-stated the progress of manufacturing
investment. He had himself been the noble lord's informant,
but had informed him erroneously.
Lord. STANLEY had had no intention of taking any part in
the present discussion, but when the hon. baronet (Sir H.
Fleetwood) had expressed his astonishment that he (Lord
,Stanley) should have referred to him, with respect to the
number of factories built within a certain period in the town
of Preston, all he could say was that he would never again
be guilty of a similar indiscretion. (Great cheering.) He
had had no intention of taking a part in the former debate,
but it having been stated, if it could be proved, that there
was an increase in the manufactories in the manufacturing
districts, within the last few years, although the manufactu-
rers were exporting at a loss, and they could not live by their
trade—yet if it could be proved that there was an increase
in machinery and in manufactories within the last few years,
then (said the hon. member) his argument would fall to the
ground. It did so happen, that shortly after these observa-
tions had been made, the hon. Baronet the member for Pres-
ton (Sir H. Fleetwood) was passing by, and having some
knowledge of the town, having passed through it many times
in the last year, and having remarked, as everybody having
the opportunity must have remarked, the great increase in
the number of manufactories, hi had asked the hon. member
not whether there had been any increase, but as to the num-
ber. (Hear, hear.) The hon. baronet said yes, there had
been, and in the years 1836 and 1837. (" No, no," from
Sir H. Fleetwood.) The hon. baronet said, that in the years
1836 and 1837 there had been built or completed in the town
of Preston nineteen new factories, at an expense of £60,000,
and houses connected with them which cost £l5OO ; and that
of these factories eleven were ereeted in one year, and eight
in the other. Such was the statement made to him by the.
hon. baronet, in the presence of several of his (Lord Stanley's)
friends, and he regretted very much that having adopted er-
roneous information he had misled the house ; but all he had
done was to quote t,,e words of the hon. baronet, his ques-
tion having been put, not as regarded the fact of ieerease,
but with regard to the particular district in which the increase
had taken place. An hon. member had said that the in-
crease of the number of manufactories was no proof of pros-
perity in that department of commerce, because they might
have been contracted for two or three years before. But
what did he (Lord Stanley) care for that ? Because it was
said that the corn laws were the cause of manufacturing dis-
tress, yet it was not proved that the number of manufactures
had increased, and consequently there must have been an
increase in the amount of articles manufactured. He dared
to say the manufacturers did not make such large profits as
formerly. • (Cheers.) But could that be expected when the
nation lapsed into a state of peace, after a war of unusual
duration ? Take the case of the growth of a child. Was it
to be said that because it grew three inches when it was six
or seven years old, that therefore it was grown in the same
proportion at the age of nineteen, when it only grew one ?
And it was to be contended that, because manufactures in
their infancy had been more prosperous than in their man-
hood, that the corn laws had been the cause of the change ?
Sir H. FLEETWOOD explained.
Mr. BROTHERTON supported the motion, contending,that
the manufacturers were realising no profits.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that upon the question before
the house—rather a narrow one, he thought—what had been
stated by his noble friend the secretary of war had entirely
forestalled any arguments he might have used. Upon that
statement he should rest his determination to give a vote
against the motion of the hon. member for Wolverhampton.
In so doing he should confine himself to precedents of which
there were several upon the journals applicable to this ques-
tion. He would not then enter into the general question,
but what lie must protest against was the course which he saw
some disposed to follow, and what he thought was neither
fair nor just to that house. What he alluded to was the
practice of saying, that because the house might refuse to
hear evidence at the bar, therefore the House of Commons
was determined to shut out all evidence, and to refuse
to hear the complaints of the people in regard to this im-
portant subject. He did not think the petitioners were en-
titled to prescribe the mode in which the House of Commons
ought to proceed, and such a course would in his opinion, be
attended with the greatest inconvenience. If there was to be
an investigation, let it be gone into before a committee up-
stairs, as Mr. Wilberforce had suggested after a year's
experience of investigation at the bar, and if that was thought
improper, then let the whole matter be fully discussed before
the whole house.

SIR ROBERT PEEL, having a sincere respect for the pe-
titioners, felt deeply concerned for their interests, important
as they were to the general welfare, as well as those of the
agricultural interest, and be could not, therfore, give a per-
fectly silent vote on a motion which he felt bound to oppose.
He would not argue the question on narrow grounds, because
the more extended his observations the more should he argue
in favour of the existing system. (Cheers.) He must take
a larger view than the honorable gentlemen opposite had

done—he must take a comprehenssve flew of the interests of
the country ; if corn was dearer in this county than others,
he must ask what operation taxation had in producing that
result ? (Cheers) He must ask, if corn was 50s. a quarter,
whether there was not a paramount necessity for preserving
public faith ? (Cheers.) Could he agree to a proposition
for taking off the duty on corn when the landowner had to
contribute so largely to the taxes of the country by the pay-
ment of the land tax, the malt tax, and the poor and county
rates ? Was he to exclude the consideration of all these
burdens, and consent to argue this question merely on the
ground. of the higher pride of corn in this than in other
countries, and because if it was lower there would be less
competition with foreign manufactures ? (Cheers.) He
seemed to have excited some alarm opposite by stating how
many questions must enter into the consideration of this
subject ; but he could not exclude them, though it was
the possible wish of a part of the house, taking a narrow
view of the subject, to exclude them—yet this was the
real question after all. Comprehensive or limited, he
would not consent to an inquiry at the bar ? Why was it
resisted by the noble lords ? Why—on the ground that there
were no direct precedents, or that the time of the house was
so precious it ought not to be wasted—or that there were sub-
jects to be considered of more interest, or more importance ;
but he (Sir R. Peel) resisted it because he had a strong con-
viction on his mind that the present system of corn laws
ought to be maintained, and that hitherto the champions of
repeal, or alteration, had produced no plausible arguments to
alter that conviction. (Cheers.) But would no evil arise from a
protracted inquiry? Could they limit it? (Cheers.) Could
they exclude an in.quiry into the taxation which bore on
the land ? Must, therefore, the inquiry not be most pro-
tracted; and evae it not equally clear that pending the inquiry
the application of capital must be suspended—that there
would he a total uncertainty on the part of the farmer and
agriculturist as to what application they would give it ? This
would be an evil which would be greater than that arising
from the mere circumstance of the inquiry lasting during the
present session and the next, and he much doubted whether
it could be more restricted. He had listened with great at-
tention to the arguments put forward by the hon. member
for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers), and he agreed with the
hon. member that they ought to try this question as men of
business, that party feeling ought to be excluded from it as
much as possible, and, as men of business, that they ought
to apply themselves to the, question whether or not the manu-
facturing interest was so depressed as to call for solemn in-
quiry or not. The hon. member for Salford (Mr. Brother-
ton) had said, not following the example of those who had
preceded him, that he should be able to show that it was a
landlord's question, and that the tenants had no interest in
it. (Hear.) Was it quite so Blear, that if the arguments of
the corn-law opponents were correct—was it quite so clear
on the point of reduction of rent ? Did then the abolitionists
not want to reduce the price of porn ? (Cries of " No, no.")
Yes, many of them did, because they desired to raise it on
the continent; if not diminish it here. Suppose the landlord
believed them, and declined to lower his rent, did they be-
lieve it would be easy or competent to a tenant to convert his
plough, his farming utensils and-stock ; or would it be easy
for him to transfer it ? This was a tenant's question as much
as a landleed's, and when the house came to a consideration
of the main subject, he should show that it was a labourer's
question. (Great cheeriiig.) He showed that the anticipated
good could only arise from a reduction of wages, and he should
attempt to show that the labourer couldnot be benefited by
a general alteration of the corn-laws. (Oheers.) The hon.
gentleman said it was tree that factories had been established,
but with a grave face he added that no profit had been derived
from them. Did gentlemen recollect, when the farmer com-
plained in 1833 that he was pursuing his avocation without
profit, what ridicule they had cast on him ? , (Cheers.)
They had asked would Bagshot-heath lave been brought into
cultivation if there was no profit? The hon. gentleman who
made use of that argument thought %hey proved that, if men
continue to be farmers, that was a sufficient proof that farm-
ing was a profitable occupation ; but the same argument
might now be applied to the supposition that men would not
remain manufacturers without realising a profit, or without
a hope of profit. He would take the speech df the hon. gen-
tleman who had introduced this question, and would argue it
upon the narrow ground on which he had placed it, in order
to make out a prima facie case against the corn-laws. He
apprehended the grounds upon which the case was rested—
he had taken down the 'words of the honourable gentle-
man, in order that he might make no mistake—to be these :
He admitted it might be proved that there had been an
increase in our export of manufactured articles, but in the
first place he said that that increase had taken place without
a corresponding profit, and then he asserted that the increase
which had taken place was in what might almost be consi-
dered the raw material, being a description of manufactured
goods in respect of which the cost of human subsistence en-
tered in the smallest-degree—that in those articles in which
much manual labour was required there had been a decay.
Still in cotton twist and cotton cord, into which little of
human labour entered, but which were intended for manu-
facture in other countries, he admitted there was an increase.
The hon. gentleman said that there was great competition
'throughout the whole of Europe, and assumed that by the
corn-laws we had inackthe former consumers of our manu-
factured goods our competitors. Now, supposing the hon.
gentleman's facts to be true, he was not prepared to admit
the 'correctness of his inferences. How could we expect that
there should be an increase of manufactures, throughout
Europe generally ? The hon. gentleman said, "Do not pride
yourselves upon the superiority of your manufactures—do
not suppose that there is some cause why English manufac-
tures ought to monopolise the market of the world—do not
indulge the antiquated prejudice, which ought to be exploded,
that you have some secret influence and power over the
traffic of the earth." He (Sir R. Peel) admitted that
nothing would be so absurd as to entertain such notions ;
but let hon. gentlemen extend the reasoning, 'and inquire
whether, after the lapse of 23 years of profound peace, what-
ever might be the operation of the corn laws, it was not
likely and natural that the nations of the continent should
become manufacturing countries. That hon. gentleman
said, " Look to Saxony and see the progress of manufac-
tures since 1815." Let the hon. gentleman read the history
of Saxony for some years before 1815, and when he found
that that country had been the battle field of the European
struggles, could he be surprised that, after the war had
ceased, the inhabitants should turn their attention to the oc-
cupatioris of pea Ce. (Cheers.) It was because they were
men, and that they shared in the same love of gain which
influenced our own conduct, that this was to be expected.
The hon. gentleman said also that the United States of
America were becoming a manufacturing country. (Hear,
hear.) Could anything be more natural than that in the
progress of civilisation, as their towns increased, with large
markets for their productions, and when the profit of culti-
vating wild land had debreased, such a country should, with-
out any extrinsic cause, become, a manufacturing country ?
He had said that, even if he admitted the hon. gentleman's
facts to, be correct; he was not prepared to admit' his in-
ferences. He would not condemn the . corn laws upon the
two facts which the hon. gentleman thought decisive—
namely, that corn was dearer here than onthe continent, and
that some nations which had been consumers of our manu-
factured produce had betome our competitors. But he de-
nied the hon. gentleman's facts. The hon. gentleman said
there was a gradual diminution of the export of those
articles into the production of which the cost of living en-
tered. He should limit himself entirely to the narrow
ground upon which the hon. gentleman had argued it, and
he trusted the house would listen to his attempt to demon-
strate the fallacy of the position which the hon. gentleman
had assumed. He, was going to show that the present-state
of the British manufactures was not so gloomy as had been
asserted • he was going to show, not that the export of those
articles of manufacture on which little labour was expended,
not that the export of wool and woollen yarn, and of cotton
yarn, and cotton twist had increased, for :an increase in the
export of those articles was admitted on every side, but he
was to try to convince the hon. member acid the house that
there had been a positive increase in the exports of those
very articles into which the cost of human subsistence en-
tered, and which might be considered as liable to . be most
affected by the price of corn. He held in his hand an account,
which he believed to be accurate—namely, a comparative state-
ment of the declared value of British cotton goods exported
from the united kingdom in each of the last eight years,
distinguishing the different branches of manufacture. What
he was going to show was, that thbre had been a progressive
increase last year, as compared with the former years ; and
that that increase was derived, not from the raw material—
not from cotton twist or yarn, but from articles, into the
manufacture of which the cost of manual labour had en-
tered, and the price of which ought to be affected by the
price of provisions. He would take the total of the cotton
goods exported to all parts of the world ; and he said this
would be infinitely more satisfactory than the opinion of any
gentleman who might be examined at the bar. That gentle-
man might tell him that the exports to Saxony had decreased,
and that powerful cotton-mills had been erected in Switzer-
land and in France ; but he (Sir Robert Peel) protested
against such individual testimony. He would say, refer to
returns showing the state of your whole trade, and from the
general result determine whether the argument founded upon
the decay of our exports to a particular place were a sound
one. He confined himself to this point, according to the
hon. gentleman's own dictation. He excluded all other
questions connected with the subject. He excluded the
question of. Ireland, and argued the case upon the narrow
ground upon which it had been placed—viz., whether the ex-
port of articles into which the price of human labour entered
had decreased. He would take the whole 'of our exports,
then, for eight years, and he would tell the house why he
excluded the years which the hon. gentleman had taken ar-
bitrarily ; sometimes taking the years from 1826, 1827, and
1828, and sometimes the five years after the peace. He
would take the last eight years during which the corn laws
had operated, because they constituted a test of the opera-
tions of those laws, not upon agriculture merely, but also
upon manufactures. His attempt was to prove that under
those laws manufactures had flourished, and steadily in-
creased. He would compare the average of 1838 with that of
the seven preceding years, and he asked whether there could
be a fairer test of the total, then, of cotton goods exported
in the seven yearse preceding, 1838 ? The average was
5£20,100,400 of deatnestl value. ' This was an average of the
seven years preceding, and what was the state of this decay-
hlg manufacture in 1838 ? Why, in that year it increased
from £20,000,000 to £24,000,000. The declared value of
cotton goods exported in that year, as compared with the
average of the seven preceding years, exhibited an increase
of £4,000,000 on the declared value. But ;the hon. gentle-
man would say, " You include in that the export of cotton
twist." Certainly he did. He gave the house the whole.
The average of the cotton yarn and cotton twist exported
duriqg the seven years preceding 1838 was £5,340,000 of de-
clared value ; but the goods exported in 1838—cotton twist
and yarn he meant—rose from the average of £5,340,000 to
£7,430,300, being an increase of £2,000,000. He hoped he
made himself understood. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentle-
man had complained grieyously of the decaying state of the
hosiery trade, and had proceeded to show that large exports
of hosiery took place from Saxony to Cuba,_ and that our ex-
ports of such articles were diminished. Now, he (Sir R.
Peel) said that to arrive at a correct conclusion as to the
state of the trade,' we must not take Saxony, which might
possess many advantages over us in the manufacture—nor
must we take the exports to Cuba alone ; but in order to de-
termine whether the hosiery trade was in the state of decrepi-
tude in which it was represented to be, the proper course
was to take the averages of the seven preceding years, and
to compare them with the year 1838. The average exports
of hosiery in the former years was £587,300 of declared value,
but in 1838 it rose from the average of £587,000 to £650,000.
He would now take another, and the chief article, in respect
of which, of all others, the cost of manual labour operated,
and which ought to be influenced by the price of provisions.
He referred to calicoes, muslins, dimities, ginghams, dia-
pers, shawls, and silk handkerchiefs. The average of these
exports for the former seven years was £13,349,000 declared
value, and in 1838 the amount was £15,320,000. He had
shown what had been the increase of cotton twist and yarn,
and he now took the higher and more valuable descriptions
of manufactured goods, and he thought it material to show,
after what had been said by the hon. mover, that there had
been a positive increase of two millions in the exports gf last
year. He asked how it could be contended on this limited
ground that manufacturing prosperity could not be kept up,
and that the operation of the corn laws had been fatal and
detrimental ? The hon. gentleman had next referred to the
importation of corn into various parts of Europe, and said
he would show that there was good ground for believing that
the manufactures of this country, compared with those of '
other states, were on the decline. On the first of the re-

turns to which he (Sir R. Peel) had referred, there could he
believed, he no doubt. The one.to which he was now about
to refer had been placed in his hands that day, therefore he
could not be responsible for its aocuracy in all particulars,
but it was taken from an authentic Liverpool circular, in
which the 'highest confldence was placed. This was an ac-
count of the consumption. 'of eottoa diiring the years 1837
and and he applied. it .as a test to the argument that
other nationg were, in the article of cotton,, making an alarm-
ing progress as compared with .o-urselves. The honourable

gentleman had referred to Switzerland and the states of
Germany. This was an account of the consumption of cot-
ton in Great Britain and in several of the continental states.
It appeared from it that in 1837 the amount of cotton im-
ported into England was 1,059,000 bags ; and in 1838,
1,280,000 bags. So much for England. Nqw he would take
other countries of Europe. In France the amount consumed
was, in 1837,.357,539 bags, and in 1838 it increased to 393,000
bags. The result of the statement was, that in other coun-
tries in Europe, comparing the accounts of cotton consumed
in 1838 with that of 1837, there was a decrease of about two
per cent. Those continental states to which he referred
were Holland, Belgium, and the German States. In these,
as he had said, there was a decrease in 1838 below the con-
sumption of 1837 amounting to two per cent. In France
there had been an increase of 91 per cent. But what had
been the increase in Great Britain ? Seventeen and a half
per cent. (Hear, hear.) Now, really, if it were true that
tins foreign manufacture, the progress of which was so alarm-
ing to the honourable gentleman, could be tried by a fair
test, that test was the quantity of cotton consumed ; and
from the investigation it turned out that in the continental
states, with the exception of France, there had been a de-
crease of two per cent., in France an increase of 94 per cent.,
and in Great Britain an increase of 174 per cent. By this
test also, of the quantity of cotton consumed, he tried the
soundness of the hon. gentleman's arguments as to our own
manufactures, and he certainly could not agree in the in-
ference that the prospects of manufacturers were as gloomy
as they were represented to be, and that those who had
heretofore been consumers, had, on account of our refusal
to take their corn, become successful competitors with us.
His belief was, that do what we would with the corn laws,
while there was peace, we could not make ourself es an exclusive
cotton manufactory for the whole civilized world. (Hear,
hear.) The duration of peace, the increase 'of tranquillity
and civilization, the security from hostile aggression, would
increasimanufactures, and he was not aware that it was at
all corresponding with sound doctrines of political economy
that we should repine at the progressive prosperity of other
nations. (Hear, and cheers.) The object aimed at was to
increase the price of corn in other countries with a view to
diminish their manufactures. If such enormous evils were
attached to a high price of corn, at all events it did not seem
a very philanthropic object to endeavour to entail those mis-
fortunes upon other countries ; but if the object were the
raising of the price of corn abroad, in order to diminish foreign
manufactures, was it not just possible that other nations
might see through our project, and the moment they found
that the export of corn added so much to the prosperity of
Great Britain, and tended so much to the depreciation of their
own manufactures—was it not possible they might impose
such duties upon the exportation of corn as would deprive us
of the benefit to be derived from it? (Hear, hear.) On all
these considerations it would be well to reflect how far a
country consuming b'2,000,000 of quarters of wheat, and
whose main hope must be founded upon the internal supply,
could depend, in case of famine or of war, that money would
at all times ensure a sufficient supply. (Hear, hear.) Into
those general considerations connected with the corn laws, in
fulfilment of his engagement to the house, he should not now
enter ; he should be ready to enter upon them when the ge-
neral subject was brought forward, and should be prepared to
show that the interests of all classes, including the manufac-
turers, who were deeply interested in the preservation of the
home market, tended to show the policy of continuing to the
agricultural classes the prosperity which they at present en-
joyed. But he was now arguing the case on the sole ground
upon which the honourable gentleman invited hkrn. That
honourable gentleman had promised to show that in the de-
clared value of those articles into which the cost of manual
labour entered, there was a decay, and also that there had
been a progressive increase of foreign manufacturers, which
to an alarming degree exceeded the British, but he (Sir R.
Peel) had attempted to show not only that our exports ge-
nerally had increased, but the exports of goods of a finer de-
scription had increased in a corresponding ratio, and, that if
the consumption could be taken as a test, the manufacturers
of England were quite in as flourishirr, a condition as those
of the continent ; and upon that ground,' and knowing the evil
of a protracted inquiry ; sensible of the agitation of the pub-
lic mind that would arise from postponing, the general ques-
tion, he was, with all respect for the petitioners, prepared to
give his decided negative against entering into the proposed
inquiry. (Cheers.)
_ Mr. VILLIERS replied ; SirROBERT PEEL explained; and
the debate, which had been expected to be an adjourned one,
concluded with a division, when Mr. Villier's motion was
negatived by a majority of 189, the numbers being 361 to 172,
and the house adjourned at a quarter before twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—WEDNESDAY.
The House of Lords did not assemble to-day.

HOUSE 01? COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY.

Mr. Du Pre, the new member for Buckinghamshire, took
the oaths and Ls seat.

Many petitions were presented against any alteration in
the corn laws, and some for a revision of the same.

,
Sir C. B. YERE and other members presented petitions
against any system of national education unconnected with
the superintendence of the church.
Mr. Hawns\ presented a petition from David Jones, for
the abolition of the ecclesiastical courts, and gave notice
that he woull 'call 'attention to the subject next day ; but at
the suggestion of Sir J. OWEN, the notice was afterwards
postponed till Friday.
The CIIANCELLOT{ of the EXC'HEdITEE., at the request of
Alderman Sir M. Woon, postoned his motion for referring
papers, correspondence, &c., regarding.the rebuilding of the
Royal Exchange, to the London Improvement Committee.
Mr. MACKINNON inquired as to the delaY which had taken
place in the builclinz, of the terrace .and other works con-
nected ;with' the proposed new houses of parliament.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was understood to
say that he would look into the subject.
Lord G. SOMERSET asked if it was the intention of go-
vernment to institute any inquiry into the proceedings of
railway comapanies.
Mr. P. THOMPSON could not state what course he should
pursue, but admitted that it was high time something should
be done for the protection of the public.
Sir R. PEEL wished to know if any new arrangement was
contemplated for the conduct of private business, as it might
be necessary to postpone to a more distant day the.consider-
ation of private bills.

Mr. Pi THOMSON stated that the committee would soon
be able to make their report, and if further time was neces-
sary it would be granted.
Mr. P. HOWARD inquired whether it was thr intention of
the. Chancellor of the Exchequer to relieve the country from
the duty on raw cotton.
The CrIANcELLon of the EXCHEQUER declined answer-
ing the question until he brought forward his financial.state-
ment.

In ,answer to El!question from Mr. PATTISON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER contradicted a
statement which had appeared as to the non-payment of de-
ficiency bills. •The fact was, that more had been paid off
. than, at,any former, corresponding period.
1‘;11-: Wy sE, after some observations, withdrew his motion
On the Subject of education.
~,,coTv,rio,qtyrns were ordered on the motion of Mr. I-11751E,
'ehiMy connected with the Canadian question, after which the
'h4oU§e

FRIGHTFUL ACCIDENTS ON THE LONDON AND
BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY.

. .
(From the Morning Herald of Tuesday.)
Loss OF LlFE.—During the last few days several acci-
dents, some of them of a most serious and calamitous nature
(and, we regret to add, in one instance attended with loss of
life) have transpired on the line of the London and Binning,.
ham railway. Doubtless, accidents on the various lines of
railways now in existenee in England are of more frequent
occurrence than those which through the medium of the
press are laid before the public, from the fact that every
caution is taken on the part of the railway companies to pre-
vent every species of information respecting them being given
by their servants, and it is upon record that an inspector on
a certain line was actually discharged for giving information
to a reporter with respect to an accident. Notwithstanding
these impediments we have received the following information.
Yesterday morning about seven o'clock, an accident of a
most frightful and fatal character took place on the line of
the London and Birmingham railway, near Watford. A la-
bouring man, employed on the line was at work not far from
the Watford station, when, observing an engine coming
towards him on the down rails, he walked across on the other
line for the purpose of clearing it at the time, not perceiving
that a train was approaching him in a contrary direction, on
the very line to which he had crossed. The Birmingham and
Liverpool mail train was the one alluded to, and was pro-
ceeding at full pace with the engine in the rear (which is
usually the case when there is ice or snow adhering to the
rails, to preVent accidents and facilitate the progress) ; when,
on seeing the man, the guards, as well as the engineers,
called to him to get out of the way ; the poor fellow, how-
ever, although he looked at them, was unable to do so before
he was met by the Post-office van (which was foremost) and
dashed to the ground with gieat violence. Every exertion
was made to stop the train, but it was in vain, before it had
passed over the unfortunate man, nearly severing his legs
from his body, and otherwise mutilating him in a shocking
manner. He was picked up in a lifeless state and conveyed
to the Watford station, where his remains await a coroner's
inquest.
On the evening of the 11th ult., between eight and nine
o'clock, an occurrence of an alarming description took place
under the tunnel extending from Chalk Farm to Kilburn,
which might have been attended with the most disastrous re-,
sults. A luggage train belonging to Messrs. Pickford and
Co. (who have entered into a contract with the company for
the conveyance of goods inland), containing no less than 36
carriages and an engine, 26 of which carriages were loaded,
bearing- upwards of five tons each, had been detained up-
wards of five hours behind her time of arrival at the ware-
houses at Camden-town, in consequence of the power of the
engine being inadequate to the extent of the weight attached
to it. On its arrival within a few yards of the:Chalk Farm
entrance to the tunnel, a portion of the train became de-
tached, in consequence of one of the chains or hooks by
which they were connected breaking ;—but a few minutes
had elapsed before the mail train was heard approaching,
and seen on the same line entering the tunnel at the Kilburn
end. The sicmal of obstruction was immediately announced
to them by the policeman on duty, who hoisted a red light,
but which was, unfortunately, not perceived in consequence
of the dense volume of smoke and steam by which the tun-
nel was filled, and which had emanated from the engine
attached to the luggage train. The mail train, which was
going at between 29 and' 30 miles an hour, was upon them
almost instantly, causing a collision of a most frightful de-
scription, and a report which rang through the tunnel like
heavy thunder. The screams and consternation among the
passengers was awful in the extreme. The engine was nearly
dashed to atoms, as were also one or two of the carriages.
One of the guards, named Posford, in consequence of the
violence of the shock, was precipitated from his position on
one of the carriages, completely through the window of
another, which had been thrown off the line, and his com-
panion, named Roots, from the roof of one carriage to
another. The escape of the engineers was absolutely mira-
culous. With one or two exceptions, the passengers were
but slightly injured. A lady and two gentlemen, however,
suffered severely, from the glass windows, which cut their
faces in a shocking manner. Posford was also lacerated very
much with the glass, and bruised, and Roots had his legs
slightly injured ; but with these exceptions, attended with
great delay, no other inconvenience happened.
Accidents are frequently happening through the foolish
temerity of persons in attempting to get out of the carriages
while at full speed, to recover articles they may happen to
drop or lose on the road. Two narrow escapes have recently
taken place in consequence of this practice. One of them
occurred to the servant of Lady Baring, who happened to
lose his hat. He immediately (whilst the' rain was proceed-
ing at the rate of 30 miles an hour) jumped from the carriage
he was in, and, fortunately for him, was precipitated into a
pond. The een,equence was great inconvenience to her
ladyship; the Iler v n t haying her pass tickets in his possession,
and being left eh:nd the train, her ladyship, on its arriving
at Euston-grove, had to pay her fare twice over. Another
cccurred to a man who, under the influence of lipuor, jumped
out.. and was subsequently found sitting on a piece of timber,
on the line, severely bruised.

CURIOUS COINCIDENCE.—On .Thursday two gentlemen
. et out in a gig from Spalding, to,visit some friends at Bil-
ngborough ; as they were on their road they perceived a ve-
icle driven at a furious rate coping towards them ; they drew
p close to the hedge on their proper side of the road, in
rder to avoid a collision, but froth Some cause or other their
i g was driven against, and all parties were thrown out ; the
ehicle causing the accident contained the very identical per-
sons the Spalding gentlemen were goitig to see, who had set
out to visit them.—Lincoln Chronkte.

ADDRESS 0-E THE GOVERNOR OF BRITISH

GUIANA.

TO THE FREE LABOURERS OP BRITISH GUIANA.

Five mouths have now passed since the Ist August, when
the law made you free—free to choose your employer and em-
ployment—free to return to the land of your forefathers—free
to seek your fortune in other countries. Freedom has been
bestowed on you in the largest and most unqualified manner.
You have had ample time to experience what the blessings of
freedom are, and must be convinced, by all the orders from
her Majesty's government at home, that your rights, as free
persons, subject only to the common law of the land, are
carefully watched and protected.
You have seen, or heard, or known, or if you have not,
now learn—there has not been a commitment nor' a convic-
tion since the Ist August, that has not been laid before me,
and the evidence under which punishment has been awarded,
read by me, and, where possible, this has been remitted or
diminished. This 1 have done, with earnest anxiety to prove
to you and satisfy myself, that as far as human means have
permitted, your liberties, rights, and interests have been
strictly guarded. _ _

The new year, has begun—and while life and health are
mercifully granted to me, I shall in nothing relax my vigi-
lance to maintain the just rights of free men.—l look in
return for your confidence in my good disposition towards
you, and I trust every succeeding year will add to your hap-
piness, strengthen your moral and religious habits, and
increase your comforts in the rational enjoyment of the fruits
of your industry.
You have experienced the full effect of the law of Ist
August ; some of you have changed your employers and em-
ployment. All of you have worked when you chose, and
where you chose.- I do not hear of any of you leaving this
colony to seek your fortunes elsewhere, and I do not believe
the delights of a savage life, have tempted any of you to the
land of your forefathers, or to dispute with the wild beasts
and barbarous Indian tribes of the interior, the possession of
their woods and wilds.

You have magistrates under my control to protect you
against ill treatment ; you have a still more effectual remedy
—the right of changing your employer.
It is my duty now to appeal to you as christians, as free
persons, as British fellow-subjects, whether all of you have,
hitherto, shown yourselves sensible of your position. This
great colony is as yet thinly peopled. The withdrawal of any
great number of its labourers, or the partial industry of the
whole, will sensibly affect the prosperity of all. I have told
you that merchants do not come here with their merchan-
dise for the purpose of sending home plantains, yams, or
your pigs and poultry, (all very necessary objects of life in
this country, and useful for its wants.) The merchants are
here to exchange their merchandise for sugar, coffee, and
cotton, which, if they .do not ?obtain, the greatest number
will shut up their stores and leave the colony. You require
churches, and chapels, and pastors, and ministers of religion,
schools and schoolmasters ; you enjoy the possession of good
clothing, and desire luxuries which labour only can bring
you, for which payment must be made. The revenues of the
colony supply the first of your wants, the high wages you
obtain procure the last. If provisions alone were cultivated,
there would be little revenue, and wages would fall, so that
luxuries could not be bought.

Many of you remember when you were unbaptised, un-
taught, unclothed; you were in a state of slavery, had neither
hope of change, nor desire for the habits of civilised life.
The case is now altered : if labour be a curse, it is the lot of
all, for head or hands must work for bread.

In uncivilised countries, existence depends on hunting, on
plunder, on strength, on cunning ; they produce evils which
our religion teaches us we are now to avoid. The wild hun-
ter gorges one day and starves the next ; the plunderer is in
his turn plundered and murdered. Strength fails, and " none
to help." Cunning is outdone by cunning. Even in the
regions bordering on this colony, the Indian starves, is inse-
cure from the attacks of fellow tribes, he is massacred or sold
as a slave. I have, within . these few days, heard of the
tribes, on the confines of the British territory, being carried
off into slavery by the unprincipled Brazilian borderers.
From all this, the people of this colony are secured. The
British subject, while within the precincts of civilization, fears
nothing, the law upholds him—the British flag protects him.
What does society demand in return ? that all those who
have strength and health should contribute their utmost to
add to it 3 wealth, its social comforts, and by mutual union of
strength, or mental and moral faculties, to raise the condition
of all. _ _

I have said, you had formerly no hopes of elevating your-
selves from the condition of labourers subject to the caprices
of masters—that condition is changed, yet labour must con-
tinue, but every man has the chance, by industry, with God's
blessing, of raising'his family from being tillers of the land,
to be proprietors of land—but it is the work of time, the
hard earned money of the pareut descends to his children,
but they too must work, if they cannot pay other labourers.
In every country the land is cultivated according to the na-
ture of the soil. In some countries it yields wheat ; in some
barley, in some, oats—the land in some is only valuable by
what is taken from beneath its surface in mines and quarries,
—here what are most valuable, and which will secure inde-
pendence and comfort to you all, and increase your worldly
prosperity, the more they are cultivated, are those pro-
ductions which I have told you are sent to. Europe by the
Merchants. •

FooliSh or designing people, have perhaps endeavoured to
make you believe, that provided you cultivate provisions
for your subsistauce and for that of your families, you have
fulfilled your duty—to what)does this lead? not to the ad-
vancement of your race, but to its remaining stationary, if
not to its decrease. In the land of your forefathers the
ground is- cultivated ; but the people are naked, have neither
arts nor commerce, unless the vile traffic of fellow-creatures,
seized by powerful neighbours and sold for slaves, be ac-
counted commerce. 'lf you were to be satisfied with the
mere cultivation of the soil as a mode of existence—it would
come to this : there would be no interchange of wants, you
would have no combination of labour, you would soon he
without government ; your descendants would probably be-
come subject to strangers, who, finding them unprotected,
would perhaps drive them to the woods, or employ force to
make them turn their labour to that which would be most
profitable to the invaders.
The new year requires new efforts on your part—no longer
coerced to labour for one master—you are free—your gains
are your own—learn to appreciate the advantages of a com-
fortable home, be no longer content to return to your cottage,
roll on the unboarded floor, or bask in the sun on the bare
ground ; work so as to enable you to have good clothes, good
beds, good tables, chairs, and domestic utensils ; think of a
resource in old age or sickness ; there is no reason why, hav-
ing finished your day's work, you should not return to a clean
room and decently served meal ; let those who understand me
instil into the minds .of the heedless or ignorant, that man is
farthest removed from the brute creation as he is distinguish-
ed from .their habits. The savage and the wild beast live
almost the same life. ,

I look on the new year with thankfulness and gratitude to
the Almighty. I begin it, remembering that the first act of
my administration was to sign your freedom. The old year
has closed—it will be remembered so long as, this world is
suffered to remain amongst the worlds which God has created.
One million more free beings offer up their prayers to God,
with thankfulness, with gratitude, and, let us hope, with a
determination to make the gift of freedom useful to them-
selves, useful to the country who gave it, and be an example
to other nations, that the soul of man is of no colour.
The eyes of the nations who still possess slaves, are on
you—your friends are watching you. Our gracious sovereign
Queen, and her ministers, depend on you to forward their
views in your favour. If the treasures of the mother country
are diminished' by your idleness, your enemies will blame
your benefactors—those treasures must be diminished, if the
estates on which you labour do not receive your full portion
of industry.
Your Christmas- Day has passed. They who witnessed
your peaceable, orderly deportment, will testify in your fa-
vour, and compare the quiet of freedom with the boisterous
and troublesome revelry of slavery—when guards were dou-
bled, and patrols'of soldiers secured the country. The old
year has closed—the prisons contain one-half fewer'prisoners
than they did six months ago ; everything proves your general
obedience to the laws of civilized life. May God direct us
through the year we have began ; may we be found prepared
to quit the world, if it be so willed, ere its close ; may the
mutual relations between man and man tend to the happiness'
of all, and while the proprietors of land profit by your in-
dustry, may the ties of affection, equally with those of in-
terest, be the bond which unites you together.
Your faithful friend,
HENRY LIGHT, Governor.
Guiana Public Buildings, January Ist, 1839.

ANOTHER GOOD DIVIDEND.—The annual general meeting
of the proprietors of the Sheffield and Rotherham Banking
Company was held at the Cutler's Hall, on Wednesday last,
when a highly satisfactOry report was read, and a dividend
declared, at the rate of 10 per cent, upon the paid capital,
besides upwards of 40 per cent. of the profits being added to
the reserved fund.--7 Sheffield Iris.

THE WHIGS OF OTHER DAYS.—There is a party amongst
us distinguished in what is called the science of political
economy, who wish to substitute the corn of Poland and
Russia for our own. Their principle is, that you ought
always to buy where you can buy cheapest. They repeat with
emphasis that the nation pays a tax of £25,000,000 yearly to
the growers of corn. They count as nothing the value to
the country of a hardy race of farmers and labourers. They
care not for the difference between an agricultural and mann-
facturino-b population, in all that concerns morals, order, na-
tional strength, and pational tranquillity. Wealth is the only
object of their speculation ; nor do they much consider the
two or three millions of people who may be reduced to utter
beggary in the course of their operations. This they call
diverting capital into another channel. Their reasonings lie
so much in abstract terms, their speculations deal so much
by the gross, that they have the same insensibility about the
sufferings of a people, that a general has respecting the loss
of men wearied by his operations. It is to these men, I sus-
pect, that our ministers are about to give up the question of
trade in corn.—Lord John Russell's Letter to the Farmers
of Huntingdon, dated from Woburn Abbey, January 14th
1822.

LANCASTER CANAL.—The annual meeting of the company
of proprietors of the Lancaster Canal Navigation was held at
their office in Lancaster, on Tuesday last. It would seem
that the affairs of the company are in a very prosperous con-
dition, from the following extract from the report then pre-
sented :—" It is gratifying to your committee to refer to the
amount of the tonnage duties for the past year, notwithstand-
ing the loss from the interruption to the navigation by frost
during the unusually long period of seven weeks at the com-
mencement of the year. The tonnage account is credited
£17,243. 15s. received from the Lancaster and Preston Kail-
way Company—increased beyond the amount reported at the
last annual meeting, by the value of additional land at Pres-
ton sold to that company.—and £3OOO from the accumulation
of dividends and interest, also appears at the credit of the ac-
count. The sum of £22,950 on mortgage has been paid off
during the year, and at§ no extraordinary disbursements were
required, your committee have the satisfaction to remark the
diminution in the expenditure of upwards of 8,000 as erim-
pared with the previous year, and to state the balance of the
accunt £22,352. 16s. 7.” The company's debt, on mortgage,
is now only £67,9oo.—Lancaster Gazette.

ANTHRACITE COAL.—A correspondent writes--" As time
progresses, so do tile experiinents on this important fuel, and
no doubt now exists, in the minds of those best acquainted
with its merits, as to its full and entire applicability for loco-
motive engines and steam vessels, and that at a saving of 56
per cent. over the common Sunderland cold ; and when we
consider that, in addition to the important saving of stowage,
proprietors of steam conveyances in general are now provided
with a fuel that burns entirely free from smoke, and almost
without dust, we cannot but see that the day has at length
arrived when anthracite coal will have to perform an almost
exclusive part in the movement, not only of loco-motives and
steam-vessels, but also of every description of steam machi-
nery in the kingdom. Till lately, a difficulty existed as to
the renewal of anthracite fires, (the sudden damp occasioned
by a fresh supply having lowered the steam pressure, and, as
a consequence, the power and speed of the engine,) but by
an ingenious and exceedingly simple contrivance, that diffi-
culty has been overcome, and the combustion of the coal is
fully and perfectly kept up. By the proprietors of steam-
vessels, this important desideratum must be hailed with pe-
culiar satisfaction ; for, instead of having to carry across the
Atlantic some 800 tons of bituminous coal in the great steam
ships now trading to America, about 350 tons of anthracite
will be sufficient for the voyage ; and the same calculations
hold good with regard to railway engines. Surely, after this,
we shall bear no more of great steam-vessels returning from
sea for want of stowage room to carry sufficient fuel for the
voyage. The East India and other companies, about to '
establish steam communication with India, will do well
look to this matter ; as, with a saving of 56 per cent.
using anthracite, they will be enabled to store their del-rats rr
the Cape, Bombay, &c., at a saving in exßense of freight o
more than one-half, or, speaking decimally corrects of £56
in erkri £loo."—Birmingham paper.