The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-02 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY.

The first business was the motion of Colonel WOOD
(Brecon) for a bill to exempt from toll all lime conveyed
on any turnpike-road in Wales. He explained the general
purport of the acts of parliament that regulate this subject
in Wales, and the great hardship with which this toll, an
impost on manure, is found to bear upon the small agri-
culturists in Wales ; indeed, he believed it to have been
really the primary cause of all the late disturbances there.
While lime bore the heavy toll he thus complained of, the
artificial manures in general, such as guano and bone dust,
paid no duty at all.
After some conversation, in the course of which Mr.
DA.RBY objected to the bill, as tending to diminish the
security of creditors having made advances upon tolls, the
house .divided:—For the introduction of the bill, 68 ;
against it, 42. Majority for it, 26.
Mr. HUTT then moved for a committee of the whole
house upon the expediency of allowing corn to be imported
from the British possessions in South Africa, India, and
Australasia, at the same duty as from Canada. Those
possessions had a stronger claim to this relief than
Canada, because, being at a greater distance, they were
more exposed to the disadvantages of the sliding scale.
They were all of them corn-producing and corn-exporting
countries : Van Diemen's Land, in particular, produced
wheat of most excellent quality, and there was a proba-
bility that freights would not, in future, be too high to
leave a profit upon corn brought hither from those coun-
tries. He called upon the government to carry out their
own principles, and deal equally with all these posses-
sions.

Mr. MANGLES seconded the motion, with a view espe-
cially to Indian interests. Having ruined the manufac-
tures of India, we were bound to make some compensation
to her in her agriculture.
Mr. GLADSTONE reminded the house,that in the debates
respecting the admission of Canadian corn, it was dis-
tinctly announced by the government that it was not their
intention lightly to extend the relaxation to other colo-
nies. The colonies specified in this motion were not
properly and habitually corn-exporting countries to Eu-
ropean markets, though they might occasionally bring
over a little corn. There were peculiar circumstances in
the Canadian case, which distinguished it from the case of
the other colonies ; in particular, the Canadian measure
was accompanied with a condition that the Legislature of
the Canadas should impose a duty on corn imported into
them. He would not consent to entertain a motion of
which the tendency was to produce, whether with more or
with less reason, a panic among the agriculturists of
England.
Lord STANLEY, though he confessed that he did not
himself apprehend any real danger to English agriculture
from such an alteration as this ; yet, being persuaded that
great alarm, rightly or wrongly, would be sure to arise
from it among the agricultural interests, he would resist a
proposal which would produce so great an uneasiness, and
disturb the whole arrangement of the corn-laws, and for
no substantial purpose.
The house divided—Against the motion, 117 ; for it,
47. Majority against it, 70.
Sir G. STAUNTON moved for a committee of the whole
Souse, to consider of an address to the crown in favour of
the widow and family of the late Dr. Morrison, on the
ground of his eminent public services in China, eulogised
in a proclamation of Sir Henry Pottinger.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE seconded the motion.
Sir R. PEEL, while he praised in the highest terms the
services of Dr. and Mr. Morrison, lamented the difficulty
of acceding to a proposal which would constitute a pre-
cedent of the most embarrassing description. As com-
pared with the surviving families of other eminent public
servants, this family had been fairly dealt with ; but still,
if he had not been restrained by his sense of public duty,
he would have had great personal gratification in acceding
to a further provision.
Sir G. STAUNTON withdrew the motion.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNESDAY.

The Birmingham Corporation Bill was rejected on the
second reading by the majority of ten.
The Bolton and Preston Railway Bill was read a third
time, and passed.
Sir R. PEEL stated that the commission on the subject
of Harbours of Refuge would be issued in three or four
days.
In reply to a question from Lord Sandon to Lord Ash-
ley as to the course which his Lordship would pursue on
the Factories Bill, Lord Ashley said that his first impres-
sion, which had since been confirmed by the opinions of
several of his friends on both sides of the House, was not
to offer any oposition to the Government proposition to
withdraw the Bill. (Hear, and oh, oh.) It was, there-
fore, not his intention to oppose the Government on Fri-
day, in their motion for the withdrawal of the Bill. He
was aware that he surrendered many advantages which he
now possessed by adopting that course, but he thought it
his duty on all occasions, when he could do so without
conceding principle, to consult the wishes and conveni-
ence of the House and the Government. I take this
course (said the Noble Lord) on the understanding that
the Government will immediately introduce another Bill,
and will take the discussion upon it on an early day after
Easter.
Sir J, GRAHAM.—Perhaps I may be permitted to say
—having given a notice which now stands for Friday
evening with respect to the Bill lately discussed—that if
such a proposal meets with the general assent of the House,
I shall on Friday move to bring in a Bill to alter the exist-
ing law as to labour in factories. If the present Bill
should be withdrawn, and leave to introduce a new Bill
should be obtained, I shall move that it be read a first
time on Friday, and printed, and shall fix the secondread-
_ ing for an early day after Easter.
The house soon after adjourned.