The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

klf I
been made to securea proper•supply of labour in its ro

Indies befor

a the planters had to con

all the sug

Toposition of Sir It. Peel NI

Is countr

ring the last thir

g the pr,

priet, r
creasin

ghtest injury to the colonial pro-

'; and it would have the additional advantage of in-
g Vie consumption to the fullest extent contempla-

Ir. VILLIERS
It hon. oaronet

ment should b

ntended that the arzr

lung whatever to do wish the

untry should s, ,ss on
What did the country owe them ? Where
What did it - ' Where was

ffer such an annua

Its annual loss to terminat

amount to ?

only to lose £2

It appeared to him that in
re not

3 the Wet India in'terest they

300,000, but were to be saddled with t

f the rt

signed for I he 11(

—namely, to discourage slaver

propose to keep up the diet
Jav, and Ma
free lemur ?
to these plat

in the c

both of which w

,cting the

gement of slaver

Lord 110 WICK would support the motion of the hon

for Manchester, up.on the understAr

g that its

object was to redu,

duty on foreign z.ugar tc

at the same time that government should avail itself of the
present opportunity to reduce the dutie,: paid by all sit-
He looked upon the differential duty of 10s. as a
enormous tax upon the British consumer—it wa4,
in fact, an unfair and unjust spoliation of the British con-

sumer tor the benefit of t
India ula

1 a cas

colonial planter. If t'

....ft. it. um,' 41111.1 I.
would be ready to meet it. Let them establish their de•
wand, and the British people would be prepared to pay
in the way least onerous to themselves—they would

it, but

pay it out of the treasury, and not in a manner tiiat

i them to pa

) pounds fore

ry one pound which

protection was a delusion, f.r he felt convinced that the

n of s

)!es would ultimate

free to triumph over slave labour in our colonies.
Mr. GLADSTONE admitted that an extra amount of duty

f hone

ble niembe

but although 1

in the abs

could be
Scare,ty o

was of opinion that snb3tantial grounds
I in favour of protec

n the Vt

,n in this case

/1 was another

enhanced the cost of production—absent,_
and a more important one; and then the ab ilitiun
very had so changed circumstances, that during the
few years the West India proprietors were losers by their

...ivy were nor, nowever, maintaining a mo-
nopoly, for they had reduced the amount of the differen-
tial duty from 275. to 145., thus gradually lessening the
So long, lowever,

burden to the people of

As cowry

as their present difficulties continued, the colonial sugar-
grow(-rs could not compete with the slave-grown sugar if
the duties were eoualiv,d.

Mr. CARDWEI.L depended Sir G. Clerk from the sar-
casms of Mr. Villiers, and replied at considerable length
to the observations of that gentleman. It was well enough
••-•-• _
to th

if it were so, who had authorized the existence of slavery
in those islands? And if the supply of sugar had fallen
off after the abolition of slavery, who bad caused that abo-
lition? lie•enact slavery, license the importation of slaves,
and give to the West India proprietors the economy of
their own advantages to compete with Brazils and Cuba.
You would thus put them in the same situation in which
they were before you deprived them of their advantages,
and when they would gladly repay you the millions which
you gave them as a compensation for tlieir slaves. If the
house should determine to get rid of these discriminating
duties, it would be stimulating slavery with one hand,
whilst it was putting it down by our cruisers with the
other. If they pursued such a system, they would never
get a permanent arrangement of the sugar duties.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was desirous of
reserving his observations on the sugar duties until the
discussion should come more fully before the house, upon
the motion of which Lord John Russell had given notice.
He was too unwell to enable him to do so upon that oc-
casion.

Lord SANDON pointed out the gross error into which he
contended Mr. Gibson and the other free-trade members
bad fallen in their calculAtions of the loss sustained by the
British public, in consequence of the differential duty.
Mr. Gibson's amendment was negatived by a majority
of 211 to 84.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TUESDAY.
Sir R. INGLIS, in moving for the production of certain
papers relative to Sierra Leone and the Mauririns, said,
that his object was to call the attention of parliament to
the case of slaves captured in foreign slave ships and trans-
ferred by our cruisers to Sierra Leone and other places,
where they were adjudicated on by the mixed commission.
He wished the government to reconsider the proclamation
issued with respect to such slaves on the 12th of June last
by the governor of Sierra Leone. On that day, on the
autliorAy of a despatch from the Colonial-office, the go-
vernor called on ail liberated negroes, immediately after
they had been adjudicated upon, to decide at once whether
they would remain in the colony or migrate to the West
Indies. Now, it was a perfect mockery to offer such an
option to negroes in such a situation, homeless, homeless,
and helpless. The liberated slaves were told at the same
time that they must provide for themselves, as all allow-
ance to them would cease, except that of clothing and
food, which would be continued to them during their ad-
judication and up to the time at which an opportunity
was offered to them for migrating to the West Indies.
This proclamation was found too stringent, as it included
children as well as adults; and the governor withheld the
application of it from all children under nine years of age,
whom he kept at his own expense. lie expected to hear
that this was only following out the recommendation of a
committee of the House of Commons in 1842, of which
be was a member; and that as upwards of 52,000 negroes
had been liberated and provided for at Sierra Leone, the
question was, whether we should keep them there, at a
great expense, or remove them thence, at a profit to them
and ourselves, to the West Indies. He asked, in reply.
whether there was not at present at Sierra Leone an ex-
cess of revenue above the expenditure of that colony.
Mr. G. W. Hope said the proclamation was in the na-
ture of a notice to the negroes, but still left in the gover-
nor a discretion to act as circumstances might seem to
require. He would not oppose the production of the
papers moved for, but contended that the regulations
were framed with a proper consideration for the welfare
of the negro. In Sierra Leone labour was scarce, civi-
lization was at a low ebb, and the disproportion of the
sexes was greater than in the West Indies. The emigra-
tion, therefore, was advantageous to all parties, and
every care was taken to ensure the comfort of the emi-
grants. From accounts received only that morning, it
appeared that no Africans had been imported under the
bounty system into the Mauritius, and no encouragement
therefore could have been given to the slave-trade.—Mr.
Aglionby mentioned a report which he had heard,that
the Church Missionary Society was much deceived by the
agents to whom they had intrusted the management of
their affairs not only in Serra Leone, but also elsewhere.
Was Mr. Hope aware that the secretary of that society
had been recently engaged in writing circular letters to
the influential constituents of the members cf several
boroughs, for the purpose of inducing- them to engage
their representatives to oppose the recenarnendation of a
committee of that house on New Zealand?—Mr Hope
bad not alluded to the church misionaries ill his speech,
and would therefore decline to answer Mr. Aglioaby's
observations on the subject of Ne-.v Zealand.