The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-03-04 00:00:00

ZAST INDIA SVGAR.

Mr. IVHITMORE presented a petition from the East
India Merchants, praying an equalization of the Duties
on East and West India Sugars. The Hon. Member
stated that when the additional duty of five shillings was
laid upon East India sugars last year, the then Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer pledged himself •to grant a Com•
mittee to take the whole question of the equalization of
the duties on both sugars into their consideration early
this Session. He wished to know 'whether the Right
Hon. lientlensan now in office, was.disposed to redeem
this pledge?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
he was no party to the pledge given by his predecessor
last year, but his understanding of that pledge was,
that as the new duties then imposed were to he continued
only for one year, no addition to them was to be made
without taking the sense of a Committee of the House
npon the subject. Ile did not understand, however, that
a pledge was given to go into the whole question, or that
any prospect was held out that the dutets on both sugars
would be equalized.
Mr. HUME asserted that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had given such a pledge as that alluded to by the
Honourable Member. Upon the proposition ofimposing
five shillings additional duty on East India sugars, the
greatest difference of opinion prevailed, and the house
were about to divide upon the.question. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer, however, silenced all opposition, by
stating that it was intended to continue the duties only
for one year, and that early this Session a Committee
would be appointed to take the duties into their con-
sideration.

Mr. FORBES said that bis recollection of the pledge
given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, agreed with
that of the Honourable Member who spoke last. The
qnestion was not whether the East India or West India
sugars should be preferred, but whether the people of
England were to have their sugars upon the most reason-
able terms.—(Hear.)
Mr. LUSIIINUTON had no recollection of such a
pledge as that alluded to, being held out by the late Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. If he remembered rightly, the
question then was, as to whether East India sugars were
to be registered as clayed or otherwise. that question was
decided at the time.

Mr. W. SMITH and Mr. BUXTON stated that their
impression was, that the whole of the duties were to be
gone into in a Committee this Session.
Mr. BARING said that whatever interests were in•
jored, whether East or %Vest Indian, the sooner an in-
quiry was had, and redress given, the better. It was an
important question, and he wished to see it entrusted
to a Committee. He was also of (Onion that if a
a Conunittee was to be appointed, no time should be•
lust.

Mr. ROBERTSON said a few words to the same
purpose.
Mr. ELLIS thought that the absence of any intimation
to the West India Merchants, was a proof that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had not given such a pledge as
was alluded to.
Mr. BENNET said the fact of these duties passing the
House witoont his or his Honourable Friend (sir. Hume)
making at least a srech, even at two o'clock in the
morning, upon them, was the best proof that such a
pledge had been given.—(A laugh )
Mr. MARRYATT thought the want of recollection in
the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. Lushing'on), as well
las the absence of all intimation to the West India Mer-
chants on the subject, proved that the late' Chancellor of
the Exchequer had no intention of equalizing the duties
on East and West India Sugars.
•
The petition was then read.
Mr. WHITMORE then gave notice that on Wednes-

day, the 19th, he would move for a Committee of the
whole House to consider the propriety of an equalization
of the duties on East and West India Sugars.—(Hear.)

A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE 31ACISTRATBS.

Lord A. HAMILTON presented a petition from two
labourers named George and Alexander Young, com-
plaining. of an infringement of their pervonal liberty, oc-
casioned by some acts of the Magistrates of Inverness.
The LORD ADVOCATE said he was not acquainted
with the facts of the petition, but would inquire between
that and the day when the Noble Lord would bring for-
ward a motion on the subject.
Lord A. HAMILTON asked if it was intended to
bring in a 101 l respecting the Scotch Jur►es, similar to
that o hick failed in the tact Session ?
The LORD A &OVATE said it was not his intention
to propose any sneb measure. •
Lord A. .HMI urozi said be would bring forward
his motion on the 24th March.

The petition was laid on the table and ordered to be
printed.
Col. DAVIES gave notice that be would on Wednes-
day present a petition from a military officer of the name
of Allen, in %%hose ci'!e several gentlemen present were
interested.
COM/dITTEE OP TOE WNOLB HOUSR.—SINKING FUND.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER the house resolved itself into a Committee on
the Na lona Debt Reduction Acts.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—As his
object was to propose a series of Resolutions for the pur-
pose of carrying into effect a recommendation 9f the