Debates an Vrocerbinas in parliament.

THE BUDGET RESOLUTIONS.

The debate in the House of Commons on the motion to go into a Committee of the whole House to consider the first of Mr. Baring's Budget resolutions, that for the reduction of the duty on Foreign Sugar, and Lord Sandon's amendment against the motion, has been continued throughout the week.

Want of time and space prevented our doing justice to the first night's debate, really the most interesting, in the Postscript of our last number; and now, before proceeding with the subsequent nights, we supply a few of the more salient points from the speeches of that night, beginning with the opening speech, Lord Josue RUSSELL'S. He thus described the effect of emancipation on the Negroes— Throughout Jamaica, the great object of ambition with the peasantry was to possess cottages and gardens of their own. The means of obtaining this object of course varied with the condition of the tenantry on the different estates. He had desired the Governor of Jamaica, Sir Charles Metcalfe, to give him an account of the numbers of persons who had acquired freeholds within a certain time. The number of freeholders assessed at 40s. was, in 1838, 2,014; and in 1840, 7,848; being an increase of upwards of 5,800. Nothing could be more encouraging than to see that the people to whom we had granted this great boon were not:only sensible of its value, but were doing their utmost to im- prove their condition in every way, and thereby become better able to exercise the privileges `of freemen. In Barbados, many bad acquired cottages, and worked besidris under a verbal agreement eight or nine hours a day. In An- tigua, earions) independent tenures had been created, and many who possessed property of 'their own at the same time engaged themselves as labourers to others. Guiana, there had been some very extraordinary instances of pur- chases of land by Negroes : in one case, as much as 20,000/. had been given BAs estate by a number of Negroes, who joined for the purpose of buying it. As mach as 4s. 6d. a day could be earned, without any very great exertion, by the younger Negroes in that colony. Another statement was made in a letter by Mr. Chandler, a member of the Society of Friends: in Jamaica, he stated there were 90,000 persons working seven hours a day for six days in the week, at Is. 6d. a day ; schools were established amongst them, which the juvenile population were at full liberty to attend ; the Sabbath was entirely at their own disposal, and they had built chapels for their own use, and generally at their own coat ; marriage was now considered by them to be an honourable rite, and altogether their moral improvement was very considerable. Although he rejoiced in the termination of slavery, and in the comfortable condition of the population of the West Indies, he did not think it incumbent upon them to enforce the production of sugar ; which appeared to him not necessary for the comfort of the people of Jamaica, while at the same time it would expose to severe privations the people of this country. Enough had been done for the Negro : now let the regard of philan- thropy be turned to the poor weaver of Bolton and Manchester-

" I will now give you a statement of another kind, that of a gentleman of good authority, relating to the state of the labouring population in Bolton.

• In the cotton-mills alone, about 95,000/. less have been paid during the last twelve months. Many of the mills have been entirely stopped for all or part of the time, and with only two exceptions, all have worked short time for a considerable portion of the past year. I have made a very careful calculation from extensive personal inquiry, and assert most confidently, that altogether there must have been at least 130,0001. less paid in wages in the Bolton Union. Now, add this 130,0001. less in wages to the 195,000/. more for food, and there is a total loss to Bolton of 325,000/. What are the consequences 2—There are now in Bolton 1,125 houses untenanted, of which about tifty are shops, some of them in the principal streets. Here is a loss to the owners of 10,0001. to 12,0001. a year. The shopkeepers are almost ruined by diminished returns and bad debts. There were a short time ago three sales of the effects of shop- keepers in one day. Distraints for cottage-rents occur daily. The arrears of cottage-rents and the debts to shopkeepers are incalculable; but they amount to many thousand pounds. The pawnbrokers' shops are stowed full of the clothing, furniture, and even bedding of the destitute poor. Fever is also pre- valent. • • • A short time ago, 590 persons were relieved by the Poor-law Guardians in one day, in amounts varying from six to eighteenpence per head per week. In many cases two or three families are crowded into one house. In one case, seventeen persons were found in a dwelling about five yards square; in another, eight persons, two pair of looms, and two beds, in a cellar six feet underground, and measuring four yards by five. There are scores of families with little or no bedding, having literally eaten it, i. e. pawned or sold it for food. [The extract then enumerated four mills in the neigh- bourhood of Bolton, upon which thousands depended fur subsistence, all standing idle.] Several machine-makers and engineers arc now employing one or two hundred hands less than usual, at wages varying from 15e. to 40s. a week. A public subscription, amounting to nearly 2,0001., has just been raised to mitigate, in some degree, the sufferings of the destitute poor? There are other similar accounts from Manchester and other manufacturing towns, from which it appears that generally work is falling off, and the people with diffi- culty obtain wages sufficient to support life ; and that bad as the present state of things is, there are still apprehensions that they may get much worse." Lord John would not permit monopoly either in the East or West Indies— It was said that although there might not be a sufficient supply from the West Indies, yet that in the East there was rising a vast cultivation of sugar ; that great capital had been sent there for the purpose of securing a supply to be sent to this country. It was very possible, if they chose by their restric- tions so to order it, that in the course of a few years the sugar-plantations in the West Indies might find their produce ousted, not by the competition of foreign sugar at 36e. per hundredweight duty, but by the competition of East Indian sugar with a duty of 24s. per hundredweight, and with a freight very little elan • the West Indian freight. But then they would have created a new

and exorlitant monopoly—not a monopoly extending over the West Indies, which Parliament might overrule, but a monopoly in the East Indies removed

from the control of this country. And if sugar were furnished from the

East Indies, new questions would arise—in respect, for instance, of those labourers in India who received but three halfpence a day, and who, when transferred to Demerara, would not work unless compelled to do so—questions would arise how far they should interfere, not with the simple system of slavery, as in the West Indies, but with the whole complicated relations of society in

the East Indies, and how far they would be justified in giving advantages to the East Indies against the free labourers of the West Indies. Therefore, whatever might be the consequences, he should fear any permanent legislation which contemplated that India, and India alone, was to furnish the whole supplies of this country. Lord SaNnoN showed the needlessness of the measure, in the pros- pect of abundant supplies of sugar for the coming year— He bad formed an estimate on the subject. The stock in hand on the 1st January 1841 was understood to have been about 35,000 tons ; and the gentlemen connected with the West Indies estimated their year's pro- duction to be 115,000 tons. From the Mauritius there had been shipped, up to the 25th January, 20,000 tons ; and 20,000 more were waiting for shipment. From the East Indies 50,000 tons had already arrived in this country of last year's crops, and there was every reason to expect some 20,000 more. This was not a vague estimate; and the whole of the sums added together produced a total of about 260,000 tons of sugar, which was a larger amount by 60,000 tons than this country usually consumed in the course of one year. He therefore did not understand what great bounty would be given by the reduction of the Sugar-duties to the starving weavers of Bolton, which should override every other consideration, and induce the House to give up every chance of the success of that great measure of emancipation for which this country had consented to sacrifice so much treasure.

How British manufacturers were concerned in the question— What were the exports of our manufactures to the East and West Indies ? How had the export of our manufactures increased on the one hand, when dealing with a free population and a sugar-growing population, and with a slave- colony on the other? With regard to the East Indies, its sugar was placed on an equality with the West India sugar in 1836: in the following year the ex- ports thither of British manufactured goods amounted to 3,600,000/. ; in 1838, to 3,870,000/. ; in 1839, to 4,740,000/. He had no account of the exports of last year, no return being in the hands of Members ; but he knew that the ex- ports of British manufactures to the East Indies from the port of Liverpool alone last year amounted to 4,360,0001., within a trifle of the whole amount shipped the preceding year from the United Kingdom. What had been the state of our intercourse with the West India Colonies since the perfect free- dom of the slaves ? The result had been, that in 1837 we had exported thither British goods to the value of 3,456,0001.; in 1838, to the value of 3,393,000/. ; and in 1839, 3,986,000/. worth of British goods had been exported to our emancipated West India colonies. This showed the advantage of our manufacturers dealing with freemen instead of with slaves. * * • They were speaking of a trade that involved the interests of our manufacturers to the extent in 1839 of 9,000,000/. And what was the value of the trade with Brazil? In comparison with that of the East and West Indies, it was as nothing. The amount of her exports was 2,600,000/. ; and he might add 300,0001. or 400,000L for Cuba, making it about 3,000,0001.

Mr. Hose charged the Government with breach of faith to the East Indies— He for one had hailed with gratitude the measure conceded to the East India by Mr. Labouchere. The East India Company and the East Indies acknow- ledged with gratitude the concessions of Government for many years past is that part of the empire. In 1836 the Sugar-duties were equalized. It was not more than a few weeks ago that a discussion had taken place on the rum- duties ; and if Mr. Labouchere then had it in his mind to introduce this mea- sure, he was bound in official duty to have given some intimation of it to the House ; otherwise he was grossly misleading the public. In the expectation of the equalization of these duties, capital to an immense amount had gone out to India, and manufactures, to get returns in sugar ; and now, when the expense was incurred, Mr. Labouchere not only marred all the good he had done, but it appeared that he had had in his mind, from the very first, the measure which he had now introduced.

The effects of the competition with Brazil and Cuba— He believed that this country would be inundated with sugar at a protecting. duty of 36s. (Land cries of " Hear r from the Ministerial benches.) Yes, he believed it would. He did not stand there to pretend that in opposing slave- labour sugar he should not enhance the price of sugar. If slave-labour sugar were introduced, he believed that the West Indies never, nor the East Indies for a long time, could compete with it. To show the House the extra- ordinary power of production of Cuba sugar, that island produced one-fourth of the production of the world; and it was an astounding fact, that twenty years ago Cuba imported sugar for her own consumption. • • • Mr. Cock- shott, who was examined before the Import-duties Committee, in showing the price at which sugar might be laid in at Brazil, said that he had then at Fal- mouth a cargo of 265 tons of sugar from Pernambuco, and that if allowed to land it in this country, paying the same duty as British Plantation sugar, the result would be that the consumer would have it 36s. a hundredweight cheaper than the British sugar ; while he himself would have by it a fair re- munerating profit. Mr. al4Queen, a gentleman who had been examined before the Committee of which Mr. Hogg was a member, stated that one acre of sugar in Cuba produced as much as six of the most fruitful acres in the East Indies: Dr. LGSHINGTON'S summary of his reasons for opposing the Govern- ment measure— He would state simply and strongly the grounds upon which be meant to vote, laying aside all party considerations—though he was as much attached to his party, he apprehended, as any living man—mindful of their conduct with respect to these great questions in former times. First, he opposed the Govern- ment upon this question because it gave a stimulus to the slave-trade; secondly, because it would augment the misery of the existing state of slavery ; thirdly, be- cause he thought it unjust to the West Indies ; fourthly, because he thought it deleterious to the happiness of the emancipated population ; fifthly, because he did not think it prudent with reference to the East Indies ; and lastly, be- cause he believed that there existed no necessity whatever for taking the pre- sent course. Leaving out of consideration the stock of sugar on hand, which amounted to about 35,000 tons, they had almost a moral certainty that they- had a right to expect at least 205,000 tons in the course of the year 1841. A bit from Dr. Lnshington's peroration— He declared that he was not insensible to the wants of the poor of this country, and he was ready to do every thing in his power to mitigate the evils under which they laboured ; and assuredly the descriptions of their misery given by the noble lord were much calculated to excite the public upon the sub- ject ; but if he were to attempt to contrast their condition with the come• quences which might arise from inducing foreign states to increase slave- labour, the picture would be too horrible for contemplation. At the same time, he believed, that if the question were put to the working-classes of this et/unity, whether they would take sugar, if cheapened in the manner sug- gested—that sugar being the product of slave-labour, and producing fresh cala- mities by the importation of new slaves—be believed that the great majority even of those who suffered by the want of that article would be content to re- ject it. He had such a knowledge of the feelings and sentiments of the people upon this subject, that he believed they would, on these terms, rather have their dinner of herbs than the stalled ox.

Before the debate was resumed on Monday, petitions were presented against the change in the Timber-duties, from the timber-merchants

and shipowners of Dublin ; against the change in the Sugar-duties, from the East India Association of Glasgow ; for the change, from the Brazil merchants of London, and from some places in the country ; for repeal of the Corn-laws, from Edinburgh, with 27,000 signatures, and from several other places. Mr. EWART then reopened the debate ; deprecating the monstrous cry of " Protection I protection ! protection !" He urged the import-

ance of reducing the Sugar-duties for the sake of temperance. Twenty-

five years ago, there were in London but ten coffeehouses for the sole purpose of selling coffee; now there are 1,800. Mr. HEATHCOTE

would sooner have no duty at all on corn than a fixed duty of 8s. ; and

he condemned the other reduction proposed as ill-timed. Mr. LASCELLES denounced " this new bone of contention thrown among the constitu-

encies ": Ministers were not in a position to conduct any practical legislation on the subject ; they must look to their successors for that. With respect to the principle of their proposition, be entirely concurred in it : they might safely relax all restrictions on trade. But the reduc- tion of the duty on Colonial produce should have preceded that of the duties on Foreign produce.

Mr. GROTE gave his unqualified approbation to the mode in which Ministers proposed to meet the financial difficulties of the country, so far as their measures went. He would legislate on the principle of pro- ducing the greatest revenue with the least enhancement of price to the consumer. He thought, indeed, that corn should be free ; but the fixed

ditty would keep the trade steadier, and would not admit of such ex- orbitant rises in the price of bread as the present scale. It bad been contended in favour of admitting East India sugar, that the great cheapness would benefit the poor : now, however, an argument used by Mr. Hogg against admitting Foreign sugar was that Cuba was so fertile as to raise six times the amount of produce from one acre that an acre of the East Indies could produce : but why is the cheap- ness of sugar a misfortune when it comes from Cuba, a blessing from the East Indies ? Mr. Grote pointed out another inconsistency used on the same side-

" First they treat the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as one which threatens the Colonies with ruin by the extensive consumption which it will occasion of foreign slave-grown sugar. Next they take the pre- sent price of Colonial sugar and of Foreign sugar, at the proposed rates of duty, and they make out that the fall of price will be so insignificant as to yield no additional revenue worth mentioning to the Exchequer. Either of these two arguments may stand singly, but they cannot both stand together."

Mr. Grote replied to the Anti-Slavery arguments-

" When in former years the mischiefs of slavery as it existed in our own islands were forcibly exposed, the conclusions deduced were natural and legiti-

mate, and worthy of the premises laid for them. Parliament said, 'Here is a great evil existing, let us interfere and put it down.' The generous exertions of those who exposed the evil were rewarded with their proper result—a direct

and effective intervention for the purpose of putting down the evil. But when

gentlemen denounce the practice of slavery as it exists in Cubs, in Brazil, or in other foreign countries, what are the practical conclusions which they de- duce from their doctrine ? Do they propose that we should formally require the Governments of those countries to abrogate slavery, and that, in the event of refusal, we should fit out armaments to enforce compliance? No person has

ever started such a proposition. Do they propose to declare all the products of slave labour tainted, and to forbid them as abominations of which it is not permitted under any circumstances to partake, just as certain descriptions of food are peremptorily interdicted in many countries by religious precept ? Sir, I do not find that any person proposes this. But, Sir, unless gentlemen are prepared to maintain this proposition, they abandon the moral ground of the question ; they can no longer take their stand upon the dignity of a moral and conscientious scruple : they cannot be allowed to reason upon the moral view of the question up to a certain point, and then to turn their backs upon it

when they find inconveniences thickening around them : they cannot be al- lowed to rate the stain arising from slave manipulation at some fixed sum, such

as one penny or twopence per pound, and nothing more. So long as gentle- men encourage the introduction of slave-grown cotton and slave-grown tobacco, I ray that 1 am only following their example when I treat this question as one of prudence and public convenience, and not of any peremptory moral obliga tiOn." Had the exclusive system checked the spread of slavery, Mr. Grote asked, in Cuba and Brazil ?

The real question- " The question now before us in regard to the Sugar-duties is, not whether the principle of protection to the Colonial producer shell be abandoned, but

whether that system of protection can, with any show of justice or respect to the great body of consumers, be carried beyond a differential duty of 50 per cent. Can you with any reason require the consumer to pay more than this

difference ? considering that he pays it, not for the benefit of the state, but for

the benefit of certain other private interests—that is, for the benefit of certain other private individuals not at all better entitled to the protection and favour of the Legislature than he is himself. There arc millions of persons of both

sexes in these realms to whom the difference in the price of sugar is most sen- sibly felt in their morning and evening meals. Is it fair or reasonable to draw

from each of these persons a sum of money for the avowed purpose of protecting the private interest of individuals engaged in a particular trade greater than is represented by a differential duty of 50 per cent. ? Would this be equitable

or prudent dealing ? Sir, this is a strong case, but it is not all. Would it be fairer reasonable, in order that you may retain a differential duty of more than 100 per cent. upon sugar, to proceed to impose fresh additional burdens upon

these purchasers in other ways, over and above the fictitious price which they

are forced to pay for their sugar ? In the present state of the revenue, new funds must be provided by some means or another, and the question is, are you to resort to new taxes and new burdens for the purpose of upholding a differ- ential duty of more than 100 per cent. in favour of Colonial sugar ? This is the real question."

The question as it concerns the Colonies—.

" The question still remains, Can the East Indies and the Weat Indies supply the consumption of sugar to this country, being favoured in the rate of duty, as compared with all other sugars, in the proportion of 24s. to 36s. per hun- dredweight ? If they can, they will still maintain the exclusive supply. If they cannot, can they with any colour of reason talk of being able to supply sugar

at a low price, when the price of foreign sugar is by their own admission so very much lower? The aggregate consumption of sugar last year was some-

thing rather above 180,000 tons, equal to near 400,000,000 pounds weight. One penny per pound upon 400,000,000 pounds is equal to 1,600,000/. sterling. All this is a tax paid by the country in addition to the large sum which finds its way to the coffers of the state, for the simple purpose of protection and the artificial enhancement of price."

Mr. COLQUROUN rested on the argument that the reduction ought not to take place pending the experiment of Emancipation— Much stress had been laid on the evidence taken before the Import-duties Committee, as supporting the present measure ; but he found that Mr. Porter, Mr. M'Gregor, and Mr. J. D. Hume, were all united in opinion that it would be inexpedient to reduce the duty on sugar so long as the great experiment of Emancipation was proceeding in the West Indies. These gentlemen were of opinion that the principle of free trade was not applicable to the West Indian colonies in their present situation, and that they ought to be excluded entirely from the category of free trade. The first essay of the noble lord, therefore, in free trade, was to do that which every practical witness before the Com- mittee had declared to be absurd and preposterous.

Mr. GREG supported the Government measure ; and declared on the part of the manufacturing interest, that they were willing to give up all protection. Mr. WALTER doubted the possibility of lowering the prices and at the same time increasing the revenue, or he would gladly support such a proposition. He was friendly to a change of the Corn-laws ; but the amount of duty which he should support would depend in a great degree upon what he saw done with the Poor-law BilL Lord FRANCIS EGERTON repeated several of the arguments which had already been used against the Government scheme.

Mr. LABOUCHERE then entered upon the question at very great length. He replied to the taunt that the Whigs had been able to effect no commercial reforms, by instancing the Timber-duties, which they had offered to change ; but the proposal had been thrown to the ground by a counter-proposition to refer it to a Committee up stairs. Mr. Hus- kissou had been able to carry out financial reforms, with the sullen acquiescence of his party, and the Whigs had supported him ; but against similar efforts of the Whigs every faction and private interest was arrayed. However anxious as a party-man to retain those of his own opinions in power, Mr. Labouchere pledged himself to support the reforms now proposed if brought forward by his political opponents. He devoted a considerable portion of his speech to showing, that from himself and Mr. Poulett Thomson the West Indians had had ample warning of the approaching necessity of some change in the Sugar- duties, especially in reference to the expiring treaty with Brazil. He then entered into details to prove that the extent of the consumption of sugar depended in a great degree upon the price : but it also de- pended upon the price of another article— In 1830 the average price of sugar was 25s.; the average quantity con- sumed by each individual in the United Kingdom was 201b. per head. In 1831 the average price was 28s. 8d.; the average consumption fell to 1916. per head. In 1833 the average price was 29s.; the average consumption was 17191b. In 1834 the average price was 29s. 21d.; the consumption was 18.311b. In 1835, which was a year affording a remarkable exception to the general rule, the price was 33s. 9d. ; and the increase in consumption was very considerable, the average being 19.211b. per head. That was an exception to the general rule; but what were the causes of it ? The year 1835 was u year of remark- ably cheap bread. The price of bread was a very disturbing cause to reduce the demand for any article not of primary necessity to the working-classes ; and at that time the working-classes were extremely well off, able to spend more than usual in articles of this nature. In the year 1836 the average price rose to 40s. Pd.; the average consumption fell to 16-581b. per head. In 1837 the price fell to 348. 5d.; the consumption increased to 18-381b. In 1838 the con- sumption was much about the same, the price being 33s. 7d.; and the con- sumption was 18-421b. In 1839 the price was 39s. 4id. • the consumption 17113. In 1840 the price was higher than ever, being 48s. 7ict.; and he begged the attention of the House to the fact that the consumption per head throughout the United Kingdom fell to 15-28lb. Upon the whole, if they compared the first year of the period he had taken with the last, they would find that the consumption of sugar per head throughout the United Kingdom had fallen very nearly one-fourth. Mr. Labouchere quoted a variety of figures, given in by different persons, to show how little trustworthy were any estimates as to the probable amount of Colonial sugar to be produced in the coming year. He also wished to check overtrading- The variations were considerable; but there could be no doubt of this general fact, that a very great supply was coming from the East Indies. He was in- duced by this very circumstance to come to the conclusion that it was impor- tant to revise the Sugar-duties and put them on a sound and wise footing. If no other consideration could have induced hhn, he would have been induced by the manner in which capital had been attracted by the extravagant prices of last year and was now rushing into the East Indies; because he was per- fectly satisfied that such a state of things must lead to the worst results for those who embarked their capital in such speculations. It was also perilous to the consumer in this country : the nature of the sugar supply from the East Indies was this—it was itself a great sugar-consuming country, and only sent us what it could not use itself: they had been attracted to send their sugar to England by the known deficiency in the British supply; but when the prices fell here, the supply from India was at once cut off. He then went on to combat the Anti-Slavery arguments: instancing Brazil, he said, take what you would in payment for British exports, it must be slave produce ; and why not sugar as well as any thing else ? and the growing importance of the Brazil trade, the immense resources of that country, its vast rivers, upon which steam had just been intro- duced, and the irritation of the Brazilian Legislature at our restrictive systems, were all grounds for paying careful and conciliatory attention to the subject. To show, however, that Government had not neglected the important object of suppressing the slave-trade, he said that they had made it a condition of their entering into a late treaty with the state of Texas that the right of search should be allowed by that state to our cruisers. His anxiety in this debate arose not so much from the immediate subject of it, as from the still larger considerations which the discussion involved. He knew the great resources of this country, but she had come to the verge of a great commercial revolution exten- sive reforms must be made ; and it was impossible to move in any direction without disturbing some protective duty or other. Last year our exports had materially decreased, and it was of the greatest im- portance to revive them by a measure which would have the effect of making England the great entrepot of the sugars of the world. Though the House should now refuse to go into these questions, they would not be set at rest. The people would not be content to continue the system 0 favouring particular classes. Mr. Wrixism GL&DSTONE opposed the plan of reducing the Sugar- duties ; contending that the relief professedly claimed for the weaver of Bolton and Manchester would be trifling, while the injury to the Colo- nies would be destructive— Mr. M'Gregor stated before the Import-duties Committee, with great good sense, that if they wanted to relieve the poor consumer of sugar who purchased but half a pound or a quarter of a pound at a time, it was vain to attempt it by any reduction in the price which should amount to less upon the whole than one penny in the pound. But what became of this miserable Is. 6d. by which the price of sugar would be reduced under the proposed measure, when he in- formed the House that, according to the last Gazette, a further reduction had taken place in the price of British sugar, and that, instead of 37s. 6d., it was at this moment but 36s. a hundredweight ; so that the Is. Gd. which the noble lord promised to the weaver of Bolton was already completely disposed of? Mr. Labouchere laughed at the estimates of the future produce of the colony : how did he know that his new Sugar-duties would produce him 700,000/ ? But even the lowest estimate gave quite sufficient for a year's consumption. Mr. Gladstone explained why the supply of sugar from the East Indies would be more permanent than Mr. Labouchere al- lowed— What British India wanted above all things, was the means of remittance homewards of 4,000,0001. annually, which must find its way to this country; and the sugar-trade supplied that medium in the most convenient form. There was, therefore, every motive that could be combined together in such a case to insure us a permanent supply of sugar from the East Indies.

Why humanity was concerned especially in discouraging the em- ployment of slave-labour in sugar-making--

Free labour might produce coffee, but not so with respect to sugar. Coffee might be cultivated by women or by children, but the cultivation of sugar re- pored the best efforts of the full-grown man. When Hayti became free, she left off the cultivation of sugar and adopted that of coffee. Sugar demanded the masculine vigour of the adult, and thus was the great temptation presented to the man-stealer. It was on sugar that the slave-trade depended for its ex- istence. Slavery had been got rid of with respect to coffee, and if not encou- raged with regard to sugar it must of necessity die a natural death.

When Mr. Gladstone sat down the debate was again adjourned.

The debate was opened on Tuesday by Mr. MACAULAY ; called forth by a remark of Mr. Gladstone, which imputed some derelic- tion of principle to the son of Zachary Macaulay, the unostentatious coadjutor of Wilberforce, in colleaguing to encourage the employment of slaves. Mr. Macaulay was at a loss to understand what principle his colleagues had relinquished ; and he combated the charge by re- ducing Mr. Gladstone's position ad absurdum; showing the incon- sistency and nullity of the humanity which would admit slave-grown cotton but not slave-grown sugar. or slave-grown sugar itself in New- foundland bat not in England. He denied the inconsistency of giving 20,000,0001. to get rid of a great moral evil in a country under our im- mediate control, though we could not legislate for foreign states.

Sir GEORGE CLERK asked, why then did Mr. Macaulay support the expeditions to Africa for the suppression of the foreign slave-trade ? Admitting the abstract principles of free trade, Sir George denied their practical applicability in rigid perfection ; just as the incontestable prin- ciples of pneumatics might fail to produce certain results, from disturb- ing causes in the mechanical application. He reintroduced the argu- ment, that with the prospect of more than a sufficient supply of sugar this year, the reOxportation of the overplus to foreign markets, where it would meet the competition of foreign sugar and be lowered in price, would keep down the price in this country to a reasonable amount. The deficiency in the revenue made it a very improper time for experi- ments in reducing duties ; a lesson which Ministers might have learned from the reduction of the postage.

Mr. WARD sarcastically remarked on the fanaticism of humanity, which was enabled to effect an alliance for the protection of the Sugar- duties that could not be mustered in behalf of the Corn-law or the Tim- ber-duties ; and he warned Lord Sandon against the danger of taking re- ligion for an ally in matters of political economy. The country is taxed to the extent of its powers : the failure of the Chancellor of the Ex- chequer, last year, to obtain more revenue by an increase of taxation, proved that it was necessary to take some other course ; and the only way was to relieve the tax-paying powers of the country of some part of that hidden taxation which it pays in the shape of protective duties. Sir ROBERT INGLIS wished that the parenthetical sentence in Lord Sandon's resolution, about the prospect of a supply of sugar, had been omitted : he would rather have had the Ministerial proposition opposed apart from any party considerations, solely on the ground of the encou- ragement which it tended to afford to slavery. Sir Robert was struck with admiration at Sir Stephen Lushington's conduct : he had never seen so great a sacrifice to consistency, for the thirty years that he had laboured in the cause.

Mr. CHARLES WOOD repeated at great length several of the argu- ments already used in support of Government. Mr. GOULEURN reminded the House, that this was the year in which the slave-apprenticeship had been originally destined to cease. What, he asked, would have been the feeling of the House if Lord Stanley, on the day when he introduced that measure, had proposed that in the moment when that apprenticeship should terminate the slave-trade should be let loose with unlimited licence ? He did not now deny the exigency of our finances ; but he denied that Ministers had pointed out in what way their proposals would redress that exigency. It had been asked how the Conservatives would supply the defalcation : the an- swer was, by letting things alone—by letting Colonial and East Indian sugar come in as it was now disposed to come.

Sir GEORGE GREY congratulated the House, that at last, after three nights of reserve as to the plan of finance contemplated by the Con- servatives, Mr. Goulburn had disclosed the secret, that their plan was, to let things alone ! Mr. Gladstone's speech took a high tone of mo- rality, but it was to last only while sugar was at 57s. The truth was, that at the bottom of the resistance opposed by the Conservatives to the reduction of duty on foreign sugar, was their repugnance to a reduc- tion of the protection upon corn ; and with them came forward the West Indian body, professing their horror of slavery ! It was said that the objection against admitting slave-grown produce applied only to the case of sugar, which required a severity of toil not requisite for cotton or tobacco : but the people of England would take no such nice distinctions—their objection was broadly and plainly to slavery, in whatever way the labour of the slave might be directed. To ex- elude, however, all produce of slave-labour, would be a chimerical At- tempt. English capital was largely employed in the Brazils, if not to cultivate sugar, yet to maintain banks and to work mines which were wrought by the sinews of African slaves.

Mr. InViNo, who had been alluded to by Sir George Grey as having capital employed in Brazil, opposed the Government measure. He admitted that he was connected with Brazilian mines: so were many other Members of that House, and he wished them joy of the concern : he would willingly allow Sir George Grey to stand in his shoes : if he had, as Sir George phrased it, drawn "blood " from the poor Negro employed in the mines, he at least had drawn no gold from him ! The debate was again adjourned.

The debate was begun on Wednesday by Mr. CHOLMONDELY, who opposed the Government.

Lord HOWICK began by contending against the exclusion of any one species of slave produce in particular. He should admit with hesitation

the mortifying conclusion, that free-labour could not compete with slave labour, and that it could only rest upon the broken reed of mo- nopoly. It had been said that our Colonies were defective in fertility : but were not Demerara and Trinidad more fertile and productive than any other sugar colonies in the world ? He reckoned also much upon the effect of owners cultivating their own estates instead of employing agents ; on new and improved modes of cultivation, with better ma- chinery titan the mere application of brute force as at present, and

proper rotation of crops. In the East Indies, the only thing wanted was the introduction of British capital ; and some had been transferred there already. It was better to leave the free labourer to the stimulus of a fair competition, and to attack the slave-trade in other modes— He was rejoiced to see that the efforts made to put down the slave-trade were acquiring a bolder character. Captain Denman, by destroying one of the depots where slaves were collected previous to embarkation, bad given a blow to the slave-trade from which it would not easily recover. He thought we should he justified in forbidding the African chiefs to take any part in this traffic. We had made war for lighter causes, and for more questionable ob- jects. When they attempted to collect slaves, we ought to land our forces and destroy the depots in which they were collected. The fact was, that the existing monopoly was the very thing which prevented the West Indians from adapting themselves to the altered state of matters : only he would have given them increased facilities for competition— Three years bad now passed since the measure of Emancipation. The imme- diate disturbance of the regulations of the Colonies had now passed over; and now, if ever, was the time for preventing another bad system from taking root. Now was the time for preventing any persons with vested interests from creating a monopoly; now was the time for stimulating our own producers by a fair but not excessive competition. In his opinion, the Government would -have acted wisely if it had proposed a reduction of the duty on Colonial sugar. He would have been inclined to have proposed a reduction of the duty on Co- lonial sugar to the extent of seven or eight shillings, leaving the proportion be- tween the duty on Colonial and Foreign sugar the same as was now proposed by the Government. lf, however, the House should think proper to reduce the duty on Colonial sugar, it could be done in a Committee of Ways and Means.

Lord Howick analyzed the relation betwixt free trade and taxation— Was there any man who did not see that there were nations on the face of the globe able and anxious to sell us many articles of which we had great need ? Could any man doubt that we might obtain Baltic timber, Brazilian sugar, foreign corn, and a vast variety of other articles, if we would only consent to receive them ? And, on the other hand, was there any doubt that if we should admit the produce of other countries, those countries would take in exchange articles the produce of our industry ? That was a proposition so plain and clear, that no man could be found to doubt it. When the wants of our population were urgent, could they refuse to adopt the simple means of relief which were so obviously before them ? If they refused to adopt those means, the only alternative was, the imposition of some heavy tax on the people. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, whoever it might be, mast come down and propose some new tax on the people. Such a proceeding would lead to the shutting up of more houses in Bolton, and would convert a still larger portion of the lowest order of rate-payers into rate-receivers. There was no tax which could be proposed—not even a Property-tax—which would not pro- duce those disastrous effects. A Property-tax would press heavily on the labouring classes, by diminishing the means of the rich to afford employment. He was sure that if the advocates of monopoly would attentively consider the proposition before the House, they would see that it would be for their ad- vantage to adopt it. The landowner would be compensated for having a lower rate of protection on corn, by getting rid of a number of other monopolies which now existed. The same observation applied to other interests. The Canadian timber-merchant and the West Indian proprietor did' not calculate how much they indirectly lost by strengthening other monopolies for the purpose of preserving their own.

Though-now postponed by Sir Robert Peel, like Catholic Emancipa- tion, some such measures as those proposed were inevitable : the proof of it might he found in the House of Commons itself— He remembered, when he was first a Member of the House, no man ventured broadly and fairly to argue on the principle of commercial freedom. Even the great and liberal measures of Mr. Huskisson were carried, to a certain degree, in disguise. That statesman was, in a great degree, compelled to flatter the prejudices and nominally to acquiesce in the doctrines of those whose igno- rance he was well aware of; and whilst his practical measures were all tending towards freedom of trade, the language he used was frequently of a different character. In those days, the advocates of protection and monopoly had the field almost to themselves ; and those who entertained different opinions were treated as the greatest visionaries and enthusiasts, and could scarcely obtain the attention of the House. How changed was now the state of things! how striking the contrast which the present debate presented! Those who came forward in defence of monopoly and protection—even they were ashamed of the cause which they supported. (Cheers.) To judge of men by their professions and not by their acts, it was a House of free-traders. (Cheers and laughter.) There was no division of opinion on the subject. Perfect unanimity prevailed. Every man appeared to be in favour of commercial liberty and free trade. Not an attempt was made to revive the old talk about Great Britain flourishing by means of protection, and of the necessity of keeping up an army of Custom- house-officers to prevent the British soil being polluted by the produce of the industry of foreign nations. Quite the reverse. It was now unanimously acknowledged that commercial freedom was the best thing in the world; only, to be sure, as Mr. Huskisson once happily observed, each interest considered it bad in its own particular case. (Cheers and laughter.) Mr. CHARLES WYNNE exposed the Ministerial change of view on the subject of agitation— He would not repeat the opinion the Prime Minister had expressed last year, as to the insanity of the person who might propose the repeal of the Corn-laws;

but he begged the House to recollect, that the noble viscount expressed the most decided objection to any proposition for reducing the duty on corn, on the ground of the agitation it must produce in the country. Would any man venture to say that there was any reasonable ground for supposing that the agitation resulting from bringing forward such a proposition would be less this year than might have been anticipated last? The Government must have known that their proposition would excite agitation ; and they also knew that it had not the slightest chance of being carried. What, then, was the object of Government in bringing the question forward ?—Simply to get up a cry out of doors; in which he was happy to say they had altogether failed.

Mr. WILLIAM Evezni supported the Government. They were op- posed by Lord WORSLEY ; who turned the discussion on the Corn-laws; reading extracts from evidence before the Import-duties Committee, to show that Baltic corn would take the place of British in the market, and before the Committee on Agricultural Distress, to show the inju- rious effects which that importation would have.

Sir ALEXANDER GRANT returned to the Sugar question ; insisting upon the impossibility of a successful competition between the West Indies and slave countries. He explained the trifling amount of the compen- sation with which the West Indians had been taunted— Before the Emancipation Act, the West India proprietor, rightfully or wrongfully, was possessed of his slaves by the laws of the land : he had a free- hold in them ; they were subjected to the same laws as landed property, and they descended in the same way—(Ironical cries of " Hear !")—he defied them to deny it—(" Hear !")—and they were made the subject of settlements and of mortgage—(Increased cries of " Hear, hear!") He understood those cheers. lie was not defending the system, but was only stating the case. (" Hear, hear !") If they interfered with private rights, they were bound to compensate the parties for any damage sustained. Take the case where, for the purpose of opening a thoroughfare, they find it necessary to destroy cer- tain streets. They could not do so without granting the value of the property to private individuals ; not the value which they might put on it, but the value appraised by an indifferent party. The value of the slaves in the West Indies had been made by officers under the Colonial Government. Was that appraise- ment twenty millions ? No; if his memory did not deceive him, it was three times twenty millions. Was it to be supposed that the West India proprietors would have acquiesced in the grant of twenty millions had they foreseen that the consequences would have been the destruction altogether of the property they possessed ? On a moderate calculation, West India property of the value of not less than 150,000,0001. had been interfered with. Where, then, was the extraordinary munificence of the grant which had been so tauntingly alluded to ?

Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, an Anti-Slavery agitator in Ireland, would oppose Lord Sandon's amendment, in favour of the resolution which his father was about to propose. Sir JOHN HEM, addressing Ministers for the last time "in their official capacity," read them a lecture, "as an old merchant," upon the recklessness of their conduct. Mr. GISBORNE gave his support to Government ; anticipating a speedy natural death for slavery throughout the world. To show that the Ministerial pro- jects must be effected, he quoted an extract from a speech delivered in the House of Commons on the 31st July 1833— It ran thus " There are many questions on which the declaration of the King's Government in their favour or otherwise is decisive of their fate : we find this to have been the case with respect to the question of Reform. 1 believe it will also be found the case with respect to this question. The moment the King's Government arrays itself against any restriction, its fate is sealed ; for it is impossible to restore respect to authorities so treated." These were the words of Sir Robert Peel—( Cheers and laughter); and thus supported, be was bold to say that the fate of the Corn-laws and of the present duty on sugar was sealed. (Cheers.) Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, admitting the principles of free trade in the abstract, denied their applicability in the present case. Mr. VERNON SMITH enlarged upon several topics already handled. He attributed some of the difficulty which the West Indians felt in meeting com- petition, to mismanagement in their first attempts to obtain a supply of labour by means of importing Hill Coolies.

Lord STANLEY denied the frequent assertion, repeated by Mr. Gis- borne, that Lord Sandon had not met the original proposition in a direct manner: the proposition before the Huuse was, that they should go into Committee on the plan of the Chancellor of the EX,licataxer fnr raising 700,0001. towards the deficiency by an alteration in the Sugar-duties ; and Lord Sandon's resolution told the House that they would not go into Committee to adopt that plan. It was said on the other side, that the proposal was only part of a great plan for altering the duties on sugar, timber, and corn ; and he did not complain of that avowal ; but he did complain of their being told that a great principle was involved, and a broad line of demarcation to be drawn in point of principle between those who voted on one side or the other. If so, the Government resolutions ought to declare what that principle was. The principle, indeed, was said to be that of free trade— Now he had not heard any Member, either on one side of the House or on the other, except the honourable Member for London, advance the doctrine which he considered to be the doctrine of free trade. If lie understood the doctrine of free trade, it was that we should buy in whatever markets we could buy cheapest ; that we should have no protecting-duties for the purpose of protecting one or the other interest; that all duties should be levied for the purposes of revenue ; that they should be as light as possible ; that they should be impartially diffused over all imports; and that if there were any reduction or discrimination—and this was a principle which was asserted most broadly as the principle of free trade—they ought to charge nothing or as little as possible upon those imports which embrace articles of general consumption. He believed that he had fairly stated the principle of free trade ; and it that principle were fairly stated, what approach towards it had been made by the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer? Neither party in that dis- cussion had been guilty of the indiscretion imputed to them by honourable gentlemen opposite. This was no question of unrestricted free trade on one side and of prohibition on the other. Lord John Russell himself had stated in that House, and he had been informed that in another place the noble lord at the head of the Government had stated, that their object was plainly and dis- tinctly to afford protection. Protection, then, was their intention, and not free trade. He would ask Lord John Russell how he could stand before the country as the advocate of free trade, and at the same time impose duties for protection upon sugar, upon timber, and upon corn ? But Government went beyond the line of protection— Lord John Russell said, also, he was for free trade in timber ; and yet, what was he about to do ? Not only to keep up the discriminating duty between Baltic and Canadian timber, but he, an advocate of free trade, went one step further, and on the inferior article, and that which was mainly consumed by the lower classes, he intended to impose an additional duty of 100 per cent. be- yond the present duty, for the purpose of revenue. The thing to be determined, then, was the amount of protection which might be afforded to different interests ; and in that respect the same rule could not be applied to the agriculturist and to the manufacturer ; the capital of the former being so much less moveable, and less inde- pendent of the seasons ; and sugar was one of those descriptions of agri- cultural produce with respect to which the application of the rule was matter of peculiar difficulty. But admitting the general principle as applicable to both agriculture and manufactures, if it was necessary to foster a manufacture in its infancy by protection, it was especially ne- cessary in the present case of the sugar-trade. Lord Stanley entered into details, exhibiting the probable abundance of the future supplies of sugar from our own colonies, and the excess of those supplies beyond any likeli- hood of British consumption. The management of this question, he said, was matter of the greatest importance, with reference to the course which foreign nations would take in respect of the great experiment of Emanci- pation. Lord Stanley showed that Mr. O'Connell's intended resolution for discriminating between free and slave sugar, proposed an im- possibility, for it was directly in the teeth of the existing treaty with Bra- zil: in opposing such a proposition, therefore, to Lord Sandon's resolution Mr. O'Connell was in effect supporting the Government measure. Yet last year he joined with Government in opposing a proposal brought forward by Mr. Ewart, identical with that now made by Government ; though there was even less need for it this year than there was then— The price of sugar when that motion was brought forward was ttfis. and 87s„ a- hundredweight, and was then rising. The price had now fallen 20s. a hundredweight. The price reached its maximum soon after that period, when foreign sugar was imported; it then gradually fell to 36s. a hundredweight, and within the last clay or two it had risen ls., and was now at 37s. a hundred- weight. Thus, when Mr. Ewart brought forward his motion, the pressure on the consumer was 56s. a hundredweight, with a rising price; and from that time there had been a gradual decrease in price until now, when that decrease amounted to 20s. a hundredweight—more than 2d. a pound to the consumer.

Lord John's argument, derived front the happy condition of the Negro, Lord Stanley retorted upon him— The noble lord said that the Negroes were purchasing freeholds ; that marriage was becoming more frequent amongst them ; that population was increasing. Thus were all the most material elements of prosperity sown among them, if they would only have patience. The immense importance of the question might be inferred from the fact that in Jamaica alone 90,000 Negroes divided amongst them in one year the sum of 1,730,0004 the produce of their labours in the cultivation of sugar. Was this a state of things into which the noble lord ought to break? Ile said nothing of the hundreds of millions permanently invested in machinery and land—he said nothing of the 20,000,000/. paid by this country, or of the ruin to which it would subject our fellow countrymen in the West Indies ; but he would ask them, when they saw the Negro acquiring habits of honest industry, stimulated to labour by the wages offered—when they saw an increasing population, and when they knew that all this flourish- ing condition was owing solely to the consumption by this country of their staple article of production—he would ask them, if this was the moment to choose for the destruction of their incipient prosperity ? Was this the moment to choose for the introduction of a new competition in the shape of slave-grown sugar, depriving the Negro of those wages which, while they amply repaid him for his labour, were the means of stimulating him to laborious exertion?

The deficiency had been attributed to commercial distress. He felt deeply for the distress of our manufacturing districts ; but it would be- come the Government to pause before they closed, for the sake of a new vent in Brazil, that great Colonial market which had hitherto afforded so large an outlet for British commodities, and that other fresh and un- limited market which was now opening itself in the valley of the Ganges ? And what was the true cause of the distress ?— When they talked of distress, he would call the attention of Government to the disturbed state of our affairs in America—to the uneasy situation in which our relations had stood with respect to a powerful neighbouring state—to the recent events in the East—to the transactions in Syria—to the condition of our East Indian possessions—and to the loss, amounting to 3,000,0004 which our merchants had sustained by the destruction of opium, and to our relations with China—and then ask whether these were not sufficient to account for the present commercial distress ? Ile, however, did not despair of the finances of this country, under a good, iprudent, and proper Administra- tion. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) When he found that with a constantly --aasing revenue during the last five years, in the first of which there was a surplus di 1,o0o,n410/, and in the last a deficit of 2060,000T ; when he found that for five continuoum a-ars there had been, with a gradually increasing revenue a gradually accumulating oaa-s r. amounting at the end of that

period to about 7,000,000/.; when he saw, mdreo.— . a event deficiency in

the present year was to be accounted for by an expen.diture , _ of Canada and China; when he saw that the moment of a great finatil'ildttt ficiency was the time Government selected for taking off a tax which produced, without pressure upon or injury to the people, 1,600,000/.' when lie saw that in these three items he could trace the whole amount of deficiency in the pre- sent year, he might be excused if he entertained some doubts of the capabi- lities of those who had involved us in these difficulties. (Renewed cheers.) Lord Stanley denounced the last act of expiring desperation— It had been said, that whatever might be the result of the immediate proposition, the seed was sown which would produce its fruit in due time. Ile feared that the seed was sown which would produce a bitter fruit ; and deeply regretted that at the moment when the Government felt themselves tottering to their fall— (Loud cheers)—when the financial difficulties of the country, to say the least of them, were most serious—when, he would not say county by county, but borough by borough, they saw their hold upon the country gradually slip- ping away from them—(Great cheering)—that at that moment, when the common consent of the country proclaimed, whatever might be the opinion of honourable gentlemen opposite, that they could no longer hold the reins of office, as they had long since ceased to hold the reins of power—(Renewed cheering)—he regretted, he said, that this should be the time chosen by Go- vernment for throwing loose upon the country a crude and undigested scheme, involving the most extensive financial regulations, deeply affecting every in- terest in the country, paralyzing for the time all speculations in trade and all activity of commerce ; and this under the full conviction that it was impossible they would be able to carry the project into effect. (Great cheering.) Against Mr. Gisborne s quotation of Sir Robert Peel's speech in 1833, Lord Stanley made a different sort of quotation : since then, they had been taught by the present Ministry that the Government support of a measure did not make its ultimate adopt!oa so certain as it used to be in former years— He held in his hand a matter-of-fact paper, the Price-Current of Liverpool, dated Tuesday the 11th May 1841, containing the following commercial view of this amazing scheme, this new principle, which was to be developed and car- ried into effect by Government. It was signed by two gentlemen, one a warm Conservative, the other a warm supporter of the Government—so much for its impartiality ; and at the end of it, under the head of " Corn," were these words : " Sir—Since the development of the Ministerial plan, the bare allusion to which excited such a panic in the trade, the market has become much calmer "—be bad omitted a parenthesis after the word " market," saying, " from a conviction that no such project can be carried into effect." (Repeated cheering.)

The debate was adjourned a fourth time.

Mr. BROTHERTON recommenced the debate on Thursday. He saw Mammon at the bottom of the pretended zeal of the Opposition against slavery, and praised Ministers for " their noble conduct in bringing forward these measures of finance." Mr. HAMILTON treated with con- tempt the proposal of measures which Ministers never expected to carry. Mr. ALsvoN, the proprietor of a small estate in Jamaica, would vote for the reduction of the Sugar-duties ; but he should oppose any alteration of the Corn-laws. Mr. HARLAND would not consent to such sweeping changes in the protective system : they went too far, or not far enough. Mr. HASTIE, a commercial man, and Deputy-Chairman of the East India and China Association, hailed the Chancellor of the Exchequer's financial statement with the greatest satisfaction. If Go- vernment did not carry their present proposition, he recommended an extension of the Legacy-duty to real property. Mr. GEORGE PALMER concurred entirely with Lord Sandon and Dr. Lushington. Mr. CLAY would not encourage either the existing monopoly of the West Indies, or a future monopoly for the East Indies. He contended that the proposed scale of duties would afford ample protection to the West Indies ; and went into elaborate details of proof. Mr. AARON CHAP- MAN, looking especially to the Timber-duties, warned the House that the contemplated measures would be destructive of our Co- lonies and our shipping. Sir E. L. BULWER repeated a few general arguments in favour of the reduction of the Sugar-duties : he was for protection rather than prohibition in the corn-trade, but, representing an agricultural constituency, he thought 8s. fixed duty too little protection. Mr..HUME blamed the lavish expenditure, which had been urged by both sides of the House. He showed that the revenue had not decreased, in spite of the falling-off in the Post-office : the excess of the public income in the years 1839. 1S40, and 1841, over the years 1836, 1837, and 1838, averaged 675,0001. ; and that included the Post-office. The greatest diminution was in the revenue derived from sugar, which bad decreased by 1,000,0001. The House had a right to expect more infor- mation as to the intentions of the Government with respect to a general revision of the tariff; and in Committee he should propose lower duties than those now fixed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Hume calculated that the protection afforded to the West Indian sugar-grower would virtually amount to 80 instead of 50 per cent. ; for the West Indian would realize 28s. a hundredweight, while the Cuba merchant would only realize 15s. 5d. He quoted another Liverpool Price-Current against that quoted by Lord Stanley— That of Liverpool, of the 1st of May in the present year, in which he found the following statement—" The able and enlightened views, however,of the Chancel- lor of the Exchequer, as developed in the Budget of the 30th ultimo, give us every encouragement to anticipate the removal of those hindrances of wealth and prosperity, those checks to enterprise, those results of a cramped and ignorant policy, the heavy protective (alias prohibitory) import-duties. We may also hope for a moderate fixed instead of a sliding scale of duty for wheat and flour, so as to admit a constant supply from the 'United States and the corn coun- tries of Europe. A direct trade, which has been dormant for years, will also be opened with those states which formerly exported vast quantities of timber to this country, but now only know the country by name, or the trade from tradition."

Mr. Hume encouraged Lord John in his new policy— Let not the noble lord be alarmed if he lost the present motion by the votes of a few of those from whom he usually received support : let him go on—let him persevere—let him stand by his own words; and he would ultimately triumph, for the question was not his, but the country's. The noble lord said he looked forward to a new sera from the adoption of his plan : let him, then, not forsake that plan, and, with the people to support him, he must succeed.

The debate was ;hen adjourned once more.

CORN-LAWS.

The subject of the Corn-laws was again brought before the House of Lords o a Monday, by a motion of Lord ROSEBERY, for returns showi..5 the amount of foreign grain imported in 1838, 1839, n".1 ,s40. Earl Ells- wria.reat drew attention to returns of tho of grain for the years 1821 to 1838, showing the grpot o--aattons which had taken place : when he

found that a period of eighteen years the average price of corn

t----

ow. 4 . a quarter, while in some years it was as low as 39s. 4d.,

it was evident that such a variation must operate injuriously to those who held lands. Lord BEAUMONT said that the question was not only between the great landed proprietors and the community at large— It also affected, in a very serious manner, individuals who cultivated their own land, who lived on their own land, and who subsisted by the profits which they derived from their labour and outlay. If the present price were lowered beneath the average which the noble earl had mentioned—nay, if it were not considerably above it—this class of persons would not be able to culti- vate their land. This was especially the case with reference to poor land. Fully relying on the good faith of the Legislature to give them due protection, they had disbursed their money ; and when those persons found that the law was to be altered and their wheat driven out of the market by foreign grain, they would be obliged to abandon their land. Lord ASHBURTON averred that the Corn-laws had produced great steadiness of price. Lord PORTMAN calculated that the supply pro- duced in this country is insufficient for the population— The arable acres of England amount to something like 20,000,000; the population, according to the last census, exceeded 17,000,000; and the quantity of wheat required for such a number is about 17,000,000 quarters. Now the average produce of an acre is about three and a half quarters ; and if they mul- tiplied that by a fourth of the arable acres of England, which is not more than ought to be employed in growing wheat in one year, there would just be a surplus of 500,000 quarters above the demand for that population. The farmers, too, were afraid of the low prices, and therefore did not like to grow so much wheat.

The Earl of HADDINGTON observed that Lord Portman had left Ireland and Scotland out of the account. Lord RADNOR remarked, that the export of wheat from Ireland had been decreasing for the last eight years ; and Scotland, from being an exporting, had become an importing country. There was another little discussion on Tuesday, on the presentation of some petitions. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought that the first person who touched upon the subject of free trade was Adam Smith : that great authority excepted corn from the doctrine which he laid down with regard to all other articles. Adam Smith said—" It is essentially necessary that great care should be taken to provide for the subsistence of the people at large." Earl FITZWILLIAM was not aware that Adam Smith made any pointed exception of corn as distinguished from other articles. It was some time, however, since he and the Duke had read Adam Smith's work on the subject : he thought it would be better for them both to refer to that treatise before the next discussion took place.

There was some more rambling talk on Thursday. Among the peti- tions presented for repeal of the Corn-laws, was one from the females and other inhabitants of East Arford ; which, the Earl of WARWICK dis- covered, had only five autograph signatures to it, a great number besides being crosses. Earl Fixzwu.max rebuked the other for implying that because poor people had not the advantage of education which he had in common with his class, they had no right to express their feelings and opinions. The Earl of WARWICK denied that he had meant any such thing.

LORD CARDIGAN.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Mr. MuNaz moved, that an humble address be presented to the Queen praying for an inquiry into the conduct of the Earl of Cardigan during his command of the Eleventh Hussars, " with the view of ascertaining how far such conduct has ren- dered him unfit to remain in her Majesty's service." The imme- diate cause of the motion was the recent flogging of a soldier at Hounslow, on Easter Sunday ; but Mr. Muntz would not have consi- dered that a sufficient justification of interference, had it not been the last of a series of improper acts by Lord Cardigan— Flogging was at all times a most disgustingproceeding,.and quite unneces- sary, as the discipline of the French and Prussian armies, in which it was not used, fully proved; but there was at least no necessity for its being inflicted on a Sunday. There was a general feeling in the public mind that the authorities of the Horse Guards were not quite free from censure in their dealing with this subject throughout ; and that opinion was strongly confirmed by the fact, that Captain John Reynolds was now on full pay, with leave of absence and a promise never again to be called upon to serve under Lord Cardigan. The truth was, that Lord Cardigan's infirmity of temper quite unfitted him for command. Mr. Muntz read a statement with which he had been furnished, showing how tyrannical Lord Cardigan's conduct had been. " In two years, out of a regiment of 350 strong, the Earl of Cardigan had held 105 courts-martial. In the same two years he punished in the defaulters' list upwards of 700 men. During the same period, 90 men were placed in Canter- bury gaol. During twenty years in India, the regiment was 700 strong, and the punishments less than during the two years under his command. During his command for one month, there were more courts-martial and more men defaulters than in the preceding twelve months. In the following six months that he had not the command, there were only two courts-martial. He refused Captain Reynolds leave of absence which he had previously given, on the ground that the verdict of a Court-martial, of which Captain Reynolds was President, was contrary to his wishes. He frequently gave the lie to officers when on duty, before the men." A fine fellow had exclaimed to Mr. Hunt", ' What can I do? I might ride out, and cut him down; but I should be shot for it.'" Mr. SCHOLEFIELD, in seconding Mr. Muntz, said he had only two observations to make : the one was, to express his regret that the high; minded young men of England should be subjected to such tyrannical treatment as Lord Cardigan had exercised towards his officers ; but he felt much deeper regret still that the Commander-in-Chief should have persisted in excusing, even if he did not evince a disposition to approve of, the noble lord's conduct in tyrannizing over the officers of his regiment. Mr. MscAuLer objected to interfering with the prerogative of the Crown in the distribution of rewards and punishments, except in extreme cases— Ile did not justify Lord Cardigan; but he thought the present was not such an extreme case as to call for the course proposed. A particular case ought not to be laid hold of to create a precedent which might afterwards be turned by the hand of power against helpless innocence. Au officer buys his commission

with a sum of money sufficient to purchase an annuity equal to his depe om of it, pay ; and he ought not to be except by sentence of a court-martial. The t

000< to question, however, was not one to come under the consideration of such a court. When any thing was done in the Army which was not previously forbidden, but which was nevertheless reprehensible, the course was to point out the culpability of the act by a general order, which general order should regulate the Army for the future. Lord Hill, the Adjutant-General, and the Duke of Wellington, fully allowed the great indecorum of the conduct of Lord Cardigan on the occasion ; but they also held that it was not forbidden by the Articles of War, the Mutiny Act, or the regulations of the service; and that it was only a cases oinissus, which rendered the party liable to a reprimand. He had never heard the slightest whisper of Lord Cardigan's being in the habit of giving the lie to his officers; and he concluded that if it were true, it had never been brought before the Horse Guards by a complaint. He could not allow that penal cases of this description should be submitted to the kind of tribunal contemplated by Mr. Muntz. Lord GEORGE LENNOX defended Lord Cardigan— With respect to the giving of the lie, only once had something of the kind occurred; and then it was not at the head of the regiment, but at the mess- table ; and it had been arranged in a manner satisfactory and honourable to both parties. The only fair ground for the motion was, that Lord Cardigan had flogged a man on Sunday : the whole of his conduct up to that event had been approved of by the Horse Guards; and if blame attached to any one, it was to them. Lord Cardigan was a much-abused man : he had been dragged before a public tribunal for doing what no offic.r could avoid doing. Officers were placed in great difficulty ; if an officer fought a duel, he was liable to be tried for felony ; if he refused, or even did not resent an injury soon enough, he was liable to be tried by a court-martial, and dismissed. Lord George men- tioned a case, (subsequently confirmed by Colonel Verner,) in which an officer exchanged four shots with a civilian, but was afterwards sentenced to dismissal because his challenge bad not been sufficiently prompt.

Sir FlussEv Values had been authorized by Lord Cardigan to express his regret at what had taken place, and to state that it arose entirely from an error in judgment.

Mr. EWART thought that there were the strongest grounds for in- quiry. Mr. WARBURTON asserted that the Horse Guards had censured Lord Cardigan for producing insubordination in his regiment. That was denied by Sir ADOLPHUS DALRYMPLE ; but Mr. WARBURTON afterwards quoted a letter by the Adjutant-General, remarking that the insubordination and dissensions in the regiment must attract serious at- tendon. Mr. Warburton admitted that that told both ways • but it made out a case for inquiry. Lord HOWICK thought that it would have been well had an inquiry taken place at an earlier period, by order of -the Commander-in-Chief; but he could not support the present motion, as he did not think it justified by the extremity of the case. He de- murred, however, to Mr. Macaulay's dictum that no officer ought to be deprived of his commission except by sentence of a court-martial : ge- neral unfitness was proper ground for obliging an officer to sell out—a course by no means unusually adopted at the Horse Guards. Colonel SaLWEY observed, that Lord Cardigan attributed his conduct to an error in judgment : had he not acted in other instances without discretion and judgment—so often as to prove that he was entirely unfit for command ? In reply to Mr. HUME, Mr. MACAULAY said that Captain John Reynolds had applied for leave of absence when he came from India, that he might go to the Military College. It was then refused, as the regiment was short of Captains and not in a high state of discipline. Now that the discipline had improved, the leave had been granted. Dr. Staunton had also been allowed leave of absence ; but it would expire in a few days.

On a division, the motion was rejected, by 135 to 58.

MISCELLANEOUS.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved, on Thursday, that after Tuesday the 1st July, orders of the day should have precedence of notices of motion. The House agreed.

NEW MEMBER. On Wednesday, Mr. HAMILTON LINDSAY took the oaths and his seat for Sandwich.

PARK AT THE EAST END OF LONDON. On Tuesday, Mr. E. J. STANLEY carried a resolution for the purpose of enabling him to bring in a bill to apply the money arising from the sale of York House, belong- ing to the Crown revenue, to the purchase of a piece of ground in the neighbourhood of Bethnal Green. The purchase-money of York House and the interest accruing amount to 100,0001.

THE LORDS AND THE SYRIAN FLEET. On Monday, the LORD CHANCELLOR read a letter to the House of Lords from Sir Robert Stop- ford, in his own name and that of the officers under his command, in acknowledgment of the vote of thanks agreed to by the House.

PROMISSORY NOTES AND USURY-LAWS. On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, on Tuesday, a Committee was appointed to consider the amount of interest at present payable on promissory notes ; and, at the suggestion of Lord ASUBURTON, it was subsequently ar- ranged that the inquiry should extend to the Usury-laws in general.

ROYAL ASSENT. The Royal assent was given, by commission, on Monday, to the South Australia Bill, the Indemnity Bill, the Metropolis Improvements Bill, and to several railway and other private bills.