ebates anti Vrotetbings in Warliament.

Tan Bunenev--Ts$ FINANCES.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Sir Caem.Fs WOOD, Chancellor of the Exchequer, moved the order of the day that the House resolve it- self into a Committee of Supply.

Sir Charles stated, that Ministers could not accede to the proposal of which Mr. Hume had given notice, to postpone the Committee of Supply on the Army and Navy Estimates till the House had decided on the proposal made on Friday last by the First Lord of the Treasury. This would be a reversal of the con- stitutional usage, that a vote of supply should precede the consideration of the ways and means. The productiveness of the taxes could not rationally be the index of the amount of the vote: the amount should be voted according to the real exigencies of the state, and the " ways" in which that amount should be raised should afterwards be allotted in accordance with the " means " of the classes who pay the taxes. Sir Charles alluded to an impression which has arisen both in and out of the House that the increased taxation was rendered necessary by the increased estimates: he hoped that further consideration of what actually fell from the Prime Minister on Friday had shown this impression to be entirely unfounded. There is a present deficit on the pastyear, over which con- trol is now gone. That must be met. That alone calls for increased taxation, without reference to any additional or prospective demands. These additional demands arise in connexion with the maintenance of convicts—formerly a local charge; the fittings of the new Houses of Parliament; the British Museum-' the expedition in search of Sir John Franklin; the new scale of payments to certain petty officers, and the new modes of paying-off seamen and marines. None of these expenses have a military aim—not even of defence. The Government seriously. deprecated any parade of armament. The Ministers in their proposals meant simply to act according to the rule in such cases: a deficiency in a de- partment of public service having occurred, they came with a specific proposal to the House for the addition which would fill up the new want. They had nothing more at heart than that the House should be fully satisfied.

As, however, necessary explanations could not conveniently be made to the House itself, Ministers proposed that a Select and Secret Committee be appointed to examine how far the Estimates of the Navy, Army, and Ordnance, may be adopted, and to inquire generally into the affairs 'of those departments. (Great sensation and expressions of surprise.) This Committee would be distinct from the one Sir Charles would move for next day for inquiring into the expenditure for Miscellaneous Services, and reporting whether any redactions or improvements be practicable under that head. Sir Charles cited precedents. Sir Robert Peel in 1828 moved for a Finance Committee; and on his motion recounted parallel cases in the years 1785, 1791, 1796, 1807, and 1817. So again a somewhat similar Committee sat in 1834, on the expenditure of the Colonial department. Complete information could be laid before such a Select Committee; the statements made to the House at large could only be imperfect and unsatisfactory. The constitution of the Committee would not in the least be influenced by Ministers; and the full discussion, he supposed, according to usage, would take place in the Committee on Ways and Means.

Meanwhile, the Secretaries at War and for the Navy would propose the votes ne- cessary for carrying on the public service; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer deprecated any partial discussion in anticipation of the general one that would ensue of coarse on next Monday. He moved the reading of the order of the day for going into Committee of Supply. Mr. Hiram warmly opposed this arrangement— If private men of prudence cosi-sate their means before settling their expenses, the nation should do the like. The revenue of the country, after deducting the cost of collecting, was about the same amount of 56,000,0001. in each of the two years 1846 and 1848. The expenditure, however, varied by an amount of 6,756,0001. in those years—there was a surplus in receipts of 3,800,0001. in 1846, and an excess in payments of 2,956,0001. in 1848. Was this no justification of his endeavour to stop Government till some inq niry had been made whether ex- penditure might not be somewhere reduced? From 400,0001. to 500,000/. an_ unities have ceased, and Government might have been expected to propose re- trenchments: they have instead proposed an increase of the Income-tax. The people will not bear the additional burden. Oar Navy showed a great waste of na- tional resources—ships uselessly lying in the Tagus, or engaged in the fruitless squadron on the coast of Africa. Mr. Hume also strongly objected to the pro_ posed secrecy of the Committee.

Mr. RWART and Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD spoke to a similar effect. From this point the debate took a very discursive and desultory turn. The House then went into Committee of Supply ; and Mr. WARD, with- out any preliminary statement, moved a vote of 245,411/. to defray the ex- cess of the Naval expenditure beyond last year's grant.

Mr. HERRIES thought no vote should be taken without a statement from its proposer, and a discussion. He was influenced by the proposal of a " secret " eommittee. He was repugnant to withdrawing from public no- tice all the votes of Naval and Military Estimates. Sir CHARLES WOOD explained, that this vote was for past expenditure. With regard to any other votes to be applied for, they would not be for whole sums. The fullest information should be given when the full votes were asked. Mr. BANNES asked, was this a vote which had been subject of controversy between the Treasury and Admiralty? Sir CHARLES WOOD admitted it was; but pressed for the money. Mr. HERRIES wanted to know the distinction between a " secret " and a "select " Committee. Sir CHARLES WOOD answered, that a Select Committee is open to the whole world, a Secret Committee is not. Mr. Hintz having consented to the vote, was chidden by Colonel Sin- THORP, who had hoped better things of him: the Colonel opposed an un- explained vote, and the secrecy. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK was dissatisfied with the explanations. Grave reasons of state, and evident peril surround- ing the country, would alone justify the House in delegating its powers to a Secret Committee.

Lord Josue Rusar , recounted the precedents; and was at a loss to comprehend why that which was done on all those several occasions should be unconstitutional " in 1848. All that was wanted was a vote for the sum the public service required. The fullest discussion on the Estimates was courted. Lord John denied that the Estimates were " war " estimates, or that they had been framed in any view of a rupture with any power.

Sir ROBERT PEEL apprehended that precedents would determine that the Committee should be "select," but not "secret," though having power of reserving information—

As it would have the power to withhold matter unfit for publication, it would be secret. The Committee, nominally select may inquire in secret, and reserve from the public evidence unfit for disclosure. No Committee should ever be secret in such a sense that it may not publish information it may judge beneficial for the public mind. He reserved his opinion whether the Estimates should be referred: if so referred, however, he had stated the course he thought the Committee should pursue.

Mr. NEWDEGATE thought the only distinction between a " select " and a " secret " Committee was, that Members might attend the former and might not attend the latter. Select Committees had, however, the power to ex- clude when they chose: secrecy was: obtained, therefore, without men- tioning it. Members on his side did not object to vote a round sum for current expenses, but objected to make any specific vote.

Sir CHARLES WOOD accepted this hint, and would consent to ask nothing but a vote on account.

The debate proceeded, still in the same desultory and bitter way. Mr. R. C. HILDTARD saw in the proposal of a Committee nothing but a pur- pose of taking from the shoulders of Government the responsibility that belonged to them. Lord Joint Rums, was willing to undergo the ordeal of a Committee of the whole House, in addition to the trial by the Secret Committee. The service would suffer if the vote were withheld. Mr. Disausts threw a sarcasm across the House amongst the crowd of Mem- bers below the gangway: assistance from them in economic endeavours was hopeless—their silence was, no doubt, agreeable to Government.

Mr. WABLEY was drawn forth by Mr. Disraeli's taunt— He was sorry to end that gratification which Mr. Disraeli ascribed to Ministers in the silence of himself and friends. The proposal of the Minister had been re- ceived by his constituents with astonishment, indignation, and disgust. ("Hear, hear!" and much laughter.) He liked to express himself in plain and intelli- gible terms—would be sorry to talk for an hour in the fashion of some people, and at the end of the hour leave his hearers in perfect doubt of what he really. meant. The noble Lord could scarcely be aware of the feeling which his proposition had raised out of doors. The people were angry to a certain extent with the right honourable gentleman the Member for Tamworth when he proposed a tax of three per cent upon property and income for "the short period of three years." (A laugh.) But there was a fascination in the manner of the right honourable gen- tlemen which made his proposition acceptable to the House. It so paved the met, it laid the ground for it so nicely, that it was next to impossible to be angry with him. (A laugh.) The noble Lord, he must say, resorted to no expedient of that kind. He came out in a very broad and manly way; and it was quite evident that he considered his proposition would not be unacceptable to the public. The noble Lord, however, would find that it would have been of advantage if he had used some strategem. He thought honesty was the best policy; but honesty, upon this occasion, would suffer. It was his deliberately-formed opinion, that although the proposition to extend the continuation of the tax might be carried for three years, it was not in the power of the Government to increase it to five per cent (Cheers.) He might be wrong, but he was sure the public would make such re- clamations to their representatives in the House that those representatives would not dare to support Ministers in carrying out that proposition. He opposed the augmentation to five per cent at once, for if once imposed for two years it was imposed for good and all However, if John Ball would hearit, then give it him, and more, and punish him for his stupidity. (Laughter.) The Income-tax pressed most heavily on the poor man, whilst the Property-tax scarcely touched the rich. He would read part of the simple words of a letter sent him by one of his constituents. " I am one of a class of persons who have succeeded, after many years of exertion, in obtaining an income exceed- ing by a few pounds the sum which makes me liable to the payment of this impost. Its operation in my case may be taken as an illustration of hunilrs of others. I have a wife and children: I have to maintain my wife and self in decent respectability, and to supply the wants of both the bodies and minds of my children: this I do, and as long as health is given me I may hope to continue to do so. But my income is dependent entirely upon the continuance of my health; and should I die, (except a small sum, to secure which I have annually further to reduce my heavily-taxed income,) my wife and children would be left entirely destitute: and yet I am called upon to y from this precarious source as much as the man who has 5,0001. in the Funds, or property to that amount of which no contingency can deprive him, and which will remain to support his family should he die. A Government seeking to preserve people from indigence, and to enable them to maintain their independ- ence, would encourage as much as possible the practice of saving something from their present income to provide for future wants; but this tax assumes that the future is the same with all, and that the income, a portion of which should be de- voted to the demands of a future day, is as fair a subject for taxation, and should be called upon to yield up as much for the wants of the state, as the income upon which there are no provident claims—as income derived from property, which, indeed, testifies for itself that the owner is in possession for himself and posterity of a decent independence. Is this fair? Ought one to be expected to pay with- out discontent a tax which thus confounds appearances with facts, and makes a man with 150L pay as much as another man with 5,0001. ?" After a few words from Mr. EWART, the vote was withdrawn.

Mr. WARD then proposed three votes,-800,0001. for Wages of Seamen; 400,0001. for Seamen and Marines; and 200,0001. for Military Pensions and Allowances. Last year an increase of 1,500 Marines was voted, and it was then intimated that 1,500 more would be added this year.

Mr. OSBORNE observed, that last year the House was very neglectful of its duty: the Navy Estimates might be reduced 500,0001. without weaken- ing the service at all.

The Chairman having read the resolution for granting the 800,0001. for Seamen, Mr. G. R. ROBINSON moved that the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again : but he did not press this amendment. Captain PECHELL complained of the practice of late years of asking for votes and deferring the discussion on them till afterwards.

The vote was agreed to; as also, under a protest of Colonel SurrHonr, those of 400,0001. for Seamen and Marines, and 200,0001. towards Pen- sions and Allowances.

Mr. Fox MAULE moved for a vote of 1,800,0001. for land forces; part of a whole sum required of 3,836,0001. Mr. Ossionant moved to reduce this sum to 500,0001.; and was seconded by Colonel &Hums% On the statement of Mr. Fox MauLE, that no more than was absolutely necessary immediately had been asked, Mr. Homitias and Mr. HonsmaN prevailed on Mr. Osnonatz to give way; and the vote was agreed to.

A vote of 500,0001. on account of 1,200,0001. for Pensioners passed without opposition.

The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be received this day. On Tuesday, several Members having been induced to waive their right of prior motion,—Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD with an Irish motion proving rather obstinate,—Sir CHARLES WOOD rose to state the grounds on which he moved for two Committees; one to inquire into the expenditure of the Navy, Army, and Ordnance; the other to inquire into the expenditure of the Miscellaneous Estimates.

The expenditure for the Navy, Army, and Ordnance, has increased from 11,730,0001. in 1835 to 17,340,0001. in 1847. The Army increase is inconsi- derable; the Navy increase is 3,500,0001.: but the Ordnance has doubled its cost since 1835. That increase is a very proper subject of inquiry. On their acces- sion to office, Ministers intimated their intention of appointing a Committee to inquire into the Miscellaneous expenditure. It was convenient to defer the time of appointing that Committee till this session: in the mean time, Mr. Hume sug- gested it should not be confined to a finance inquiry, but should inquire into the whole subject of the national expenditure. Such an inquiry would be so wide as to lead to no result; but it was thought very desirable that these Estimates should be submitted to a Select Committee, who should inquire how far our increased expenditure was real or only nominal—how far, for instance, increased by efforts to improve the condition of our soldiers and sailors in actual service. He was not anxious to adhere servilely to mere precedents; but if instances were demanded they could be found in abundance. Mr. Pitt appointed three Committees of the kind, in 1791, 1797, and 1801. In 1817 Lord Liverpool gave an example; in 1828 the Duke of Wellington furnished another; and one was supplied as late as 1834, on a Colonial subject, by Lord Stanley. He thought that neither Mr. Pitt nor the Duke of Wellington nor Lord Stanley was likely to yield too easily to pressure, or to avoid the official responsibility. The Committee of 1828 reported, among other things, on the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, and then on the expenditure of the country. Although they failed in carrying out their inquiries to the fall extent they contemplated, yet such information was ob- tained, especially on the examination of Sir Henry Hardinge, as led to the great and important reforms in the Admiralty introduced by Sir James Graham. Since that time, the expenditure has increased again, and fresh ground been laid for Si Charles Charles frankly confessed an error be had been under the night before, in calling some of the earlier Committees " secret." He found it was not necessary to give a power of exclusion : Select Committees have of themselves that power, and can exclude or suppress evidence and documents as they think fit. With this explanation, he simply moved for the appointment of a Select Com- mittee " to inquire into the expenditure on account of the Navy, Army, and Ord- nance; and to report their observations thereupon to the House ": also the ap- pointment of another Select Committee, "to inquire into the expenditure for Mis- celaneous Services; and to report to the House whether any reductions can, in %Cu' opinion, be effected, or any improvement made in the mode of submitting this branch of the public expenditure to the consideration of Parliament."

Lord GEORGE Bilarrnsow observed that the state of the case was altered now that the " Secret " Committee had dwindled to a jumble of two " Se- lect " Committees on the Miscellaneous Estimates, and the Army, Navy, and Ordnance expenses; and, protesting against any encroachment by the Committee on the proper functions of the Executive, he offered no further objection.

Mr. DISRAELI did not, on the previous night, mean that Ministers should be hampered in the discharge of their duties by strict adherence al- ways to precedents; but let them either act on precedent or act independ- ently of precedent, not cite them and disavow them in the same breath. Every instance quoted had been one of what was called a" Finance Committee"; and in every instance of the Finance Committee the intention to appoint the Committee had been graciously intimated in the Royal Speech. What analogy was there in the present case? What warning had been given? The Chancellor

rises and surprises the Opposition, and probably all the House but the Cabinet, by virtually saying, "I am going to prevent all criticism of these Estimates by sending them to a Committee up-stairs." In 1828, when Sir Robert Peel posed a Finance Committee, it was for the purpose of effecting constitutional economy; and he was perfectly justified in the course he took. " But the present Government are proposing this Committee for a different purpose. They are not pro- posing it for purposes of economy. I will not say they intend to delude and deceive the people; bat, certainly, it is their object to procure from its recommendations in- creased establishments, and to form upon its statements a proposition for increased taxation. I think, then, it will be admitted that the question of precedent can- not be insisted upon; and, if there is no precedent to support it, let us look to the rp iple involved. It is neither more nor less than shi.ing the responsibility of Government upon a Committee of the House of Commons. It is, in fact, .pro- posing that a Committee of this House shall assume the functions of a Committee of Supply. Why should it not also assume the functions of a Committee of Ways and Means? If a Committee of the House can exercise the functions of a Com- mittee of Supply, and prepare the Estimates, why not also assume the power of ascertaining the means by which those Estimates are to be paid? So far as I eau form any opinion of the temper of the House, it would be as easy, and more agreeable, for the Government to propose that the Income-tax should be sent also to a Committee up-stairs. This is a proposition that cannot be separated from the rest of the financial exposition with which we were favoured the other night. You may permit this course to be taken without any opposition being offered to the Government: are you prepared on Monday night to be equally goodnatured? I think the Government has made a mistake in the course it has recommended to us; bat, happy men, whose blunders only prove the anxiety of their opponents to assist them ! " (Great laughter.)

Mr. NEWDEGATE asked if the inquiry would refer to the distribution of the forces. Sir CHARLES WOOD quoted resolutions adopted by the Com- mittee of 1834, and deduced that the inquiry would apply to the distribu- tion and the amount of the forces. Mr. Hums hoped the Committee would not have a majority of men who had been hardened into callousness by familiarity with large estimates. Sir ROBERT PEEL certainly did not understand that the Committee would rid Ministers of executive responsibility. He was prepared to con- sider the Estimates as proposed on Ministerial responsibility; the weight of which, recent experience would not allow him to forget. If there ex- isted a Government impressed with other than patriotic views, their mani- fest interest would be to gratify the House with reduoed estimates. Sir Robert alluded to the invasion panic, and the letter of his friend Lord Ellesmere—

That letter presented an imperfect and unjust account of the spirit of English- men—of the strength of the country—of the spirit of the men of mature age—nay, of the oldest men and the oldest women. (Cheers and laughter.) If the Lord Mayor undertook the duty of billeting the French I army he must do so in secret: Sir Robert defied him to show his face in Cheapsids. t is difficult to estimate the spirit with which invasion of or insult to this country would be repelled. Still, he would not say a word against proper precautions. He was by no means astounded by the Estimates proposed, but gratified at finding in them a wise decision against increasing the Army or Navy. Looking to the great calls of our Colonial empire, New Zealand one year, some Australian settlement another, then Hong-kong, and referring to what has happened in China very recently, be was not surprised at the need of a great military establishment. Looking to India—to Spain, to Mexico, and the spirit animating the American Republic—he concluded it not unreasonable to maintain the Army and Navy unreduced. If the Committee were not, in the words of Mr. Hume, made of men "hardened in favour of large estimates" but of men of official business habits, honourable and independent, who would give their minds to an impartial review of the public expenditure, he thought it might produce much public advantage.

Mr. BRIGHT' criticizing the Ministerial plan, expressed an opinion that if the Cape colonists had been responsible to some extent for the expenses of their local quarrels, we should not now have 1,300,0001. to pay for their Kafir war.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL corrected Mr. Disraeli's misapprehension that the Committee could rob the House of any of its powers whatsoever.

He admitted, his resolution to apply for the Committee was unexpected. The necessity for the Committee had only arisen when misapprehension about the Estimates had become prevalent. He had not made an addition of one man to either Army or Navy; and the Marines added were announced to be added last year, but were reserved for the present. He must say that the economical re- formers had not enforced retrenchment very actively of late years. The most active parts in debate had been ,taken by professional gentlemen, each intent on the improvement of his own arm of the service. The result, though only just claims were conceded, had been a very considerable increase. The responsibility of considering such questions is properly on the Executive: that of enforcing an economic expenditure of the public money is on the House, whose retrenchments it is not for Government to resist. The remedy of Ministers, who shun their re- sponsibility, is to resign.

In reference to Mr. Bright's remark on local expenditures borne by the Imperial Government, Lord John said—" I must admit that the Government of this coun- try, being the Government of a country of great power, must defend its subjects in whatever position they are placed; that, in a colony, they cannot allow life and property to be destroyed; they must see that there are means for that purpose; but I think it hard that the whole of that expense should fall on the mother- country. In the eame way I must contend, and with a view to force generally', that wherever British subjects are found, they expect, and expect naturally, in case of danger—in case of outbreak, whether from the Government of a foreign country or from popular insurrection—that their persons and property shall be protected by some British force; and those events may occur in any part of the world. If British subjects are in danger at Messina or Palermo, they say,' Where is the ship—where is the British flag to protect us?' The same thing in the Canton river. They say, ' Where is our national flag? We expect protection from that.' And the Executive Government would be highly to blame if they gave less protection to British subjects than they were accustomed to in former times, or if the name of Englishmen were less a name of respect in foreign coun- tries than it was formerly." Lord John assured Lord George Bentinck that he shrank from no responsibility, and wanted no Committee whatever as a screen. Mr. GEORGE RANKER deprecated a Militia: Lord John Russell had spoken of the 150,0001. as only a beginning. Sir ROBERT INGLIS, Captain HARRIS, and Mr. SLANEY, advocated the proposed Committees: Mr. SHARMAI■7 CRAWFORD opposed them.

Mr. ConDEN, in consenting to the Committees, did not consent that they should say whether a certain amount of expenditure was necessary.

He did not surrender his discretion to oppose any sums demanded for estimates whichehe deemed extravagant. He should vote on any proposition to reduce the Army or Navy, or disband the 5,000 men coming home from India, as though no Committee had been appointed. The responsibility of the Ministers had been much insisted on; but, while theirs was only the responsibility of proposing, the House sustained the greater responsibility of approving and consenting to the Estimates. Mr. Cobden glanced warningly at Sir Robert Peel's flatteries of the people on the greatness of their colonial empire. He alluded to the late melancholy affair at Canton. When he saw the accounts of that massacre, he inspected a return made to the House of our naval force in the Tagus daring the last twelve months. On the 1st of December, about the date of the murders at Canton, there were lying in the waters of the Tagus ten ships of war, including four steamers, with 590 guns and 4,812 sailors: this while there was not one sailor to protect the lives of our merchants in China!

Admiral DUNDAS corrected this error. There was a steamer always in the Canton river; and there was in addition a man of war there at the time of the late melancholy occurrence. Mr. Boor and Mr. VILLIERS interchanged taunts on the prophecies which each had uttered about the effects of free trade in corn. A Member thought, now that the Income-tax bid fair to be permanent, that Ireland should no longer be exempted from its operation.

The motion was then agreed to.

TEE WINDOW-TAX.

On Thursday, Lord DUNCAN asked leave to bring in a bill for the total repeal of the Window-tax; supporting his motion with arguments and sta- tistics of a kind already familiar to the public, but also suggesting a plan in substitution for the tax.

He would strike off the increase from the Estimates on account of the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, for the ensuing year,—which would give 600,0001.; abolish the slave-trade squadron,-300,0001.; instead of retaining the 5,000 soldiers re- called from India, he would arm the Metropolitan Police with muskets,-100,0001. • and he would sell the New Forest, Dean Forest, Hainault Forest, and other forests belonging to the Crown,—which would yield 500,0001.; in all, 1,500,0001., or " in round numbers" 1,600,0001. The expenses of the forest management, including dinners to Verderers and other officials, nearly equals the income; and the forest lands are a source of pestilential miasmata. The motion was heartily supported by Mr. HUME, Colonel Srwrisortr, Sir DE LACY EVANS, Mr. WAKLEY, Mr. MACGREGOR, Mr. Enamours O'Corrsoa, Captain PECRELL, Mr. AGLIONBY, Mr. CowaN, Mr. Mowarr, Mr. EIS-ART, Dr. Bowan o, Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, and Mr. BOND CABBELL.

The tax was condemned by Mr. Rourrunnt PALMER, Mr. STAFFORD, Lord ASHLEY, and Sir ROBERT PEEL; but in the present state of the re- venue they could not press for its immediate repeal. Sir Cassano Wow (supported by Lord Joss; RUSSELL) pleaded the state of the revenue. Arguments may be found against any tax taken simply on its merits; but he could not spare 1,600,0001. or 1,700,0001. Thus also Mr. Ewart had a notice on the paper to abolish or reduce the taxes on bricks, paper, soap, butter and cheese, tea, tobacco, and wine, in- volving a sacrifice of 9,000,0001. [Mr. Ewart withdrew his motion, later in the evening.] However, Sir Charles admitted that the tax might be better arranged: Ministers had been in communication with the Chairman of Stamps and Taxes, and had been considering various plans to improve the mode of rating the Window-tax and remove objections.

On a division, Lord Duncan's motion was negatived, by 160 to 68. EMIGRANT SHIPS.

On Monday, Mr. Lasoncazaz moved the second reading of the Pas- sengers Bill.

Mr. HUME observed that the mortality on the whole number of emigrants of last season had reached up to 17 or 18 per cent; the deaths being in most cases from fever. He was glad that means were now proposed for mitigating this terrible state of things. It would be well to simplify the present law by repealing the existing acts, and passing a single one contain ing all the law.

Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the bill would provide that every emigrant- ship should contain a Government superintendent, bound to enforce the requisitions of the law. It was found impracticable that this person should always be a qualified surgeon. The cost of this officer would be a salary of twenty pounds, and a shilling per head on taking out the emigrants, to be paid by the vessel's owner. Government would bring their officer back at their own expense. The bill effected very numerous alterations in the law; and it would have been unsafe to add to the difficulty of carrying it in time to be of use this season, if it had been made a consolidating as well as an enacting bill. He had no objection to withdraw it after the third reading, and make it a consolidating bill, on the understanding it should be unopposed.

Mr. \VARLET maintained, that among the three Medical Colleges of Eng- land, Scotland, and Ireland, and their 17,000 qualified surgeons, there could be no difficulty in finding sufficient and efficient superintendents, if an adequate remuneration were offered, instead of the paltry allowance of some thirty pounds per voyage.

Eventually, the bill was read a second time, and referred to a Commit- tee up-stairs.

THE SLAVE-TRADE.

On Tuesday, Mr. HUTT moved for the appointment of a Select Com- mittee to consider the best means which Great Britain can adopt for miti- gating the horrors of the slave-trade and providing for its final extinction.

He had to lay a practical question before the House—What are the results of the policy which this country had pursued for thirty years past in suppression of the slave-trade? Had the slave-trade been suppressed?—It is more extensive now than when suppression commenced. Are its cruelties mitigated?—The world never saw such horrors as are now perpetrated in consequence of our inter- position. Not ten men out of Bedlam look for the triumph of our present policy. It is sometimes said that the traffic is only not suppressed because means are not applied with enough of liberality: he believed the whole treasure of England might be lavished on the wild crusade in vain. Often had it been stated in that House that a profit of thirty per sent insured the continuance of a contraband trade against every preventive system. In this trade the profits amount even to 1,5001. or 2,0001. per cent! Neither gunpowder nor steam can countervail that. In fact, the profits are enhanced in a strict proportion with the success of the blockade, by its raising the value of slaves; one successful trip out of six leaves a handsome return.

Meanwhile, the United States is the only Government in the world which .heartily aids us. France is not provided with the necessary authority to act with us. Portugal can hardly help us when her officers are mostly stipendiaries of the slave-traders. In Spain and Cuba he had noticed the name of Queen Christina herself in connexion with slave transactions. The wife of the Governor of Cuba receives 10,0001. per annum for countenancing and protecting the traders. Though the United States alone really cooperate with us, the citizens of the States have the lead as shipbuilders for the slave-trade. We English ontselves do not come into court with clean hands: the capital of respectable British mer- chants at Rio and the Havannah goes to the stimulus of this trade. The traffic is actually increased since our interference. In 1795, the number dragged from Africa was estimated by Mr. Pitt at 70,000; in 1839, Lord John RuSsell stated it to be 100,000. In 1847, the numbers landed in America were f.)0,000: allowing for inaccuracies, for failures and captures, as many as 100,000 at present leave the coast of Africa annually. Official and private intelligence coil. cur to prove that the trade is at this moment in great activity.

To aggravate the horrors of the passage to the slaves, we keep from twenty-sir to thirty men of war, with from three to four thousand men aboard, on the most pestilential station in the world. In 1827, the Eden lost 110 men out of 160 is SIX months; in 1837, the Raven lost 17, and the Curlew 20 men: the av deaths in 1837 were more than 13 per cent. Some 600,000/. per annum of straitened national funds may be saved if this system be abandoned. If the trade be unfettered there will no doubt be an enormous increase: but better that five slaves should be taken without cruelty than one with the present agonies. Far- ther the glut will cure itself: Brazil and Cuba are already uneasy at the great disproportion of slaves to free men, and at the dangers of insurrection. In this way the trade will extinguish itself if left alone.

Mr. JACKSON seconded the motion; and begged to state the result of an experience of sixteen years of traffic with every part of the West coast of Africa, from Sierra Leone to the Cape of Good Hope.

His firm, as a trading adventure, sent an enterprising, clever young man, in- structed to thread every port, river, creek, and bay on the coast, and learn by what means and with what goods the slavers purchased the slaves. It was found that nine-tenths of the goods used in the traffic were of British manufacture. His firm directly fitted out a ship, freighted with such goods, and sent her into the very nest of the slave-trade, to see whether those who sold the slaves would not perhaps use those slaves in making produce to exchange for the goods. The result was the suspension of every slaver's trade, and the fast filling of the ship with palm-oil.

We are wrong in preventing traffic between the African coast and our West India islands. Free-labour can be had on that coast to any amount at a dollar a month and only rice for food, without reference to time or sort of service. He never sent a ship but canoes of twenty or thirty men came off to her, ready to be engaged on these terms. He knows persons lately on the spot who will engage for 41. 10s. per man to plant on the West India islands as many men as they can take, willing to work for twelve, twenty-four, or thirty-six moons, at a dollar per month, with passage home at the end of the term. The slave costs 41. on the coast, and 1001. when landed in Brazil: let all restrictions be removed and the squadron suppressed, and free-labour would go across the sea at one-twentieth the cost of the labour of slaves.

Mr. Jackson complained of the want of support British merchants had received. "I mast confess, it seems to me that ever since the Committee sat in 1842, a dead set has been made at the Liverpool merchants, in order to create an impression that they were directly or indirectly engaged in the slave-trade. When first I entered into the African trade in 1820, only 1,500 tuns of palm-oil were imported into Liverpool; when I left off business, the imports of that article amounted to 23,000 tuns. Believe me, the trade with Africa is altogether undervalued—I might almost say overlooked. Yet our imports from Africa amount in value to 1,000,0001., and they are all carried in British bottoms, manned by British sea- men. More than this, they are exchanged for British manufactured goods. A more legitimate system of commerce never existed. If this commerce were fostered instead of being discouraged, it would in itself put an end to the slave- trade, because it would have the effect of making the Blacks more valuable as producers of articles of commerce than they could be as exported slaves. The free labourers also, on their return from the West Indies, would carry back with them some of the arts of civilization. They would know how to till the ground—how to sow and to reap; and, by their means, the cotton-plant would be cultivated on millions of acres, the produce of which we should obtain in ex- change for our manufactured goods. 1 do not hesitate to say, that in a few years Africa would be able to take as many manufactured goods as we could conve- niently supply. Instead of 1,000,0001. of exports, we might send 10,000,0001.; and a more legitimate trade does not exist on the face of the earth. Gold as coin is not known in Africa; dollars are seldom heard of; all our trade is carried on by barter, in which we exchange British manufactured goods for the produce of the country. I beg this House and the Government to direct their attention to the increase of commerce with the African coast, because I know that it will prove a fund of wealth, whilst at the same time it will be attended with the great advantage of doing away with the curse of the slave-trade, in the manner which I have already explained to the House. I speak with confidence because I speak from experience. My experience, too, has been purchased by considerable sacri- fices. Two of my brothers have left their bones on the coast of Africa, and I have seen many friends depart for that place who have never returned. All my experience has not, however, been of the same melancholy character: I have seen some friends return; one has recently come back in health, after twelve years' re- sidence in Africa. When my house was engaged in the African trade, we did not hesitate to carry our traffic into the interior of Africa. We had a trading station where Davison's dust lies; and three hundred miles further up the river we did not hesitate to plant a White man, who had no protection but the good faith of the Black man. We ever found the relations of the Blacks with us were based on good faith and honest intentions. I assure you that the Black character is misunderstood. No race of men is more intelligent, more desirous of obtaining knowledge, or more anxious to extend commercial relations and advance in the path of civilization. I recollect that the first vessel we freighted to Africa carried out 1,000 barrels of gunpowder and 10,000 muskets; our last vessel contained not a single barrel of powder nor one musket, but amongst its cargo was 1,5001. worth of household furniture. What, I should like to know, can tend to civilize Africa so much as the enterprise of British merchants? I have sent out house after house, and followed that up by sending out embellishments for the houses. On the banks of the rivers where we traded we found the males and females in a state of nudity; but after the lapse of some time the women placed cloth over their loins, next covered their bosoms, and the men clothed themselves in jackets and trousers. (Cheers and laughter.) Although what I have stated may amuse the House, it must be allowed to be an interesting fact. I want the House to lis- ten to these facts, in order that it may know that the efforts of the British mer- chants have not been altogether misdirected. If commerce between Africa and the Islands be emancipated, I do not hesitate to say that, by adopting the means I recommend, you will more easily attain the great object which you have at heart than by 10,000 ships manned by 1,000,000 of seamen." (Much cheering.)

Sir ROBERT brows praised Mr. Jackson's speech; and much regretted that such knowledge and experience had not been brought before the Com- mittee which sat some years ago on the subject. It was not to be denied that the efforts made to suppress the slave-trade aggravated its horrors. Still, he thought the system was not a failure, and that it ought not to be abandoned.

Mr. HUME was prepared to prove all Mr. Hutt's propositions by separate evidence of his own collecting. Mr. CARDWELL thought that neither on the ground of treaties, of naval expenditure, of just consideration to our own men and officers, nor the great ground of humanity itself on which we had undertaken this unsuc- cessful enterprise, could satisfaction be felt with the status quo of the slavery question. Inquiry being therefore most desirable, he approved of the Com-

mittee. PALMERSTON did not oppose the Committee; but he thought Mr. Hutt had made exaggerated statements and come to false conclusions.

For instance, stating that 50,000 slaves were landed in America, he assumes 100,000 to haye left Africa. The loss in former times was 12 per cent in the

Theand is now but 17 per cent: Mr. Hutt, however, puts it at 100 per cent. The very statement made that the price is so great in America, is proof that the supply is much narrowed and diminished. Lord Palmerston combated the received notion that the horrors of the transit had been aggravated by our pre- ventive measures; and he referred for proof to the ample details of horrors given in accounts of former times. He could not admit that commerce was an equal foe to slave-traffic. It was one means, though not strong enough in itself. If ear forces were withdrawn from Africa, the whole coast would swarm again with pirates and slavers, and fair commerce be driven utterly away. He adverted to our treaties, and paid a tribute to the good faith of the French Government in their share of the operations. He hoped that the Committee would at all events not come to the conclusion of reversing our present system. It were sad indeed to retrace our steps, now that only two powers remained on whom we had not prevailed to join us in making this traffic piracy to its citizens. Those two countries are Spain and Brazil. We have succeeded in nearly cutting off the slave-trade with the Spanish Colonies. Cuba has less than one-sixth of the former arrivals within the past three years. He hoped also by perseverance to be successful either with or against Brazil. Lord GEORGE &scrums. observed, that as many as 2,000 slaves annu- ally got safe to Cuba; our fleets captured some 3,000 more; some 60,000 annually got to Brazil: it seems therefore that at a cost of 700,0001. a year we save one slave only out of every twenty torn from the African coast. Such humanity is terribly dear.

Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON supported the motion; Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. WARD opposed it; Mr. Hurt replied; and the Committee was ordered.

The rame subject was discussed in the House of Lords on the same day. The Earl of ABERDEEN drew attention to the state of the African squad- ron; deprecating its abandonment, and insisting on its success.

He had witnessed with pain the partial change which had passed over the pub- lic mind on slavery. The number of the sufferers is diminishing gradually but surely, so that we may soon look for a total cessation of the traffic. The returns on their Lordships' table showed the reports on the health of the ships to have been incredibly exaggerated. The returns for 1847 gave an annual mortality of not above two per cent, a loss by no means equal to induce us to relinquish such an enterprise. The Waterwitch had in November last lost but one man in three years. He saw in the great success of the squadron reason to hope that our efforts were near being crowned with perfect success. The annual importation into Cuba was formerly about 13,000; under General Valdez it sunk to 3,000; it rose under aDonnel to 8,000 in 1843, and 10,000 in 1844. In the spring of 1846, the plans of Captain Denman, for more closely blockading the coast of Africa, were first fully carried out; and the result was that the number of importations fell in that year to 1,300_ In 1846 down to October, there was actually not a single slave landed. So with Brazil there had

i

been a large success: the importations were reduced in 1845 to 16,000 from an average of 100,000 for the years 1835-40. There is reason to believe that a considerable number of these 16,000 came from the Mozambique coast, in Eastern Mrica. Two additional ships might be well stationed to close the Mozambique Channel. He little thoughtf,When preparing these measures, which had secured such results, that our own legislation should presently be directed to impair their efficacy—that we should ourselves apply a great stimulus to the slave-trade while endeavouring to suppress it with our craizers. Lord Aberdeen concluded by moving for a return of the number of vessels cap- tured by the ships employed in her Majesty's service on the coast of Africa during the years 1845, 1846, and 1847; also a return of the captures made by the United States squadron for the same period, together with those made by the French squadron for the two years 1846 and 1847. The Earl of AUCKLAND had no objection to the returns, but did not know how to get at the American documents. The arrangements made by Sir Charles Adam had been so perfect, that the African coast can be Proved to be not more unhealthy than any other Tropical station. The last letter reported more captures and fewer invalids than in any year previous.

Lord STANLEY contradicted a report, to which Lord Aberdeen bad al- luded, that be had expressed a wish for the abandonment of the squadron.

The Bishop of EXETER hoped that if it were to be the separate policy of this country to encourage the slave-trade by admitting slave-grown sugar, the blockade would be removed, so that the sufferings of the slaves might mitigated on the passage. Earl GREY, Lord DENMAN, and Lord Assmunrow, made speeches in the Anti-Slavery sense.

The returns were ordered.

URQUHART versus PALMERSTON.

On Wednesday, in the morning sitting of the House of Commons, Mr. ANSTEY delivered, in a speech of four or five hours, his enormous schedule of accusations against Lord Palmerston's policy of the last seventeen years. He commenced with the case of Poland in 1830 and Cracow in 1841, and charged Lord Palmerston with being accessory, both before and after the fact, to the criminal absorption of the Polish nation by the Russian empire. He showed how Lord Palmerston had uniformly subserved to the purposes of Russia. In 1830, France proposed to England to interfere by remonstrance, and afterwards more directly for the Poles. Lord Palmerston refused. Sweden began busily to arm for a diversion by her fleet in behalf of Poland, and to recover her Baltic pro- vinces: Lord Palmerston stopped the armament by peremptory representations at Stockholm. The army of Persia was already three days on its march to the Rus- sian frontier, when Lord Palmerston's messenger started hot-footed after it, and arrested it by threatening war in the rear from India. Turkey made ready to cross the Balkan with 200,000 horse, and was similarly curbed by his Lordship's menaces. The leaders of the Belgian Congress were induced to acqui- esce in the mediation of England by Lord Palmerston's implied assurances of in- tervention for the national existence of Poland: these assurances were afterwards evaded by his Lordship on the most frivolous pretences. Another time sub- sequently, Turkey, Sweden, France, and even Austria, were anxious to co- operate in support of the independence of Cracow: Lord Palmerston, by a course of alternate heartless inactivity and intrigue abroad and disingenuous Parliamentary tactics at home, helped Russia to force Austria in the last great crime, the absorption of Cracow. Mr. Anstey read at length Lord Palmerston's de- spatch of the 11th September to Austria, [inserted in last week's Spectator]: there Lord Palmerston held the treaty of Vienna to be still in force, and in- sulted Austria with innuendos of her objects in Italy against states not protected ky the treaty of Vienna: what did he think of the force of that treaty when Poland was divided and Cracow swallowed up? What meant his complacent de- spatches in 1830 and 1841 to Russia, when she was assassinating the liberties of states expressly protected by that treaty ? So much for the case of Poland. If the House granted him the documents that he moved for, he would substantiate his accusations in exact details.

Mr. Anstey then dealt in succession with similar charges against Lord Palmer- ston relating to Turkey, Persia, and America. He reviewed and criticized the history of the treaties of Adrianople and of Unkiar Skeleasi, and saw in the sue- ceas of Russia both times the direct agency of a Russian Minister in the British Cabinet He ventilated the whole of .61r. Urquhart's grievances; detailed the his- tory of the special political missions intrusted to that gentleman by the late King William; recalled the facts about the Portfolio, a publication supported by the King, alternately patronized and disavowed by Lord Palmerston, but paid for wholly by Mr. Unpituirt ; and related some small political scandals about divers Collisions which arose between the late King and his Lordship. Ranging from Circassia to Egypt, he charged Colonel Du Plat, the British Consul at Warsaw, with falsifications regarding the mans of Minsk; and attacked Mr. Fonblanque at Belgrade. Ile traced the isolation of France in 1840 to Lord Palmerston's per- fidious dealings with Russia, as between Turkey and Mehemet Ali; and lamented the frivolity which had prompted French statesmen to quit a grand and elevated position and accede to the treaty of 1841. He traced the Spanish marriages to the events of Cracow; and opposed a direct statement of Lord Palmerston in 1839, when he asserted the treaty of Utrecht had expired by effiuxion of time to his making it the ground of resistance against the Spanish marriages. He charged Lord Palmerston with falsifying Sir.Alexander Burnes's despatches, and thereby inducing a war with Persia, which had turned that state from an inveterate enemy of Russia into her dependent and friend. He attributed the annexation of Texas to America, and the present war against Mexico to direct and express efforts of Lord Palmerston's diplomacy. The state of our relations with Portugal was also of his unfortunate contrivance. With regard to the slave-trade, our policy is necessarily ineffective in his hands, from the dishonesty and faithlessness of his policy at one time or other with every one of the present powers of Europe. This stream of accusation was stopped once by the SPEAKER for the use of nnparliamentary directness of phrase; and Mr. ANSTRY withdrew his expressions, with a mixture of frank deference to the Speaker and the House with a fall repetition in spirit of the phrases he nominally withdrew. Mr. URQUHART seconded the motion for papers.

Mr. SHELL noted the strange " swop " between Mr. Anstey and MY. Urquhart, by which the Member for Stafford was to move a repeal of the Irish Union, and the Member for Yonghal was to bring forward this mo- tion: the world had been bartered for College Green.

The Urquhart motion has, however, been relinquished; Ireland has been given up, and the universe retained. It has been ingeniously arranged that the Member for Youghal shall lure forth the Foreign Secretary to engage him in reply, and then the Member for Stafford shall rush from his ambush, and fasten with brave impunity on his rear. (Laughter and cheers.) Mr. Sheil had come down in- tending to defend his friend on a general review of his acts and policy, and to show that he was always high-minded, direct, and true. This he could have done without fulsome adulation; for that was only less odious than envenomed vituperation, wherein the foulness of the tongue did but denote the distemper of the understanding or vitiation of the heart. But he changed his purpose. " When I heard him [Mr. Anstey] in his desultory and vague harangue, give utterance to gross contumelies—when I saw him discharging that vituperation, against which the instinct of his audience revolted—when I heard him charge my noble friend with deliberate falsehood—(Loud cheers)—when I heard him say that the noble Lord had procured Mr. Backhouse to countersign a 'lie'—(Loud cheers)—when I heard him say that Mr. Backhouse had pined to death under the sense of all the guilt and of all the shame which had been inflicted upon him by the noble Lord—(Loud cheers)—when I heard him again and again violate all the decencies of the House of Commons, until you, Sir, not to protect the noble Lord, by whom these preposterous accusations should be despised—(Loud cheers)—but in order to save the House of Commons from the maculation upon its dignity, were compelled to interpose, I felt that the speech of the honourable and learned gentleman did not call for any animadversion, and that my noble friend ought to listen to it with an apathy with which commiseration ought not to be unmixed." (Loud cheering.) Mr. URQuaANT supported the motion; and detailed his personal share in the matter.

He firmly believed the allegations which had been made that day. Under that conviction he had sacrificed every worldly pleasure, health, prospects, and fortune ,• and he exposed himself at that hour to a heavier misfortune than all—the risk of their disdain. He appealed to them, as the grand inquest of the nation and the representatives of the people, to favour and advance the inquiry.

Lord PALMERSTON rose to reply at a quarter to six o'clock. He would avoid not imitate the use of language disgraceful to the user, and at variance with the usages of the House, the courtesy of society, or the practice of gentle- men. If the House pleased to inquire into his public conduct from the first day of his public life till that present moment, there was no document or public paper, or even a private letter of his own, which he would not with pride submit for examination.

The catalogue of distorted facts and perverted statements which they had heard, resembled the confused images of a kaleidoscope out of order. Some of the events touched on happened before he was born. He was accused of being a Russian Minister, because, by luck, the Russian Ambassador thought he had once made a good speech: the honourable Member might rest safely that no such accusa- tion against him would arise out of the present occasion. Lord Palmerston had never said he approved of the treaty of Adrianople—he had done otherwise; but he thought Russia had had a fair cause of war, and the treaty was the terms im- posed by the conqueror.

When six o'clock arrived, the SPEAKER declared that the debate must be adjourned, to stand as an order of the day for Thursday.

The House came to that order, however, so late on Thursday night, that the debate was again postponed.

EXEMPTION FROM LOCAL TAXATION. On Thursday, Mr. POULETT SCROPE obtained leave to introduce a bill to exempt small dwellings from assess- ment to local rates. He proposed that in rural districts, houses under the value of 51. should be exempted from the rates; in towns of from 10,000 to 50,000 in- habitants, the limit should be 81.; and in cities like Liverpool the exemption should extend to houses of 101. value. Sir GEORGE GREY allowed the motion to pass, but announced future resistance.

THE PUBLIC HEALTH BILL was read a second time in the House of Commons on Monday.

HARE-KILLING. On Thursday, Mr. Cor..vux moved for leave to introduce* bill which would enable all occupiers of land, having a right to kill hares on their estates, to do so without being obliged to take out game-certificates. The motion was carried, with a very general concurrence on all sides of the House.

CRIMINAL APPEALS. On Thursday, Mr. EWART obtained leave to bring in a bill for giving to prisoners the right of appeal in criminal cases. Sir GEORGE GREY, however, threatened opposition at subsequent stages.

ENTAILS IN SCOTLAND. On Thursday, Mr. RUT HERFT/RD (Lord Advocate) introduced a bill to amend the law of entails in Scotland. Its main provisions are these. Future entails will be assimilated to those of the English law; only heirs under twenty-five years of age will not be empowered to cat off the entail. In the case of existing entails, a power to cut off will be given, jointly, to the holder of the estate, the heir, and a curator representing the junior children. Sums borrowed for improvement will be made chargeable on the estate, so as to be spread over twenty-five or twenty-seven years. .fhe bill was supported by Mr. Cummixo BaccE, Mr. BAILUE Cocinia!rz, and Mr. STUARTWORTLEY; Mr. FRANcLS Score approved of the prospective but not of the retrospective part. Mr. FORBES MACKENZIE hoped that ample time would be allowed between the first and second reading, for the consideration of the bill in Scotland. Mr. En- THERFuliD promised that it should. ALIENATION OF ENCUMBERED ESEATE8 IN IRELAND. On Thursday, the LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second reading of the Encumbered Estates (Ire- land) Bill, with a very brief explanation of its well-known objects. The measure received support from various sections of the House; and was read a second time; to be committed that day fortnight.

THE UNITED IRISHMAN. On Thursday, Lord STANLEY drew attention to a new Dublin journal, the United Irishman; reading specimens of its openly seditious writing. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE agreed with Lord Stanley in thinking that the publication proved that there was no extent of sedition, false- hood, or exaggeration, to which, in the pursuit of notoriety, and in the exercise of their vocation, these young gentlemen of " no property" en Ireland were not ready to go; but it does not follow that it would be beat to institute prosecutions. There are cases in which the character or want of character of the persons en- gaged in such efforts deprives them of influence. The subject had already re- ceived attention from the Irish Government, and he would leave it to the discre- tion of the Lord-Lieutenant.