presented a petition from the Clerks in the civil departments of government, complaining, that against the fair principles of justice, and the conditions under which they were admitted to serve the public, and against the provisions of an act of 1810, they were taxed to the amount of 5 per cent upon their salaries, for contributions towards the Superannuated Fund. The hon. Gentleman supported the petition, and declared the sense which he entertained of the injustice and impolicy of the act of 1822, under which this unequal tax was levied.

said, he took no blame to himself, as he had done all that he could to prevent the House from adopting the measure. He hoped that government would lose no time in taking off so oppressive a burthen from the shoulders of those who were so little able to bear it.

said, he had never approved of the measure. It was unjust, because it was a particular tax upon particular persons, with whose emoluments government could have no more right to tamper than with those of the army and navy, or any other class of persons. It was also unwise, because it operated to the changing of the tenure upon which the persons so taxed had been accustomed to serve. It went to give them a greater claim to retired allowances, than should ever be allowed to the subordinate clerks of the departments. Now, however, the mischief was done; and he was not prepared to say that he could devise any feasible measure for a substitute; though it would be very agreeable to him to hear that his right hon. friend was prepared with one.

said, that undoubtedly, it seemed a hardship to control the emoluments of those who were ill enough paid already, considering their merits and services; but, the House must look at the situation in which the question stood. In former times, the pay of the officers arose from fees, much more than from salaries. Those fees were very lucrative, and enabled the holders, by gra- dual promotion to the highest station in each office, to provide for their own retirement on the approach of age and infirmity. There were also minor sinecures at the disposal of government, with which long and useful service was frequently rewarded. Gradually both fees and sinecures were so reduced, that government had not sufficient means for that purpose. The practice then altered to the granting of retired allowances; which certainly did grow to a bulk which justified the interference of parliament. Government being thus reproached, had recourse to the act of 1810, by which it was certainly not intended to convey a prescriptive right to retired allowance. But then each department was left at liberty to settle the retired allowances of its servants, and a new grievance sprung out of this power, especially in the Customs and Excise, which again provoked the attention of parliament, and the enactment of which this petition complained was the result of the whole. It was not exactly the sort of hardship which had been described. The payers had their quid pro quo, in the claim to retirement; and as to the exclusive nature of it, there was a regulation of the very same sort which required contributions from the navy to the chest at Greenwich.

said, it seemed very hard, after the reductions which had been made, that those regulations should be continued, by which the clerks were expected to continue their respective services for double the period formerly required, and that all the recompense they received in the way of superannuation allowance, should be from money which they had paid out of their own pockets. He had no connexion whatever with the petitioners, of whom he knew but three, and those only by sight. He trusted that their case would receive the consideration of the government, and that they would be restored to the footing on which they before stood, in 1818.

bore testimony to the ability, integrity, and fidelity of the persons spoken of. At the period of his coming into office as secretary of state, he found that the measure, against the effect of which the present petition was directed, had been agreed upon. He saw that if was intended to operate universally, and he could not, therefore, claim an exemption in favour of those who were to be employed under him. The House would recollect, that it was alone responsible for this measure; which was forced upon the government, and to which they could not object, as it contained a proposition to lower their own salaries.

said, that the sentiments of the right hon. secretary had his warm concurrence. He had long been of opinion, that the government officers, from the highest to the lowest, were very inadequately paid.

hoped, that the former decision of the House would not be suffered to prejudice the claims of the petitioners; but that justice would be done to a very deserving class of persons, who had endured considerable privation by the measure.

said, the regulation had been adopted at a period when a very loud cry had been raised for universal retrenchment. In this and in other instances he thought it had been listened to unwisely and unjustly.

said, that the ground upon which the measure had been adopted, was the great increase which had been found in the superannuation list, and the amount of the expense which it brought upon the country. When the measure had been proposed, the late lord Londonderry objected to the clerks in public offices being left without any provision after age should have incapacitated them for further service. Upon that occasion, the House agreed that some provision ought to be made for them, and the regulations alluded to were adopted in consequence. He (Mr. H.) had himself proposed the 14th clause, by which it was provided, that in case of the death of any of these officers before he should be entitled to, or have enjoyed, the superannuated fund, the whole sums that he might have paid should be considered as his personal property, and handed over to his representatives. The superannuation system, therefore, was in the nature of a tontine, and was in no case a benefit to the public, but to the persons by whose contributions it was kept up. He thought the House ought not to suffer itself to be run away with by any fancied liberality, and should be cautious in undoing what had been done on very due deliberation.

would not have risen, but for the remark made by the hon. member for Aberdeen, respecting the increase in the superannuation list. That such an increase bad taken place at the period to which he alluded, was very true; but nothing could be more easy than to explain the cause by which it was produced. Under the former system which prevailed with respect to government offices, large fees were permitted to be received, and there was a considerable number of small sinecure offices which were at the disposal of those who had the direction of the various departments. These two sources furnished a provision for the clerks, when they were no longer competent to the discharge of their duties. Parliament, however, thought fit to abolish the fees and the offices to which he alluded; but no substitute was then provided for the aged clerks. Those who had the direction of them had the painful alternative of either seeing the public duty ill-performed, or of dismissing those who had once been highly serviceable, without the means of existence at an advanced time of life. It was necessary that they should be removed, and he asked if common humanity did not demand, that some provision should be made for such persons? This would account for the rapid increase of the superannuation list soon after the system was established; and the rapid mortality which followed it was the best proof he could give, that the persons admitted deserved the aid which was afforded them by it. Before it was imputed to the government of that day, that they had been lavish or wasteful in distributing this fund, it should be known, that the average number of years that the persons on the superannuated list had served the public was twenty-nine; and the average stipend was 94l. per annum. He would ask, whether this was a wasteful distribution of the public money? The total amount was a large one, but it had grown out of the circumstances he had explained to the House. Whatever the House might choose to do, he was sure that no persons could be more gratified than himself and his colleagues, if any further reward should be given to the services of those persons, whose merits and fidelity they had a daily opportunity of witnessing.

hoped, that the hon. member for Yorkshire would be encouraged by the favourable reception of the petition, to bring the subject again before the House.

trusted that the prayer of the petition would be agreed to; as he thought that the officers of the Crown were not sufficiently paid.

said, he would take his share of the odium which attached to the measure complained of, because he thought at the time it was carried, that the interests of the country required retrenchment in every practicable shape. He should now be no less willing to give the alteration suggested his fullest support, if it should appear expedient.

said, that two years only had elapsed since the House was pursuing a rapid race of retrenchment and economy, and he begged to ask what reason had been given, why they should pursue a contrary extreme? He trusted that the subject would be fully discussed before any alteration was determined on.

said, that when the ministers had taken off all the assessed taxes, he should be glad to concur in the proposal to reward more amply the public officers. Until then, the intended liberality would be ill-timed.

intimated, that he should probably, at an early opportunity, introduce the subject in another form.

rose to bring under the consideration of the House, the subject of which he had given notice: namely, the Drawbacks, or Bounties, which were paid on the exportation of Sugar. His object was, to procure the appointment of a select committee, to consider the question; and he trusted that he should make it appear to the House, that such a measure was called for by peculiar circumstances. It would be necessary for him, at the outset, to show how the affair stood. In the first place, the West-India interest possessed a monopoly of sugar in the English market against all other countries in which sugar was produced, with the exception of the East Indies. But the sugar which was imported from the East Indies paid a duty of 10s. more than that which was imported from the British West-Indies. The sugar imported from the West-Indies paid a duty of 27s. per cwt. when the price was under 47s., and of 30s. when the price was above 47s.; therefore, the sum which constituted the difference between the high and low duty was only 3s., which he considered too little. It happened that when sugar was exported to the continent, it received a drawback, not commensurate with, but greater than the duty which it had on importation, to the extent of 3s. A bounty of 3s. was there- fore given on exported sugar. This fact could not be denied; but that was not the whole of the question. The sugar which was exported was in a refined state, and received a further drawback. In the process of refining, a considerable quantity of molasses was necessarily abstracted from the sugar, and the weight was therefore diminished. For instance, 112lb. of sugar yielded only 56lb. of refined sugar, when prepared for the home market. But he was informed, that when the sugar was intended for exportation, it was not sufficiently refined; but a considerable quantity of molasses was left unextracted from it. The consequence was, that instead of 1121b. of raw sugar yielding only 561b. of refined sugar, that quantity generally produced from 60lb. to 65lb. The price of molasses in the market was from 25s. to 30s.; therefore there was an enormous profit on the exported sugar, which, as he had shown, contained several pounds of molasses which ought to have been extracted. After reaching the continent, the sugar underwent another process of refinement, to fit it for the market there. It would be a material point for the committee to consider the effect produced upon the home market by the continuance of the bounties. The consumption of sugar in Great Britain, in 1823, was 1,130,000 cwt. The excess which was exported was 560,000, upon which the public paid a bounty of 168,000l. The principle of abolishing bounties had been adopted recently with regard to Ireland and Scotland; and he had yet to learn either the justice or the policy of continuing them upon the exportation of sugar. He was aware that he should be told of the distressed state of the West-India interest. He acknowledged the existence of that distress; but he felt that it was his duty, as a member of parliament, to endeavour to point out the causes which produced that result, in order that it might be ultimately removed. In considering this part of the question, it was necessary to ascertain, whether the distress which existed in the West-Indies was of a temporary or of a permanent nature—whether it was likely that it could be removed by palliatives, or whether it had its root in the system itself upon which the West-Indies were conducted, and whether it would not be necessary to change that system altogether, before any good could be effected. He would read to the House a few statements, which would prove that the distress in which the West-India interest was at present involved was not of a novel but of a permanent nature. In 1792, Mr. Bryan Edwards had said, "The great mass of planters are men of oppressed fortune, consigned by debt to unremitting drudgery in the colonies, with a hope, which eternally mocks their grasp, of happier days, and a release from their embarrassments." In 1785, Mr. Tobin declared, that for "one planter that lives at his ease in Great Britain, there are fifty toiling under a load of debt in the colonies." A report of a committee of the House of Assembly at Jamaica, in 1792, contained the following passage:—"In the course of 20 years, 177 estates in Jamaica have been sold for the payment of debts; 55 estates have been thrown up; 92 are still in the hands of creditors; and 80,021 executions, amounting to 22,563,786l. sterling, have been lodged in the provost's office." Another report, made in 1804, after describing a state of great distress, states, that "a faithful detail would have the appearance of a frightful caricature." Again, in 1807, another report contained the following passage:—"The sugar estates lately thrown up, brought to sale, and now in the court of Chancery in this island and in England, amount to about one-fourth of the whole number in the colony." Similar facts were stated in a report which was made in 1811. All these testimonies proved, that with regard to the West-Indies, distress was the rule, and prosperity the exception. Experience had proved, that in every age, and in every part of the world, such a state of things inevitably produced the depopulation of the country in which it existed. The reason why such a result had not occurred with respect to the West-India colonies was this—that they were possessed by a country abounding in riches and capital, a portion of which had been continually pouring into them. The state of the West-India colonies was more deplorable than that of the most wretched and inhospitable parts of the world. Even in Lapland, prosperity was the rule, and distress the exception; the reverse was unfortunately the case in the West-India colonies.—These were the grounds which had induced him to look into the question in the manner he had done, and he should now proceed to state the causes from which, as it appeared to him, principally arose the distress of this branch of trade. These were—the absence of the proprietors of the estates, mortgages, consignments to mortgagees, and the expense in the system of management, in consequence of having the estates in the hands of overseers, instead of being in the hands of the proprietors themselves. These were all, in their different respects, materially important, but still only subservient to that great cause upon which all the rest depended. He would not disguise from the House his sincere opinion, that this main cause of distress and misery was the system of slave-labour. He was well aware of the difficulties which any man had to encounter who touched upon this subject, and how difficult a thing it was, to obtain a favourable hearing; but, however unfavourably he might be received, he must discharge what he felt to be his duty, and without meaning to enter at very great length, endeavour to place, by a few facts, the opinion he entertained in an obvious point of view. He had already stated, that the principle distress arose from the principle of slave-labour. That slave-labour was always of necessity more costly than free, was not stated now for the first time: it had been invariably recognized as true, by all who had examined the subject, unbiased by the influence of interest; and he should endeavour to shew the similarity which our colonies bore In this respect to different countries at different periods, with a view to prove that the statement was correct. The greater expense of slave-labour proceeded upon this principle—there must be some inducement to make men work; labour was not natural; there must be either some feeling of interest, or some principle of coercion. Now then, which will, interest or coercion, produce the greater quantity of labour? When a man works, influenced by a feeling of interest, he endeavours to accumulate a fund to provide for the wants of old age and infancy, and which he superintends with care and diligence: but, in the other case, it is far different; for when a fund is left at the disposal of managers, it is generally regulated without any attention to economy. This was the general principle; and having shewn the view he took of the subject, he did not feel it necessary to go further into this part of the subject, but be should endeavour to illustrate his principle by example. Now, let any man who was at all acquainted with the nature of agricultural labour employ a man to work by the job, the day, or by compulsion. Do we not know, that with the first, the man works with all his zeal and power and energy; that in the second, his exertions will be smaller; but that in the third, his labour, as compared with the other two cases, will not only be very deficient in quantity, but in quality? The subject was so abundant in instances, and they presented themselves from so many quarters, that his embarrassment consisted, not in the scarcity of examples but the difficulty of making a selection. Now, he would first refer to ancient Italy; and there he found that the writers on rural economy traced the decline in the prosperity of the country to the system of slave-labour. The same thing was to be remarked in the United States of America. In the northern parts of that extensive country, labour was free, whilst in the south it was done by a slave population; and it had been remarked, that the moment you pass the boundary by which the country was so distinguished, the difference became immediately perceptible. In the north the farms were small, the farm-houses comfortable, and a general air of comfort seemed to prevail: the lands appeared to be in a slate of fertility, and were managed with every attention to economy. But when you crossed the; boundary, you found a state of things exactly the reverse: labour itself sickened and drooped under the influence of slavery [hear, hear !]. The slave-owners, it was true, lived in a state of magnificence, but then they were surrounded by the miserable hovels of the unfortunate slaves, who cultivated the soil under their direction. It was also a matter of considerable importance, as affecting the value of land. For instance, in Virginia and Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, where labour was free, the value of land was one-third higher than in Virginia. In Maryland, in the lower part of which slave-labour was carried on, the distinction was still greater. To follow this up with all the instances he could adduce, would occupy too much of the time of the House; but, before he quitted this part of the subject, he begged to call the attention of the House to one particular instance, which was, in his judgment, entitled to the fullest consideration. The case had been alluded to before in that House, and nothing, as it appeared to him, could be so conclusive. He meant the case of the hon. Josias Steele, of Barbadoes. This gentleman's estate yielded him a very small return upon which he lived in England: finding himself embarrassed, he went over to the colony, with a view to ascertain whether there was any thing in the system which tended to produce the distress in which he found himself involved. Being a gentleman of a comprehensive mind, and not likely to be affected by the prejudices necessarily springing out of a state of slavery, he turned his attention to the system. He had a property of 1,060 acres and 288 slaves, amongst whom, in the space of three years, there were 15 births, and 57 deaths. Immediately on his arrival he proceeded to take measures for the amelioration of his slaves. He introduced a system of having negroes tried by negro courts, and abolished whipping; and the consequence of these wise changes was, that in the space of four years and three months from the introduction of the new system, the number of births was 44, the deaths 41, and, with respect to the improvement of his estate, the nett amount of his profit was increased more than treble. So that here we find the consequence of this judicious course of policy was, an increase of births, a decrease of deaths, and an augmentation of property [hear, hear !]. Under circumstances of freedom, if property be secure, the effect must be, to accumulate the national wealth, and promote the national prosperity. Look to that interesting colony on the shores of Africa, Sierra Leone; and he alluded to it particularly, because its internal constitution was the same as that of our West-India colonies; and he was sure that any one who examined its condition would discover a degree of comfort, a rapid progress of wealth and civilization, and of that moral wealth which distinguished man, such as was not surpassed in any other country in the world. He would beg to turn the attention of the House to the amount of duties which were annually received there. He had a return from 1812 to 1823, but he should not trouble the House with going through the entire. However, he found that the produce of the duties amounted in the year 1812 to 1,922l.; in 1813 to 1,538l.; in 1820 to 6,153l.; in 1821 to 6,314l.; in 1822 to 4,764l.; but in 1823 the duties amounted in three quarters to 6,939l.; and if the other quarter was in the same proportion,: it would be more than double what it had been in 1822. This, then, proved a considerable increase of trade; and public buildings, churches and other improve- ments were going on rapidly. Their trade was extending in the interior of Africa, and persons from the river Niger came to trade with this very interesting colony, and carried away its various productions. Why then, when we saw such beneficial effects flowing from a system which was not clogged with restrictions, or prohibitions, or monopolies, why should we not expect the same effects, if the same causes were put into operation in other colonies? The next document to which he should refer, related to the state of trade in Hayti, which was drawn up by one of the secretaries of state belonging to that island; and this would clearly demonstrate that Hayti was making a progress to prosperity no less rapid than the country to which he had just alluded. He did not mean to trouble the House by enumerating all the items in this long document; but there were some of the statements it contained to which he prayed particular attention. In 1822, the number of ships employed in the import trade amounted to 1,135, the tonnage was 121,474, the amount of the cargoes was 13,017,890 dollars, the duty to the state amounted to 1,477,178 dollars. In the export trade, the number of ships employed was 700; the tonnage 78,769; the total value of the exports of their various commodities was 9,020,397 dollars, and the total duty on exports was, 1,365,402 dollars. The state of Hayti was in the enjoyment of freedom and security, and there was no reason to infer, that the same results would not follow a similar system, whenever it might be introduced. He held another document in his hand on the same subject, and he was sorry it was in the French language, because he was prevented from reading its contents to the House; for it exhibited the most delightful picture of the prosperity of the people, and demonstrated in the most conclusive manner, the advancement of the country in agriculture. He was aware that he had trespassed too long upon the attention of the House [hear, hear!], and should immediately come to that part of the question which it would be expedient to consider, provided the sum now paid on the export of sugar should be devoted to promote the prosperity of these islands. What he should propose was, that the sum raised upon the people of this country (and which he should be able to prove, if the House would grant him a committee), should be devoted to promote the great object of emancipation. He did not mean to propose any violent change in the present system. He was persuaded, that the easiest means of facilitating the object would be that proposed by the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Canning) in one of his resolutions respecting Trinidad; namely, that the slaves should have one day in the week allotted to them to raise a fund by which they might ultimately be enabled to purchase their emancipation. This, he thought, would be a measure of wise policy; and, if a sum of money could be raised equal to that now levied on the people, the effect would be, to promote, to a very great degree, the emancipation of the slaves, whilst at the same time it would confer a great benefit upon those who received the purchase money, and would also abolish that system from which their distress arose [hear, hear!]. There were various other ways in which such a fund might be rendered available to the object, but he should not trespass longer on their patience. He would implore the House to grant the committee for which he meant to move, not with a view to go into those points to which he had alluded latterly, but specifically to inquire into the operation of these bounties, in order to ascertain, whether the view he had taken of the subject were correct, and whether this sum was or was not raised on the people as he had stated it. That fact being proved, it would be a subject for further consideration, in what manner so large a sum could be most beneficially applied. He wished distinctly to have it understood, that he proposed to limit the inquiry to the object he had stated, and if his opinion should be corroborated, it would be seen that there existed a system quite at variance with those principles of free and unrestricted trade, upon which the government professed to act. He should now conclude by moving "That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the Bounties paid upon the export of Sugar."

said, that so large a portion of the able dissertation of his hon. friend had been addressed to the great question of slavery, and so small a portion of it to the very narrow question of which he had given notice; namely, the drawbacks on the exportation of sugar, that he thought the House would agree with him in thinking, that it would have been much more properly addressed to the House, when the great question was under their consideration, if his hon. friend was not prepared with some practical measure to be introduced in the present session with reference to this portentous question, and all the important considerations growing out of it. After the feeling which had been generally expressed on the subject in that House, and the mode in which it had been determined to approach it, he thought it would have been much better if the hon. member had left the subject to the executive government, and not have agitated a question which was fraught with such fearful consequences. His hon. friend had stated at large his abstract views, founded upon moral considerations, as to the relative value of compulsory and of free labour; which latter he had again subdivided into work by task and work by day. In the general principle it was impossible not to agree; but, for the reasons he had stated, and in which the House seemed to concur, he must repeat, that this was not the proper time, nor the proper mode, for such discussions: and he had further to complain of his hon. friend, for having shaped his motion in such a was as that the House were taken by surprise, and had not come down prepared for the discussion of this important subject; and also, having discussed it, for not coming forward with some practical measure. It would not, therefore, be expected that he should follow his hon. friend through his details; and he should confine himself simply to that small portion of the question which was embraced in his motion. His hon. friend said, that the condition of the West Indies was most unfortunate; that distress was their natural state, and prosperity the exception; and then he had referred to the history of Jamaica by Mr. Bryan Edwards; so that if he were to follow his hon. friend, he should have to trace the history of that country for the last forty years from the period of their prosperity, into which they had been speedily raised by the great convulsion at St. Domingo, down to their subsequent distress, occasioned, perhaps, by that very sudden change. But, he would take simply the premises of his hon. friend, and admitting that the distress existed, without going into the causes of it, he might even admit, that cultivation by slaves might have aggravated the difficulties; but, admitting all this, he would ask his hon. friend, whether it was wise to select precisely the moment of their distress, to deal out a measure, the immediate effect of which must be, even according to his own view, to aggravate this distress? His hon. friend, sanguine as he was—and God knew how heartily he wished his hopes could be realized—must at least admit, that although, perhaps, there existed a facility for a change from slave labour to free, yet still it was not a thing of a moment: he knew—he must know, that the amelioration of the state of the colonies must proceed upon other and different grounds from a sudden emancipation. His hon. friend must be aware, that before these salutary advantages could be obtained, all the aids of improved moral intelligence, all the motives to good action, must be well inculcated and well understood, before they could hope to secure for the slave-population that benefit which a change in their condition was intended to realize for them. He was convinced that if his hon. friend would look with more care into all the details of calculation which the subject involved, he would find himself much mistaken in many of the essential parts of his estimate, and necessarily wrong in the conclusions which he drew from them. If these errors had entered into his calculations, why call for their correction by the appointment of a committee? It was a dry matter of fact, capable of elucidation without taking any such course; and being so, no parliamentary ground had been laid for the appointment of a committee, which, in the present state of the West-India interests, was calculated still more to embarrass those engaged in the trade, in all their fiscal and pecuniary arrangements. The sense of parliament having been already expressed upon the great general West-India question, and it being understood that it was to be left to the consideration of the executive government, and intrusted to their responsibility, he thought it would be wise not to deal with it by incidental debates either in or out of committees, but to leave it where it could be most practically' viewed. When his hon. friend said, that, by his proposed arrangement, a fund for the emancipation of slaves might be created, amounting to no less than 1,100,000l., he again greatly overshot the mark; for the actual amount of the difference to which he had alluded, as paid into the Exchequer, did not exceed from 100,000l. to 150,000l. Taking, however, that part of his hon. friend's proposition, for granted, he must say, that it ought to be propounded in a different shape. If that change in the condition of the slave-population was to be effected by a fiscal measure of economy, let it be broadly put to parliament, whether they were ready to work what might be deemed a salutary change, and to pay such an amount in cash to the masters, to purchase the emancipation of such a number of slaves. As to what his hon. friend had observed, respecting the prosperity of Sierra Leone under a different system, did he mean to say, that what was practical in the education, discipline, and internal regulations and improvements of a small colony, so placed, and so paid for, could be practically introduced, and with equal practicability managed, when transplanted and applied to the condition of the West-Indian population of 800,000 slaves? That the commercial policy of Great Britain was altering, was indeed clear. His hon. friend could not be unaware of the immense change which was now working in the old commercial system of the world, by the recent events which had occurred, and were still in progress, in the new world. A great commercial country like this, must more or less, adapt her policy to a state of things which had arisen in those large and important colonies which had separated themselves from their previous state of European dependence. New interests had been created, and still were creating: and England must regulate her policy according to circumstances, many of which were not yet fully developed. This, again, was a point of discussion into which he thought it would be improper for him incidentally to embark, with his hon. friend. For these reasons he trusted the House would agree with him, that there was no necessity for appointing a committee to ascertain facts which were not in dispute, and more particularly for the purpose of discussing conclusions which could not fail to awaken jealousies and alarms, which it was not prudent at the present moment to excite.

in reply, observed, that he had the most conclusive evidence to shew the great difference of price which existed between the sugars of the British plantations, and foreign sugars of inferior quality, on bond. It was quite clear that some change of system must take place. When the right hon. gentleman charged him with absurdity, because so large a sum as he had named was not paid into the Treasury, he must beg leave to assert, on the other side, that the sums paid into the Treasury did not measure the amount drawn out of the pockets of the consumer.

rose to bring forward his promised motion for the continuance of the Salt Duty; and to enable the House to ascertain if some more substantial relief could not be obtained for the country by the diminution of an equal amount in some other part of the public burthens. He was aware that the great objection which had been urged, as it were in limine, on the consideration of this subject, was, that the faith of parliament stood pledged for the entire abolition of the salt duties [loud cries of "hear"]. He hoped he was not particularly prone to any laxity of principle; but he confessed he could not see how a vote of that House could be held indissoluble. Parliament was a collective body, its faith was its united pledge; perhaps this pledge might have been given when one third of the collective body were not present. But, be that as it might, his idea of the honour of parliament was, to measure its conduct by the present view of what it would be best for the true interest of the country to adopt, under all the circumstances of its present situation. Their duty, and the express order of their institution was, at the time of their being called upon to consider a proposition, to see what was then best for the interests of the country to adopt. What, then, was the best course for the House to take, under existing circumstances, with respect to the remaining salt duties? He was aware that the objection was not so much as to their present amount, as it was to the operation of the Excise regulations which still accompanied the payment of what remained; and the particular inconvenience of which was felt by the class less able to bear that infliction. It must be obvious to all, that the details of such a subject must be left practically to the individuals engaged in the regulations. He had, therefore, for information upon that point, referred to Mr. Carr, the solicitor of the Excise [cries of "hear," from the opposite benches]. He begged to inform the hon. gentlemen who had just cheered his refer- ence, that he was no advocate for these severe Excise laws, or their accompanying penalties; but, he must declare, that both the one and the other ought to be considered with patience, and not with passion. He begged to call the attention of the House to what had been said by Mr. Carr, when he was examined respecting the operation of the Excise laws, before the committee on the criminal laws. Mr. Carr, before that committee, had justly laid it down as a principle, that if low duties were imposed, low penalties would suffice; but that it was the imposition of high duties which necessarily led to high penalties, and these in their result, to the desperate schemes of smugglers. Something had been said of the anomalous difference between the English and Irish salt duties, and an argument for the total abolition had been founded thereon. Upon that point he would merely remark, that as they had now a consolidation of the English and Irish Excise boards, some regulations might be made to obviate the objection to which he alluded, consistent with the fair retention of the remaining portion of the duty. The amount of duty retained was 300,000l., and the expense of collection, estimated at 5 per cent, was 15,000l. In viewing this object, he had called for returns, showing the state of Excise prosecutions in England and Scotland during the last five years, and the result established his opinion, that the diminution of the duty had repressed smuggling in the article. In 1819, the general amount of Excise prosecutions was in number 191, penalties recovered from 3,000l. to 4,000l. In the year ending 5th Jan. 1824, there were twenty-three prosecutions, and the penalties recovered were 53l. The state of prosecutions actually originating with, and carried through the court of Exchequer, was, in 1819, 37 prosecutions; penalties recovered, 2,400l. In 1824, three prosecutions; penalties recovered, 11l. 18s. 8d. In Scotland, in 1819, there were 513 prosecutions, and 4,000l. recovered. In 1824, 212 prosecutions, and 604l. recovered. The smuggling in salt was, therefore, almost wholly done away with. There was one man in Cheshire who used to employ 25 of these men during the high duties, and he had discharged them all when the tax was reduced. He knew, from what he could learn from the bakers of Norwich, that no smuggling in salt was carried on there; and the hon. member for Yarmouth could Say whether, he had or had not received similar information respecting the fisheries at Yarmouth.—On the subject of the fisheries, he was far from wishing the adoption of any measure calculated to discourage them; but it was well known, that their fisheries could not be carried on to an indefinite extent; sometimes the 6sh would come, when the men or their nets were not there to catch them; and, at other times, when the nets were spread, the fish would not approach them. There was not the same quantity of fish consumed here, as there was in Catholic countries. The next point to which he should allude was the quantity of salt used for the purposes of agriculture. He was aware that, under the existing law, it was necessary that a person using it for these purposes should give a certificate, stating the quantity which he used, the land on which he used it, the sheep, or other cattle, to which he gave it, and the result which he derived from it; and that, if he failed to give such certificate, he was liable to a penalty of 40s. a bushel for every bushel of salt he consumed, or to a penalty of 100l. for the whole quantity, at the discretion of the Board of Excise. He had no objection to do away entirely with the necessity of giving this certificate. With regard to the utility of salt for agricultural purposes, he believed it to be much magnified. The hon. member for Cumberland, could, however, afford to the House the best information upon that subject, as he had frequently employed salt upon one portion of his estates, and not upon another. He understood, that not only the members for Wareham, and Shaftesbury, and Bodmin, were opposed to his proposition, but also all the members of the western counties; and that, too, chiefly on account of the advantages which the employment of salt conferred upon the agriculturist. There was, however, one gentleman connected with the western counties, whose support he expected, and whose vote he would rather have than that of all the other gentlemen of the western counties put together. That gentleman was the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster. On a former night, that hon. baronet had said, that it would be of the greatest advantage to Ireland, if the House voted to her service the million of money which it was going to expend on much worse objects; and had added, that he should feel great satisfaction, if the 500,000l. which the House was going to expend on new churches, the 300.000l. for there pairs of Windsor Castle, and the 200,000l. which was derived from the salt duties, were to be transferred to the use of the population of that distracted country. He inferred, from this declaration, that the hon. baronet was in favour of the proposition which he was now going to submit to the House; for he could not see how the hon. baronet could derive 200,000l. from the salt duties, unless he was prepared to continue them for a longer period. The hon. member then proceeded to contend, that the repeal of the existing salt duties would he of very slight advantage to the country. He was aware that Mr. Parks, when he was asked by the committee, "what new manufactures from salt, or otherwise were likely to originate from the repeal of the salt duties?" had answered, "that it was impossible to ascertain the number of new manufactures that might rise upon the repeal of the salt-tax; for such an impetus would be given by it to every branch of trade, that all the manufacturers would set about examining in what manner it be could best applied to their particular trade." Now, if Mr. Parks would come for-ward, and state any particular trade to which the recent reduction of the salt duties had given the slightest impetus, he would immediately withdraw his motion. Nay, if the hon. member for Bodmin would lay aside his affection for pilchards, and standing forward in the dignity of an abstract man, would assert, that the fisheries had derived from that reduction the benefits which it was asserted that they would derive, he would also withdraw his present motion. The hon. member for Shaftesbury had declared to the same committee, that if the salt-tax were repealed, the small house-keeper would use 14lb of salt where he had formerly used one; and the larger house keeper would use a bushel where he had formerly used a gallon; and he had further added, that if salt were used in the potteries, which he promised it would be, were the tax repealed, the health of the workmen, who, at present, were much liable to paralysis, would undergo great improvement. Now, without meaning the slightest disrespect to the hon. member, he would ask, was there any man who could believe this statement to its full extent? Sir T. Bernard, speaking of the salt-works at Northwich to the same committee, had said—

"Vestibulum ante ipsum, primisque in faucibus Orci

Luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia curæ,

Pallentesque habitant morbi;"—

meaning by the "pallentes morbi," the 147 excisemen who were stationed there to prevent any fraud upon the revenue. Really, when hon. gentlemen talked in such a strain, and when they inveighed upon the demoralization which was likely to arise from the continuance of the small duties upon salt, he must say that, for his life and soul, he could not understand them. He then proceeded to argue, that if these duties were continued, the country might be freed from the window-tax paid by small houses, and supported his Proposition by references to the last popuation returns. He had been told, that his motion for their continuance was inadmissible, because a positive pledge for their repeal had been given to the House by the members of his majesty's government. Now, that proposition he for one could not understand. He would illustrate what he meant, by an example. He had maintained, and he did still maintain, in common with his majesty's ministers, the policy of keeping up a sinking fund. But he would ask, whether he must vote for the sinking fund remaining at 5,000,000l. in perpetuity, in case it should appear to his majesty's government, upon mature deliberation, to be expedient to diminish the amount of it, and to relinquish a part of it to diminish the amount of taxation? Certainly not; and yet the House and the government were as strongly pledged to support the sinking-fund at 5,000,000l. under all circumstances, as they were to repeal the remaining salt-duties. His reason for moving to continue them was, that he did not consider them to be in themselves objectionable, and that he wished to keep up a source of income with which little or no fault could be found, and to get rid of another which was liable to much and serious abuse. Contending that it was the duty of hon. members to look at taxation, not as it affected their particular constituents, but the country at large, he called upon them to judge of the present motion, not by their private interests, but by its general merits. The hon. member concluded by moving "That it is expedient that the present rate of duty on Salt be continued, in order that his majesty's government may be thereby better enabled to give a more effectual relief to the country in the ensuing ses- sion of parliament, by the remission of the duty payable on windows."

seconded the motion. He thought the duty, at its present amount, not oppressive, and that other taxes might be remitted, which would be mote beneficial to the people. The machinery, by which the salt-tax was collected, was not, he contended, more expensive than the machinery for collecting several other taxes. If the tax were remitted, he doubted whether it would go into the pockets of the people.

said, that standing in the particular situation which he did as a minister of the Crown, he was anxious, at that early period of the debate, to declare, without reserve, the opinion which he held with regard to the present motion. Honourable members would do him the justice to recollect, that in the statement which he had made to them, at the commencement of the session, he had distinctly informed them that if, in the course of it, there should be a general feeling that the cessation of this tax ought not to take place at the time fixed for it by law, it would not be a difficult task to find other means of affording relief to the public; but that he was of opinion that, as far as himself and the government were concerned, they were pledged—[great cheering.] specifically pledged—to adhere to the law as it now stood. He would not go so far as to say that parliament was pledged to stand by that law, if it were good that that law should be repealed; or that the government were bound not to repeal it, if the repeal of it were either good or useful to the public. He had, therefore, on formerly addressing the House, qualified the pledge which he had given in this manner—that there must be a strong general feeling in favour of this tax before he could venture to propose its continuance. If, therefore, any such feeling had been excited, he should have felt himself at liberty to support the motion of his hon. friend; for he agreed with his hon. friend in thinking, that the objections to the continuance of the 2s. duty on salt had been very much over-rated. Indeed, it was his opinion, that the consumer would not be at all benefited by the repeal of it. It was impossible, he contended, to retain these two shillings duties without retaining the exemptions. He was inclined to say, that if any tax on salt were continued, it ought either to be much more than 2s., or to be reduced to so low a rate as to dispense entirely with the exemptions; for it was out of these exemptions, that all the smuggling, perjury, and demoralization arose, which rendered this tax so generally objectionable. Though he believed, that if the exemptions were removed, and the duties lowered, the produce of the tax, from the greater consumption given to the article taxed, would be as great as it was at present, he was not prepared to say that there was no objection to the extinction of these exemptions. The hon. member for Bodmin would, perhaps, tell him, that the evil created by these exemptions was not compensated by the amount produced by this small tax—a sum which he believed was somewhere between 200,000l. and 250,000l. The question which he had to put to himself was this—is the advantage which the public income derives from this tax sufficient to justify me in retaining it against the indisposition of the House? which certainly was much greater than he had previously expected. His hon. friend had told them, that he anticipated many objections to his motion. He had told them, that he had reckoned among his opponents not only the hon. members for Shaftesbury, and Bodmin and Wareham, but also all the members connected with the western counties. This was a proof that there was no strong feeling in the country in favour of this tax. He therefore felt, that, after the pledge which had been given, government would not be justified in continuing it a moment longer than the period fixed by law. Thinking that there was no general feeling in favour of the tax, he had not waited for the expression of the opinions of the House; but had come forward at the earliest opportunity, to make a suggestion to his hon. friend, which he trusted he would not be indisposed to adopt; namely, to withdraw his motion. As his hon. friend had coupled his project with another, to which he could by no means accede, he should have been obliged to make the same request to him, even if the House had been inclined to listen to his Proposal about the salt-duties. If his hon. friend was not disposed to accede to his suggestion, he must conclude by moving the previous question [loud cheering]. Cries of "question, question," were then raised, mingled with a loud call for "Mr. Wodehouse" from all sides of the House. Upon which, Mr. Wodehouse rose, and, with the leave of the House, withdrew his motion.

after a speech which was rendered inaudible in the gallery by the confusion prevalent in the House, moved a resolution of which the effect was "to increase the salaries annexed to the great offices of state, and to high judicial situations of the country, so as to render them more adequate to the labour and importance of the duties to be discharged, and more worthy of the justice and liberality of the nation."

asked, whether any gentleman seconded the motion?

said, that an hon. member had promised to second his motion, whom he did not at that moment see in the House.

said, that he rose as an officer of the Crown, but not to second the motion of his hon. friend. With regard to the first part of his hon. friend's proposition, he did not mean to say a single word; but with regrad to the second, he might be permitted to state, that the propriety of increasing the salaries of the judges had recently been, as indeed it deserved to be, under the consideration of the Crown. The emoluments of the judges were at present insufficient to support the situation which they occupied in the country, and fluctuated according to the fees which they received. Now, he thought that nobody would dispute this proposition—that the emoluments of the judges ought neither to be precarious, nor derived from uncertain fees. The public interest required, that such an addition should be made to the salaries of the judges, as would induce men in the prime of life and of mental vigour, to devote themselves to the discharge of their important duties.

stated, that he should feel it his duty, if the suggestion of the right hon. secretary should ever be submitted to a committee, not only to oppose it, but also to submit another motion of very considerable importance to it, if that suggestion were adopted: namely, that in future, there should be no promotion on the bench. He would not now state his reasons for such a motion, but he had a motive for entertaining the intention; and he repeated, that if the suggestion of the hon. gentleman should travel to a committee, he would not shrink from explain- ing that motive. He threw this intimation out, in order to give the right hon. gentleman fair warning, that the proposition, come when it might, would meet with opposition. Many hon. gentlemen thought with him on this subject, and it would be found, that the generality of the country concurred in the opinion.

was favourable to an increase of the judges' salaries; and hoped the addition would be accompanied with a provision for a third assize.