presented a Petition from Navan, praying for a more equal distribution of Church Lands, and for the abolition of Tithes and Vestry rates.

could not let this opportunity pass without stating his opinion, that Ireland never would be, nor never ought to be at peace, until there was a more equal distribution of the property of the Church. That one man should be wallowing in wealth, by the enjoyment of Church property, whilst millions of his fellow-countrymen were starving, was a state of things which it was utterly impossible could be much longer endured. Ireland could not continue in the enjoyment of tranquillity if such a state of things were permitted to continue.

felt it was impossible to remain silent and hear such insinuations as the hon. member for Middlesex thought it convenient to throw out against the Established Church. Any one who heard the hon. Member would suppose, that the members of the Established Church of Ireland did nothing at all, but lived in ease and indolence, whilst their fellow countrymen were starving. The same imputation, however, might with equal justice be thrown on every man who enjoyed any other kind of property as well as Church property. He had never been in Ireland, and therefore had no opportunity of knowing much of the Clergy of the Established Church of Ireland from personal observation; but from all he had heard, he had reason to believe, that they were extremely able and efficient, and that many of them laboured very hard in the discharge of their duties. He also believed that their revenues were not too large; but, at all events, he implored the House not to allow itself to be worked upon by insinuations on this subject, insinuations which he was sorry to say, had not then fallen from the hon. member for Middlesex for the first time.

said, the hon. member for the University had not done him justice when he said, that he (Mr. Hume) had insinuated. He did not insinuate, but affirmed broadly; and he believed 999 persons out of every 1,000 concurred with him in his views on this subject.

had only to say, that he did not believe that to exist which the hon. member for Middlesex affirmed so broadly.

said, he must always protest against having Church property set down as held by the same title as other property. It was trust property, and might be taken from one and transferred to another by Act of Parliament. If a clerical person, holding Church property as a clergyman, became a Jew or a Catholic, he forfeited the property, and if the principle was adopted, that Church property could not be alienated, he begged to ask what became of the title to the estates of four-fifths of the Members of that House? Why, the Duke of Bedford and many other noblemen would be stripped of their property? No one ever objected to paying the clergymen of the Established Church according to their employment, but the complaint was, that they were not paid in Ireland according to their employment. The Rev. Thomas Perceval Magee, whose name was before the House a few nights ago, signed twice to the same petition, had no less than eleven livings. The Rev. gentleman would require more lives than a cat to want all those livings, or to attend to them. There was also another case brought under the consideration of the House a few nights ago, in a petition from a parish in the county of Kildare. It appeared that the Rector of that parish, who was an absentee, had an income of 1,100l. a-year, whilst the Curate, who performed all the duty, and had a large family to support, received no more than 75l. Irish, or 69l. 7s. 4d. English. Could any one say that, in a country where; such a state of things existed, Church property was properly distributed?

supposed the hon. and learned Gentleman did not mean to say, that the case he had stated was the case in all the parishes in Ireland?

—I mean to say, it is the case in two-thirds of them.

said, that he had given notice on Friday evening last, of his intention of submitting to the consideration of the House, what had appeared to him to be a gross violation and Breach of its, Privileges. He did assure the House, that a sense of duty to the House, rather than any personal feeling or any personal considerations whatever, had actuated him in this proceeding. He would repeat, that a sense of duty which he felt that he owed towards the House, as a component though a humble part of it, had made him feel it incumbent upon him to call its attention to what he, as he had before said, considered to be of very serious importance. He scarcely need inform the House, that he was alluding to observations or statements, or, he would rather say, to various mis-statements, of what had fallen from himself as a Member of that House, on the evening of Tuesday, the 6th instant, upon the discussion of the Reform Bill in the Committee. In reading The Times newspaper on Wednesday morning, the 7th instant, he had found there—what certainly did then appear, and what now appeared to him to be—a gross, unjustifiable, unwarrantable, and, he was bound to say, a totally false statement of the words which had fallen from him upon that occasion. He trusted it would be evident to every Member of that House—indeed, upon a perusal of the paragraph, there could be but one opinion—that it was the wish, on the part of the newspaper, The Times, to vilify an individual Member of that House, as well as so to represent every proceeding as to degrade the House itself in every possible way in the eyes of the public at large. That paper, in the paragraph and report which he should now lay before the House, had introduced a statement, both with respect to what had fallen from himself, and with respect to the conduct of the House, which (and he could safely appeal to any hon. Gentleman who had heard him) was wholly of an unwarrantable nature, and composed in terms of the greatest falsehood. He had felt it a duty which he owed to himself, as well as to the House of which he was a Member, to contradict the statement the very next day, the 7th; and he had likewise felt it incumbent upon him to endeavour, as far as he possibly could, to vindicate the Members of the House from the gross aspersions which that newspaper had thrown upon them. What was his surprise when he had found on the next day (in the paper of the 8th instant), that the same paper had reiterated its offence; and he thought, that by such reiteration and such re-statements, it had committed a double insult on the House, and upon himself as a Member of it. He had found that the writer in The Times, on the 8th instant, had endeavoured to vindicate himself, in a paragraph in which he stated—"We have referred this observation not only to the Reporter whose account is complained of, but to others who were present: they deny the accuracy of the hon. Member's charge. On looking at the Herald and Chronicle, we find, that though the reports are shorter, they contain the same allusions to the laughter of the House, which the hon. Member asserts to be an invention of our Reporter." This, he would maintain, was equally false with the original statement, and it was a gross misrepresentation of the truth, for upon his perusal of The Morning Herald and Morning Chronicle, he found no such disrespectful statements as that which had appeared in The Times newspaper. He believed he had, as much as any man in that House, or out of the House, the greatest respect for the freedom of the Press. He would avow, that he had the highest respect for the free exercise of its important functions, and he would maintain that nothing could be so dangerous, and he should say that nothing could be so calculated to degrade every Member of that House, as such gross and repeated misrepresentations of the proceedings in Parliament as those of which he now complained. Having seen and known that misrepresentations had been made of various occurrences and circumstances relative to that House, it was his duty, as a Member, to proceed by contradicting the mis-statements in the present instance, and afterwards by following that line of conduct which the rights and privileges of that House gave him the power to do. Without trespassing any further upon the time of the House, he should beg leave to move, that the said newspapers The Times of the 7th and 8th instant be put in and read. A pause.

Who seconds the Motion?

said, that he would second the motion of his hon. and gallant friend; and in seconding it, he felt it necessary that he should make a few observations upon the subject to the House. In his opinion, the House ought to feel itself very greatly indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for bringing forward the conduct of the journal in question, which was the most audacious, vituperative, and calumniating paper that had ever issued from the press. Not only had this journal turned into ridicule, in the most coarse and unseemly manner, the Members of that House whose political opinions did not agree with its own, but it had altogether pursued a course of conduct which must render both Houses of Parliament little more than mere ciphers, and make them most completely, and in every respect, thoroughly contemptible in public opinion. He trusted that the House would never abandon its privileges, or refuse to vindicate its character, and he was confident, that in a case like the present, it would not pass over conduct so reprehensible. He trusted that the House would immediately take the case into its most serious consideration. He was not surprised that The Times, which had put forth the most base, and cowardly, and calumnious insinuations against a royal person, whose conduct had deserved and attracted the respect of almost every man in the country; he was not, he said, in the slightest degree surprised that a paper which had been guilty of this baseness, and cowardice, and calumny against a royal personage, should have indulged in such language as The Times had used with regard to that and the other House of Parliament. This very day that paper had, in a leading article, not only threatened the other House of Parliament, but had openly declared, that the military, if called upon to act, would not perform its duty. If such a course were tolerated, he, for one, must confess, he could not foresee whither it might lead, and where it might end. Who could tell what effects such a publication might produce upon the public mind throughout the country? He felt the most anxious hope, that the motion of his hon. and gallant friend would meet with due attention, and it would most assuredly meet with that attention if the House studied what was due to its own dignity, and what was necessary for the protection of its Members in the discharge of their duties. If the House were not lost to all sense of its dignity and its privileges, it would immediately bring to condign punishment the editor of as malicious, as calumnious, and as revolutionary a paper as ever disgraced the public press of this country.The Times newspaper of the 7th and 8th instant were then put in, and read by the clerk, as follows: "Colonel Sibthorp rose with violent agitation, and declared that he had opposed the Bill fairly and fearlessly. His side of the House was cheered by the supporters of Ministers, as if they had got through their labours. He could tell them that their labours were only commenced. (A laugh.) He did not understand being treated with contempt. (Continued laughter.) He would tell those who laughed at him, either in the House or out of the House, that he would support his opinions and vindicate himself to the last hour he had to breathe. (Laughter, and cries of "hear hear.") He regretted that the Bill had passed so soon. (Bursts of laughter.) The Bill had passed too speedily. (Laughter.) If his opponents were tired, he would not give up. (Laughter.) He would never give in. (Laughter.) He was never yet put down in the House, and never would be. (Laughter,) He was never put down out of the House, and he defied the hon. Member opposite who was laughing at him, to put him down. (Laughter.) (We could not exactly catch the particular Member to whom the hon. and gallant Colonel alluded, the laughter appeared to us to be general.) He defied the hon. Member to do it. The hon. Member had supported the Bill conscientiously, and why did he not suppose that he (Colonel Sibthorp) had opposed the Bill with equal conscience? (Cries of "Question, question," from all parts of the House. Colonel Sibthorp with great vehemence)—he prayed to God that the Bill might not pass. (Cries of "oh, oh," and "question, question.") If the Bill did pass, which he prayed to God might never be the case; all he had to say was, in the words of that great, that sublime statesman, now admired, and who, he fervently trusted, would have his memory for ever preserved in that House,—"Oh, save my country, may God have mercy on it! May God protect it from revolutions, and may he preserve in it all proper respect for the aristocracy—all proper respect for the"—(The hon. Member was so interrupted with laughter, that we were unable to catch the objects for which he invoked respect.) He felt confident that the Bill would not pass—such a Bill could never pass." The clerk then read The Times of Thursday the 8th inst., as follows: "Colonel Sibthorp said, he should take the present opportunity to complain of a contemptuous report of a speech of his in the Committee yesterday, which had appeared in one of the morning newspapers of that day. The report to which he alluded was interspersed with laughter, and other expressions of derision, which he flatly denied had been justified by the fact (hear). He considered he had the more reason to complain, as this report had been inserted in a journal of the highest respectability—he meant The Times—and it was, therefore, only an act of duty to the House and to himself, to contradict so gross and unwarrantable a statement. "We have referred this observation not only to the Reporter whose account is complained of, but to others who were present; they deny the accuracy of the hon. Member's charge. On looking at the Herald and Chronicle, we find, that though the reports are shorter, they contain the same allusions to the laughter of the House, which the hon. Member asserts to be an invention of our Reporter."

again rose, and said, that feeling, as he did, the greatest regard for the House, and the strongest desire to support it in all its privileges, he now considered it to be his duty, as a Member, to move "that the printer and publisher of a certain newspaper called The Times, which was printed and published upon Wednesday the 7th, and Thursday the 8th instant, having been guilty of a gross breach of the privileges of the House, they do attend at the bar of the same on Wednesday the 14th instant."

seconded the Motion.

thought, that the gallant Member had left the House rather at a loss how to proceed, for he had not distinctly stated in what respect he felt himself aggrieved. Did the hon. and gallant Member mean to complain that the words attributed to him in the report of his speech on Tuesday night were not the words that he had actually spoken, or did he mean to complain only of the reported expressions of laughter with which it was said that the gallant Member had been received by the House? He (Mr. Hume) did not understand which it was that the gallant Member complained of, or whether he meant to complain of both. Surely it was necessary that the gallant Member should explain himself. If he acknowledged that the statement or report of the speech in The Times of Wednesday was correct in words, then there was one part of the question before the House at once disposed of: if he acknowledged that the description of the laughter was correct, then the other part was disposed of. Would the hon. and gallant Member at once declare whether the report was or was not a correct publication of the speech he had uttered upon the occasion?

said, that as he was not in the habit of composing beforehand the speeches that fell from him in that House, he could not call to mind precisely every word or every monosyllable that he had uttered; but he did mean to say, that he considered the report to be an exaggeration of what had fallen from him; and as to the manner in which he was received by the House, he was proud to say, that whatever opposition he had offered to the Reform Bill, no such conduct had ever been exhibited by the House towards him as that described in the report. For these reasons he was prepared to maintain, that The Times newspaper had been guilty of a gross misrepresentation.

was at all times most desirous that a full and faithful account should be published of whatever passed in that House, and he even regretted, that the House did not itself publish such authenticated reports. He now felt himself under the necessity of submitting to the gallant Member, whether he really thought it possible to call the editor of a paper forward for what he (Colonel Sibthorp) termed an exaggerated statement of laughter? Whether it was one Member who had laughed, or a dozen Members had laughed, or whether the whole House had laughed, still, to have an editor called to the bar on such an account, would turn the whole proceedings into ridicule. If any motives had been imputed to the gallant Member which he had not displayed, if any expressions had been attributed to him which he had not used, then he would have been fully justified and warranted in requiring, that the imputation should be removed, and the misrepresentation explained. Nothing, however, of this sort had taken place, and under the circumstances of the case, if the editor were called to the bar of the House to-morrow, he, for one, should not know what to do with him when he got there. One Reporter might take down, and another might omit to notice, the manifestations of feeling with which the House might hear any one of its Members on a particular occasion; but this could be no ground of imputation, nor of proceedings upon the part of the House. He had great doubts how the House could act, consistently with its own dignity, if it pursued the course recommended to it by the gallant Member.

thought it would be lowering the dignity of the House, to call any man to the bar on such a complaint. He had no doubt, that the gallant Officer believed, that by making this Motion he was upholding the privileges of the House; but he was firmly persuaded, that to agree to this Motion would be to disparage greatly that dignity which it was the object of the gallant Officer to maintain. The House could never, consistently with its own dignity, and with credit in the eyes of the country, summon a man to appear at their bar, except upon some affair of importance and solemnity. No one surely would argue, that the question whether a Reporter had or had not put too many 'laughs' into his account of a Gentleman's speech was a matter either important or solemn. He was not present when the gallant Officer delivered the speech which was said to be misrepresented; if he had been, he should have stated what his impression of the report was; and, as he could not do that, he was quite willing to take the gallant Officer's own character of that report. Let all that the gallant Officer had said of the exaggeration of the report be true, and still that would not alter his opinion, that to entertain a motion like the present would be derogatory to the real dignity of the House, and tend to lower its character in the eyes of the public. If the publisher of The Times newspaper had committed a much greater offence than the gallant Officer complained of, he thought that the said publisher had already been sufficiently lectured by the hon. member for Durham (Mr. Trevor), and that there could be no necessity for calling him to the bar to receive the comparatively mild reprimand of Mr. Speaker. He could not sufficiently express his admiration of the conduct of that hon. Gentleman, who condemned a man first, and was prepared to try him afterwards. The hon. Member, one of the judges in this case had, without hearing the supposed culprit, laid to his charge the most serious offences, and declared that he was worthy of condign punishment. But perhaps the hon. Member thought that this, too, was consistent with the dignity of the House, as well as with its judicial character. With regard to the Motion itself, he must openly declare his opinion, that if it were agreed to, no one could for the future say, that there was anything like the liberty of the Press in this country. For the maintenance of its privileges, that House had clothed itself with a power which was altogether unlimitted and despotic. It might be—and he did not say that it was not—necessary that the House should be intrusted with such a power for its protection; but then the very character of that power ought to render the House extremely cautious how it was exercised, in any but cases of emergency. The gallant Officer might, if he pleased, proceed against the publisher of The Times by indictment or by criminal information. Now, in order to judge of the character of the present Motion, let the House consider for a moment what would be the result of the gallant Officer proceeding criminally against the publisher, in an ordinary Court of Justice. If the case were brought before a Court of Law, and the report complained of read, it would bid defiance to the gravity of the most serious bench of Judges in the world; and there was no counsel, however rigid the muscles of his countenance might be, whose stern features would not relax into a laugh while he attempted to make out, that anything criminal had been done, either by the reporter of the gallant Officer's speech, or by the person who had published it. A Jury would laugh the case out of Court at once. He readily admitted, that if a Gentleman's speech were misreported, it was quite right that the misapprehension which might naturally be supposed to result should be set right by explanation. This the gallant Officer had done. The gallant Officer had set himself right with the House and with the public; and he must, therefore, express a hope that the gallant Officer would not press his Motion. [Colonel Sibthorp shook his head.] Well, if the gallant Officer persisted in the Motion, he should certainly take care that it should not be disposed of without a division, and he should feel it his duty to divide the House upon it himself.

admitted the right of the hon. and gallant Member, as of every Member of the House, to make complaints of matters of that kind, but it had always been the practice to consider the nature of the offence. In the particular case brought then under notice, he entirely subscribed to the principles laid down by the hon. and learned member for Kerry, and he hoped that the hon. and gallant Gentleman would see the inexpediency of pressing his Motion to a division. Under all the circumstances of the case, and in the present disposition of the House, he was sure that the hon. and gallant Gentleman would see, that that would be his better course. In saying this, he did not mean to question the hon. and gallant Gentleman's right to bring such a Motion forward; he only, under the circumstances of the case, doubted its expediency. He was present on the occasion alluded to, and was perfectly able and willing to confirm the statement of the hon. and gallant Gentleman, that the account of the hon. and gallant Member's speech was much exaggerated. He believed—he might say, was sure—that as much laughter did not follow as was represented. Indeed, he recollected distinctly but one decided instance of laughter—that which ensued on he hon. and gallant Gentleman's stating that the "Bill had passed too speedily." He repeated, he was sure that there was by no means the excessive laughter that the report of which the hon. and gallant Gentleman complained had represented. But still he was certain the hon. and gallant Gentleman would see that an exaggeration of this kind would not warrant the House in a manner entering into a contest with the Press, that, in fact, the offence was not of such moment as to call upon the House to visit it with its direct censure. The hon. and gallant Gentleman had not probably as much experience in these matters as he had—it had been his fortune to witness more than one newspaper publisher called to the Bar for a breach of privilege; and the more he witnessed of the effects of such motions, the more he was convinced of their inexpediency, and consequently, the more he was disposed to avoid their recurrence. He trusted, therefore, the hon. and gallant Gentleman would himself see the policy of not pressing his Motion to a division. In urging him not to take the sense of the House, he begged to say, that he was fully alive to the necessity of the House retaining in its own hands the power of visiting with its heaviest censures all attacks on its privileges, and that reports of its proceedings should be permitted only by sufferance; but still he need not point out the wisdom of exercising such an arbitrary power with due caution. The noble Lord repeated, that he did not conceive the present such an offence as warranted the House interfering to protect its privileges, though the report might have been an excessive exaggeration.

was in the House on the night to which the hon. and gallant Member's Motion referred, and could take it upon him to state, that The Times report was verbatim et literatim correct, so far as the sentiments of the hon. and gallant Gentleman was concerned. Indeed, he had never read a report more accurate, or one, as it appeared to him, of which it might be said there was "nothing extenuate nor aught set down in malice." There might have been, perhaps, an exaggeration as to the amount of laughter, though he must say, the manner in which the hon. and gallant Gentleman received the first symptoms of laughter served to increase it very much towards the end of the speech.

said, the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had totally misrepresented his behaviour on the night in question. He felt himself compelled to press his Motion to a division, in consequence of the repetition of the offence, which appeared in the next day's number of The Times, in the form of an answer to his complaint. He would make precisely the same Motion on a recurrence of the offence.

in moving that the Report on the Wine Duties Bill be received, said, that as he was desirous that the present measure should be adopted without opposition, it was not his intention then to introduce any clause respecting the future increase of the Duties on Cape Wines, which would remain at 2s. 9d.; but he begged that it might not be thought that he was abandoning his former proposition with respect to increasing those duties in the year 1834.

said, the wine-growers at the Cape had suffered materially from the uncertainty in which they had been kept, but he hoped the announcement of the noble Lord would restore that confidence which they had lost in the House of Commons.

would not go into the question at length, particularly as his hon. friend had nearly exhausted the subject, but content himself with seconding the Motion.

hoped that the House would allow the Bill to go into a Committee, when he should be prepared to make a statement of what were the intentions of the Government, which could be conveniently made in the Committee, and for not making which the hon. Member seemed inclined to reproach his Majesty's Government. He was sorry the hon. Member had not chosen a better opportunity to make his statement; and that it was not a favourable one, the thin appearance of the House should have satisfied the hon. Member. He should have other opportunities of answering the hon. Gentleman, and should, therefore, decline following his statements. The hon. Member had, however, brought a charge against his Majesty's Government, as to the course it had pursued, and to that charge he would reply. The hon. Member complained that the Government had not taken those papers into consideration which the West-India interest had submitted to it; but the hon. Member forgot, that after those papers had been submitted to the Board of Trade by the West-Indians, there was a debate on the subject in that House. His noble friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) then offered to refer the whole matter to a Committee, but both the noble Lord, the member for Buckinghamshire, and the right hon. Baronet, the member for Tamworth, advised the West-Indians not to accept the offer, and declared that it was a matter which the Government ought to take up, and carry forward on its own responsibility. The Government had been pressed to afford relief, and it had done what it could; but it could not, by adopting the suggestions of the West-Indians, disregard all other interests. The Government had taken the subject into its consideration, and such relief as it could give, it had given, and further measures were still in contemplation. The charge was, that the Government had not attended to the suggestions of the West-Indians. The first of these was, that the duty on sugar should be reduced; but his noble friend had at once stated, that he could not concede to that proposition, on account of the state of the revenue. The next point was, to give them relief by enabling them to procure supplies at a cheaper rate. This had been done. The Intercourse Act had been passed, and relief had been afforded [no, no]. At least Government had done something to afford relief. The third suggestion was, to give a bounty on the exportation of refined sugar. He did not deny, that such a measure would give relief to the West-Indians, but it would injure the revenue, and increase the price to the consumer; and it was one which, he was sure, looking to the present state of public feeling, the Government could not successfully propose, nor the House receive with patience. It would not at present be borne that a tax should be levied on the people to pass directly into the pockets of the West-Indians, The hon. Gentleman said "No, no." How, then, would it operate? Would it not increase the price to the consumer, and would not the whole sum gained by the West-Indians come out of the pockets of the people? The Government was doing what it could to introduce molasses into the breweries, which was a means of giving relief. The whole charge against the Government fell to the ground. Why did the West-Indians not have the subject referred to a Committee above-stairs when it was offered? and why did they ask for a Committee of the whole House to examine a subject that required the closest and most minute investigation? It was impossible for a Committee of the whole House to examine documents, and have evidence before it to substantiate them; and quite impossible, therefore, that the Committee should be granted to the motion of the hon. Gentleman. The charge of the Government not sympathising with the West-Indians was not borne out by the facts. The Government had spared no labour to collect information, or to understand the subject, and it had spared no labour to ascertain what was the best course to adopt. That it had not succeeded to the hon. Gentleman's wishes was not surprising, for the West-Indians did not agree among themselves as to what they wished. The hon. Member opposed the Foreign Sugar Refining Bill, but he could bring several West-Indians, well acquainted with all the bearings of the question, who approved of it as a benefit to the colonies. Some Gentlemen thought the reduction of duty would be a great benefit, but he could find West-Indian planters who maintained that it would be no benefit at all. The whole subject of the colonies, particularly as they were referred to by the hon. Gentleman at the close of his speech, was so mixed up with very important political considerations, which it did not fall within his province to discuss, that he should think himself blameable if he entered further into the subject on such an important occasion, and in such a House. He admitted the great importance of the subject, but that was, in his opinion, a sufficient reason to regret that it had been discussed incidentally, when so few Members were present.

did not conceive, that the bounty on exporting refined sugar was the only means which could be devised to give relief to the West-India interest. That body had a right, he thought, to complain of the Administration; and not merely of the present Administration, but of former Administrations. It might complain, too, of those who advocated its interest, for they appeared not to understand it. Both the causes of the distress, and the measures that would give relief, were more obvious than people generally supposed. The great cause of the distress was, that our colonies grew more sugar than could be consumed in this country: it was exported to the Continent, and the price at which the export sold, determined the price of all the sugar that was consumed at home. The instant the quantity sent to this country was more than could be consumed, and we were obliged to export it, that instant the price of sugar on the Continent determined the prices in our markets. But the sugar sent to the Continent was raised at a much lower rate than the sugar of our West-Indian colonies; thus the sugar of these colonies, raised at a greater cost, was actually sold for no more than what paid the cost of production of the sugar raised at a much less expense. At present the Legislature compelled the West-Indians to raise their sugar at the increased cost; at least, it augmented the difficulties of raising sugar in our own colonies, and this evil ought to be immediately obviated. If that were done, a considerable relief would be afforded to the West-Indians. The diminution of duty would not afford relief to any extent. If it did not so increase the home consumption as to leave none to export, he doubted whether it would do any good. The cost of raising sugar in the West Indies would be lowered by allowing them to get all their supplies free. The Legislature ought to take off the absurd restrictions on the trade of the colonies, and allow them to buy their timber, their lumber, their food, as cheap as they could. In fact, the West Indies were sacrificed most unjustly to the policy of supporting Canada, and the West Indies were taxed to enrich Canada. There was a system of continual protection; and in order to compensate the West Indies for the taxes levied on it in favouring of Canada, the East Indies were taxed. We had got into a vicious system of protecting all interests, one against another, and the consequence was, the general distress of all. They were all in distress. Why did not the House legislate on sound and simple principles and avoid those interferences with the great machine that kept up continual friction? After reducing all the duties on their supplies of lumber and food, and after allowing them to import their food from where they pleased, why should they not be permitted to refine the sugar they grow? Formerly several colonies had flourished by that process, and why should the Legislature refuse that benefit to the West-Indians? There was nothing but a miserable system of restrictions and protections, which were only obstructions; and it was time to allow the people to get what they could at the cheapest rate, and not increase distress by laying restrictions on their industry. Another cause of the great cost of the West-Indian sugar was, the putting an end to the importation of slaves into them, while the foreign sugar-growers had a free importation of slaves. The Government ought to use its exertions to put an end to the foreign slave-trade, and that would give relief to our own planters. As to the Bill under consideration, he thought the refining of foreign sugar in this country would do no good. That was the produce of slave labour; and we ought to discourage the consumption of sugar grown by slave-labour. The Government ought to settle a colony at Fernando Po, and make it a large dépôt: and from there we ought to send out agents up all the African rivers, endeavour to introduce commerce into every part of that continent, and convince the native chiefs that it would be for their interest to put an end to the slave-trade. If that were done, a considerable relief would be afforded to the West Indies, while the measure for refining foreign sugar would only have a tendency to encourage the foreign slave-trade. The Government ought to revise the whole West-India system, and legislate for the colonies on sound and simple principles.

thought his hon. friend, the member for Dumfriesshire, was justified in bringing on the discussion then, because no other time could be found for it, and it was difficult even then to attract attention to it. The hon. Member who spoke last, seemed to think it would be very easy to remedy all the evils of the colonies. He recommended the Government to adopt the system of free trade, and throw open our colonies to all the world. Before it did that, he would advise it to consider, as our colonies could be supplied cheaper from other countries than from our own, that it would transfer the whole commerce of those colonies to foreign countries, and transfer with it all the shipping now employed in the colonial trade. The hon. Member, he believed, was exceedingly mistaken. The measure of free trade had been tried, and had not answered expectations. It had failed to give relief to the West Indies. The markets there had been partially opened, and what was the consequence? Why, from having supplies from two sources, the market was uncertain, worse supplied than before, and prices were higher than before a direct trade was allowed to the United States. The West-Indians were not benefitted by this trade, because the United States would take nothing in return, and would be paid for their cargoes in specie. The hon. Member took, he thought, a superficial view, when he supposed, that by establishing a free trade in one country, he would necessarily produce a free trade in another. It would do no such thing, and his free trade scheme would be attended with none of the expected advantages, unless he could induce other nations to establish reciprocity treaties with us. If we were to equalize the duties in the West Indies on the commodities brought from our North American colonies, and from the United States, the consequence would be, that the whole benefit of the trade would belong to the United States, unless the Government first established a reciprocity treaty. By opening the trade to foreigners, we should only destroy our own colonial trade. He was sure, that the system recommended by the hon. member for Ashburton, would only deprive us of ships, colonies and commerce, or, at least, leave us the barren honour of possessing colonies, and the burthen of providing for their security, but would transfer all the substantial advantages of having colonies to other nations. The reduction of the duty on sugar—and it should be remembered that the present was a war duty, which the people were entitled to have repealed, and the Government was guilty of a breach of faith by not repealing it—the reduction of the duty would, by promoting consumption here, limit the surplus to be sent to the Continent, and raise the price, both there and here, and confer a great benefit on the West-Indians. If the Government withdrew its protection, from the colonies, it would be better at once to allow them to withdraw their allegiance, and seek protection elsewhere.

had expected to hear, but had not heard, some arguments from the hon. member for Worcester, to refute the statements of the hon. member for Ashburton. The hon. Member had contented himself with repeating his old assertions about the necessity and advantages of reciprocity treaties, and had not shown that the system recommended by the hon. Member opposite (Colonel Torrens) would be disadvantageous. He thought it was the duty of the Government to explain its views; and the hon. Member who spoke first had some reason to find fault with it for not having done so. The right hon. Gentleman had not understood that hon. Member, and the Government owed it to the West-Indians to give a further explanation. The Government ought also to grant a Committee of Inquiry; but the right hon. Gentleman wished to pass his Bill first, and inquire afterwards. There was a difference of opinion concerning the probable effect of this measure, and therefore it ought to be inquired into. He was not one of those, though he was friendly to the abolition of slavery, who was willing to ruin the West-Indians by a sudden emancipation. He wished to do justice, and the Government ought to do justice. The reduction of the duty on sugar was due to all parties; and he believed it would have a most beneficial effect. If the war duty were taken off, the consumption would be much increased, and the West-Indians benefitted as well as the consumers. After that, the Navigation Acts ought to be modified, and the West-Indians allowed to provide themselves with provisions and timber, from what quarters they pleased, and they, of course, would provide for themselves as cheaply as possible. Government ought also to demand the fulfillment of those treaties relative to the abolition of the foreign slave trade we had purchased at a high price. At present the foreigner purchased a slave for 40l. while our planters must pay 80l. In the foreign colonies fifty slaves out of the hundred were workers, while in our colonies there were not above thirty-five out of the hundred. It was impossible that our planters could compete against the foreign planter under such disadvantages. The hon. member for Worcester said, that the Intercourse Act had done no good; but he had received a letter from Trinidad that day, which gave a different account. The barrel of flour, which had cost twenty dollars, now cost sixteen dollars; and at the same time the barrel of flour bonded at Liverpool, cost only 1l. 17s.; and what prevented that from being sent, for the voyage was only, as it were, a few days, to where it was worth 3l. 4s.? The Government ought to allow a perfectly free importation of food into the colonies, and it ought to put an end to the foreign slave-trade. It ought to send a number of steam-boats off the coast of Africa, and follow the advice which men well acquainted with the matter had given, and which was to be found in papers on the Table. If Africa ever could be civilized, it was by means of commerce. They ought, therefore, to endeavour to extend it by means of the establishments in Fernando Po, and by forming new ones in the Bight of Benin, in which neighbourhood the slave-trade was carried on to the greatest extent. It was clear to demonstration, that, when commercial relations had been established with the chiefs along the coast, and they had become aware, that it was for their interest to provide those commodities which were the produce of their own soils, for trading, they would do so, and give up slave-dealing. He had seen a letter from a merchant settled on that coast, in which he stated the means which he had adopted to induce some of the African chiefs to abandon the slave-trade. He asked one of these men how much he got by the sale of each slave, and he was informed, between three and four dollars. The merchant then proved to the satisfaction of the chief, that he would get much more by employing these slaves to procure palm oil. The result was, that the African abandoned the slave-trade, and carried on a trade in the produce of his country. This plan ought to be generally pursued; for he thought that nothing was more certain than, that commerce had done more to civilize the world than all other means put together. It was very fine to talk of the glory and splendor of military achievements, but they all sunk into insignificance when compared with the blessings which commerce had bestowed upon the world. The means at present adopted to put down the trade were, in his opinion, decidedly inefficient. A few English ships were stationed along the coast, and they were not empowered to seize a ship unless it had slaves on board; but above all, the system must be defective as long as a premium was given to the British seamen for the slaves captured: as long as this custom continued, it was not to be expected that they would be disposed to employ great zeal in completely destroying the slave-trade. What had been done hitherto to put an end to this disgraceful traffic, had cost this country between 200,000l. and 300,000l. a-year, together with a great waste of life. He would undertake to say, that with half this annual expenditure, if proper steps were taken, the object would be attained. He had reason to believe, that the slave-trade was at this moment carried on to a greater extent than it ever was before. The waste of human life in the foreign slave colonies was almost beyond belief. In the Island of Cuba a slave could be purchased for 10l., and the price for the best negroes never exceeded 40l. The proprietors found it cheaper to overwork their slaves for four or five years, and then leave them to perish—than to take care of those they might have. Thus all the worst practices which ever were carried on in slave colonies, were continued to a greater extent than ever, in the foreign colonies in the West Indies, in addition to the great sacrifice of life that resulted from the manner in which the slaves were necessarily conveyed from the coast of Africa to the places of their destination. In addition to the justice due to our own colonies, every feeling of humanity should prompt us to exert all our energies for the destruction of the slave-trade. He trusted, that this would be done, and that a more enlightened system of commercial policy would be pursued towards our colonies than had hitherto been witnessed. He hoped Government would abandon the absurd course of holding out threats to the colonies, which could be productive of no good, and only served to irritate the minds of the parties interested. With respect to the question of the Sugar Refining Act, he thought an opportunity should be afforded the West-Indian colonists to make out their case as they said they could do; and prove that the foreign sugar which was brought to this country to be refined, found its way into the British market. If nothing else were done, care ought to be taken to insure the exportation of the same quantity of refined sugar as had been imported in a raw state. He had always been the advocate of the complete removal of all restrictions on our commerce, and contended that a perfect competition should exist; but he could not concur in putting the sugars produced in those countries which at present carried on the slave-trade, on an equality with sugars brought from our own colonies. He did not know whether the documents that the hon. Member proposed to refer to the Committee were fit and proper documents to found an inquiry upon, but he was satisfied, that some investigation should be gone into on the subject. He should, therefore, give his cordial support to the Amendment.

said, that the honourable Member seemed, from the nature of his observations, to have misunderstood the question before the House. That question was merely, that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on the Sugar Refining Act, and on that Motion the hon. member for Dumfries (Mr. Keith Douglas) had moved, as an Amendment, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the satements, calculations, and explanations, submitted to the Board of Trade, relating to the commercial, financial, and political state of the British West-India colonies. That Motion, if carried, would not, however, it should be recollected, effect the object the hon. member for Dumfries had in view, because it could not give any of that relief which the West-India interest demanded. He had himself proposed to the Gentlemen connected with the West Indies, to grant an inquiry; but the answer then was, that they could not accept it, because it would merely create delay. All was known, they said, that it was necessary to know. The distress was plainly overwhelming, and required prompt and immediate relief. The question had since been thoroughly investigated before the Board of Trade, and he was of opinion, from all he had heard, that the only substantial relief the West-Indians could look forward to, without a material injury to the interests of the mother country, would be found in a bounty on the exportation of sugar, and in the effectual putting down of the foreign Slave-trade. As long as the supply of sugar continued more than equal to the demand of this country, it was obvious that the price could not be affected by any thing but the increase of the quantity sent to the foreign market, and to that the West-Indians must look for relief. He was quite ready to admit, that the British West-Indies were entitled to the entire and complete monopoly of the home market, and the effect of the measure now before the House would be, he believed, to make that monopoly more secure; any plan for the admission of foreign sugar, although refined, should not leave that object unsecured. He must candidly admit, however, with respect to the facts brought forward on the subject, that they did not leave the question wholly without doubt. The Government was not altogether satisfied, and it was for that reason he proposed that the Act should be in force but one year, in order that they might be able to acquire further knowledge by the experiment. It was, in his opinion, quite clear that the West-Indians could not hope for relief from anything but a reduction of the quantity of sugar brought to market; and he did not think that the reduction of the duty would produce any material effect in that way, while it must be accompanied by a material diminution of revenue. With respect to the refining of sugar by the West-Indians themselves, he had no objection; but when an offer of that kind was made to them, they replied, the construction of machinery for that purpose, after so long a prohibition, would be so expensive, that they could not hope to receive any relief from a permission to refine. The noble Lord concluded by observing, that he agreed with the hon. member for Middlesex, in his expressions of abhorrence of the continuance of the Slave-trade by foreign Powers; but, he trusted, that the negotiations which were now going on would terminate in the entire destruction of a traffic so disgraceful to humanity.

contended, that the measure now proposed would be a boon to the foreign Slave-trader, and that Government were guilty of the gross inconsistency of professing to desire the termination of Slavery, and yet at the same time encouraging, by every means in their power, the productions of those colonies where the Slave-trade was carried on to the manifest injury of our own colonies, where it was wholly prohibited. He challenged the Government, or any Member of that House, to point out a single instance of the violation of the orders of the Legislature by the West-Indians since the passing of the Act which prohibited the continuance of the Slave-trade; and yet, at the present moment, and for many years past, the Slave-trade had been carried on to an extent greater than ever by France and all the countries which professed to have abandoned it. By them it was carried on in a more revolting manner than ever. England's endeavouring to suppress it had been answered by strong declarations indeed, but not by any efficacious acts. Some of the foreign Powers said, they would concur in putting an end to a scourge which had so long desolated Africa, degraded Europe, and afflicted humanity. The three great colonial Powers in Europe—France, Spain, and Portugal, whose concurrence was the most essential—withheld it. But the House should be aware of the means by which Great Britain proposed to the other powers of Europe—and in which they joined—to coerce France, Spain, and Portugal, into the abolition of the Slave-trade. The late Lord Londonderry, in a despatch to the Duke of Wellington, then at Paris, urged a declaration on the part of all those powers, concurring in the abolition of the Slave-trade, that they would prohibit the consumption, in their territories, of the colonial produce of such of the Powers who still continued to carryon the trade. The expediency of enforcing such a prohibition was again urged by Mr. Canning, and formed the subject of a renewed declaration at the Congress of Verona, on the part of Austria, Russia, and Prussia. This country had hitherto, except in passing the Sugar Refining Act in 1828, with perfect sincerity and fidelity, acted on the principles she professed. Her colonists had most religiously observed the enactments of her Statutes for the abolition of the trade. Not an instance had occurred on their part of a violation of them. A case occurred in Jamaica, strongly illustrative of the truth of his assertion. It was the only case that ever occurred in that island of an attempt to import slaves after the passing of the Abolition Acts. In 1817 a person who was proved, on his trial, to be an entire stranger to the island, with no acquaintance or connexion in it, arrived at a remote part of the coast, in a vessel with some Africans on board. He went ashore and the very first person to whom he offered these Africans for sale immediately proceeded to a Magistrate, and lodged an information against the Captain, which was immediately transmitted to him (Mr. Burge) as Attorney General. In three weeks this slave-dealer was prosecuted, brought to trial, convicted, and on his way to the place to which he had been transported, the utmost term of years which the Statute authorized. The mate and others of the crew who were amenable to the law, were brought to trial and sentenced to such punishments as the Statute authorized, and the vessel and Africans were condemned to the Crown. Far different had been the conduct of the other Powers of Europe. Notwithstanding the professions and public declarations of Russia, the principle of her tariff went to encourage the importation into her dominions of sugar the growth of slave-trading colonies, and to exclude that of Britsh colonies. A similar complaint might be made against Austria and Prussia. Although, after long and repeated negotiations, France, Spain, and Portugal, as well as the government of Brazils, adopted measures for abolishing this trade; yet, in direct opposition to those measures, they still continued to carry it on to an extent, and under circumstances, the narration of which, in this age, one could scarcely credit, if papers on the Table of that House did not afford the most abundant proof of it. First, with respect to France. Between the 23rd of August, 1826, and the following 23rd of November, no less than eleven French vessels were fallen in with, having on board 2,577 slaves. Commodore Bullen, in his despatch of the 26th of that month, said, that three-fourths of the Slave-trade were carried on under the flag of France. In the private correspondence of the French merchants, dated in 1826, found on board the slave-trading vessels, proofs would be found of the security with which this trade might be carried on. These unhappy persons were, in the slang language adopted for the purpose of concealing the traffic called 'logs of ebony.' It further appeared, from the papers before the House, that from the 1st of June, 1827, to the 4th of December of that year, twelve slave-ships, and from the 1st of January to the 14th of May, 1828, eight slave-ships had been spoken with. Between the 4th of November, 1828, and the 5th of January, 1829, no fewer than 1,721 slaves were publicly landed in Guadaloupe. In 1828, 5,000 slaves were imported into Martinique. In 1829, the Neirsée or Estafette, a French ship with 289 slaves on board, was captured by his Majesty's ship Eden. The crew rose on the prize-master, and forcibly took possession, and carried her with the slaves into Guadaloupe. It was not until after strong remonstrances on the part of the governor of Dominica and Admiral Fleming to the governor of Guadaloupe, that they were given up. The Admiral, in his despatches, expressed a decided opinion that this trade was carried on with the perfect concurrence of the governments of those places. Thus, then, France, notwithstanding her municipal regulations, which, if they were honestly enforced, would put down this trade, had carried it on to an enormous extent. The consequence of this great increase of slave labour had been an immense increase in the quantity of her colonial produce. That country, too, took care of her colonists, and secured to colonial produce full protection; she did not allow the produce of other colonies to come in competition with that of her own colonies. She not only, by high duties prohibited the importation of the sugar of British colonies, but allowed a protecting duty to the export of the sugars of her refineries; whilst our policy, with a chivalrous generosity which excited the ridicule and contempt of every foreign State, tended to sacrifice our own interests to those of foreigners. France had the wisdom and the justice to make her own interests and that of her colonists the first and exclusive object of her care. He wished England would follow her example, instead of gratuitously giving to other nations those advantages which ought to be reserved for ourselves. With respect to Spain, the papers on the Table exhibited a still more appalling picture of guilt on the part of her subjects, and of perfidy or indifference on the part of her government. Between the years 1811 and 1820, there were imported and sold at the Custom-house of Havannah, 116,000 slaves. In the subsequent five years, after the trade had been declared illegal by Spain, there were 69,000 slaves imported there. Thus it would be seen that the average importation, whilst the trade was legal, was 11,000 in each year; and during the five years when the importation was illegal, the average annual importation was 13,000. In the Brazils, a corresponding increase in the importation of slaves would be found. There were imported into Rio Janeiro, between the 1st of July and the 31st of December, 1827, 15,481 slaves; from the 1st of January to the 31st of March, 1828, 15,483. Into Maranham, for the year ending the 31st of December, 1827, there were imported 1,917. Into Rio Janeiro, in 1828, between the 1st of July and the 1st of September, 7,582; and between the 1st of October and the 31st of December, 16,906. From the 1st of January to the 30th of June, 1829, there were imported into Rio Janeiro, 25,179, of whom 2,236 died, so that there had been in nine months imported into Rio Janeiro 30,964, not including those imported into the ports of Bahia and Maranham. Since 1815 there had been an average annual importation of 30,000 slaves into Brazil, which had actually imported no less than 390,000 Africans; and the total number imported into the colonies of France, Spain, and Portugal, was 680,000. The House would be mistaken if it supposed that even this frightful number of 680,000, imported into the Havannah and Brazils between 1815 and 1829, constituted the total number of unhappy beings torn from their family and country. What would the House think when they learned that, in addition to this number, there were, between 1824 and 1827, 10,814 slaves captured by British cruisers, and afterwards restored to freedom? During their voyage, the most dreadful mortality prevailed, induced entirely by the confined and narrow space allotted to these unhappy beings on shipboard, and by the other means resorted to for carrying on this trade with the least possible risk of capture. Without giving in detail, as he might do, the numbers dying during the voyage, he would state one fact which was alleged in a petition presented to the Chamber of Deputies in France—that captains of slave-ships annually threw overboard 3,000 negroes, more than one half of whom were sacrificed alive. The Brazilian and Cuban, as well as the French colonists, had thus been enabled to increase the cultivation and manufacture of sugar, to an extent which had necessarily added to the distress of the British colonist, by the increased quantity of produce he had to encounter in the foreign market. But this was only a part of the evil which was inflicted on our own colonists. The Brazilian and Cuban colonist could purchase, by means of this abominable traffic, a slave at 40l.; whilst the British colonist could not rear his slave from infancy to manhood at a less price than 85l. In the British colonies, the number of slaves, whose labour was made available in the great gang, was from 34 to 35 in 100—while in Cuba they were from 50 to 55 in 100; of those generally considered working people, but not in the great gang, or in respect of whom the returns of labour exceeded the cost of maintenance, the proportion in the British colonies might be taken at 45 in 100. In Cuba the number was 65 in 100. If to this were added the increased expense to the British planter occasioned by his humane treatment of his slaves—by the laws of amelioration which were in force; the expenses of medical attendance, of clothing, and allowances of moral and religious instruction—of registration, as well as various other charges, and of the higher salaries paid to white men—it would be found, that the foreign colonist could raise his produce at less than half what it cost the British colonist to bring his produce to market. In addition to this, it had been truly stated, that the foreign slave-trading colonist found a double advantage in meeting the competition of the British colonial surplus in this country rather than in the continental markets, because, besides the advantages already stated, he also obtained the benefit, be it more or less, of the British drawback, which was allowed for the express purpose of enabling the British colonist to meet his competitor in the foreign market upon fair terms. One or other of these two results must follow—that the foreigner thus obtained a large share of the drawback intended for the British colonist, for whose protection and encouragement it could alone Justifiably be given; or else that the British Exchequer must lose that amount of drawback to the extent of the foreign produce introduced. But they had been told, that the British West India colonies had lately gained a very considerable advantage by the relaxation of the restrictions upon their intercourse with the United States. Unfortunately, however, the great impolicy of those restrictions was continued too long to allow the West-India interests to reap that advantage from the removal of them which they might have expected, had it taken place sooner. He did not say this with a view of casting any blame upon his Majesty's present Ministers, for it was to be attributed to those who preceded them. This mistaken policy had been too long continued. The trade had passed away into other channels, and could now never be regained. The United States, excluded by our prohibitory system from our colonies, had begun to look within themselves for those productions which they had before received from us. They encouraged the cultivation of sugar and rum in the State of Louisiana, and had now the means of procuring both those articles in such quantities as to become almost altogether independent of us. The quantity which they did require they took from Cuba. Formerly North America had taken our rum and sugar—in exchange for which she had given us slaves and lumber; she now sold us the same articles, but, not wanting our produce in return, she demanded hard dollars. Many other instances of the same sort might be quoted where the injurious system had been discontinued too late to remedy the evil. So in Jamaica, the cultivation of cotton and indigo was done away with in consequence of the high duties. The great misfortune of the West-India colonies had been this;—that no change in the British policy had been made until circumstances had occurred, in which that change could be of no benefit. Of late years, our West-India colonies seemed to have been regarded only as they could be made to contribute to the coffers of the Exchequer, and to know and feel their relation to the parent State only in the burthens to which it subjected them, and the dangers to which it exposed their property, in consequence of the sanction which was given to plans, and schemes, and principles invading the very title under which that property was held. They had not the same consideration bestowed on them as any other branch of agriculture or commerce. They were the only class of his Majesty's subjects to whom peace had not brought any alleviation of the burthens imposed on them for the purposes of war, and which they had been assured should end with the termination of war; and yet, amidst all this protracted and accumulated distress, they had remained distinguished for their loyal and devoted attachment to this country. He could assure the House that he would not address to it the language of menace, but he could not disguise from himself, that the policy adopted towards our colonists would compel them to ask, that if they were no longer valued—if, in the folly and madness of modern political economy, they were considered as a burthen, in God's name let that connexion be dissolved. If it was not to be the means of their protection, let it not be rendered the means of their destruction; let them protect themselves, or obtain protection from those who know their value. This was not the first time he had addressed such language to his Majesty's Ministers. How different an estimate did the statesmen of other days form of these colonial possessions? They seemed to have been desirous of recording their sense of the importance which Great Britain ought to attach to her colonies; for there was scarcely a Statute, commencing with the act of trade, in which a preamble, eloquently and warmly boasting of the advantages of her connexion with them, would not be found. But if, wiser than our ancestors, we would renounce these advantages, or did no longer estimate them, or, if we were disposed to give to foreigners the benefits to which our colonists alone were entitled—if we no longer thought them of sufficient importance to receive exclusive protection at our hands, then common justice and common fairness required us to say to them—"Seek from some other Power that protection which it is no longer our interest or our inclination to afford you." His complaint was not against the present Ministers alone, but he complained of the whole policy, which, for years past, had been pursued towards our colonies. Let not the present Ministers persevere in it by the adoption of the proposed measure. It had been said in the course of this discussion, that the relief to the colonists to which they ought to confine themselves was that of a reduction of the high duties on sugar. They had urged their claim to it in vain, and yet it could not be denied that such a reduction, whilst it would have saved them from their deplorable condition, would not have caused such a diminution of revenue as could justify the Government in refusing it. The effect of a reduction of the duty on coffee had been seen. In 1807, when the duty on that article was 2s. 2d. per lb., the consumption was 1,064,000 lbs., and the amount received by the Exchequer was 119,500l.; in 1808, when the duty was reduced to 7d., the consumption was 9,000,000 lbs., and the revenue obtained 270,796l.; in 1830 the consumption was nearly 22,000,000 lbs. weight, and the revenue received 579,363l. 10s. 7d. A similar increase in the consumption of sugar would take place if there were a similar reduction of the duty on that article. When the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed, in the late Parliament, that such of the colonies as would adopt certain speculative schemes, in relation to the slave-population, should obtain a reduction of duty which should be withheld from such of the colonies as did not adopt those plans, he admitted the extent of the relief which a reduction would afford, and that such a reduction could also be granted consistently with a regard to the other interests of the empire. But his Majesty's Government ought not to annex a condition to the concession of that to which the colonists were absolutely entitled, and still less, a condition which would not merely render the concession itself perfectly fruitless, but invade the very title on which colonial property was held. It was pretended, that the importation of Brazilian and Cuban sugar, for the purpose of refining only, and to be again exported, did not encourage the foreign slave-trade. He answered this by asking this plain question, whether the Brazilian or Cuban would send his sugar to this country if it were not for his advantage? He found that advantage in British capital and British credit. The advantage thus afforded him, encouraged him to extend his cultivation by those means which would afford him the greatest profit, and subject him to the least expense, and those means were derived to him by the importation of Africans—by the continuance of the infamous slave traffic. He could not understand how such a measure as the present could be passed, without doing that which the Abolition Laws had directly prohibited. By those laws, British subjects were prohibited, under the heaviest penalties, from advancing their money to assist in the prosecution of the slave-trade. No British subject should do that which might encourage its continuance. By the Sugar Refining Act, the Legislature itself would afford that encouragement. In fact, since its first enactment in 1828, the importation of Brazilian and Cuban sugar into this country had much augmented. The Act, therefore, encouraged the slave-grown sugar, and encouraged the foreign slave-trade, and he trusted that the West-Indians would, on this ground, be supported by all those who were averse from slavery. His object was, to have the subject of this Act alone referred to a Select Committee, and he, therefore, would recommend his hon. friend to withdraw his amendment, for the purpose of substituting one which he (Mr. Burge) would, in that case, move, namely, that the Foreign Sugar Refining Act be referred to the consideration of a Select Committee, for the purpose of inquiring how far it could be renewed with a due regard to the interests of our West-India colonies.

said, he would adopt the suggestion of his hon. and learned friend. His only object in submitting the Amendment was, to bring the matter fully under consideration; if that object could be better attained, and he was ready to admit it might be, by the Amendment proposed by his hon. and learned friend, he was perfectly ready to withdraw his Amendment.

said, as the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, had, by moving another Amendment, brought the subject of the Sugar Refining Bill fairly under the consideration of the House, he should avail himself of the optunity to explain the nature of the measure, which, out of deference to the House, he had declined doing in the early part of the evening, whilst the much wider and more general subject—the whole question of the commercial condition of the West Indies—had been involved in the Amendment first moved by the hon. member for Dumfries. He thought, indeed, that he had fully explained, that he had purposely declined entering into this particular measure when first he addressed the House, and therefore he had good right to complain of the extraordinary speech of the hon. member for Middlesex, who charged him with calling upon the House to consent to a plan which he was pleased to say would inflict serious injury on the West Indies, without having assigned any grounds for giving the sanction. That hon. Gentleman was, indeed, singularly infelicitous in his observations; for not only had he shewn that he knew nothing of the nature of the subject under discussion—not only had he chosen to pass censure on a measure of which he could know nothing until it was explained—but he had been actually ignorant of what the motion was before the House, and upon which the hon. Gentleman was prepared, as he said, to vote; for the hon. Gentleman said, that he wished for a Committee to examine the details of this intricate subject—to sift the bearings, and to examine the facts; an examination, proper or improper, which could only be conducted in a Committee up-stairs, such as had been called for by the hon. member for Eye (Mr. Burge); and yet he supported the motion of the hon. member for Dumfries, for a Committee of the whole House, which he ought to know would entirely put an end to any such inquiry. But he left it to the hon. member for Middlesex and his new friends to reconcile all these inconsistencies, and he should pass at once to the subject which was now really before the House. In the first place, he should wish, however, to explain the cause of the delay which had taken place in the introduction of this measure, because an argument had been founded upon it, which was most unjust to the parties interested; for it had been said, that, however this Act, for the renewal of which he should move, had been suffered to expire, the subject should be treated as a new one. He particularly addressed himself to the hon. member for Eye. He said, that no claim could be set up on the part of the refiners—that they had entered into engagements on the understanding that the Act would be renewed, because it was suffered to lapse. He would tell the House—for the hon. Member himself must know it, from the communications he had had with him—what was the case. The subject was fully considered very early in the year. What had been advanced by the West-Indian interest against the renewal of the Act, received equal consideration with the arguments which were advanced by the refiners; and the result of the whole was, that early in the year, before the end of the last Parliament, his Majesty's Government was prepared to introduce an Act for the renewal of this measure, and the parties interested were informed that such was its intention. The dissolution of Parliament, of course, prevented the introduction of that measure, but at the opening of this Parliament, the Bill was again prepared, and was ready to be introduced. It would have been introduced in the latter end of June, the Act expiring on the 5th of July; but on the 1st or 2nd of July, three or four days before the Act actually expired, representations were made by different gentlemen connected with the West-Indian interests, both in London and Liverpool—not again controverting the principle of the measure, not again bringing up the old arguments against the principle of the Act—but stating, that in the full practical operation of the law, there existed great frauds, and that not only the West-Indian interests, but those of the revenue, were seriously injured by the system. Under these circumstances, of course, it became the duty of his Majesty's Government, seriously to inquire into the existence of these alleged frauds, and in consequence, an active inquiry was immediately set on foot, both at Liverpool and the Custom-house in London. The West-Indians were again heard on several occasions. The statements of the West-India merchants, both in London and Liverpool, were fully examined: and the facts they brought forward were inquired into. The allegations of fraud in the Custom-house were minutely examined and reported on; and the result was, that Government still adhered to the measure which they proposed to introduce, finding that those assertions, as far as they could examine them, were not based in fact—he meant the assertions of fraud; and, of course, the present measure was the same as that originally introduced. This, then, was the cause of the delay which had taken place; and would it not be very hard now if, because the Government were induced to pause, in order to institute this inquiry, they who were inclined to oppose this Bill were to turn round and say, "the Act is very different to what it originally was—it is an entirely new measure—and one which you have no right to call upon the House to pass as a renewal of the former Act?" So much for the delay! He would then address himself very shortly to the nature of the proposal itself. He was compelled to own, that when he heard of the extraordinary ferment which this measure was said to have caused among the West-Indian interests—when he heard the various statements which had been set afloat —when he saw statements bandied about of a most extraordinary description (one of which was put into his hands just before he came there that night), in which they were told that this measure was to be the utter destruction of the colonies—and when Gentlemen were requested to come down that evening in order to prevent the utter ruin—(for that was the expression) of the West-Indian interests, he felt surprised, knowing as he did that this measure had been introduced successively, year after year, with so little remark—with so little observation—that in those records which remained of what passed in that House, he could not find, that more than a single, if, indeed, one single—observation, had been made upon the subject at any time. When he found, therefore, that this measure had been year after year introduced and passed, almost sub silentio—when he found that this had been done, not by one Government only, but by three successive Governments—he must own he was a little astonished at the sudden outcry which was now raised against this enactment. He lamented that so much exaggeration had gone abroad, because he was satisfied that exaggeration never could advance or assist any cause whatever. The history of the measure was shortly this: for many years there had been a complaint on the part of the refiners—of London especially—that at certain periods of the year their works were stopped, because there was a very inadequate supply of West-India sugar before the arrival of the Spring vessels in February and March. Before the West-India vessels came in, so small was the quantity of West-India sugar imported, that they, the refiners, were obliged to stop their works for a time, which naturally put them to great inconvenience and expense, because the price of sugar for a moment rose, and the quality became of a kind which did not suit them. This circumstance attracted the attention of Mr. Huskisson, as it had that of former Governments; and in 1827, he passed an Order of Council by which he admitted, for a certain time, foreign sugar. On a further consideration of the subject—not with a view generally to the advantage of particular individuals, but with a view of benefitting the refining trade—an Act was introduced, founded on the principles of the Order in Council of 1827. That Act, which was nearly the same as that he now proposed to introduce, was brought forward by Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, who was then President of the Board of Trade. In 1829 it was again introduced, and passed without observation. In 1830 the Act was again introduced, and again a little altered, with the view, which had always been entertained, of increasing, rather than diminishing, the facilities of refining. It was then, also, carried after very little observation. He confessed he should have thought that an Act so introduced, by three different individuals under two different Governments, might have been again carried into effect—perhaps with opposition—perhaps with some discussion—but certainly without exciting all the attention or animadversion which it now appeared to have done. What was the principle of this Act? The hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had assumed that it was even deeply injurious to the West-Indians; he had, indeed, only followed the hon. member for Middlesex, who had gone much beyond him; for, knowing nothing of the proposal of his Majesty's Government—unacquainted entirely with any of the details of the measure—he had not only asserted that it would be injurious to the West-India interests—but he had actually stated by how many shillings a cwt. this measure, of which he was utterly ignorant, would injure the trade. The hon. Gentleman had also stated—he did not allude to the hon. member for Middlesex, but to the hon. Gentleman who spoke last—that this measure would tend materially to assist the foreign slave-trade. The principle of the measure was directly the reverse; the principle was simply this—to give to the British refiner the power of refining sugar of foreign production in this country, with a view to export; and he believed the hon. Gentleman himself admitted, that if all foreign sugar were exported and went abroad, it could not affect the price of, or come into competition with, the sugar of this country. Indeed, the hon. Gentleman admitted that our principle must depend upon details; with that opinion he entirely agreed. Upon the principle, therefore, it appeared to him that it would be useless to say one word. It was a principle upon which they always had acted, and upon which they always must act, beneficially to this country—the principle of making this country the workshop of the world, by receiving the produce of foreign countries, and then employing our greater skill, our greater industry, our greater capital, our greater ingenuity, in working up that raw material, and again selling it to different parts of the world. On that principle, then, he should have thought there could be no doubt, but least of all should he have expected to hear a doubt expressed on the subject—though certainly one should not be surprised at anything now—by his hon. friend, the member for Middlesex; but, as he had said before, the question depended on whether the details of the measure were such as effectually to prevent the price of West-India sugar in this country from being lowered by the circumstance of foreign sugar, when refined, being consumed; or, in other words, of the whole of that produce, or an equivalent to it, being exported: because it was clear, that if foreign sugars, refined under this Act, were to come in here for consumption, they would have the effect to a certain extent, and to a certain extent only, of affecting the price of our West-India sugar. This was a point to which he must beg to draw the attention of the House; the subject was an intricate one, but he trusted the House would allow him to state to it the conclusions on which the opinion of the Cabinet was founded. This subject had engaged Mr. Huskisson's attention for a long time; it had also engaged, for a long time, the attention of all the Governments under whose consideration successively it had come; and there was no doubt that there would be no difficulty whatever in arriving at that point at which they must aim, if it were possible to have sugar refined in a sealed warehouse, and then exported without its ever coming to what might then be called this country; but that plan had been hitherto found to be impossible to be carried into execution, and another plan had, therefore, been resorted to—which was simply this. A certain number of cwts. of foreign sugar had been allowed to come in, paying a duty equal to the duty on West-India sugar, supposing the quality of that sugar equal to the Gazette price of West-India sugar; but, if it exceeded that quality, it had then paid an additional duty, equal, and more than equal, to the produce of refined sugar. He would leave out of this question for the sake of argument, the ascending scale of duty; because it was admitted by every one, that in the ascending scale of duty, when foreign sugar was of a finer quality, and at a higher price than West-India sugar, the additional duty was so much out of proportion to the additional value of the sugar, that it was not paid; and it was only when it was rather below, the Gazette price that it could find its way to this country. He would state to the House the calculation on which a drawback was granted of British West-India sugar—a drawback was granted equal to the whole duty on the quantity of refined sugar exported, and, in this way, no duty whatever was charged upon the treacle which came from that sugar, and which was consumed in this country; so far, therefore, the importer of British West-India sugar had an advantage in bringing his treacle into the market; if, therefore, the refiner were allowed to bring in his foreign sugar, without any allowance being made for the advantage the West-Indian enjoyed in his treacle, he would be getting an advantage by means of that treacle; because treacle always bearing a higher price in this market than upon the Continent, British sugar bore a price exactly in that proportion higher than foreign sugar. This, therefore, formed one of the conclusions on which foreign sugar was admitted, which were simply these:—For every cwt. of foreign sugar admitted, of a value equal to West-India sugar, the duty on West-India sugar was paid, and the drawback on West-India sugar was allowed; but, as it was calculated, that, as there was an increased value given to West-Indian sugar, by the treacle being admitted duty free, a duty of 2s. per cwt. would be just; and therefore foreign sugar was charged 2s. a cwt. more than West-India sugar of the same quality—or, in other words, the importer of foreign sugar, of a given quality, was enabled to be under-written by the Government at 2s. per cwt. less than the sum at which he valued his commodity, reserving, therefore to the West-India merchant a very fair advantage. In the measure which he proposed to introduce, he did not preserve that proportion in exactly the same state, because, in consequence of the advance in the price of treacle, the West India merchant was entitled to an advantage of nearly 3s. He would, therefore instead, of foreign sugar being under-written at 2s. less than its real value in the market, here propose that it should be under-written at 3s. less;—giving by that means, to the West-India proprietors, the advantage of an additional shilling per cwt. to which, he believed they were justly entitled. He had stated these details of the plan to the House; and he should proceed to shew, as he had already told the hon. Gentleman opposite, that it was impossible for foreign sugar introduced into this country to enjoy any greater advantage, through the process of refining here, than British sugar possessed, as must be apparent to all who understood the state of the case. The hon. Gentleman opposite, or any one acquainted with the subject, must know, that the price of sugar in this country must always be regulated by the price of sugar abroad—but above all, the price of foreign sugar consumed here, or of West-India refined sugar exported abroad, must be regulated by the price of foreign sugar which was refined abroad. Foreign sugar here and abroad, and West-Indian sugar here, of equal qualities, must always bear the same price; and it was evident that it would not, therefore, answer to refine foreign sugar in this country at a dearer price than that at which foreign sugar could be refined abroad. It followed, then, that if the Refining Act, which was supposed to give that advantage, were not passed, the only effect would be, that foreign sugar going abroad would be refined abroad, and would then come into competition with West-India sugar; and, consequently no advantage whatever would ensue to the West-Indian. Indeed, price was precisely the test to which he would allude. Supposing one cwt. of foreign sugar were worth, in this market, 24s., taking from that 24s. the 3s. advantage which the West-Indians gained in their treacle, the price of that sugar abroad would be 21s. Supposing it were taken abroad, it would yield exactly the same produce there, in refining, as it would here. If it went into the foreign market to be refined, it would then come into competition with the West-India sugar at 24s., which paid the same duty as it was proposed to impose upon this description of sugar. Upon, this principle he was prepared to contend, that under the Act as it was introduced, not the slightest benefit could arise to the foreign grower of sugar, in consequence of its being refined in this country. If they were to shut their gates against it, it would only go to a foreign market to contend there, and come into competition with their own sugar, exactly as it did now; and no advantage could possibly arise to the West-Indians. But, there was also another circumstance to be considered;—the foreign sugar, when introduced here, not acting in the slightest degree upon our prices, because, as he had shown, there could be no increase of price whatever, in consequence of the operation of this Act, it could not be the case, as the hon. Gentleman opposite had contended, that an additional market would be found for foreign slave-grown sugar. It was clear that the price of sugar must be regulated, like other things, by the cost of production; and, unless the demand in foreign markets could be increased, which this measure would have no tendency to effect, no inducement was held out by it, to grow one single pound more of sugar by means of slaves than at present. There was this circumstance also to be taken into consideration—there was a large capital invested in the sugar refineries of this country, and it was the bounden duty of the House, as it was its interest, to endeavour to assist that industry, where such assistance could be afforded without injury to the rival interests of any other manufacturers, and this was exactly what he would accomplish by this Act, which would not do the slightest injury to the West-Indians. He would not, however, content himself with the mere statements he had made, which he was well aware might be called only theory; but he would proceed to facts and he did so the more readily, in consequence of the most extraordinary statement he ever heard in his life, that was made by the hon. member for Eye, who said that the effect of the Sugar Refining Act, passed in 1828, had been greatly to increase the supply of sugar in all the foreign ports of Europe, and that it was owing to that circumstance principally, that such an increased consumption had taken place there. Great, indeed, must be the effects that spring from very little causes, if such were the case. He would ask the House, could it really believe that such an effect had been produced by the operation of that Act? Thinking, perhaps, some such statement as this might be made, he had furnished himself with an account of what the quantity of foreign sugar, refined in this country since the passing of this Act of 1828, had been; and, with the permission of the House, he would state the result of that account. In 1828, after the passing of that Act, the quantity of foreign sugar refined in this country amounted to about 4000 cwt. He was aware that he might be told that this was only for half a year. But he came to the year 1829, when the Act was in full operation—when it was even in operation to a greater extent—and he found, that the quantity of foreign sugar entered for refinement, in that year, amounted to 9072 cwt. The total exports of refined sugar in that year from Great Britain amounted to 808,000 cwt.: the total quantity consumed was 4,013,000 cwt., so that the quantity of foreign sugar refined in this country in the year amounted to about one thousandth part of the quantity of British refined sugar exported. In 1830: the total quantity entered for refining amounted to 42,000 cwt.; the consumption of sugar in this country amounted to 4,604,000 cwt., and the sugar refined and exported amounted to 1,032,000 cwt., making the quantity of foreign sugar entered for exportation in this country amount to about four per cent of the sugar exported, and not quite seven-eighths per cent of the sugar imported. Yet this, which in one year amounting to about one thousandth part, and in the other to about seven-eighths per cent, was to be assigned as the cause of the great increased consumption of foreign sugar in all the ports of Europe! But it would be said, perhaps, that it was clearly laid down that the great advantage of not refining foreign sugar here had been discovered; and that, if he took the quantity of foreign sugar entered for refining in this half year, 1831, he would find it was very large. He perfectly agreed that it was much larger than it had been: with the permission of the House he would state what it was in the first part of this year. The quantity of foreign sugar entered for refining in this country amounted to 90,000 cwt. From that amount however a considerable deduction must be made; because the refiners, finding that the Act was not, and could not be passed on the 5th of July, took in as much sugar as they were permitted by law to do, in order that they might work it all up before the Act passed. He had stated to the House, that the advantages enjoyed by the West-Indians upon treacle were very considerable; and this circumstance appeared to him to have been an inducement to bring in foreign sugar for refinement during the last six months. That, however, would be at once corrected by the Act which he had the honour to introduce to the House. If treacle fell again in price, which was not impossible, as it increased in amount, it would not become the interest of the refiner to use foreign sugar, and he would be subject, probably, as he had been in 1828 and 1829, to the chance of not being enabled to make use of it at all. He might be permitted to say, that this was a consideration worthy of remark. He would beg to ask the House, why this Sugar Refiners' Act of 1828 was passed? Was it passed for the purpose of becoming a dead letter? It was a dead letter in 1828; it was a dead letter in 1829; it became useful in 1830 and 1831; and then of a sudden, all parties turned round and said "Good God! do you not see what a quantity of sugar is coming in, and yet you are actually re-enacting of this measure? Stop it by all means—it never could have been intended to be carried into operation." He must say he did not believe that the Legislature of this country ever passed an Act without intending that it should work, or that it ever intended to pass an Act of this description to be a mere delusion, as it were, to any particular interest, and never intended to become practically useful. He had, in fact, replied to that, in replying to the last argument of the hon. Gentleman opposite, in which he stated that the effect of passing this Act must be to increase the advantages held out to foreign growers; there was however, one part of his argument, or rather a fact which he adduced in support of his argument, which certainly deserved some reply. The hon. Member said, "Why should the foreign grower send his sugar to this country, incurring all the disadvantage of double freight, and all the increased expense, unless you gave him a better price, to counterbalance those inconveniences?" He was aware that the hon. Gentleman had been in the colonies, but he believed his pursuits there had not been commercial; if they had been, he (Mr. Poulett Thomson) certainly should not have been able to account for his adducing an argument which displayed so little knowledge of the trade. When he talked of double freight, he would beg to ask him, did he not know that a large portion of the sugar, cotton, and other commodities which were to be shipped for the Continent, came here in the first instance? Did he not know, that, in consequence of the great facility for shipping in this country—in consequence of its having become, what we should be most happy that it was—almost the emporium of the world—various commodities came here for the express purpose of being reshipped for the Continent? He (Mr. Poulett Thomson) had some practical experience on this subject, and he would tell the hon. Gentleman what the expense of shipping was. In Saint Katherine's or the London Docks it was about 6d. per cwt.—scarcely one per cent upon the sugar itself—and he believed it could be done by some careful individuals for 3d. or 4d. per cwt; therefore the expense was nothing at all in comparison with the great advantages which were derived from the security of shipping the sugar in this country, and the additional means thereby afforded for its distribution to different parts of Europe. If, therefore, the hon. Gentleman thought that a great boon was necessary in order to induce the merchants or consumers to send their ships here, he really was not acquainted with the expense of which he spoke, for it was absolutely next to nothing. He would not, however, press those points upon the consideration of the House, because, as he stated before, the details of this measure were of such a nature, that it was not possible, taking into account the advantage given for treacle, to adduce any substantial argument which would go to shew that the price of foreign sugar was raised in the slightest degree, or that the least benefit whatever accrued to the foreigner from this proposition. The benefit was all our own, and the only difference was, that the Act benefitted English capital and English labour, instead of foreign labour and foreign capital. Nay, he could go even further in answer to the observations of the hon. Gentleman, and say, that if by the present measure, or any other of this description, it were possible to make this country the emporium of the refiners of sugar, more would be done to injure the employment of slaves in the slave-importing colonies than could be effected in any other way: this would be the course. It could be refined so much cheaper in this country, owing to the greater scale of capital, of quality, and, above all, of consumption, that it would become the interest of these countries to send their sugar here to be clayed, instead of having it clayed, as at present, there. The hon. Gentleman knew, that the expenses of this operation was so great, that in the British West Indies it was too expensive to be carried on. If by any means foreigners could be induced to send their sugar here to be clayed, that would go further than anything else to destroy the slave-trade in those countries; because the English would, by pursuing that course, perform the duties now imposed upon slaves. He did not, however, anticipate that this could be the case, because he believed, that the measure, even in the state in which it now was, was not very likely to afford any great facility for the introduction of refined sugar. He believed, that the ascending scale of price would effectually prevent any considerable portion from ever coming in, although, on certain occasions, when there was a scarcity of material (he did not believe that such would frequently be the case,) we were bound to extend all indulgence, and to give every facility which it was in our power to afford. At the same time, however, that they were introducing this measure, he was bound to say, that he did not consider it such a case, as regarded the revenue, as it had been described; because he believed that, owing to the improvements in refining, it might very probably happen, that a greater quantity of sugar would be produced from the cwt. than used to be produced when the proportions to which he had referred were calculated; and, in consequence of that, a greater drawback could be received by the refiner. The subject of the drawback was well worthy of attention; but the qualities of the sugar could only be ascertained by a course of experiment, which would be a very long one, and which would occupy three or four months. Considering, therefore, that the interests of the revenue were materially concerned in this respect, they had directed that measures should be taken for instituting an inquiry at once into the comparative merits of both kinds of sugar; and if it were found, as some supposed it would be, that the foreign sugar yielded more than the West-Indian, or that they both yielded more than they used to do, it would then be the duty of his Majesty's Government to submit these facts to the consideration of Parliament, and, if it should appear necessary, to found any measures upon them which it might think expedient; but, pending that inquiry, they had no right whatever to refuse to persevere in this measure, on the ground that the West-India interests would be affected. He had already proved these interests could not be affected. On the ground of revenue, as this subject had been considered, he contended that they had no right, without trying the experiment fairly, to subject the trade of this country, and the merchants engaged in this business, to such serious inconvenience. To a Committee of Inquiry on this subject, therefore, he most decidedly objected. What, he would ask, was there for them to inquire into—as they had all the facts before them, so far as they could be brought under the consideration of the House? He would tell the hon. member for Middlesex, that they must inquire into facts; and the fact of the produce of the sugar could only be ascertained by experiment; and they could not go into a Committee of Inquiry without delaying this measure, which they were bound to endeavour to pass at present, in justice to all parties concerned. The proportions would be inquired into: and if it should appear that they had altered to such an extent as to render some additional check necessary, either this law would not be renewed next year, or, if it were, he trusted that those parties who had expressed their apprehensions, would perceive that they were totally without foundation. For these reasons he certainly proposed to persevere in the measure, and he trusted that the House would support it.

did not think a case had been made out, to prove that this Bill would not do injury to the West-India interests. At the same time, however, he considered that the Bill ought, in fairness to the parties, to pass for another year.

objected to the measure, upon the ground that it did directly encourage the foreign slave-trade, which was at present carried on to an extent never before known. The planters, he was fully assured, felt, that the present Bill would be most injurious to their interests, while the refiners desired it. The Act had deviated from its original principle. It was expected that the very same sugar entered for refinement and exportation should be really exported, and not retained for home consumption, whilst an inferior quality was sent abroad, which was the case under the Act now proposed to be renewed. If the refiners, therefore, had some reason for claiming its renewal, the West-India planters had a still stronger right to protest against it. He would contend that the possible injury to the refiners afforded no good reason for continuing the operation of the Bill for another year, when it was evidently injurious to a more important interest than theirs. In the refining establishmzents there was not more than 300,000l. embarked, while in the West-India interests there was question concerning millions of money and millions of men. He thought that inquiry was necessary; and he was resolved to vote for the Amendment, and, though sorry to oppose the present Government, he would resist the Bill in every stage of its progress.

observed, that if it could be shewn to him that the foreign sugar, which, under the operation of this Bill, was introduced into the country, was here consumed, he would vote against the Bill; but he knew that was not the case. It really was not consumed here, but was wholly exported. He had found that it required one-third more labour to refine sugar abroad, and import it into this country in a refined state than in a raw state; therefore, in permitting foreign sugar to be refined in this country, they were substituting, to the amount of this additional one-third, British machinery at home for slave labour abroad; and consequently to this extent diminishing slave labour, and discouraging the slave-trade. Upon this ground he would support the Bill, at least for another year.

did not think that foreign sugar ought to be refined in this country, because we were thereby giving the slave colonies, who had already the benefit of cheaper labour, the additional advantage of British capital and British ingenuity, and of a market on the Continent generally, in which our sugars could not compete with them. He thought the subject well worthy of inquiry, and should therefore support the Amendment; believing, as he did, that the West-India interest, already so depressed, had suffered additional injury by the operation of the Bill.

stated, that he would vote for inquiry, and consequently support the Amendment. The continued operation of the Bill would, he contended, encourage slavery, and give foreign sugars a market in which our sugars could not compete with them, as it would not be possible for the British planter, who had not the advantage of cheap slave labour, to sell at so low a rate as the foreigner.

announced his determination to oppose the Bill.

said, the colonial proprietors were in the last stage of distress, and discontent existed to such a degree, that a very slight shock would be sufficient to cause an explosion. He would not run the risk of causing this, and would therefore support the Amendment.

put it to the noble Lord whether, after such a division, he should feel himself justified in proceeding without inquiry.

replied, that to submit the measure to inquiry in a Committee above-stairs, at that period of the Session, would be tantamount to abandoning it. He should, therefore, oppose such a proceeding.

remarked, that in the course of the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, he had admitted the subject was one on which much information was necessary, and yet he had given his vote against inquiry. The argument about delay went in his opinion for nothing, because it was the fault of Ministers themselves that inquiry had not been made during the last twelvemonth. He declared that every man who agreed to the Bill agreed to promote the Slave-trade. He had never heard anything which surprised him more than the declaration of the hon. member for Weymouth.

complained of the expressions used by the hon. member for Middlesex as discourteous, and he must accuse that hon. Member of ignorance, otherwise the hon. Member would have abstained from his remarks. It was impossible to make the inquiry proposed, because it was not until the 1st of July that any fraud had been discovered in the mode of taking foreign sugars out of bond, without which there could be no injury to the West-India interests.

said, he was astonished to observe the anti-colonial spirit that appeared to pervade that House; and he was sorry to see that Ministers were so deeply infected with it; that although they had but a majority of four, they yet thought proper to refuse all inquiry. There were millions of property embarked in the cultivation of our sugar colonies, and all upon the understanding that full protection should be afforded to the speculators. That understanding, he now saw, was not to be acted on. Ministers were false to the promises they had made. They encouraged the foreigners in preference to our own colonists, and thus gave an advantage to those who procured their sugars through the means of the slave-trade cheaper than our colonists could, and thus they encouraged that slave-trade which, for so many years, it had been the aim of this country to destroy. He did not ask the Ministers to pledge themselves to pursue any particular line of conduct; all he asked was, that they should grant a Committee of Inquiry to ascertain what was the best course before they decidedly adopted their present plan. French politics were now all the fashion; he wished they would remember what had been the observation of the present Ambassador from the French to the Emperor Napoleon some years back; it was this—that the colonies were the wings of England, by means of which she had been enabled to soar to her present height among the nations of the earth; and that if those wings were clipped, she would lose both her power and splendor, and become inferior to many of the nations around her. Again and again he repeated his call for inquiry.

observed, that the division which had just taken place was not in a full House, and the number seventy-three, to which the hon. Gentleman alluded, was certainly not a very large portion of that House. The hon. Member charged the Ministers with making false professions; but how did he make out the charge, when he could not deny, that they stated their belief that the effect of this measure would not be injurious to the West-Indian interest? Indeed, he rather expected that it would be found beneficial. The measure was, in fact only a renewal of the Bill which had been regularly passed since the year 1828. Did hon. Gentlemen who opposed this measure imagine, that if sugars were not brought here to be refined, they would not be carried to the Continent for the same purpose; and if they were carried there, the only difference would be, that this country would lose the benefit of the manufacture. He could not see how this measure could operate as an encouragement to the slave-trade; for, he repeated, the only difference it would make with respect to foreign sugars would be to bring them here to be manufactured, instead of compelling them to be carried elsewhere for that purpose. It was manifest, however, that the refusal of the measure would not only be injurious to some extent to the English sugar-refiners, but to a very high degree to those capitalists who had embarked their property in the speculation of bringing the Brazilian sugars here to be refined, and who had done so on the faith that the measure of preceding years would be renewed in this. There was the less reason to inflict this injury on these persons, as there had been no notice of opposition to the measure till within three or four days before the last bill was about to expire. A Committee of Inquiry was a captivating mode of putting a question of this sort; but if granted in the present instance, at this late period of the Session, it would amount to a defeat of the measure itself. He should, therefore, oppose it altogether.

said, he had no doubt the noble Lord was sincere in his wishes not to give any encouragement to the foreign slave trade. He claimed, however, the same justice for himself, for he had always been a zealous supporter of the abolition of that trade.

said, that though Government might be satisfied on the subject, the House might not, and he had therefore supported the motion for an inquiry.

hoped that, after the division which had taken place, the Government would consent to grant the Committee of Inquiry.

asserted, that, without inquiry, the House were not in a situation to come to a decision on the subject. As to the injury that might be done to the importers of Brazilian sugars, he did not think that the want of caution in the Board of Trade in allowing these persons to enter into such speculations, was a reason why inquiry ought to be refused.

said, that when he first introduced this Bill, he distinctly stated, that it was only an experimental measure, so that the Government were under no pledge to renew it; nor could any person accuse them of breaking faith if they refused to renew it.

objected to the measure, as it imposed restrictions by penalties upon trade, and would most certainly be evaded. If it could be carried into effect, it would only promote the interest of publicans. He was sorry, also, to observe, that, by means of mistake and delusion, it had created a strong sensation among the lower orders.

regretted that the hon. member for Stafford had yielded to a senseless clamour, in bringing forward this measure, which he felt confident could be productive of no beneficial results. He also regretted that Ministers should have lent their aid to the measure, which was a reflection on the good sense of the working classes, inasmuch as it implied, that they were unable to look after their own interests. He considered it a monstrous innovation upon the sound principles which governed the labour of the operatives at present, and was also calculated to excite disunion and ill-feeling between the masters and the workmen. About 300 years ago such laws as this were passed, but they were not adapted to an enlightened period like the present. He objected also to the exceptions of the Bill. Why should not the prohibition extend to domestic servants, and to agricultural labourers, as well as to the various classes of manufacturing labourers included in the Bill? The hon. Member had excepted those classes, because he knew that if they were included, the country Gentlemen would attend, and soon drive the Bill out of the House. Those engaged in mines were also excepted, though he could see no reason for putting them on a footing different from other labourers. What was wrong in principle must be absurd in details; and the clauses of the measure afforded a striking illustration of that truth. Nevertheless, he should not attempt to propose any amendment in the Committee, in utter despair of reforming what was so objectionable; but, if he stood alone, he would take the sense of the House on the principle of the Bill. He wished to see how many Members there were who understood the true principles of trade; how many were anxious to raise up that spirit of hostility between masters and workmen, which had been allayed by the change in the Combination Laws; and how many were determined to pass a law which declared that food and raiment should not be supplied to the hungry and naked. He approved of the Bill, which had just gone through a Committee, inasmuch as it repealed all the antiquated and mistaken Statutes upon this subject, but he disapproved of re-enacting them by this measure, which was founded upon ignorance, which could do nothing but mischief, and which originated only in selfishness.

thought it an anomaly in the Bill that, although it extended to Ireland, yet it did not repeal all the Statutes already in force on the subject in that country, though those Statutes were carefully repealed so far as regarded England. In the present state of Ireland that might do great evil, for although some inconvenience might arise from the truck-system near Belfast, it was not to be compared to the injury which would be done in the South, by throwing many hands out of employment. He contended that the real effect of this law would be, to legalise the truck-system; a manufacturer who sets up a shop might pay his men in money at one counter, and compel them by threats of turning them out of employ, to spend it at the other counter. In this way, this Act, which was brought forward as the perfection of wisdom, in putting down the truck-system, ought really only to be considered as a scheme to comfort those who were inclined to carry it on in the regular way. It was as absurd to abolish the old laws and then to revive them, as it would be to revive all the exploded Statutes against witchcraft. He would oppose the Bill, unless a clause were introduced extending to Ireland the repeal of the previous laws relating to truck. He should certainly oppose the Bill, unless Ireland were excluded from its operation.

inquired if the hon. member for Middlesex meant to move any Amendment.

seconded the Motion, because he thought this Bill would work infinite mischief; it would act like the penalties on usury, which were said to fall on the weaker party. It would not prevent the truck-system being carried on, it would only render its operation more circuitous, and thereby create confusion.

was anxious that the Bill should be permitted to go into Committee, to satisfy the minds of the labouring classes, who imagined that they were oppressed by the continuance of this system. He agreed with the general principle that no interference should take place between the employers and employed, but he thought deviations from that rule ought to be permitted in favour of the weaker party. Such were the Acts of the Legislature to restrict the labour of children in the cotton factories; but he held, also, that any legislative regulation as to the amount of wages was absurd. In the manufacturing towns the master had given up paying in money, and substituted a system of barter, which was highly injurious to the workman's interests. So far as this Bill checked such a system he would support it. He thought, in a Committee they might make its provisions more reasonable and less severe. He did not justify the measure on principle, but, in the peculiar circumstances of the case, and considering the hardships suffered and felt by so many of the working classes, from the operation of this system, he thought some attempt to check it, exceedingly desirable.

reminded the House, that this Bill was founded on the statements contained in petitions from all the great manufacturing towns and counties, most numerously signed by the labouring classes, and not contradicted by any counter petitions or statements whatever. The measure was introduced, therefore, at the desire of the working classes, and was intended for their benefit. The hon. member for Leicester, whom he always listened to with great respect, had been pleased to declare his opposition to the measure—but no persons had given the Bill greater support than his constituents. Whilst the present system continued, the working man had not, and could not have, the full benefit of the repeal of the Combination Laws, and it was notorious, that the universal feeling of the working classes was in favour of some attempt to put down this odious system. He differed with those who thought that there was nothing in this Bill to prevent a master paying money with one hand, and receiving that money for goods with the other. The power given by this Bill to compel agents to give evidence, would render it extremely difficult to practise an artifice of this description. Besides, if this Bill passed, the workmen must be paid in money, which was a great advantage, the complaint now being, that from one end of the year to another the workman never had any money. As to the anomaly relative to Ireland, pointed out by the hon. and learned member for Kerry, it certainly was deserving of consideration. In the future stages of the Bill, however, there would be an opportunity either for repealing the existing Statutes, so far as they referred to Ireland, or of excluding that country from its operation. The provision including Ireland was introduced in the House of Lords, but he could not say that he was extremely anxious on that subject, though he thought it desirable that the laws of the two countries should be assimilated as nearly as possible.

thought that it was his duty to the master manufacturers and to the workmen themselves, to oppose the Bill. He would give it his support if he could think that the truck-system would be put down by it. But he believed that its effect, on the contrary, would be, to interfere oppressively with the well-intentioned, and to give increased facilities to the evil-intentioned employer. It would, besides, operate in a very partial manner. In the county he had the honour to represent, the iron foundries on one side of a road would come under its operations, while the tin melting on the opposite side would not be affected by it. It made such distinctions between certain descriptions of manufacturers and tradesmen, that it would be attended with most mischievous consequences.

supported the Bill, and said, that the manufacturers in the part of the kingdom with which he was most acquainted, were favourable to it.

said, as the working classes desired the measure, although it was at variance with strict principles, he was disposed to endeavour to gratify them. He was afraid, however, the suppression of the truck-system would not confer the benefits upon them which they appeared to anticipate. The evil was too deep seated to be so easily eradicated. The profits of trade were so small that employers were compelled to reduce the wages of their workmen. Then came the question, how were the profits of trade to be increased? In old and full-peopled countries, profits had a constant tendency to decline, and this, which was caused by the increasing cost of obtaining food and raw materials, could only be counteracted by the full admission of foreign agricultural produce. The only remedy was cheap food and low taxes. To attempt to abolish the truck-system while the Corn-laws and high taxes continued, would do little to mitigate the evils. He really feared it might have the contrary effect. A master paying by truck made up for the low profits in his manufactures, by the difference between the wholesale and retail price of the commodities consumed by his workmen, and which, but for this aid, he would be compelled to abandon. Under such circumstances, the abolition of truck would diminish the demand for labour, and throw operatives out of work. Still if the working classes preferred low wages paid in money to higher paid in goods, he was content to gratify them, but he hoped the measure would only be considered one of a temporary nature.

expressed his disapprobation of the Bill, and stated, that a considerable manufactory in Ireland had been totally ruined in consequence of such interference as the Bill contemplated to enforce. He thought it both unjust and dangerous for the Legislature to interfere with private contracts.

said, he thought the clause required in some degree to be qualified. It referred to contracts, but did not sufficiently explain their nature. Besides, he should be disposed to exclude written contracts from its operation. He would move that these words be inserted, "Provided always that nothing contained in this Act shall extend, or be construed to extend, to any contract which shall have been entered into, and duly signed, in the presence of one credible witness."

said, the effect of the noble Lord's Amendment would be, not only to entirely neutralize the effect of the Bill, but to repeal all the existing laws upon the same subject. Magistrates had over and over again set aside contracts of such a description.

objected to it; he thought the provisions already passed were sufficient to put an end to the system. First, contracts were to be made null, then there was to be no payment in goods, and after all came a penalty. It was impossible to make all contracts for money alone, and a man might be subject to a penalty if, with the consent of his labourer, they mutually agreed that part of the hire should be paid in money, part in goods.

said, it was useless for the gallant Officer to say he would consent to try the measure, and then object to all the machinery by which it was to be executed. Generally speaking, the penalty was reduced: it was now on a graduated scale, according to the frequency of the offence.

said, in his opinion it would be right to impose something like a maximum of the fine to be inflicted; he should, therefore, propose to add these words to the clause, "So that the fine shall not in any case exceed the sum of 100l."

said, such a limitation would be nothing to a master who gained 8,000l. or 10,000l. by the profits of his works. He should not oppose the addition, but he thought the clause would be better without it.

said, the punishment of three months' imprisonment for what might be nothing more than an inadvertency was excessive. He should, therefore, propose, that fourteen days be substituted for the words three months.

objected to giving an informer 20l., which was nothing more or less than an inducement for a servant to betray his master.

must resist any alteration in this clause, and for this simple reason, that a servant must know that all informations laid by him would immediately lead to his dismissal, and therefore, if he were to receive no reward for informing, the object of the Bill would be completely frustrated.

observed, if it was not the interest of the person supposed to be aggrieved to give information, it showed he had suffered no injury, and was but little interested in the principle of the Bill. He dreaded informers in all shapes.

said, they must within certain restrictions encourage informers, or persons who had causes of complaint would not give evidence. He could not conceive that the refusal on the part of a person to give evidence, could be considered as a want of interest in the Bill.