Dann% an Vrotetbings in parliament.

THE SUGAR-DITTIES.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the debate on the new Sugar- duties commenced; Lord Joni RUSSELL moving the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means. Lord Groaoz Bea mien moved the amendment of which he had given notice- " That in the present state of the sugar-cultivation in the British East and West Indian possessions, the proposed reduction of duty, upon foreign slave-grown sugar is alike unjust and impolitic, as tending to check the advance of production by British free labour, and to give a great additional stimulus to slave labour." In bringing forward this amendment, Lord George disclaimed all hostility to Ministers.eQuestions involving, such enormous interests as were engaged in the cultivation of sugar in both hemispheres ought not to be confounded with party considerations. A surmise had been indulged in that he and his friends around him rant only to fight a alma battle: but that was a most unjust imputation. Ha amt be feeble, but he was certainly in earnest; and he was prepared to fight theittittle of the. East and We India interests, and of the African race, with all the vigour and perseverance of which he was capable. The subject divided itself into three heads. The first respected the interests of the British sugar-planters a the East and West Indies, and the supply of sugar to this country; the second head related to the revenue, a point touched by Lord John Russell when he in- troduced his resolutions; and the third regarded the condition of the Afri- can race. As to quantity, he thought that Ministers had under-estimated the aggregate supply to be received from the West and East Indies and the Mauritius; and he adduced a number of authorities to prove that that supply would exceed the quantity calculated upon by Lord John Russell from all the three sources—Colonial, free-labour, foreign, and slave-grown. Great exertions to increase production in the East Indies, by the applica- tion of capital and the introduction of improved machinery, are going on; and already the annual produce of sugar there is enormous. The inhabitants, a population of a hundred millions, are large consumers of the article when the puce is as low as 8 rupees, but when it rises to 11i they relinquish the use of

it. He bad every reason to believe that the quantity to be irted would amount to 100,000 tons. The introduction of the Otaheite cane proved of immense

advantage: its produce was not less than four tons an acre, while native cane would not produce one-sixth that quantity: the latter is little larger than a man's finder, and not above six feet in length; the Otaheite is as thick as a man's arm, and grows to the length of eighteen or twenty feet. From Mauritius not less than 60,000 tons is to be expected next year. Altogether, Lord George advanced the follbwing as an estimate quite within the mark— From the. West Indies 115,000 tons.

From the East Indies 100,000 „ From the Mauritius 55,000 „ Total from our Colonies 270,000 tons,

Exclusively of the Foreign sugar from Cuba, Java, Siam, Penang, Manilla, China, &c., there may be expected nearly 300,000 tons; whereas the greatest consump- tion ever known in this country was 245,000 tons. Moreover there is a stack on hand of 71,000 tons; exceeding by 10,000 tons the corresponding amount last year, whilst the consumption has been less by an equal amount. He calculatqd that would actually be a surplus of 110 000 tons.

Lord George next adverted to the West Indies. The sanguine expectations entertained by the friends of Emancipation, of the labour of the Negroes in a state of freedom, had been bitterly disappointed. The climate was so enervating, that the Negroes, though stimul d by the offer of high wages, could not increase the produce of their labour. Since their emancipation, these Labourers had pro- duced very little more than a half, and had never exceeded two-thirds as much as before. He had statements to show that while in the Mauritius 300 free labourers produced not more than 500 tons a year, the same number of slaves in Louisiana, labouring on a less fertile soil and exposed to a less genial climate, produced 1,500 tons. He stated this to show that it was not reasonable to expect that the West India planters should be able, with their free labourers, to compete

with the slave-labour of Cuba and Brazil, unless they had some protection.

The House had been told that the state of our manufactures required that Brazil should be open to the produce of Manchester and Birmingham—that Brazil would not take our manufactures because we would not take her sugar. That might be true; but if they gained Brazil they must lose the West Indies; and he had yet to learn in what respect any customers in Brazil or in Cuba could be preferable to their old customers in our own Colonies. In 1845 we exported to the West Indies goods to the value of two and a half millions sterling, while to the United States of America we exported to the amount of seven and a half mil- lions sterling; being in the former case about 57s. loci. for each inhabitant, and in the latter independent country not above 7s. 2d. per head.

Adverting to the revenue, he could not see the grounds upon which the Chan- cellor of the Exchequer had has right to calculate upon a gain of 725,5291. from his new duties. Although it were possible that a country which had never consumed more than 246,000 tons before should next year consume 280,000 tons, his noble friend could have no such gain to the revenue as he had anticipated.

Lord George addressed himself particularly to the subject of slavery. He did not wish to blink the question: it was a question whether or not the people of England would have the slave-trade and sugar at six shillings per hundredweight cheaper than at present, that was two-thirds of a penny per pound reduction; or whether they would have it at a somewhat higher price, and give no encourage- ment to the slave-trade. He agreed with the sentiments expressed on a former occasion by Mr. O'Connell, that it was a farm to let in the slave-grown sugar of Cuba and to pay for the emancipation of the slaves in the West Indies. It was only necessary to place the question fairly before the people of England, and he did not fear for the result. At the present moment the people of England paid half a million yearly for the purpose of repressing the slave-trade, and were they prepared to contribute from 1,500,0001. to 2,000,000& to add to the profits and pre- miums of slavery? Lord John Russell had admitted that the effect of introducing slave-labour sugar would be, not to cause the price of East and West India sugars to fall to the price of slave-grown sugar, but to make the prices of free-grown sugar and of slave-grown sugar meet—flr sugar like water would find its level. If thus the price of slave-grown sugar were raised towards the price of free-grown sugar to the extent which was calculated, it would have the effect of raising the value of each slave 181. per year more than it is at Fesent: calculating the greater amount of work which the slave is made toperform and assuming the life of a slave under the lash not to exceed ten years, the estimated duration in Cuba, the additional value given to the slave would be for ten years 1801. The average price of a male slave, they were told by her Majesty's Commissioners, Messrs. Hesketh and Grigg, was 811. at Rio Janeiro, and the average price of all descriptions 641. per hmd • and the extent of the traffic in slaves might be under- stood from the fact that one dealer in slaves, Manoel Pinto Fonseca cleared 150,0001. in the year 1844 by this infernal traffic. It appeared by the returns of slaves im rted, that out of 16,200 slaves imported into Rio Janeiro in one year, Fonseca imported 4150. He had a fleet of ships to carry on the trade; and it appeared that at the present prices, if one slaver in five escaped capture it would pay the cost of all risk and loss and yield a sufficient profit: so that the House could form an idea of the effect which would be produced on the slave- trade by increasing the value of the slave 181. a year, the value of the slave de- pending on the price of sugar. A letter had been published in the newspapers by Mr. Porter, arguing in fa-• your of the application of the principle of free-trade to sugar; and stating, that by adapting the opposite course men had "placed themselves in opposition to what we have a fair nght to believe it is the intention of Providence in giving different climates and various productions to the nations of the earth; and that it is among our first duties to aid, so far as we know and can understand them, not to thwart or attempt to thwart, the designs of the Great Parent of the Universe." " What I" exclaimed Lord George, " was the Great Parent of the Universe to be brought in- topartnership with the Government as a partisan of the diabolical slave-trade? [Cheers from the Protectionist Members. j We have always been taught to be- lieve that the Great Parent of the Universe declared man-stealing and the shed- ding of man's blood an abomination ; and are we now to be told that He was to be called into partnership with Mr. Porter, the paid servant of the Crown, to en- courage slavery in Cuba and Brazil, and to give additional profit and premium

to the traffic in human beings between Africa and America? Lord George quo- ted a narrative by an English sailor named Page, of what he had witnessed when serving on board the Kentucky, a slaver belonging to Fonseca. The brig left the coast of Africa for Rio Janeuo with a cargo of 500 slaves on board: they were

laced in irons on the slave-deck, a part of the vessel between the deck and the beam, and only two feet ten inches in height ; a bulk-head divided the women and children from the men: in good weather the slaves were allowed to come on deck, but in bad weather they were kept below. On the day on which the vessel Crossed the bar, the Negroes rose, got their irons off; and broke through the hulk-heads: the captain armed his crew, who were principally Brazilians; and they Bred down through the hatches on the slaves, evidently looking upon the thing as good sport. Few of the Negroes were killed or wounded, as they had Sheltered themselves from the fire. They were brought up the next day on deck, two or three dozen at a time, and were tried by Manoel Pinto Fonseca and the officers of the ship; and in two or three days afterwards, when they had all time to cool, forty-six men and one woman, were hung or shot, and thrown overboard. The slaves were ironed together, and when they were hung, the mode of proceeding was to fasten a rope round their necks and draw them up to theyard-arm, which partially strangled them; they were then let down to the deck and shot through the breast. That was the way in which two were put to death ; but when only one of two ironed together was to be put to death, they laid his neck on the bulwark and Cut off his head to save the iron, chopping off the legs of the unfortunate victim also, with the same view, that the iron which was attached to his companion Might be saved; but when two were to be hung or shot, they threw them into the sea irons and all. About a dozen heads were thus chopped off; and the Brazi- lians appeared to think it fine sport; throwing them and the legs which they chopped off into the sea. Could anything be imagined more devilish or infernal than that? In 1844, Lord Aberdeen stated that the average number of slaves annually imported into South America and the West Indies from Africa was not less than 100,000; and the returns showed that upwards of 10,000 were import- ed into the province of Rio Janeiro last year. The numbers imported into the Havana had decreased last year, according to the account furnished to Lord Aberdeen by the Commissary at Havana; but he said that, although the num- bers had fallen off 25 per cent, it did not arise from a fear of British cruisers, but because the price of sugar had fallen. In Cuba, no fewer than 3,000 slaves died under the hands of the military in one year. Lord George repeated his remark, that the people of England would not grudge 1,500,0001. annually to put down the slave-trade. If Lord John Russell drew an argument from their inconsistency in refusing to consume slave-grown sugar while they consumed slave-grown cotton and tobacco, he valued that argument at nothing: it seemed to be nothing but the old argument of the highwayman and the sheepstealer, "If we are to be hanged for stealing a lamb, we may as well be hanged for stealing a sheep."

Mr. GEORGE Baxisms seconded the amendment.

The Cstancnimon of the EXCHEQUER treated the subject under the three heads of Lord George Bentinck- First, as to the question of supply. The measures of the late Government had proved a failure in so far as augmenting the supply was concerned; and it was therefore incumbent upon the present Government to provide fresh sources from which sugar might be drawn. Of course the demand for sugar depended on the power of consumption; and he believed that were prices sufficiently, low and the supply sufficiently large, it would be almost impossible to fix a limit to either Power of consumption or demand. Experience had shown that when the price was high consumption diminished, and vice versa: as a proof, he might mention that the quantity released from bond during the last quarter fell short by 10,000 tone of the quantity taken out during the corresponding quarter of last year. He did not agree in Lord George Bentinck's estimate of supply; and thought that Lord John Russell's was more likely to hold true. With respect to supplies from the East Indies, Lord George Bentinek had himself admitted that if the price were to fall to a certain rate ex 'on would cease: it would there- fore follow that the measure which would have the effect of cheapening the article in the English market would cut off the supply from India. From the best au- thority it appeared that the price at which the consumption of sugar would ex- tend in this country must not exceed 45s. duty-paid, or 81s. in bond. In fixing the differential duty at 21a, the object had been to bring down the price to the sum now mentioned. This was no doubt equal to a reduction of 58. per hundred- weight; but then it should be remembered, that the present price was unnaturally high. Were a duty of 23s. 4d. instead of 21s. to be added to the selling price of 24s. 3d.—the price without the duty of sugar corresponding to foreign slave- grown—the result would be 478.7d., or 2a. 7d. above the price necessary to induce extended consumption. By adding, however, 218. to 244. 3d., the requisite amount of 45e. was made up. He dui not think that prices would rise; he be- lieved, on the contrary, that a fall was more likely to be experienced. As to the West India interest, he believed that its prosperity was bound up with low profits and large production: if inquiry were made at the large manufacturers of this country, it would be found that that was the system which they had found to answer best.

Mr. Wood then went to the question of revenue; showing from the increased iture which must take place inseveral departments, the necessity of pro-

vi for it so as to steer clear of a deficiency. Should no increase take place in the income, a deficiency of 352,0001. may be apprehended. Under the proposed duties, however, he expected to realize a sum which would do more than remove the chance of deficiency.

With regard to the proposition that the measure will give an impetus to the slave-trade, Lord George Bentinck, notwithstanding his harrowing description of the mode in which the slave-trade is carried on, failed to show that the proposed measure would operate as an encouragement. Mr. Wood proceeded at consider- able length to state the extent to which other commodities the produce of slave labour are introduced and consumed in this country; showing also that the pre- sent policy for discouraging slave-labour had completely failed. " Yon may as well say, or fancy, that you can lower the liquid in one vessel having a communi- cation with another without affecting the liquid in that other, as that you can secure the Continent from using slave-grown sugar to fill up the vacuum caused by your taking the free-labour sugar. We have attempted to lay down a prin- ciple which cannot be carried oat; while at the same time we deprive the great body of the people of that which has become an actual necessary of life." He believed that, on a fair trial, it would be found that free-labour was cheaper than slave-labour. He understood that at this moment the people of Cuba are so dis- satisfied with the result of slave-labour that they are importing 3,000 free labourers.

Nothing can tend more to the development of the resources of the West Indies than the permanent settlement of this question. " All they require is, as my noble friend said, though I say it in a sense different from that which he intended, to be let alone. They wish to be saved the annual discussion of this question, and the possibility of this House, year after year, reducing their protection and altering their position."

Sir ROBERT INGLIS, opposing the measure, enlarged on the deadly effects of the slave-trade- Lord SANDON looked upon the question as wholly different from what it was in 1841, when he brought forward his amendment to the Sugar-duty proposals of the then Government— Then, the House had only to deal with Colonial sugars as opposed to Foreign; but since that time Foreign free-labour sugars have been admitted into the British market. In 1845, when the proposal was made to make a distinction between slave-grown and free-grown sugar which had never before been recognized, he ex- messed a doubt as to its wisdom. A proposition was now made by her Majesty's Government, which compelled the House to reconsider the question in all its bearings. Following out the theory applicable to the subject, and referring to the experience of merchants, he could come to no other conclusion than that, when once they entered the foreign market, they practically entered the foreign market for slave-grown as well as free-grown produce. The distinction of free-grown and slave-grown sugar was a fallacy; by adopting which they might gratify their feelings, but they would not obtain their object,. and would interfere with their own commerce. He had taken every means in his power to ascertain whether it was considered that the measure proposed by Lord John Russell would have the effect of encouraging the slave-trade: he had applied for information to disinter- ested parties, as well as to persons who had taken a most decided part in opposi- tion to the slave-trade, and to slavery in every shape; and the opinion distinctly expressed was, that this measure was not viewed as in any way likely to promote or encourage the slave-trade. Mr. GmarrtEr BERKELEY attributed the deficient supplies from the West Indies to the want of labourers— It was the business of the Government to give facilities for the introduction of labour. If this were done, no limits could be set to the productiveness of the West Indies. A gentleman, well acquainted with West Indian affairs, had asked him why the English Government did not place agents at places on the West coast of Africa, where the slave-trade raged, to promote voluntary emigration to the West Indies? The Gallinas and the Bight of Beninwould be proper localities for this purpose; and their presence there would keep slavers off the coast. The present measure was said to be a measure of free trade; the Government intended to carry oat Free-trade principles: if that were the case, what right had they to restrict the Colonies as to the localities whence they should seek their labour? • Sir JassEs WEIR HOGG would support the new Ministerial proposals, the present policy having failed— In 1841 he -had ventured on the dangerous sea of prophecy, and he would direct the particular attention of Lord George Bentinck to its penis. He stated that in 1842 there would be 100,000 tons of sugar received from India. He did not make that statement rashly; be made every inquiry, and his informants had no wish to mislead or deceive lum. How came it that India did not send that quantity? Because India had a dense population, and its inhabitants were preeminently a sugar-eating people. Sugar was almost their only luxury, and according to their means they indulged in it. But they scarcely ever consumed manufactured sugar; their sweetmeats, in which form it was generally used, were composed of the juice of the cane in its unmanufactured state. He was rather pleased at the cause of the error he had fallen into, for the element that escaped his observation was the improved social condition of the people of India. He was, however, sorry to say that, as far as his knowledge of India went, the fairy visions of Lord George Bentmck were not likely to be realized; and he was afraid that Lord George wart misled with respect to his calculations of the productiveness of the Indian soil and of Indian capital.. If he had failed in his anticipations with respect to tlik

tity, he need scarcely say that his anticipations with respect to the price of

had also failed; for, from 1841 lip to the present time, sugar in bond had un er- gone no sensible diminution in price. Mr. Hogg quoted a resolution adopted by the East India and China Association since the. Ministerial plan was promulgated, to show that the East India interest were in nowise alarmed at the consequences. Slavery had received encouragement from the very means adopted to suppress it. Sir Powell Buxton himself admitted that all we had done was but a splended fail- ure. In Cuba not merely had the cultivation of sugar increased, it might almost be said to have sprang into existence under the system we had adopted to suppress the slave-trade.

Mr. GEORGE WILLIAM Horn supported the amendment.

Sir ROBERT PEEL explained how he came to the conclusion that he must support the Government measure— At an early period of the session, he announced on the part of the late Govern- ment, that it was their intention to give greater facilities and encouragement to the admission of free-labour sugar. That measure, so proposed on the part of the Government, would have continued the exclusion from the markets of this country of sugar the produce of slave-labour; but it would have admitted at lower rates of duty. than the present that sugar which is the produce of free- labour and of foreign countries, in competition with sugar the produce of our own possessions. From the many peculianties connected with the case of the West India planters he and his colleagues thought that in dealing with them they were justified in departing from ordinary rules, and to provide for the allowance of considerable time before subjecting them to competition with countries placed under very difliirent circumstances. The engagements, too, into which the late Government had entered for the suppression of the slave-trade, placed them in IL peculiar position—engagements, in fact, that violated all the principles of inter'-' national relations. Under these circumstances, it was their intention to give a further period to the colonists, particularly to the West India colonists, in ordee that they might be enabled to bear the competition with slave-labour sugar. The House had sympathized with the description which had been given by Lord George Bentinck of the abominations of the slave-trade; and if it could be shown that by raising the price of sugar Id. or lid. a pound an effectual stop could be put to the horrors of that trade, be believed that the public would willingly submit to that further sacrifice.

Entertaining apprehensions which he was afraid others did not entertain, that the measure now under consideration may give, at first, a stimulus to the slave-trade, it was not without great reluctance that he had come to the conclusion to give hie support to the proposal. "I do so on this ground—I am forced to consider other than the mere abstract merits of the question. I am forced to consider the peed- tion of parties and the prospects of forming another Government. I agree with the noble Lord, that there ought to be no sham and delusive opposition. I agree with the noble Lord (George Bentinck) that if there be opposition to the measurer; of her Majesty's Government, it ought to be an opposition intended and calculated to be fatal to that Government. I believe it would be possible by a combination to displace the noble Lord (John Russell); at least I believe it would be possible by such a combination to prevent the present success of the measure the noble Lord has proposed. I think it would be possible, by the union of different parties, by appeals to the feelings and passions of the people of this country, to raise a temporary impediment to the success of the noble Lord's measure: But I feel bound to ask myself the question, Is it consistent with my ditty to 'sanction that combination, and to lend myself towards promoting it?' I think it is not." The late Govern- ment had been displaced by a vote which was tantamount to tiosithdrawal of con.. fidence. He yielded respectfully to that decision; and Lord John Russell Was called by her Majesty to form an Administration, apparently with the general concurrence of those by whom the late Ministry had been displaced. :Lord John had made a proposal for the formal adjustment of this difficult and lag:40seited question; and Sir Robert was prepared for that proposal. Looking at the opinions entertained by Lord John, and expressed in resolutions moved by him or given notice of to the House, Sir Robert could not have expected him to resume office without making such a proposal for the settlement of the question. It is better, perhaps, that the question should be thus met at once, than that the country should be left in uncertainty. " There would be advantage, no doubt, in delay; because there are parts of this measure that require serious consideration, and which I hope will yet receive serious consideratioh from the noble Lord. There is the question of the admission of molasses, and the adjustment of the spirit-duties, matters which I hope will be well considered by the noble Lord. There is also the subject of additional labour to our Colonies; though I have doubts whether this will, for some considerable time, oe productive of any fereat effects. Give every encouragement you can to the immigration of free labour; and I think you ought to disregard imputations that you feel to be unfounded, such as that you are encouraging the slave-trade by so doing, if you are conscious that you are not. If you take care to place those coming mto your Colonies on fair terms, I am in favour of a free encouragement of the immigration of labour. But with all the encouragement you can give, I am afraid there are many difficulties to surmount. Speaking in the first place of the West India Colonies, the expense of bringing. the natives of Africa is very great; and, ob- serve, unless you accompany the immigration of the males with a due supply of females, you encounter risks of the most appalling kind. Of this I am sure, that for the purpose of promoting the ultimate success of the experiment, it is of the utmost importance there should be a due admixture of women. Therefore it is that entertaining less sanguine expectations of the effect of the introduction of free labour than do many who have _paid more attention to the details of the sub- ject, I hope the noble Lord and her Majesty's Government will take to themselves the time to consider what are the benefits which they can give the West India proprietors, so as to enable them to enter into competition with countries where Slavery still exists. However, I was putting the question—do I feel myselfjus- tified in entering into a combination for the purpose of displacing the noble Lord from the Government within six weeks from the period at which he acceded to it? Gentlemen seem to think you may safely enter into that combination, for that the noble Lord will still keep his seat. I do not know how he would act; but I think the noble Lord, under the circumstances in which he accepted power, being de- feated in so important a measure as the present, would not only be prepared to abdicate power, but would be fully justified in doing so. ("Hear r from Lord John Russell.) Those who would compel him to abdicate power are bound to ask themselves whether, in the event of success, they are prepared to undertake the Government. (Cheers.) Why, there are circumstances in the history of every country when that question must be asked by those who enter into combinations to subvert a Government. Two Governments have existed during the last six weeks: shall we have a third ? (" Hear, hear!") If so, on what principle? Shall it be the restoration of the late Government? ("Nor from the Protectionists.) I entirely concur in that sentiment. (Cheers and laughter.) I do not think that the late Government, having withdrawn from office in consequence of the signi- fication that they bad forfeited the confidence of this House, if it were to follow a course by which at the end of six weeks it might be restored to office, would be doing that which would be altogether creditable. (" Hear, hear!") What chance have they of increased means of governing this country? I believe none; and therefore all this only confirms the line I have taken, believing that it would not be for the benefit of the country to displace the Government of the noble Lord. (Cheers.) Well, then, with respect to others, the advocates of pro- tection—I mean to speak of them with all the respect that is due to their con- scientious advocacy of their own opinions; but at any rate they cannot be sur- prised that I should not be willing to lend myself to a measure which would have the effect of placing in power those who not only are the advocates of protection, but who are bringing forward this resolution, not only for the purpose of defeating the Ministerial measure, but of recalling and revoking that great change which has lately taken place. There must be many gentlemen in this House who can- not but cordially concur with me in thinking that defeating the noble Lord on one question in order to make way for a Government to succeed him who would be bound to"ether by no common principle of governing the country, would not be a creditable course of action. (Cheers.) I for one am not prepared to take the consequence of the success of the resolution of the noble Lord opposite, by displacing the noble Lord, and by being again restored to power; and it seems to me that the situation of parties at the present moment, and the general aspect of affairs, compel those who concur in the noble Lord's (Lord George Bentinck's) resolution to take the question into their serious consideration, what will be the result of displacing from power those who have held the Government for the last six weeks? If it could be shown that, in that event, a Government could be formed which would be enabled permanently to resist the introduction of slave-labour sugar into this country, then I should say, that the honourable Member for the University of Oxford, and those who sincerely concur with him in thinking that at all risks slave-labour sugar should be excluded from this country, would be justified in adhering rigidly to their principle. But what I doubt is, whether in the present state of public opinion, and in the present state of parties and of the affairs of this country, any Govern- ment that could be formed would be able permanently to resist the introduc- tion of slave-labour sugar. If this country could feel a confidence that such a Government could be formed, and the Colonies could feel a confidence that the principle of excluding slave-labour sugar would be adhered to, they might acquiesce in the formation of such a Government. But is there soy hope that any Government could permanently support the principle that articles of slave-labour produce should be prevented from coming into this country?" Lord George Bentinck's resolution itself did not affirm that slave-labour sugar shall not in any case be introduced. In fact, the resolution is very much the same resolution as that of the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, [Lord San- don,] in 1841; and it leaves the introduction of slave-labour produee into this country dependent very much on the supply there may happen to be of free-labour produce: should the produce fall short and prices rise, the amendment would, under certain conditions and modifications, admit slave-labour produce into this country. He doubted whether any Government could be formed on the principle embodied in that amendment, He thought that all parties, both West Indian and East Indian, attached great importance to a permanent law; and this is comprised in the Ministerial proposition. " I did not expect to have passed a permanent law this year, had I remained in office. I only contemplated a measure for continuing the present sugar-duties for the present year; and I greatly doubt if any Government that could be called to power would long retain office that pro- posed a measure that did not involve provisions for the permanent settlement of this question. I think, therefore that the Government has acted well in what they have done with regard to this question." Sir Robert concluded thus— "I shall not harass them [the Ministry] by a vexatious opposition on the details of this question. The advice I give them is disinterested, and my advice is, that the noble Lord, intending to discourage slave-labour as much as possible, as his intention and aim must be, he will give the best encouragement he can to free- labour, and concert with his colleagues such measures as may be calculated to ena • ble those who have nothing but free-labour to depend upon to contend with the competition that they will have to encounter, so as togive as little as possible en- couragement to the abomination of slave-labour. Believing, then, that this measure, if obstructed now, must ultimately be carried, and believing that if it is to be carried no one is better suited to carry it than the noble Lord, I am come to the resolution, certainly not without reluctance, as I said before, of supporting the principle of the measure."

Sir THOMAS DIKE ACLAND, opposing the measure, objected to Sir Robert Peers mixing up the question with the state of parties. The debate was adjourned about one o'clock, to Tuesday; the under- standing being that it should be brought to a close that night.

uesday, the debate was resumed by Mr. Pulsar MILES, who sup- e amendment On the same side spoke Sir Josue RAE REID and on the other side were Mr. Boarirsvicx, Mr. ALEXANDER fr. HUME, Mr. BERNAL, Mr. JOHN EVELYN Damson., Mr. BA.RKLY, and Lord Jolla RUSSELL.

Mum believed that the effect of the measure would be to throw out of cultivation many estates in the West Indies. The fault of diminished pro- duction was not attributable to the planters, but to the Executive Government, who ever since emancipation was carried had refused to listen to any complaints the colonists had to make. It was the want of labour and the high price they had to pay for it that had led to the present state of things. He himself had al-

ways been of opinion that emancipation had answered every. object that was ex- pected of it ; and from what he had seen of Cuba and Louisiana, free-labour, if properly carried out, would be far cheaper than slave-labour. Mr. BORTHWICK censured Sir Robert Peel's speech; and declared that, what- ever might be the consequences to the Ministry, he would on all occasions ex- claim, " Fiat justitia, rust cesium," and vote according to his conscience. It was said that the supply of sugar from the East Indies could be greatly increased: but what was this but the production of sugar by slave-labour? Were not the Pariahs on the banks of the Ganges bought and sold? If not, who were bought and sold Sir JAMES GRAHAM (to whom Mr. Borthwick appeared to address this ques- tion) was understood to remark, that it was difficult to know who were bought and sold. (Laughter.)

Mr. HUMR denied the truth of Mr. Borthwick'a remark about the existence of slavery in the East Indies. There was not a native in Bengal who might not, if any attempt were made to coerce him, go to one of the courts of justice and be set at liberty. He did not believe that the introduction of slave-grown sugar into England would have any effect on the slave-trade. Sir Robert Peel has avowed a different opinion; but he gave no reason, nor could he. Mr. Hume believed with

Sir Fowell Buxton, that all the measures adopted by this country to repress the slave-trade had only tended to promote it, and to increase the horrors of the mid-

dle passage. But while he entertained these views, he did not despair of putting an i end to slavery. He was satisfied that we had it in our power to abolish that sys- tem, if we only pursued the right plan. Free-labour, it procured in abundance, would be found even cheaper to the planter than slave-labour. Let the planters have free access to the labour-market, and the temptation to reduce human beings to slaves would cease. Let Cabe and Brazil take the natives of Africa as slaves if they chose, for, in fact, we could not prevent them; and let the West India planters take their labourers also from the shores of Africa—buy them as slaves i if they so pleased, and set them free the moment they were landed in the Colonies.

He was satisfied that if the whole or the half of what was expended in keeping

up that portion of the Navy engaged in repressing the slave-trade were expended in one year in procuring labour for the Colonies, it would be the means of putting an end to slavery. Mr. Hume thought that for revenue reasons the West India planters ought to have had longer time allowed them than that provided for in the Government measure. Sugar in its cultivation required arrangements which other crops did not, and they should have given the planters a longer period of time to prepare for the change. If the proposal could be altered in Committee, it certainly ought to be: and he hoped to see the duty on sugar reduced to 105.; he was satisfied it would be productive of great benefit to the country.

Sir Jour( RAE REID declared that if the Government proposition were carried it would cause the total and complete ruin of the colonists. He had no hesitation

in declaring this, when he had to state to the House, without reserve, that that

very day, in consequence of the turn. the debate had taken last night, and the probability of this measure being carried, as he had no doubt it would be, a de-

claim' had been come to by some of the most respectable parties connected with the West Indies, and the fiat had gone forth for preventing the supplies being silt out for cultivating their estates there. Every practical man connected with the Colonies would bear him out in saying, that to compete with slave-labour, placed as the Colonies now are, is altogether impossible.

Mr. BERNAL remarked, that what he was about to say would commit nobody but himself, as he was no longer a member of the Committee of West India pro-

prietors. With respect to the term of years to be given the West Indians, he

cared not for it; he wanted to see the question settled once for all. Whatever might arise, let them have the solid substantial prospect of a settlement. The

planters must prepare themselves for coming events by increased assiduity and skill, and by.the adoption, he might almost say, of European modes of cultivation. He saw no other mode of meeting their difficulties. It was generally allowed that a large importation of free-labourers was wanted. If it was asked where were they to come from, he would say, the coast of Africa. The African Negro was much better fitted for the purpose than the Indian Coolie. The Indian Coolie, from his accustomed diet and habits, was not likely to prove so useful a labourer

in point of bodily strength and activity as the African, nor was he so likely to amalgamate with the West Indians. '1 he proposed period of contract, however—

twelve months—was too short; and he hoped the noble Lord at the head of the

Government would think well before he tied down the West Indian proprietor to that period. As to fiscal arrangements, the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought

to throw aside existing difficulties and the representations of interested parties, and act with energy upon the principles of free trade. The duties on West In- dia rum and British spirits ought to be equalized, and sugar and molasses intro- duced into the breweries and distilleries of this country. He regretted to hear the statement of Sir John Reid that certain gentlemen connected with the West In- dies had determined to abandon the cultivation of their estates. That was not

the course which he intended to pursue. He was resolved rather to look to in-

creased energy to enable him to meet the competition by which he would be surrounded; and he would say to others who were similarly situated as himself,

"Do not despair; do not waste your energies in vain regrets." He called upon the Government to reconsider the details of their plan; and expressed his approval of the suggestion to appropriate some part of the money snt in keeping cruisers on the coast of Africa, to the formation of an emigration-funped, under the manage- ment of well-trained agents. Mr. EVELYN DearrsoN said, if there was one thing more than another that the Legislature ought to bear in mind, it was to take care that the experiment in our West Indian possessions did not prove a failure. He referred at some length

to the coercive measures adopted by this country to suppress the slave-trade, to the expense of them, and to the admissions made by men of all parties as to the failure which had attended them. Ile thought that the claim made by the -West India interest in 1842, to be allowed to import labourers from Africa, was a rea- sonable and fair demand. He was not indisposed, even this year, to say that he

should agree to vote a certain sum, say 50,0001., for the purpose of assisting the immigration of free-labourers into the West Indies; and that sum he should propose to deduct from the expenses which we incurred in the prevention of the slave-trade on the coast of Africa.

Mr. JAMES thought that the public, and more especially those whose interests were immediately affected by the proposed change, were under great obligations to Lord John Russell for the attempt be was makin" to put the Sugar-duties on a permanent footing. He did not think, however, &at the plan proposed was the best which could have been devised for carrying. out Free-trade principles. -Mr. BARKLY was for free trade in sugar, as he was for free trade in corn; and having voted in favour of the latter when proposed by the right honourable

Baronet, he could not withhold his assent from the former when brought forward by the noble Lord. Ile wished, however; in dealing with this question, that due consideration should be given to all interests concerned, both in this country and in

the Colonies, and that free trade in sugar should be deferred until our West India

Colonies were placed in r. condition to enable them to compete fairly with the foreigner whose produce was raised by slave-labour. Emancipation had succeeded morally, but economically it had failed; and the British Legislature, by its subse- quent legislation, had added to the difficulties which that act had entailed upon the colonists, by limiting the means of procuring free-labour. Under these circumstan ces, it was unjust to bring the foreign slave-owner, with a full command of labour,

in competition with the West Indian planter, thus fettered. The interest of the consumer was largely concerned in the question; but that interest would not be best consulted by throwing the sugar plantations of our own colonies out of cultivation, and making this country dependent on slavery for its supplies. He admitted that it was impracticable to exclude slave produce from consumption in this country; looking to our consumption of coffee, cotton, and tobacco, it was im- possible: but by that admission he did not preclude himself from arguing that slave-grown sugar should be so admitted as to extend as little as possible the slave-trade. He must, however, say he was struck with the contrast between the simplicity of the commercial reform of the right honourable Baronet, and the com- plication of the scheme of the noble Lord at the head of the Government. Not that he considered so much blame attached to the noble Lord and the right hon- ourable gentlemen the Chancellor of the Exchequer on that account, as they had necessarily been hurried in bringing it forward; and he believed that if they had had more time they could have prepared a measure of a sounder kind. But it was now evident that the resolutions of the Government would be carried; and he trusted that in Committee the noble Lord would improve the measure, and thus advance the interests both of the consumer and the producer. In considering the vote he was to give, he would not forget the state of parties: he could not but feel that carrying the amendment would lead to an appeal to the constituencies of the country; and that the cry of "Cheap sugar " on the one hand, and "No slavery" on the other, would be bandied about from side to side. He had, there- fore, come to the determination, however reluctantly, to vote against the amend- ment: for he felt that by that course he beat discharged his duty to his constitu- ency, and best consulted the real interests of the producers of sugar themselves.

i He was no party to placing the present Government in office: he did not approve of the means by which they obtained office; and he did not think they were wise in accepting office with so weak and divided a party. But he felt strongly that the interests of this great country were too important to be made the object of party straggle. They could not afford to have a change of Government every six weeks. Mr. Dumas"; although an attentive listener to the speeches delivered in favour

of the Government measure, could find no feature, no characteristic, which made them answers to the speech of his noble friend Lord George Bentinck. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in his speech appeared to him to have met the first proposition of his noble friend by opposing to it an assumption, to the second an hypothesis, and to the third a sophism. Mr. Disreali was prepared to sustain all the positions of his noble friend. [Mr. Disraeli proceeded to lend his aid, in his own peculiar manner, at great length, with much elaboration, and often with amusing point and verbal pleasantry, that do not bear condensation.]

Lord John Russell had told the House that the Anti-Slavery plea wanted " completeness " for they tolerated the use of slave-grown cotton and tobacco: Int when Clailtson, and at a subsequent period Wilberforce, addressed those dis- tricts of the North of England which originated the great movement against

slavery, at the moment when were pronounced the thrilling words that touched the heart of a great nation, when the horrors of that traffic were first revealed to the pure. conviction of this country—he would ask the noble Lord, whether at that anornent the fabrics of the North of England were not fed with cotton the produce of slave-labour? He would also ask whether, when the public men of that day, seeing that the question would be carried, put themselves at the head of the movement, and delivered addresses to public assemblies in which were expressed with uncultured eloquence the true convictions of an unlettered people—whether that people of England did not then smoke, and snuff, and chew—whether they had not fur two hundred years been smoking, snuffing, and chewing slave-grown tobacco? Those facts destroyed Lord John Russell's case. Mr. Disraeli contro- verted the position that the proposed measure would not encourage the traffic in slaves. He adduced figures to show how much more valuable, in a commercial point of view, the West Indies are to England, than those countries that produce sugar by slave-labour. He did not, however, oppme. the resolutions because they were antagonistic .to existing arrangements for the suppression of slavery, but because they are hostile to what he considered a valuable fragment of the Colonial system of England.. For the moment these were old-fashioned notions, but in his belief

.they would yet be furbished. up by national approbation. He b be elieved that Par- liament would are long be called upon to rebuild the old structure of protection. The history of England is _a history of reaction. The Church, the Monarchy, the House of Lords, even the House of Commons, had been destroyed by turns; but each had been restored.

" We heard last night a funeral oration delivered over the Abolition cause by

.the noble Lord the. Member for LiverpooL I thought that if the subject was not choice, the orator. at least.was chosen. When I remembered another speech that the noble Lord (Sandon) made on the same subject at no very remote period, I must say that .he is the last person I should expect to find venturing upon a criticism of the resolution of my noble friend. The resolution of the noble Lord the Member for Lynn, whatever else may be its failings, did not contain the" pru- dential parenthesis with respect to free-labour sugar to be found in the resolution of the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool. Whatever my own private opinion on the matter may be, still I cannot presume to inform the Houce which is an authentic speech of the noble Lord. The noble Lord's speech of last night was his speech, I suppose, by courtesy; but the speech by unction, I would say, was his speech of 1841. Among'

mong all the strange things we have heard, it is that

which makes complete the scenes of this eventful session. To see the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool on a hogshead of sugar, in a white sheet, holding the taper of penance in his hand, and crying Peccavi 1' (Cheers and laughter.) The noble Lord at.the last election had carried before him a wooden Bible. I am of opinion that the speech we heard last night was the wooden Bible speech; I .believe that the liters versa was the _speech of 1841. (Much laughter.) Not- withstanding the default of this chosen champion of Anti-Slavery, still we might have fought the battle of the good cause had we the assistance of the right hon- ourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth. The right honourable gentleman Made a speech which appeared to be an admirable resume of every argument that .eould be adduced against the resolutions. No one understands the West India question better than the right honourable Baronet. There is not a detail that has escaped his subtle and vigilant attention: nay, more the warning that he gave the noble Lord, to take care that if he, bad immigration of free labourers there should be a sufficiency of females, will, I hope, not be lost. (Laughter.) But, Sir, great was the mortification of myself and my friends when we found that speech terminated by a resolution that was fatal to all our hopes. But I must say that the reason that was given for the vote of the right honourable gentleman was less ingenious and more surprising than most of the arguments that we have heard even from him. If the right honourable gentleman really is convinced—if there is no doubt as to the opinion which he expressed with so much ability—is it possible that the fate of the Colonial empire—of a population under such remarkable circumstances—of the fate of such great interests, which, if not national, all must admit are most important and extensive—are they to be sacri- ficed for such minute considerations as who shall sit upon that bench? Sir, I said a few minutes since, that if we go to the hustings and tell the people of Eng- land that fifty millions of their treasure have been spent in prosecuting a delusion, they might, perchance, have some misgivings as to the excellence of this Parlia- mentary government under which they have so long been living; but, Sir, when then are told that it is not a question of fifty millions, but may be of fire hundred millions—of countless treasure—of principles which they appretiate beyond all treasure—that are given up by one, the most gifted of our assembly, against his conviction—for the sake of party convenience—for the calculation who shall be the Minister of England—then I say, farewell to the government of the Parlia- ment of England. The right honourable gentleman told us, indeed, that he could not, under the circumstances of the case, act otherwise than be did, because he could not see bow a Government could be formed. Sir, I will not stop to notice the indecorous mode which has crept into this House of always supposing the Go- vernment of this country is to be appointed and selected, not by one out of this House in a higher position, but by the House itself: but this I will tell the right honourable gentleman, that, in my mind, his forte lies not so much in forming a Government as in destroying it."

Towards the close of his speech, Mr. Disraeli was profuse in compliments to Lord John Russell; and he expressed an opinion that Lord John, if defeated on this question, would not be called upon to resign.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in reply, reviewed the tendency. of the amendment, and the speeches of Lord George Bentinck and Mr. Disraeh in support of it. The amendment affirmed principles which went far beyond a mere condemnation of the Government proposal: it did so by declaring adherence to the principles of commercial protection, and asserting that the Government measure is calculated to give a stimulus to slavery. In upholding the Anti-Slavery view of the ques- lion, Lord George Bentinck, in reply to the argument founded upon the intro- duction of cotton, copper, and other slave productions, had said that this was nothing more than justifying one wrong by another. " But, Sir, I do not admit the wrong. I do not admit that it is wrong to take slave-grown cotton, or slave- grown rice, or slave-grown tobacco, or any of those other slave-grown produc- tions. I do not admit that it tends to humanity, that it is wise, that it would further the cause of humanity in the world, if on were to declare that in your tariff, and in your customhouse-books, you would take an exact account of the means by which certain products were first produced, and afterwards brought to the vessel in which they were imported to this country. Will any man say that the commercial intercourse of this great country with Asia and Africa has not tended to mitigate those barbarous practices, and to mitigate slavery where it has existed in India and other countries; and, on the whole, reviewing the state of the world, has not produced a far more civilized and far more happy relation between man and man than would have been the case if you had pro- ceeded on the narrow and exclusive principle of what seemed to be tha humane, but which turned out to be the barbarous and injurious policy." He was sorry to hear the statement that several planters had resolved to discon- tinue the cultivation of their estates; he was sorry to find that there are people so dispirited: but if other persons would take these lands, put machinery upon them, and cultivate them with vigour, there would be no better speculation in any English colony. Alluding to Mr. Disraeli's theory of the tendency of this country to retrace its steps, Lord John said—" The honourable gentleman made, I think, some very curious remarks as to the policy of this country. His observations led to the conclusion that this country always retraces its steps. A statement more unexpected by me could not have been made. No doubt, there may be particular cases in which Parliament may have found it necessary to modify its proceedings: but has this country ever gone back after it has adopted an improved system— after it has thrown aside the fetters of prejudices, and cast of errors that are ex- ploded? That, Sir, is not the characteristic of the English people. I do not refer now to what occurred in those times of violence when the Throne and the Par- liament were scattered by the decisions of a House of Commons, acting with usurped authority, and governing solely by the sword. But, speaking from those days when we have had anything like regular government, after the restoration of the house of Stuart, I think there can be nothing more prudent, nothing more regular, nothing more beautiful to the readers of history, than the progress which this country has made. In those days of which I now speak, perso.nal liberty was not safe; the subject was liable to be seized and sent to a distant prison. The Habeas Corpus Act was passed to remedy that abuse. Has the country ever retraced its steps in respect to that statute? Have we ever since said that personal liberty ought to be dependent on the will of the Monarch ?" Has anybody ever said that the Bill of Rights ought to be repealed, the censorship of the press restored, the Toleration Act repealed, the slave-trade revived, or Catholic disabilities reenacted? Lord John's opinion was altogether opposite to Mr. Disraeli's. He was convinced that "when questions have been ripened by discussion, and when the leaders of Par- liament have taken their parts in any great measure which tends to secure the liberties of the people of this country, and when the mind of the country has been once awakened and has duly weighed the proposition, and the question has thus been settled and decided—when great questions which have been so deter- inined have been finally determined, they have been carried without convulsion, and remained without risk of repeal." In allusion to the suggestion that defeat need not lead to the resignation of the Ministry, Lord John remarked, that if he were tamely to acquiesce in such an amendment, it would expose his Government to contempt, injure the dignity of the Crown whose servant he was, and cause some diminution even of the glory of the country.. " To hold office in the degraded position which I should occupy if the resolution of my noble friend were carried,' against the first measure which I advised since I came into, office—to hold power in that debased position, would be a permanent injury to the constitution of the country; and I should not be doing justice to my Sovereign if I continued, under such circumstances, to hold office any longer."

The House divided—For the motion, 265; for the amendment, 135; Government majority, 130.

The House adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

In the House of Peers, on Monday, Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, signed by Thomas Clarkson, the President, praying the House to refuse its assent to any pro- position tending to strengthen the slave system. Lord Brougham sup- ported the petition in a long speech— It was matter of astonishment to him that their Lordships should be discus- sing in 1846 whether they should give encouragement to the African slave-trade. In comparison of this question, all that they had been discussing for the past six months sank into utter insignificance; and yet that question was brought forward on the 27th July, being the ordinary period of the termination of the Parliamen- tary year! There was undoubtedly one reason for this course, which he could un- derstand as a ratio suasoria, and which might make it justificatory. The mea- sure might pass more easily this session than another; the question might go off more glibly: parties were in a strange position; in the scramble there might be a chance of getting it through; it might follow in the wake of the Drainage Bill,— a very important measure unquestionably, but not quite so important as one which involved the interests of humanity: at all events, there was a better chance of its passing now than hereafter. If it had to be decided in that House, which had decided the question of the Corn-law, he knew he should not have found himself, as he should now, in a minority upon a question against which Thomas Clarkson honestly and conscientiously protested. There was no occasion for haste. A temporary bill might be passed, and the leisure it afforded devoted to inquiries calculated to assist in the framing of a permanent measure. On the evil of haste, Lord Brougham read some extracts, showing that the people of Cuba and the Brazils are under the impression that unless they emancipated their slaves and put down the slave-trade their glut of sugar would not be relieved by access to the English market. There was no scarcity to justify the pressing of the mea- sure. The scarcity plea had been largely made use of upon the Corn question: it had furnished excuses to representatives for betraying their trust, and to indi- viduals for invading, the rights of property and appropriating to themselves what belonged to their neighbours. There were two others in company besides Famine —Alarm and Poverty: "Et Metes, at malesuada Fames, at turpts Egestas,

TenibUes visa fonme."

But Famine is not only malesuadst—it is a false as well as a bad adviser; for after

you have sold yourself, and you are sold to it, like another evil demon, it will turn round and laugh at you. He had not heard lately of the disease in the potatoes. (Ironical cries or Hear, hear!') Well, he was sorry if it was so; but there wait no disease in the sugar-cane. He described the argument in favour of the admission of slave-grown sugar, deduced from the fact that other kinds of slave produce are consumed in this country, as the very grossest and most puerile i 9f all fallacies. The answer is—" That is not the question." The question is now about sugar; and when questions came on for discussion as to coffee and cotton, he might possibly adopt the same arguments as upon sugar. Such was precisely the argument Thomas Clarkson would use. He would say he was against slave-grown cotton just as much as against slave-grown sugar.

Lord Brougham would turn from his own feeble and unanthoritative testimony to that of one whose candour and justice were only equalled by his steady consis- tency and principle: he felt himself refreshed by the opinion of that noble person- sed me recreat et mIcit Crud Pompeii sapient:salmi et justiesimi viii concilium. "When," said Lor&Dennisn, whose authority he had for making the statement, "we were talking of the new Government to be formed on the expulsion of Sir Robert Peel's, one observation that occurred to us all was, that it could not go to the country with any great liberal measure at the present time. We forgot the great advantage that a Liberal Government would possess in appealing to the people to restore the slave-trade. What capital speeches may be made ! What powerful addresses from the priests of all denominations ! What attractive inserip, ions for banners and cockades ! Do as you would not be done by.' Do evil that good may come'; the evil unlimited, the good sordid and doubt- fuL A free passage from Africa to Brazil." The liberty of the lash,' &e, Argument is netting, in this case. The right and wrong are clear. The only question is, whether the right is to be violated and the wrong done, wilfully and deliberately done, by England, which affects a moral influence over the destinies of the world. Argument is not attempted on the other side— nothing but a miserable deduction from the force of ours. We cannot do all the good; therefore are free to encourage all the evil, for our own lucre. By oversight --perhaps by design—a certain amount of evil is uncontrollable, and incorrigible: therefore, what we can control, correct, probably extinguish, certainly keep down and greatly diminish, we are free to encourage and promote. As to the great ex- periment to be tried between free and slave labour, I am convinced that it will be decided in favour of the latter. If it was cheaper forty years ago to buy than to breed, so it is now. The experiment never can be tried on equal terms. But, in- deed, I take this cloak to be a thin one, and that the real notion is that slave- trading cannot be put down, and common sense' must connive at its continuance, and the feeling against it is either affectation or insane fanaticism. Frequent changes of Government arc assuredly evils, but what comparison between the evil of such changes and that of one month's existence of the slave-trade? What is all that could befall all our parties and their members, compared with the suffer- ing which is inflicted by the success of ten slavers ? I know these things appear ex- travagant, but they are the real facts, and our habitual indifference does not disprove them, but shows to what an extent our minds have been corrupted and debauched by this long abuse of our own wealth or power. I blush to read the peddling illustra- tion from receivers of stolen goods, and lament the quarter whence it came. Indeed, I could shed tears at the thought that the triumph which I hope to witness must be gained at the expense of those who still derive all the popularity that belongs to them from tire name of Fox. I wonder what Mr. Fox would have said in 1806, if any qne had predicted that, after abolishing the slave-trade, England should become the principal fomenter of it, and the principal customer in the market for the sale of human beings. Or, in the great year when the Act of Emancipation passed, and England paid twenty millions to those of her sons whom her own mil practice had betrayed into the relation of master to slaves, what if Parliament had been moved to give a new stimulus to the trade to try a great experiment in political economy at the sacrifice of some generations of Negroes ? The question of protection fades to nothing beside these considerations: but I cannot help think- ing that the withdrawal of it from our countrymen in Jamaica would be an unjust proceeding—both to White and Black." Lord Brougham touched upon a variety of other topics; such as the horrors of the middlepassage, and the fact that the slave-owners, like the postmasters of former days, fit ound more profitable to buy stock and use them out than to breed and save them. He discarded the assertion that free-labour is cheaper than slave- labour; contending that, under certain circumstances, the contrary is the case. He adjured their Lordships not to treat the question as one of mere commercial policy. It was not a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence. It was a question that in- volved ad the best interests of this country and of mankind—the cause of religion, of justice, of humanity, and of sound policy; above all, it involved their national character, credit, and honour. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE remarked that the fit time for discussing the question had not arrived— The petitioners had called upon their Lordships, not to refrain from any par- ticular course of commercial policy, but to refrain from any consumption of slave- labour produce at all. But the whole tenour of Lord Brougham's speech was to .avoid the ground taken by the petitioners, and to cover over the apparent neces- sity of persevering with measures similar to those their Lordships had already adopted. Their Lordships had for years been in the habit of receiving, and en- oouraging by their measures, the reception of article after article of slave-grown produce. Lord Brougham had seen that course of public policy adopted; and when the time for arguing the question came, he would undertake to show that miseries as great, calamities as horrible, the severance of ties as painful to behold, had been the natural result of that slave-cultivation which was permitted and en conraged by their legislation, and which Lord Brougham did not propose to alter, as any of those horrors which he had with so much eloquence, and not for the first time, described as attending the middle passage.

Lord Lansdowne disputed Lord Brougham s assertion that there is a sufficient supply of sugar. Since 1841 constant efforts had been made to increase the

quantity, but they had right unsuccessful. He thought that her Majesty's Government bad done right to lose no time, censistently with a due deliberation and observance of the laws of Parliament, in bringing this subject forward, or in Calling on their Lordships for an immediate decision upon in

On Thursday, Lord. Barn:wawa withdrew a motion of which he had given notice for the following night, against the adoption of any measures which might encourage, directly or indirectly, the African slave-trade: but he reserved the power of bringing the matter before the House on a future Occasion, should he feel called upon to follow such a course.

THE DISMISSED IRISH MAGISTRATES.

On Thursday, Mr. Awn) ROBERT ROSS, with an allusion to the im- proved tone of party feeling in Ireland, asked Mr. Labouchere whether it Was the intention of the Government to restore the Irish Magistrates who had been dismissed for taking part in Repeal and Orange proceedings?

Mr. LanoucumtE was glad that the question had been asked—

The serious attention of the Government had been bestowed upon the subject, and a determination come to. That determination was communicated to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland by Mr. Labouchere, in a letter which he would read. [The substance is conveyed in the following extract.]

"Ins Excellency is anxious not to be understood as expressing any opinion as to the .ggiliciency of the grounds upon which these gentlemen were removed ; but he is satis- 'fled that the continued loss of the services of so many Magistrates in their respective localities is not for the advantage of the administration of justice in the country. His Excellency is therefore of opinion, that these cases may be severally reconsidered, with View to deciding upon the propriety of restoring to the commission such of these gen- . tlemen as you may think properly qualified for the °Mee. I am farther directed by bit Excellency to inform you, that it appears to him that there is no reason, in the present state of the ceuatry, for the exclusion of persona who have formerly taken part in thea4 Proceedings, If their restoration should otherwise be thought deifirable."

Lord Chancellor Brady bad forwarded a reply, stating that he was prepared ixt eater upon the reconsideration of the cases, adexpressmg his concurrence in the opinions stated in the letter. On the same evening, Lord BROUGHAM put a question to the Malquia of Lansdowne on the same subject, but with an apparent animus on his own part against the restoration of the Repeaters.

ART-UNIONS.

The motion to recommit the bill for legalizing Art-Unions gave rise to an animated discussion. Mr. GOULBURN, Sir ROBERT PEEL, Sir HonsAT broils, and Mr. JAMES, spoke in opposition; Mr. MONCKTON MLLNEsi Mr. WYSE Mr. EWART, Sir GEORGE GREY, and Mr. ESCOTT, supported the bilL

Mr. Goursuaw said that the bill went to legalize neither more nor less than a lottery. The usefulness of the purpose would not justify the means adopted to promote it. If it were true that funds for encouraging the fine arts could be raised only by lottery, where did the House mean to stop? He objected generally to the bill, because it was an admitted principle that the state was not to establish lotteries or allow individuals to embark in them.

Mr. MONCICTON MIL/ors trusted that Sir Robert Peel would not assist Mr. Gonlbarn in sacrificing a real substantial benefit to an immense.number of deserv- ing men. Sir ROBERT PEEL answered the appeal.. He thht that the course about to

be taken was an exception from a right principle; , like all exceptions from a right principle, it would be found to lead to positive inconvenience. If the House did choose to reestablish lotteries, they should be reestablished for public pur- poses. Let the House avow they had been wrong, admit it was right to raise revenue by encouraging the spirit of gambling, and take the profits in diminution of taxation. But that was not what the House was about to do; for it was still avowed that it was wrong to encourage the revival of lotteries. But then there came in a case for the relaxation of the rule, and it was alleged that all the artists were in favour of it. No doubt, they were in favour of an exception which was intended to benefit themselves.

Mr. Mosicirrox Missies—" You admit it in racing."

Sir ROBERT PEEL—" Then let us have horse-unions as well as art-unions." Mr. MONCETON MILNES--" And in betting."

Sir ROBERT PEEL, in continuation, said that betting on races could not be pro- hibited, and nothing could be more unwise than to descend to legislation of that kind; as nothing could be more unfit than, after gambling by lottery had been abolished, to profess to make a particular exception. The more you restricted the exception, the more gambling there would be, because then it would run in the direction of art-unions. The question was, was this exception for the en- couragement of art? He greatly doubted the propriety of giving encouragement to art by such means; he greatly doubted whether it was for the benefit of art at all. He greatly doubted whether art-unions offered encouragement to a high style of art. He must say that he had seen no production yet from these unions the loss of which could be felt as a detriment to art. Mr. WYSE said, it was true that the distribution of paintings by art-unions was by means of a lottery; but it was a lottery which involved no violation of the principle which prohibited gambling. Government had sanctioned the principle in other cases, such as in building-societies. Sir Robert Peel had alleged that art-unions did not encourage high art: on this point two considerations arose-- not only whether particular artists were to be encouraged, but whether taste was to be diffused among the population at large. Taste for art was certainly to be diffused, but it could only be created by diffusing among the population a love of it: this, again, could only be done by means of engravings; for it was not every man who could procure pictures of the highest excellence, unless he had the large fortune as well as the excellent taste of the right honourable Baronet.

Sir ROBERT Drams expressed the pleasure he felt in agreeing upon this quer- ion with Sir Robert Peel; because a more enlightened and liberal supporter both of the arts and artists of England in this country was not to be found than the right honourable gentleman. Mr. EWART referred to the example of other countries, where art-unions were allowed, as an argument in favour of adopting the principle in this country. Sir GEORGE GREY said that the bill was merely intended to exempt Art:- Unions from the operation of the lottery-laws; and under these circumstances he should assent to the further progress of the bill.

On a division, the bill was recommitted, by 50 to 18; and subsequently the report was agreed to.

REMOVAL OF PAUPERS.

Previously to the third reading of the Poor Removal Bill, on Thursday, Mr. VERNON SMITH complained of the manner in which faith had beep broken with the agricultural interest in reference to the ten " compensgipg ' measures introduced by the late Ministry. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER disposed of the complaint thus-a-

Of the tea measures promised by the late Government, nine had been or would be passed; and the tenth, which related to the highway-rates, had been given up with the consent of the House. The only measure which had yetto be introduced was a short bill for the payment of the rural police of

The bill was read a third time; after which, Mr. GEORGE Roams moved the addition of a clause giving a pauper the option of removing to his ori- ginal settlement or remaining where he had obtained his five-years settle- ment. This Clause WaS rejected, by 62 to 52. Mr. POITLETT SCROPE then moved a clause, the object of which was to specify that by the term "re- sidence," industrial residence was meant. This clause, however, was with- drawn. On the question that the bill " do pass," Mr. HUMS objected, and the House divided—Carried, by 56 to 9.

Cnunrrents TRUSTS Bus. On Wednesday, Mr. Hums intimated his wil- lingness to withdraw his Charitable Trusts Bill, on receiving a distinct pledge from the Government that they would introduce a more comprehensive measure next session. Sir GEORGE GREY stated that he had spoken with the Lord Chancellor on the subject; and he was enabled to say that next session a mea- sure would be introduced, founded, like Mr. Home's bill, on the principle of ac- coantability. Upon receiving this assurance, Mr. litiars withdrew his bill.