dints anti prime:lingo in Vail iamen t.

THE WEST INDIA DEBATE.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, before the renewal of the ad- journed debate, Mr. HAWES went into explanations on the charges made against himself and the Colonial Office by Lord George Bentinck.

a A complaint was made that a despatch from Governor Light, calculated to im- press the West India Committee in favour of the protection which the Chairman advocated, had been withheld from the Committee, although an enclosure which caine to England with that despatch from Mr. Stipendiary Strutt, and which was favourable to the views of the Colonial Secretary was laid before the Committee. Mr. Hawes stated, that the simple reason why the despatch bad not been given ,was that no gentleman in the office had thought it contained any new matter. It did in fact contain one remark which would have given great additional weight to the enclosure from Mr. Strutt, but that had not caused it to be presented. He now regretted that the despatch had not been laid before the Committee. The Trinidad despatch was not received till the 5th May, and it did not arrive in official course in the hands of Lord Grey till the 8th; but the 8th was the very day on which Lord George moved for its production; and in compliance with that motion it appeared in due course. In each of these cases, the document when it appeared bore the date of its ar- rival; and the first also mentioned the date of the despatch which it accom- panied; so that no deception could have been intended. With regard to the Jamaica despatch, and the charge founded on Mr. Hawes's answers to Mr. Goulburn's examination on the 5th of April, the facts were these. Mr. Hawes had been described as- having- said—" he was not aware of any im- portant despatches that bad been received from Jamaica ": what he had really said-was, that he was "not aware of any important despatches which had been withheld from the Committee." Nor was he. The despatch which this question referred to was received on the 27th March. Mr. Cox, a gentleman in the Colo- nial Office, of much ability, and of perfect faith, made a note on it suggesting its importance, and-the propriety of its going before the Committee. Mr. Elliot, the Assistant Under-Secretary, made a second note—" I agree with you." On the .28th it came to Mr. Hawes, who also wrote—" I agree"; and on the same day it was given to Lord Grey, who also agreed. But Lord Grey added, that it. was a despatch requiring care in answering; and it was kept to the 30th, for pro- r preparation of the reply. On the 30th, the reply was verbally dictated by ed,Greliibut further niceties occurred, and the despatch was not ultimately weredihe 14th of April. On that day, instructions were given to send it etii1aitee; which instructions were not carried out. Mr. C.ot authorised 10,40\iitatathat the omission was entirely his. Mr. Hawes contended that the despatch was-one which it would have been his interest to produce rather than conceal ;for the onlyfassage in it that had struck him.as of importance was this ene—not favourable- to the opponents of Govern- ment*-" With- 'aspect tathe oust of cultivation, an examination of the tables will shonthat thestated general average ofthe cost per hundredweight rests upon a basisswhich malice it a very_unsafe criterion in manysiespects, and in none more BO ibltEl as therneiterion efts-general average-rate foe the wages of agricultural labour."

He ended with this direct appeal to his accuser—" I am not aware that during the long time I have had a seat in this House I have ever had doubt or discredit cast upon me; and I think I have a right—having fully, fairly, and frankly ex- plained the matter to the House—to appeal to the noble Lad, and ask him whetherihe means to adhere to the charge; and, if so, that he will allow me to have it investigated. I assure him that I shall give him every aid. I shall con- cessl-nothing;- and I trust that-when it is investigated, the- House will see that the declaration I now make, that the charge is entirely groundless, is borne -out hy the testimony of gentlemen of the most honourable character." (Much cheer- *mg) Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said, that everybody who had listened to Mr. Hawes must be satisfied that his statement respecting the.minutes on the despatch was perfectly correct. But Lord. George . adhered . to his charge against the Colonial Office, of having kept back information from the Com- mittee.

Furthermore, he continued lost in surprise at the statement made by Mr. Hawes on the 5th of April, that he knew of no important deapatches withheld, though the inquiry of Mr. Goulbura had gone distinctly to the character of the very de- spatch acknowledged to be then under preparation. -Mr. Hawes and Mr. Labott- chore had both " distinctly denied that any information had been received from Jamaica." After his reply that no despatches of importance bad, been withheld, Mr. Goulburn said—" We have received from other colonies very considerable de- tails as to the state of those colonies, and as to the prospects of agriculture;! but -from Jamaica I can find nothing of- the kind." Mr. Hawes replied—." Until v recently, I think, there has been no such general despatch received: that deeps is now printing for the Committee. I ought to add, that the Governor has been in the island a very short time." Mr. HAWES--" That had reference to the • blue book,' which had not been sent."

Lord GEORGE BRNTINCIC-" Well, bat to exclude all doubt, look at the an- swer to my question—' That is preparing, ha it ? ' The answer was in the. affirms- five= There is a despatch, but still not of the nature to which the right honour- able gentleman alludes. However, whatever we have will be furnished.'" "Not of the nature to which the right honourable gentleman alludes Why; Sir, the despatch when it was forthcoming was of the nature, and nothing else,- ex- clusively of the nature of the other despatches which had been laid before the House and the Committee. It was the most important that could have been .laid before the Committee at that critical moment."

But Lord George supported his general charge by other instances.

On the 7th of February, Lord Grey, in " another place,' had stated himself to possess a document of remarkable interest—signed -by a number of planters who had bought or leased their plantations themselves since Emancipation, and toge- ther bad laid out some 142,0001 in their purchases. Lord Grey then stated him- self highly pleased with such evidences of a change in the system from absentee- ism to resident ownership; and, "so far was he from believing that the prospects in Jamaica were bad, he thought no other part of the British dominions offered so favourable a prospect for the investment of capital at this moment." Mr. Goul- burn, astonished at this picture, on the 8th of February askedd, a question concern- ing the latest news from Jamaica: to which he got for answer, that "no despatch had been received giving.any general account of the state of Jamaica, but as SOQII as any should arrive it should be given to the House." Now for a fact. -The very document which had been thought of remarkable -interest, and which was quoted to prove the prosperity of Jamaica, contained a statement that the signers of it were so reduced by the waste of profit and by absolute loss that they could not cultivate one more year; that unless strong remedies were adopted, sugar-cul- tivation must entirely cease in Jamaica; and it ended with these words—" We beg you to consider our desperate position as an excuse for troubling you with this statement ! "

Again: on the 25th November, Lord ,George gave notice of a Committee on the distress of the West Indies the motion was first fixed for debate early-in De- cember; afterwards it was fixed for the 23d, but it was cut off by the adjourn- ment of Parliament on the 21st. Despatches bad . arrived from Lord Harris, Governor of Trinidad, on the 4th and -27th of October, both of which gave most important information on the topics of the -coming debate; and- both-of them were moved for by Mr. Hume on the 26th of November; bat- neither .of- them were produced to the House till the evening of the very night.on-which the de- bate closed. Great speeches were spoken and prejudices raised on the other. side, and went out by the packet, which never could have been made or raised if them despatches had been produced. Lord George therefore reasserted, as instances of information important to a just opinion, but withheld by the Colonial Office, the cases of the despatches from Guiana and Trinidad by Governors Light and Lord Harris, and that from Ja- maica of Sir Charles Grey, containing the proposal of a differential duty of, l4 per pound on foreign sugars. Lord George disclaimed the use of the word "fraudu- lent," but charged a systematic suppression of the truth, and a misleading of the House with regard to the West Indies.

Lord Joint Russzia, claimed an answer to Mr. Hawes's demand of- a formal acquittal or formal inquiry.

A charge had been made of withholding a despatch; then a minute of Mr. Hawes's had been called a concoction: lastly, the wards ostensibly disclaimed are a second time used, that fraud will always in the end be detected. Had the charge of concocting been withdrawn' or not? At one time the minutes were stated and at another time implied to be false. If the charges are not believed, they should not be persisted in: if they are believed, they should be referred to a Committee to be heard and determined.

Mr. DISRAELI answered, though without authority to do so, that Lord George retained no more doubts on the personal charge; but that he had adhered to the charges of official withholding or perversion of Colonial despatches. A Minister is found reading a despatch, every-word of which he says is worthy of attention, and yet omitting the only lines, which, tell against him. Was not this proof of a fixed intent to pervert information in favour of the system which they upheld ? Did any one venture to deny that Lord Grey, on the 7th of February, read from a memorial which he declared to be an interesting and important docu- ment, so as to convey an impression directly the reverse of' that which the me- morialists themselves intended to convey?

But the moment these charges are made, they are declared preposterous;- and reflections upon the character of the House are deprecated. "Of course nothing can be more natural to the Government than to deprecate discussion on such a

subject as this. To a -Ministry inquiry is always chargeable with bad taste. It is an outrage-on the delicate sentiments of humanity for a man to get up and ask

a question which itia,inconvenient to answer. But the question we ask must be answered; and I believe that the statement we make will produce an effectelse- where. That mysterious but important,.part of the world elsewhere,' to which the honourablegentleman opposite refers, will, I believe, meditate on what we have

said. 'Elsewhere' will say, that after all your statements and speeches and passionate ebullitions, there are some facts of a suspicious character that ought to be explained. 'Elsewhere' will remember that three despatches of great im- portance were not produced before the Committee on the Sugar and Coffee Do. lies. Elsewhere' will not forget that the Secretary of State for the Colonies, on the 7th of February, held out Jamaica as a most desirable investment for her Ma- jesty's lieges on the authority of papers and evidence which he held in his hand. ,lhese are feels you may deny, but I have that opinion of the good sense and pro- per spirit of the people elsewhere,' as to believe that, whether right or wrong, they will never consider a Member of Parliament in error who attempts honestly to do his duty in order to discover the truth, and who is not afraid to impugn the conduct of a Minieter, however.influential his position, however high his honour, or however great his Pedigree." (Much cheering.) Mr. Vantiow SMITH desired that the House should first have a more distinct hearing of Lord George's retractation of. concoctions, and other charges so rashly made. The retractation had been made in a most unhandsome manner; so, indeed, as to seem more like bringing a fresh charge. Let the House hear a support or withdrawal of the charges first made, and then proceed to any new ones of sys- tematic suppression of information by the Colonial Office.

Sir JoHN PAK1NGTON thought the charge against the Colonial Office the real and important question.

The personal imputation was withdrawn; and Mr. Hawes had assented to the mode of withdrawal, in the usual mode of Members, by taking off his hat. But a serious charge of official neglect seemed established by plain facts. Government was bound to vindicate its department from the imputation either of intentional -suppression of information, or from gross neglect and the committal of a series of blunders.

Sir GEORGE GREY thought that Lord George Bentinck had managed to evade a plain question—to creep out of one charge made by him, and to avoid saying a word about the other.

" The honourable gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire has alluded to the inconvenience of not having a regular Opposition in this House. The not having an Opposition is mit an inconvenience of which we have reason to com- plain: what we have to complain of is, the not having at the head of the Oppo- sition a gentleman whose high principle, honourable mind, correct feeling, and great Parliamentary experience, qualify him to be the leader of a party who look up to him; and who in his expressions observes a due regard to the dignity of the House, the decency of debate, and the character of the party who look up to him." _Lord GEORGE BENTINCIC spoke a few words more of explanation or -reiteration. The subject was then dropped.

..The adjourned‘debate as to, going into Committee on the Sugar-duties ,was opened by Mr. GLQRGE Tflostreow; who. summed up his objections to both the Government scheme and Sir John Pakingtou's amendment in this statement— He could not vote for the grant of 500,0001-, because, in the first place, it would afford no effectual relief; and, in the next place, he would never assist to introduce labour into the Colonies, the avowed • object of which was to diminish the wages of the free Negro labourer: and he could not support protection, be- cause he thought it would be an act of gross injustice to the people of this country.

Mr. BERNAL laid before the House some personal knowledge of the de- preciation and ruin that was overspreading planting estates in Jamaica. He avowed that his own estates, as those of several friends he knew, were to- tally unencumbered; - that he was a most improving landlord, having a Free- trader in heart and spirit for his manager; and yet such was the plight of West India interests that lie could not raise 1,0001. on his West India estates, however he might need it. He declared his dislike to the scheme of immigration: indeed, he was not satisfied that labour was deficient in the West Indies; the want was rather one of greater regularity and continuousness of engagement- Of the two plans of duties, one proposed by the Government and one hinted at though not -proposed by Mr. Gladstone, he preferred the former. The grant of 500,0001. he desired to have nominally appropriated, rather for its moral effect on the Negroes, if they were disposed to be idle and neglectful, than for any present purposes of immigration: bat he thought it might be wisely appropriated to the encourage- ment of public works to promote irrigation. He made no demand of protection either. A differential duty on Cuba sugars VMS not, indeed, protective in the same sen-e that a duty on foreign corn was so; for English corn already enjoyed the protection of freight, Which Jamaica sugar did not in comparison with that

of Cuba. '

Finding that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been true to his engagement with respect to the differential duty upon rum,—that he had resisted the seduc- tive coquetry of the Irish gentlemen,—Mr. Bernal intended to vote in favour of the proposition of his noble friend the Member for the City of London—( Cries of "Oh, oh!" "Hear, hear!" and continued laughter)—althongh he was not a san- guine or warm admirer either of that plan or of any other that had been pro- pounded.

Sir Jamas GRAHAM rapidly reviewed the circumstances of the first in- fringement of the whole policy of excluding absolutely from the country the sugar of slave countries; and defended the act of 1845 on the whole case as it then stood.

He admitted, however, as an imperfection of that act, that promineney had not been given in it to the question of encouragement or non-encouragement of the slave-trade. The steps following that act were a necessary sequel. to the first steps taken in the new course: the subject was one of great difficulty, but the balance, was in favour of the course taken. The act of 1846 received Sir James's unwilling support, on the grounds stated by Sir Robert Peel. He now opposed a ten-shilling protective duty for six years, as inexpedient for the Colonies them- seJtea, him, its probable effects in exaggerating the competition for labour and raising wages. He had also a more general ground of objection. On the first night of this session Mr. Disraeli had referred to a prophecy made by him two years ago, that there would be a reaction in our commercial policy; and he now triumphed in what he believed to be the near accomplishment of that prophecy— be believed that the time had now arrived when that reaction would commence. Nor was that all: Lord Stanley bad the other night, in another place, asked for a prolongation of the time during which the existing Corn-law was to continue; and Mr. Herries had deliberately given it as his opinion that, nothing would be really effectual for the relief of the West Indies except a discriminating duty approaching in its character to a prohibition. Why, if we were to revert to a system of prohibitory duties on foreign sugar, and if, under the terms of the anathema lately issued by the Protection Society and signed by the Duke of kiehmond, the idea of cheapness was to be made the subject of ridicule and scorn, then be would at once say, to any such reaction be was opposed. In passing, he would advert to a little of what had been said with respect to cheap sugar, and of the counexion which the noble Lord said there existed between cheap production and low wages. He did not shrink from that declaration. HIS official experience— Lord GEORGE BENTLNCK—" You stated it both ways." _. SirJastEs Gantram—" That taunt falls upon me harmlessly, No taunt can now drive me from office, to make way for ()there. I have no power which the noble Lord or others may desire to deprive me of to bestow it elsewhere. I de- sire nothing but to speak the plain truth. I was of opinion that low prices made Jew wages: but my official experience seems to justify the couclusion that high prices make low wages; and the effects of low wages fall most heavily on the working classes at a time when they are least able to bear that evil, be- cause then they are in a condition the least able to purchase the prime necessaries of life. I am satisfied you must be most cautious not to let anything enhance the prices of articles of the first necessity. Cheap sugar is not to be laughed .44 notwithstanding the anathema of the Duke of Richmond. Sugar enters into the comforts of every family ; it is the ooly little luxury that many families can en- joy; it renderspalatable their rice, their gruel, their crout, their indifferent tea and coffee. It is .oar duty, as far as possible, to cheapen everything. When it becomes a question of reaction and of prohibitory duties, I oppose myself to re- action: for I believe that in the present state of the country that policy is im- practicable—if practicable, most dangerous; and if carried into effect I should tremble for the consequences. I most sincerely intend to give my vote against the amendment"

On the motion of Sir R. Irnws, the debate was adjourned till Thursday.

Before the resumption of the debate on Thursday, Lord, GEORGE- BEI4t- TINCE renewed the cross-examination, through ,Mr. Labouchere, respecting

Mr. Hawes's replies to the Committee, and'Lord Grey's partial extract Of the Jamaica memorial; strengthening the effect of each item of his original charge by distinct iteration, and calling upon Mr. Labouchere to reconnile

discrepancies. Mr. LABOUCHERE repeated some of the explanatory state- ments, but disavowed any controversy on his own part with Lord George, _and expressed his perfect confidence in Lord Grey's honour.

The debate was once more continued, with scarcely a variation of view or .argument. The Government plan was opposed, on Anti-Slavery

grounds, by Sir ROBERT butts; on West Indian grounds, by. Mr. BARK- LT; on Protectionist grounds, by -Mr. UactouanT and the Marquis dl GRANBY; and Mr. MUNTZ objected to reopen the settlement of 1846. The measure was defended by Mr. LABOLICRERE; who only professed , to reiterate former arguments. ' The Ministers, but not the measure, were supported by Mr. GouLsume. Sir RostEaT PEEL took a special cow* which we describe below.

BABELy defended the planters from exploded. charges 'which had been renewed by Mr. Hawes, and corrected that. gentleman s statement in several de- tails; giving his own personal experience gathered on the spot. He thus showed

that the uureumnerative condition of sugar-planting does not arise from absentee- ism or careless cultivation. He described the exertions of a planter who had speut 6,0001. or 7,000/. and great personal exertion without success. In Berbice,.he

saw a person who had lived on his own estate for fifty years; two years beforelk. Barkly's visit, he had refused for his property 60,0001- offered by a nobleman now in the House of Peers ;.when Mr. Barkly saw him, that person had sold his estate for 1,000 dollars, and was then living on an allowance granted to him by his former manager: the manager had crossed over to the Dutch slave-holding colo- ny, and there soon amassed a fortune.

Mr. GouLBuRN took a view similar to Mr. Gladstone's; but, although he dis- claimed a recurrence to protection, leaning more to that side'; and also differing

in his practiced conclusions as to the vote which he should give. 'The gentlemen

opposite came into office on the 6th of July 1846; and on the 20th of 'July, after fourteen days' consideration, cutting short the experiment then in progress, they came down to the House and proposed a total change in the system that had been for some time previous in operation. They called for the assent of Parliament to the measure-which they proposed, and pledged upon it the existence of the Go- verment. He for one gave his assent to the scheme brought forward in these circumstances, not that he approved of the measure itself, but because he thought there was a possibility that the Colonies might escape the destruction that many

persons foretold was certain to ensue; and because at that particular moment there was, as it appeared to him, danger to the general interestssof the empire from another change of Administration, which, in his mind, outweighed those chances of misfortune that were foreseen as likely to fall on the Colonies. Sir ROBERT PEEL expressed strong sympathy for the state of the British Sugar Colonies; repudiating mere pecuniary considerations, and calling to mind old struggles in which the West Indian Colonies stood by the side of the•Mother-coun- try ; disclaiming also any argument adverse to the planters fotinded on the small proportion of the White population—indeed, the smaller that proportion is, the more should the White population be cherished for the great pures of civilize tion. And he believed the ultimate interest of the consumer to be identical with that of the sugar-producer. But he compared the several propositions before the House-

Sir Robert would have desired a 'longer experiment for the law of 1845: he agreed to the law of 1846, however, partly to prevent continual changes of a& ministration—partly because any struggle to prevent the application of Free-trade principles to the West Indies, however protracted, could not have been ultimately successful. He did not see that the report of Lord George Bentinck'i Committee proposed any return to the distinction between slave-labour and free-labour sugar, and he could not 'Mild out any hope to the West Indies of reviving that distinction. "The Committee proposed a reduc- tion of Colonial expenditure: he, thought that quite feasible. He rips proved of the suggestion to pay. the salaries of the superior Governors, ap- pointed for Imperial purposes, out of, the Imperial funds: he would reduce other

salaries—such as those attached togecretaqships of 4,0001. a year—and would at

the same time make the posts more accessible to the natives of the Colonies—men acquainted with local affairs, to whom such offices ruld probably be objects Of ambition. He did not understand that source of relm440 be excluded from, the Government plan. If the laws of vagrancy were candidIr ceneldered, it would be possible to devise a plan for checking that abuse withent reVoking the freedoM given to the Negro. With respect to the African squadron,' it is extremely dims cult to form an opinion: it is doubtful whether sudden suppression of the Aqua& ron might not give a renewed impulse to the slave-trade; but, in the absence of the evidence of Mr. Hutt's Committee, it is not possible to arrive at a final judgment.

If it were shown that the squadron is ineffectual, and that for that reason alone we desired to abandon the blockade, we might induce other countries to mimeo us from our treaty obligations on that subject; and then, no doubt, this country would be willing to devote a considerable portion of the funds thus saved to other means which might be deemed more effectual for suppression of the-slave-trade. Sir Robert did not attach such great importance as some did to immigration: for the importation of fresh labourers to act as a check on idleness, there must be a redundancy of labourers- and then full employment woUld not be provided for persons who had been induced to immigrate. It' the Government were to under- take the sole management of immigration, it appeared to him that:the scheme,, wanting the nice tact which accompanies individual speculation, ould end in Our- appointment. He was disposed to facilitate the 'operations of 'individuals whose estates require the immigration of Negroes, at the same tithe taking every pre:- caution against abuse on the coast of Africa, and after the arrivat:of the immi- grants in the West Indies; for care must be taken not to subject this country to

the imputation of, under any pretence, encouraging the slave-trade. He hoped, therefore, that Government would not insist on applying the half,Million proposed

to be advanced, solely to purposes of immigration. He would apply it to aid ih the improvement of estates—to irrigation, by a system of which Lombardy is kept in so fertile a condition; to drainage, the making of tramways, &c. Under a eyes tern of competition, improvements would create a demand for healthful labour, and lay the foundation of great local prosperity. Sir John Pakiegton's amendment pointed to the maintenance of a tenrshillink duty for six years. Against this proposal Sir Robert Peel argued, that it won* only defer the period for open competition, and would induce the slave countries to make more strenuous preparations for it. He quoted the opinion of Mr. Barkly, that a long protection would end the struggle for profits and wages, now carried on between planters and Negro labourers, in favour of the Negroes, and would only cause extravagant wages. The object was, not to put a certain m su of money into the pockets of a few planters, or of their labourers, who needed no such aid, but to lay the foundation for the prosperity of the West Indies. "If we must pay them a sum of money, for God's sake let us pay it them directly." Sir Robert rested the future hopes for the West Indies on other considerations. They are now in a condition for which protection would afford no remedy; but they have no ground for despair. He must be blind to the signs of the times who thinks that slavery can be long maintained. See what is the state of Cuba. Lord Howard de Walden, who has recently visited that island, describes the over- seers as being obliged to go armed, with blood-hounds at their heels. In the Uni- ted States, Abolitionists are tarred and feathered, and discussion is put down. Why 7—because there is no confidence in the maintenance of this crying evil- Sir Robert regretted to hear Mr. Hawes taunt the West Indies with thew frequent complaints. There have been incessant complaints for the last hundred and fifty years—under slavery—under gradual abolition—under every condition. Aud why ? Because there was a blight over the land that had slavery in it—in which there was the relation of proprietor and slave. No country can be secure in which the condition of slavery is suffered to continue; and recent events have tended to show that insecurity. "There have been mighty convulsions in Europe. That man would have been thought et madman who should have predicted the CODSO- quences of the events at Paris. That man who had said six months ago that the events at Paris would have involved Berlin and Vienna in anarchy and confusion, would have been thought a mad speculator, and would have been utterly disregarded. But events passing our comprehension have occurred, and the mighty heavings of that convulsion are already felt on the other side of the Atlantic. Look at the state of Martinique. These things are useful lessons, by which the Governments of Brazil, Cuba, and the United States, would do well to take timely warning. My belief is that the events that have happened in Eu- rope must precipitate the time when ;here shall be a final extinction of this slavery and the slave-trade. I hope that the abolition will be effected by timely precau- tions on the part of Governments; but there will be an increasing sympathy with the condition of slavery. He who traffics in human blood and transferring slaves from the coast of Africa to Cuba and Brazil, may find that, notwithstanding his present prosperity, he stands on slippery places, and may come to a fearful end; and my hope is that it may come to an end through wise and providential legis- lation on the part of Governments. But whether there be wise andprovidential legislation or not, I believe its doom is sealed and cannot long survive."

In reply, Lord Amu RUSSELL reiterated some arguments in favour of the Government scheme; especially relying on the conflict of opinion among its opponents, so that if that scheme fell to the ground no sufficient number could agree to enforce a substitute. He alluded to the delays in adopting effective vagrancy laws; admitting that there was no valid reason against the enactment of such laws after Emancipation, but deriving excuses from the natural jealousy among the Anti-Slavery party, and the difficulties of details. He explained that Government could not divert the proposed loan from purposes of immigration without creating expectations and jealousies in Canada and other colonies immigration, would demand loans in aid of improve-

ments.

The House divided on Sir John Pakington's amendment—For the origi- nal motion, 260; against it, 245; majority, 15. The House went into Corn- mitttee; and the resolution embodying a new scale of duties was moved pro forma. The Chairman then reported progress; the Committee to sit again next day.

Pending the debate in the House of Commons on the main question Lord Guar transferred the episode of the despatch controversy to the House of Peers, by a notice on Monday, and a motion for papers on Tues- day, which he introduced by a long set speech.

He began by protesting against the distinction drawn in the House of Commons between his personal and his official character: he considered that the man who could be guilty of deceiving Parliament, in the way imputed, would be as basely cul- pable as the man who commits a pecuniary fraud. He then went into the details of the three charges respecting the three despatches from Governors Sir Charles Grey, Sir Henry Light, and Lord Harris. He explained the routine of the Colo-

nial Office; and repeated the facts already given by Mr. Hawes, up to the 14th of April, when the Jamaica despatch was remitted to the subordinate officials to be

sent to the West India Committee. He thought the oversight not extraordinary,

when the multitude of documents supplied to that Committee by the Colonial Office was considered: 603 despatches, occupying 630 folio printed pages had been furnished by the Colonial Office. But at all events, Lord Grey pledged his honour that the non-production of the despatch from the Governor of Jamaica was a mistake, and that both Mr. Hawes and himself firmly believed the despatch had been given to the Committee as had been directed.

With regard to the charge of concocting minutes—a charge of deliberate for- gery, against Mr. Cox, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Elliot, Mr. Hawes, and himself—Lord

Grey hardly knew who was most worthy to be despised, he who not entertaining the suspicion should express it, or he whose mind was so lost to every generous feeling that he was capable of conceiving it true.

Respecting Sir Henry Light's despatch Lord Grey briefly avowed that it was by his direction that the despatch had been kept back and the extract from its enclosure given. On the 24th of April the Committee had still considerable time to sit: it was more convenient that the despatch should go before it in the gene- ral collection of papers which were going before the House: the particular ex- tract, however, was matter of a curious nature bearing on the subject the Com- mittee were considering; so it was taken down to them.

As to Lord Harris's despatch, Lord Grey admitted its full importance. That despatch arrived on the 5th May; it was received by Lord Grey on the 8th: on that very day Lord George Benthick moved in the House of Commons for copies of despatches received by the last two mails to be presented to the House itself. That was the only reason why the despatch had gone to the House of Commons, in a lump, instead of first to the Committee. With regard to all these despatches, if suppression had been the object, it would have been as easy to withhold them from the House of Commons as from the Committee. The decision of the Committee was comparatively unimportant: indeed, the only resolution they came to appears to have been by common consent abandoned.

Lord Grey proceeded to answer the charge against himself in particular, of quoting from a Jamaica memorial such passages as supported his argument, while lie did not read the rest of the paper. Undoubtedly he did so, and he now defended it. The memorialists were complaining of the existing state of things in the colony, and of their distress; and he argued that the memorialists them- selves admitted facts which made for his opinion. But that memorial was printed and laid at length before the House of Commons with the other papers. As to the allegation that the other despatches had not been produced in due time, he met it with the general assurance that every call for papers made by the Com:nittee or the House of Commons was obeyed with the utmost promptitude possible, con- sidering the mass of documents with which the Colonial Office had to deal, and with the most perfect scrupulousness and good faith. His directions had been, to take care that the fullest information should be supplied to the House and the Committee. On first hearing of the charges, the stronge-t feelings of indignation were roused in him; but he afterwards felt that no injury was done to him by those charges, and felt that no real cause of anger existed. " I hope I shall not be deemed guilty of any undue presumption in saying, that having been now for nearly twenty-two years a member of one or the other House of Parliament—having taken some share in public affairs, and having never before during that period haa imputed to me a mean and dishonourable act—I think I have earned a character which is proof against such an attack as has been made upon me. I have so much confidence in the generosity and justice of my countrymen, that I do not entertain the fear that they would lightly believe that, by such conduct, as that which has been imputed to me, I would have disgraced myself and tarnished the unsullied honour of a name which I am proud to inherit, because I received it from one who was even more distinguished for his pure and irreproachable charac- ter than for his talents and public services. (Cheers.) I feel that I cannot be injured by such an attack ; and further, that I ought rather to be obliged to the noble Lord for having directed it against me, inasmuch as it has given an oppor- tunity to my friends to come forward in my defence, with a generosity which, I assure them, I will never cease to hold in grateful recollection. I therefore feel that I can treat the attacks which have been made upon me—I will not say with contempt, because I wish to avoid any expression of angry feeling—but with dis- regard; convinced as I am, that theymust have elicited the censure of all high- minded and honourable men, by showing that one who aspires to taking a leading part in the public affairs of his country is so ignorant of the manner in which those affairs ought to be conducted as to bring down a great question of policy to the miserable ground of petty personality." Such a system of attack should, on public grounds, be prohibited by both Houses of Parliament.

Lord Grey introduced a criticism on a statement made by Mr. Disraeli in an. swer to Lord John Russell's taunt about Lord George Bentinck's " former par- suits," that the Duke of Bedford had acted as chairman of a meeting which re- solved on a subscription of funds to present a testimonial to Lord George Ben- tinck for zeal exhibited in exposing certain frauds on the turf. " The authentic records have been examined,—I am stating this on the authority of the noble Duke,—and it is found that not only was he not chairman, but that he was not even present on the occasion adverted to; and I believe that he did not attends meeting of the stewards of the Jockey Club on the question until the funds had been diverted from their original object to a charitable purpose." This inaccuracy was as open to misapprehension or misrepresentation as the oversight which had occurred in the Colonial Office ! Lord Grey, however charitably admitted, that in the excitement of the moment the person who made the statement believed it to be true: he acquitted that person of all intentional deceit, and he would disdain to take any other course than avow that acquittal.

Lord STANLEY declared his belief that Lord Grey was possessed of a sense of honour as high and blameless as any nobleman in the WEBS, but Lord George Bentinck was a man of equally high unblemished honour— incapable of untruth, though as strenuous in opinion and bold in asserting opinion as any human being on the face of the earth. Lord Stanley reviewed the charges, and the defence; closely and calmly AEA- lyzing the details of each. The facts concerning the Jamaica despatch were cer- tainly such as to lay ground in the first instance for strong suspicion. Sir Charles Grey's despatch, conveying his evidence on the state of the colony, and his sug- gestion of a remedy, was not only withheld at a most important juncture, but it was never produced at all to the Committee; who were obliged at last to decide in ignorance of its contents. The suggestion it made was as nearly as possible the name with one that was negatived in the Committee, on division, by a major- ity of a single vote. Lord Stanley was confident, now, that the document had not been purposely withheld. But he confessed—allowing Mr. Ilawes's character to be that of an honourable and straightforward gentleman—that he could not re concile Mr. Hawes's answers given on the 5th of April with each other. His an- swers, up to that in which he said he was not aware that any despatch of import- ance bad been withheld, were given, no doubt, under the impression that they were correct. "But the examination went on—' We have received from other colonies very considerable details as to the state of those colonies and as to the prospects of agriculture; but from Jamaica I can find nothing of the kind 7'— Until very recently I think there has been no such general despatch received: that despatch is now printing for the Committee. I ought to add, that the Governor has been in the island a very short time.' 'That is preparing, is it?'—' There is a despatch, but still not of the nature to which the nght honourable gentleman alludes: however, whatever we have will be furnished:—Now I must say, con- sidering the character of this despatch, when not one word had been said by any other person with respect to the blue book, and when the question was whether any information had been received as to the state of the colony, I cannot under- stand why the Under-Secretary for the Colonies stated vaguely that a despatch had been received, but not of the nature alluded to, (although in point of fact such a de- patch had been received,) instead of stating that, within the last few days, a most important document had been received, which would furnish important information to the Committee. I confess I do not understand an Under-Secretary's merely saying to a Committee, five or six days after the receipt of such a despatch, that until very lately no despatch had been received; that the despatch which had been received was then printing; but clearly leading the Committee to believe that such despatch had no important bearing upon the subject under their investigation.' Then with regard to another part of the case, it seemed impossible that the error of omission was not discovered by the subordinates of the Colonial Office when

collecting the farther despatches laid before Parliament. "I conceive also that it is equally impossible to believe that, upon the discovery of such a material omission, instant steps should not have been taken to repair that omission, and to famish the document to the Committee before they came to their decision. Yet, although these papers were moved for on the 8th of May, and the Committee did not come to any decision till the 22d of May, and did not come to a final de- cision till the 29th of May, in all that time this acknowledged blander was not corrected by the Colonial Office."

Lord Stanley proceeded with the other charges. He thought the coincidence of suppression at various times WAS an element of the general case. Ode or tee

inadvertencies were conceivable, but not such a repetition of them. If he were

to pass one bad half-crown, it would not cause him to suffer in general opinion; but if he passed half a dozen more, and was found with a further half-dozen in

his pocket, he feared an Old Bailey jury would impute to him a guilty knowledge. With regard to the Jamaica memorial, he summed up a review of the case thus—" But what shall we say of a Minister (and I regret to have to say it of the noble Earl opposite) who, holding in his band a document the whole gist and bearing of which are in one sense and in support of one particular view—(" Hear, hear!" front Earl Grey)—I am speaking now not of the despatch of Governor Higginson, but of the memorial, which excited great attention on the part of the

noble Earl, and from which he read some extracts to your Lordships; and I am about to show that not only were they not fair extracts, but that they involved an

inference directly and diametrically opposite to the whole tenour of the memorial itself; and that the next sentence, which themoble Earl did not read, would have utterly annihilated the inference which he sought to lead your Lordships to form." On the whole, it was not surprising that Lord George Bentinck, who had de- voted himself heart and soul to the West Indian interest, but had still sought

most anxiously to arrive only at the truth, should have felt deeply hurt that facts of one class had been intentionally concealed. His expressions had been WO strong, perhaps; but he naturally felt that there were circumstances of grave suspicion attending the manner in which the Colonial Office had for a consider- able time carried on its business.

Lord 111017G1iAse interposed with apologetic and peacemaking remarks on behalf of either side. The personal charges had been quite retracted: on the other band, the fullest and most complete and satisfactory expla- nations of the errors, and at first sight suspicions circumstances, had been given.

h should be remembered, in considering all Mr. Hawes's answers before the west India Committee, that he firmly believed the despatch to be already in pos. passion of the Committee. Some 200 despatches a week, some 11,000 in the year, posed through the Colonial Office, and are there read, abstracted, considered, de- cided on, and answered. Compared with that, the business of the Home Office or Board of Trade was trifling. Errors were unavoidable with the present staff; the staff ought to be erdarged.

Earl GREY made a second speech, in consequence of the course Lord Stanley had taken in the debate. He admitted to the full the right of comment on the actions of public men; but he distinguished between comment on their actions and impeachment of their alotives. It seemed to be the peculiar characteristic of the noble Lord by whom this charge has been made in the other House, that he never entered on the dis- cussion of any great public measure without imputing vile and disgraceful motives to those whom he opposed. Lord Grey feared he could never again entertain his former opinion of the generosity and high feeling of Lord Stanley; who had most lightly adopted the views of his political ally on this subject. He confessed he aid not feel himself equal, as an advocate, to grapple with the noble Lord in re- gard to the inferences which he had ingeniously drawn from scattered passages in variety of papers, and from a skilful comparison of dates. He had not the me- mory to follow the noble Lord through those details. Naturally the question was one not a little agitating to his feelings; and he did not feel himself capable of unravelling that ingenious web of sophistry which the noble Lord had woven, as be could 4o-bad he the time necessary for the task. For, skilful as the noble Lord WM in the art of "dressing up a case for Parliament," he never showed that still in a more eminent degree than he had done in driving home the poisoned arrow diecharged-by another.

Lord STANLEY rejoined, with an expression of regret that his fulfilment of a public duty should have brought upon him the penalty of that change or feeling towards him which Lord Grey had proclaimed. He repeated his deeided opinion that the grounds of the personal charge had been totally retrieved by the explanations; but he retained his opinion that Lord „Grey had committed a grave error in the peculiar use made by him of the memorial of the Jamaica planters.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE deprecated the mixture of personal with po- litical charges; and hoped the affair would now drop. Lord REDESDA.LE, however, by a criticism of Lord Grey's doctrine that he might quote facts from documents and yet disregard the opinions of the persons who saw the facts, called Lord Gouv again on his feet to observe—

'The next time the noble Lord does me the honour to refer to what has fallen from me, it would be desirable if he would quote something a little like what I &d say."

The subject then dropped; and the House, which met only to hear Lord Grey's vindication, adjourned.

DEFERRED MOTIONS: No HOUSE ON TUESDAY.

On Wednesday, Mr. EWART adverted to the failure of a House on the preceding day. Unfortunately for their consistency, ten Members who had notices on the _paper were absent on the occasion. He gave notice that he would make his own motion for revision of Taxation, which had thus been frustrated, the first time a Supply motion was made.

Sir WILLIAM MOLESwORTH named the 25th of July for his motion re- specting Colonial Government and Expenditure. Mr. STAFFORD lectured the "infant party" for not having made a House for its own Members. But they doubtless felt the ill effects of the "gross bribery at Leicester" by their intended whipper in, Sir Joshua Walmsley. Mr. COBDEN commented with warmth on this accusation of gross bri- bery—an accusation from which the Leicester Committee had exonerated Sir. Joshua Wiffinsley. Mr. Cobden threw the blame of the "no House" on Ministers, who had not taken the usual means to secure a House.

Me advised Members to send round notices to their friends on future occasions of making motions. There was not a single member of the Government on the Tommy-bench last night. Sir G. GREY—" There were six members of the Government in the House."

Mr. CoBDEN—" Was the right honourable gentleman here? For if he was not, I was. Hooked particularly, and I repeat there was no member of the Go- Ternment on the Treasury-bench."

,Sir G. GREY—" I was not here myself, bat I heard that there were six."

A MEMBER—" Mr. Tufnell and Mr. Parker were in the House."

Mr. Comses—" I saw Mr. Tufnell, but he was not on the Treasury-bench; he sat near the door. (Laughter.) I repeat, that if there was no House on Tues- day night, it is well known that the fact is to be attributed to the circumstance Of the Government not having taken the usual precaution to get a House." ("Bear, hear! " and " No, no! ") Sir GEORGE GREY—" Sir, I mast say that the imputation of the honourable Member upon the Government is one of the most unfair and uncalled for that I ever heard: It is astonishing that, with his Parliamentary experience, he should not know that members of the Government can be counted even although they are not sitting on the Treasury bench. I repeat, that there were six members of the Government present yesterday. The honourable gentleman asks where I was ?— I was attending a Council at Backingharn Palace. And I take leave to repeat noW what I have said before, that it is no part of the duty of the Government to make a House; and that it is not, as the honourable Member alleges, in their power to prevent a House being made." Mr. A. STAFFORD--" I beg, Sir, to retract what I said respecting Sir Joshua Wahnaley. The Committee reported that Sir Joshua Walmsley was guilty of bribery, not by himself, but by his agents: I beg to retract, and to apologize to Sir Joshua Walmsley. And, Sir I have another apology to make: I find the ho- nourable Member:1'es Dumfries does not belong to the infant party in St. James's Square. I regret1 associated him with such society: I beg to retract, and to apologize to the honourable Member for Dumfries." (Laughter and ironical

o rs.)

On Thursday afternoon, Lord Jonw Russell, asked Mr. Hume to defer his motion on the Suffrage, &c. from Friday to Thursday next, as it was necessary to get the Sugar-duties proposal through before the 5th of July, When the present duties expire. Mr. HUME consented, but pleaded for Monday; smile complained of delay arising from protracted discussions— They Were in a position that positively he never remembered the House to have been in before. They had no less than five cross-adjourned debates upon the PaPer• Something ought to be done. If the House agreed to it he should be ?tte willing to consent that there should be no adjourned debates, or that Mcen- should. be made to speak suitably to the occasion. (Loud laughter.) Eleelthwe. they are made to do so. ((ries of " Where! ") In America. (Shouts qf .1aughter, and cries of "Oh!") No Member there was allowed to speak more than half an hour in one night, except the introducer of a motion and

the Ministers who discussed it. They ought really to be more practical in their proceedings.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, without saying whether he agreed or not with Mr. Hume, really thought the evil to which he had adverted was one that merited serious consideration. Perhaps those who were in the habit of taking part in the proceedings of the House would consult the Speaker on the subject, and see if some plan could not be adopted to get through bu- siness more rapidly.

At the close of the night, after the long Sugar debate, Mr. Hume was roundly taken to task by Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. MUNTZ, and Mr. WAWN, for having given up his night, when Members had come to town on purpose to support him: Mr. Osborne warned Mr. Hume that he was losing his position. Mr. HUME sharply complained of these unfair and unreasonable imputations.

He did not give up the day. It was against his will that the day was altered; and if his friends, who now wished to blame him, had been in the House, they would have seen that it was so. But they might go out of town again if they chose, for anything he cared: he did not want their assistance. (Laughter.) It was most unjust and unfair to cast these reflections on him, knowing as they did the anxiety he had shown upon this question. It appeared to him that they wished to show to the country that he was a traitor; which he never had been. Mr. BROTHERTON defended Mr. Hume: for whom Mr. HUDSON bespoke the sympathy of the House, in his new and difficult position. Mr. HEN- LEY and Sir GEORGE GREY also cause to the rescue; and the question dropped.

ROMAN CATHOLIC DISABILITIES.

On Wednesday, on the order of the day for going into Committee on the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, Mr. GORING opposed the motion, in a speech revivingat considerable length the most objectionable doctrines and acts of former Popes, which had not to this time been repealed or disowned by subsequent Popes, and to which this bill would offer some sanction. Partly also because of the absence of Mr. Recorder Law on account of a. family affliction, he moved the postponement of the Committee till that day fortnight. Mr. NEWDEGATE, Sir HENRY WILLouoimy, Mr. FORBES and Colonel CONOLLy, joined the opposition. Sir GEORGE GREY and Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD urged proceeding at once.

On a division, the going into Committee was carried, by 102 to 76. The House went into Committee, and took first into consideration the amendment on the first clause, proposed by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, to, add these words- " Also, so much of the 13th Elizabeth entitled an 'Act against bringing in and putting in execution bulles, writings, or other instruments,' &c. as does not relate to such bulles," &c. In reply to Mr. NEwDEGATE, Sir JOHN JERVIS stated that the object of the addition was to obviate the difficulty of a doubt arising on the former act, whether it let in certain bulls called "reasonable bulls," as dis- tinguished from others. Mr. NEwDEGATE WWI not quite satisfied. Would not this clause, by approving the authority of the authors of the bulls; have the effect of corroborating the bulls themselves? Sir JOHN JER- VIS apprehended not.

After much desultory discussion, the House divided on a motion by Mr. HENLEY, to report progress; and negatived it, by 110 to 106. The House then divided on the Attorney-General's amendment; and the numbers for and against it were equal—both 113: the: Chairman of the Committee thereupon gave a casting-vote in its favour.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS proposed to go no further, in such an equal state of the numbers. On a division, after more dispute, this motion was nega- tived, by 111 to 110—majority 1.

Just as the division had been taken, Sir ROBERT INGLIS reentered the House, amidst laughter, and stated that he had been inquiring of the Speaker, whether, according to Parliamentary usage, the Chairman of a Committee possessed the same power to give a casting-vote that the Speaker of the House possessed. The Speaker said there was no precedent for such a vote. Mr. BERNAL, the Chairman of the Committee, stated that during his previous experience in the House no similar case had occurred.

After more obstructive discussion, Mr. ANSTEY yielded; and the Chair. man reported progress.

HERBY SWEEPS. In reply to Sir ROBERT INGLIS, on Wednesday, Sir GEORGE GREY stated that Government had taken the opinion of their Law-offi- cers on the legality of" Derby sweeps," and had been informed they were illegal: they were now, with the Excise Commissioners, engaged in considering some ad- vertisements of Derby Sweeps, with reference to ulterior proceedings for the en- forcement of the law.