Debates ant Vroteetrings in Varlfament.

SUGAR-DUTIES.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, the motion having been made, that the House should go into Committee on the Sugar-duties Bill, Mr. COBDEN moved an amendment— With one exception, the article sugar is of the most vital consequence to this country ; and the Sugar-bill which it was proposed to renew, the worst for the country that could be past. He believed that colonization might be made conducive to the welfare of the Mother-country as well as of emigrants ; but our existing system of colonization is one of unmixed evil and injustice. Do the Colonies share our burdens, and contribute to the revenue of this country ? The act of the 18th George III. expressly repudiated the right to tax the Co- lonies for the Mother-country. Do they pay their own expenses ? This country furnishes for the Colonies, army, navy, civil and military establish- ments, schoolmasters, bishops, and magistrates ; builds lighthouses for them, and constructs their canals; paying for their government out of the taxation of this country. The largest portion of the Army is devoted to the service of the Colonies : of 88,500 rank and file on the 1st June 1843, 44,529 were abroad exclusively of India, 43,981 at home and in India ; Lord Palmerston, when Se- cretary at War, said that the proportion should be 5 men at home for 10in the Colonies; Mr. Cobden assumed three-fourths to be devoted to the Colonies : the Army Estimates for the year amount to 6,225,000/. ; the same proportion would give 4,500,000L for the Colonies; and, adding their share of the Ord- nance, say 1,000,0001., with some unknown portion of the 6,382,0001. for the Navy, the allowance to the Colonies under those heads could not be less than five or six millions. The civil charge directly voted by the House this year was 241,0001. There was a newly-invented system of colonization, which was to be " self-suppporting ;" and under that system New Zealand had cost the country 61,0007., and South Australia 400,0001. The Falkland Iolanda, with a population of 78 souls, bad cost 4,350/. I How far does the Colonial trade reimburse this country for such an expense ? In 1840, out of the whole amount of our export trade, (51,000,000010,000,00W. was exported to the Colonies: so that we had that-ten millions to put against the five or six millions voted directly out of the pocket. of the people. It was precisely as if a)hopkeepeer, with every pound's worth of goods that he sold, gave back half-a-sovereign over the counter. It was said that the Colonies give us higher prices for our goods : but there cannot be two prices in the same market ; and in that respect the Colonies are of no more use to us than Russia or Brazil. It was argued that they encourage our shipping: but only one-third of our external shipping traffic goes to the Colonies.

Now, as the Colonies bear no peculiar burdens—as they are relieved from taxation, and are exempt from charges which most countries bear for the sup- port of their own Governments, what is there to prevent them from competing with other countries in sugar or coffee ? He moved, " That; in the opinion of this House, it is not expedient, that, in addition to the great expense to which the people of this country are subjected for the civil, military, and naval establish- ments of the Colonies, they should be compelled to pay a higher price for the productions of those Colonies than that at which:similar commodities could be pro- cured from other countries; and that, therefore, all productive duties in favour of Colonial produce ought to be abolished."

Mr. GRA.NTLEY BERKELEY objected, that the amendment could not be put ; and the SPEAKER concurred, as an amendment on the motion " That the Speaker do leave the chair," must, except on going into Committee of Supply or Ways and Means, be analogous to the subject to be discussed : the proposed amendment related to the Import-duties generally, and went therefore far beyond the Sugar-duties. Mr. COBDEN said, that in that case he would be content to divide with Mr. Ewart, on the motion which he was to make.

The House then went into Committee ; and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the first clause of the bill, continuing the existing Sugar-duties to the 5th July 1844— The grounds on which he defended the Sugar-daties were mainly those which he employed when he last addressed the House on the subject. He admitted the importance of securingcommodities as cheaply as possible; bat he could not just now sanction any experiment by which 400,0001. or 500,0001. of revenue might be lost ; and so long as the principle of protection is continued, the Colonies are entitled to a fair share of it. He calculated that the reduction of differential duties to be proposed by Mr. Hawes would only lower the price to the consumer by 2s. the hundredweight ; which could not sensibly affect the consumption, but would only transfer the 2s. from the pocket of the West Indian producer, who could ill bear the loss, to the Brazilian. It is the ob- ject of this country to extend Negro freedom to other countries : that object would be best promoted by showing that free Negro labour might be made as productive as slave labour; and thus far the West Indian Colonies have been more successful in the experiment than they have been supposed to be. On the other hand, the exclusion of Brazilian sugar had encouraged the growth of coffee; a good thing in itself, and tending to diminish slave-labour. But to discontinue the differential Sugar-duties, would admit sugar which can only be grown by slave-labour ; and would create a new demand for that kind of labour. Nor is the measure necessary. The sugar consumed this year up to 5th April was greater than that of any previous year ; in the five menthe elapsed

it exceeded the consumption of the same period in any previous year by 24,000 tons : theamount in store and expected from the colonies is estimated at 256,000 tons : the consumption of 1842 was only 193,000 tons ; so that, with every reduction of price and consequent increase of consumption, there is an ample supply. Under such circumstances, he felt that the measure which he proposed was the most consistent with the national feelings and character.

Mr. EV/ART rose to move an amendment— He commented on the inconsistency of Ministers in arguing against the ad- mission of slave-grown sugar, although they had been negotiating with Brazil

for that very purpose ; and in having the Corn and Sugar-duties both untouched,

alt bough they vaunted Free-trade principles. As an article of consumption, sugar is most important, especially in reference to the more temperate habits of the people; yet, while the population increased from 24,000,000 in 1831 to

27,000,000 in 1841, the consumption of sugar decreased from 245,000 tons to 212,000 tons. The refinery of West India sugar has fallen in a few years from 29,000 tons to nil. The evils of diminished consumption fall chiefly on

the poor : the average annual consumption of the higher classes is 40 pounds a bead; of the poor, in 1840, it was about 6 or 7 pounds. Mr. Porter calculated that the exclusion of foreign sugar caused a loss to the revenue, in 1840, of

4,000,0001.; in seven years, of 10,000,0004 ; besides a loss to the consumer in the same period of 15,000,0001.; and that after the gift of 20,000,0004 slavery-com-

pensation ! Mr. Ewart argued for admitting sugar from Brazil—a valuable

customer for manufactures, in whose favour the United States threaten us with a formidable rivalry ; and from Java andChina. He urged the ad vantage of competi-

tion in stimulating the industry and enterprise of the West Indies; and con- cluded by moving a duty of 24s. 6d. on Foreign Muscovado or Clayed sugar, with duties on other kinds in proportion.

Mr. JAMES said, that by adopting the amendment, the country would stultify itself— He quoted Mr. Deacon Hume's opinion, that Emancipation had taken the West Indies out of the category of free trade : and, to show how little the

planters had profited by the compensation, he produced the accounts of his own estate of 1,000 acres of fertile land, which used to yield him 3,0001. a year income, and last year entailed a loss of 6621.: for the 3,0004 a year he had

only received the sum of 4,7004 compensation. The House ought to give the planter fair play, and furnish him with an abundant supply of free labour, the great want. Mr. BROTHERTON and Mr. CURTEIS supported the amendment ; and Mr. VILLIERS, with some sneers at Mr. James's interested motives, argued stoutly against favouring a particular class at the expense of this country, already overburdened— Were the plans of the Government intended for the benefit of the working- classes in the Colonies ? No; but from a dread of the Government here being injured by the West Indian proprietors, the people of this country were to be

deprived of the advantage of cheap sugar. The benefit could not be intended for the working-classes in the Colonies; for at the same time that the duties

were advocated, all possible means were resorted to to increase competition for labour there. The arguments employed tended to perpetuate slavery, by making Foreign Governments believe us insincere in our efforts to put it down.

In Antigua and Barbados, where there are incentives to labour, the Negroes work well; and why should the people of this country suffer because there is a want of that labour in Jamaica which Barbados enjoys ? As many as 11,000,000 people are excluded from the use of sugar. That was an enormous wrong on the people, and yet it was one which the Government treated with indifference; shown in their silence about Mr. Ewart's amendment. There must be some change of policy; or else it would be found, if the Government should have occasion to call upon the people to rally round the principles of the constitution, the people would be also found indifferent.

Mr. WARD supported the amendment, in the interest of the con- sumers; but he rose to correct Mr. Cobden's misconceptions on the subject of the new system of colonization— He firmly believeti, that if the system of colonization bad been fairly carried out in Australia, that it would have supported itself. It was thought neces- sary, however, by the Government, to provide for the Government of small bodies of men as if they were the great communities which they were to be- come; and he agreed that if such proceedings were to be allowed, it mast end in preventing the success of the undertaking. In South Australia and New Zea- land, the mischief was due to the Governors. The proceedings of Captain Hobson in New Zealand were of the most singular nature : he formed a large staff and establishment of police to prevent smuggling, and resorted to other measures which were necessarily entailed with enormous expense; and this country was now paying 60,0001- a year for such extravagances, which could no: at present produce any return. Mr. BERNAL denied that the grant of 20,000,0004 was really com- pensation-

Had he had influence with the West Indians at the time, he would have persuaded them not to take it, anticipating the use which would be made of it

afterwards. He entered into a calculation, that if the Colonial and Foreign du- ties were levelled, what with the duty 3d. a pound, and the rise of price abroad consequent upon the admission of Foreign sugar into our market, the price could not be very much less than it is at present-6d. or 7d. a pound. He de- clared the Jamaica proprietors to be on the brink of ruin : if their decay con- tinue, small properties must be thrown out of cultivation, and grow nothing but brushwood. In the last four or five years, his properties had not returned him a shilling ; and his losses in other ways had been 4,000/. or 5,000/. And if the West Indian market were lost for our manufactures, was it certain that an equivalent would be found elsewhere ? He was asked how long he would continue the protection? In answer, he would say, just so long as the West India Colonies were allowed to continue in their present state of destitution. Supply them with labour, give them the power of importing free labour, and then be would consent to waive the protection.

Dr. BowarNE and Mr. MILNER GinsoN argued for the amendment. Mr. SCARLETT and Mr. GRANTLEY BERKELEY defended the West In- dian interests.

On a division, the numbers were— For the amendment, 50; against, 135; majority, 85.

Mr. HAWES proposed another amendment, to diminish the differen- tial duty— The question lay between prohibition and protection. He would not at once abolish protection; thinking that such changes should be gradual; and his mo- tion would have that effect. He proposed to make the duty on Foreign sugar 34s.; and the degree of protection must not be estimated by the difference be- tween that sum and 24s. on Colonial sugar. If the price of West Indian sugar were at 60s., and from this were deducted 24s. for duty and 7s. for charges, freight, insurance, Ike., 29s. would be the price received by the producer ; whereas the price of Foreign sugar being 54s., deducting 34s. (the duty which he should propose), and the same amount of 7s for charges, &e., there would remain onIftly 13s. for the producer; so that the real amount of protection was not the di erence between 24s. and 34s., but between 29s. and 13s.; and surely that was amply sufficient. He calculated that the price would-be low& red about in the same proportion that:the new Tariff had lowered other prices, and that the change would prepare the West Indians for the ulterior change which they must

sooner or later encounter. If the duty were lowered, the first effect would _ increased consumption ; • for, taking it only at pauper allowance, one ounce a week per head, 270,000 tons would be required for the whole people; a greater quantity than the East and West Indies can produce : so that the grower would not lose, while the revenue would greatly gain.

Mr. GLADSTONE followed Mr. Goulburn in contending that the pro- posed change was too small to have the expected effect on consumption and revenue ; and he vindicated the continuance of the present protec- tion for the West Indies, on the score of restrictions imposed upon them ; as we prevent the West Indian from refining sugar in the co- lony, and from procuring labour at the cheapest rate. He also argued from the encouragement that would be given to slave-labour ; observing, that the reasons formerly urged against change remained in full force.

Mr. LABOUCHERE urged the reduction of duty for the sake of the consumers, and as consistent with Sir Robert Peel's principles ; and he contended, that while we export goods to Brazil, it is impossible to pre- vent her paying us, directly or indirectly, with the produce of slave- labour ; why not, therefore, in sugar. Ile called on Sir Robert Peel for particulars respecting the negotiations in Brazil.

Sir ROBERT PEEL refused to say more than this— The British Government had proposed to treat for the freer admission of Brazilian sugar into the markets of this country, ou the condition that the Government of Brazil should adopt some measures for the purpose of amelio- rating the conditian of the slave population of that empire, and leading, not im- mediately, but gradually and ultimately, to the extinction of slavery in its dominions. But the Brazilian Government interposed the inadmissible preli- minary that the only protection allowed to the British Colonies should be 10 p,:r cent. As to Mr. Ewart's proposal to admit sugar from China and Java, that would be impossible until the duties on Brazilian sugar were lowered, because the existing treaty gives Brazil the right to the admission of her produce on the terms of the most favoured nation. Sir Robert enforced some arguments already used ; and observed, in reply to Mr. Villiers, that if he were actuated only by desire for popularity, he could not do better than at once sacrifice the West Indian interest.

The House divided— For the amendment, 122; against, 203; majority, 81.

The clauses passed through Committee ; and the House adjourned, at one o'clock in the morning.

FACTORIES BELL.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated that it was not the intention of Government to abandon the remainder of the Factories Bill ; and he moved that the bill be recommitted, in order to its alteration.

A very desultory conversation, rather than debate, ensued. Lord ASHLEY approved of the resolution of Government; deeply regretted the loss of the education clauses, by which the vast body of neglected children seemed consigned to an eternity of ignorance—a vast respon- sibility lay somewhere ; and he intimated his determination, that unless a very mighty change should take place in the mutual temper of both parties, he would never be a party to any attempt by mutual con- cession to bring antagonist parties to act together in the same ge- neral plan. Mr. MILNER GIBSON protested against the use of the word " concession " ; attributing the failure of a general system of education to the doctrine that there was some recognized superiority in Churchmen—some divine right to trample on the religious liberty of Dissenters, and to take money from Dissenters to teach the tenets of the Church of England. The lost measure, however, was a very pitiful proposal : it would not have caused the education of a single child in the great city of Glasgow, and of not many more in the manufacturing districts of England than already receive education. Sir ROBERT IN- GLIS and Mr. HINDLEY exhorted Ministers, not ou account of the ob- jections against the particular measure to abandon the general subject of education. Sir GEORGE GREY, Mr. COLQUHOUN, Mr. STUART WORTLEY, and Mr. WYSE, recommended an extension of the Parlia- mentary grant ; Mr. Wyse urging an alteration of the existing Orders in Council regulating the distribution ; and Sir George asking for an answer to the question put by Lord John Russell on Friday last.

In compliance, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated, that Government were not prepared to announce their intention of endeavouring to frame another measure on the same principle as that which had been withdrawn. They intended to avail themselves of the experience of what had oc- curred, and to wait to see what would be the effect of individual ex- ertion. It would, however, be open to Lord John Russell or any other Member to introduce a measure on the subject ; and he would not on the part of Government offer any opposition to such an attempt.

The bill was recommitted ; amendments were made ; and it was ordered to be reprinted.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, Viscount MELBOURNE men- tioned that he had received various petitions against the now defunct Educational clauses of the bill ; adding " I have only, for one, to sat, that I deeply regret the sudden termination of a measure so worthy in itself, and so much desired by a large portion of the community."

THE IRISH ARMS BILL.

The adjourned debate on the motion to go into Committee on the Arms Bill was resumed by the Commons on Monday.

Mr. GISBORNE and Mr WILLIAM Wmusms opposed the bill; Mr. COLQUHOUN defended it.

Lord Join; MANNERS had heard few suggestions of practical mea- sures likely to relieve the present distress and misery in Ireland— He had been in hopes that the speeches of Lord Stanley and Sir James Gra- ham would have afforded indications of some future measures to place Ireland in a more satisfactory state. Lord Stanley, indeed, had expoaed Lord John Russell's pitiful proposal to give the Roman Catholic priests titles or some such thing. Mr. Roebuck had also proposed his remedy—to destroy the Church. Now, some years ago a suggestion was made in a pamphlet published by Lord Alvanley, that the Roman Catholic clergy should be maintained by the State : but two very opposite objections were made to that suggestion, by a Roman Catholic priest—first, that the priests would refuse to be bought; and secondly, that England would refuse to buy them. He was convinced that the priests would not be turned ream their purpose by any such unworthy means ; and that Mr. O'Connell acted from honest motives. Mr. Roebuck said that the Protestant Church of Ireland was the church of the minority : he believed that the present Roman Catholic Church was not the original Church of Ireland. If there was one fact in Irish history more clearly proved than another, it was that the Roman Catholic Church itself was not the Church of the Irisl:nation

..riginally. It was for some hundreds of years totally and entirely independent

M5' " of the Church of Rome, differing in points of importance from it ; and it was not until an English conqueror, Henry the Second, went over to that country, that the Irish Church became connected with the Church of Rome. Whi!e on this part of the subject, Lord John expressed his sincere and hearty hope, that Government would be prepared ere long to reenter into diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome. He should urge this with all the force of his humble ability were there no such country as Ireland, or were it as quiet as it was disturbed ; but in its present state be looked on it as madness to pre- serve these ridiculous restrictions. (" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) On what principle could they fairly refuse to acknowlege the Sovereign of Rome? Was it a religious principle ? Why, they sent an Ambassador to Constantinople—(" Hear, hear 1" from the Opposition)—and expended their blood and treasure to keep the holy sepulchre in the hands of infidels. Why, then, should they not acknowledge a prince whom millions of their fellow- countrymen looked up to as their spiritual head ? He could understand why, at such a period as in the reign of Elizabeth, there might be fears of entering into diplomatic relations with Rome ; but now, after a Continental war in which we had restored the ancient Pontiff of the Vatican, he could not conceive why such a restriction should be persevered in. (Cheers.)

The best writers on Ireland attribute its political condition to its physical destitution : and, certainly, when he looked at the means which apparently offered themselves for the employment of the population, be was surprised that

something upon this point bad not emanated from the Government. He hoped that, instead of attempting to force upon the people such measures as a poor- law uncongenial to their ancient manners and habits. Government would, by an effort to govern on the hereditary feelings and established habits of the country, convert that which was now, be feared, but a legislative, into a real union, and would succeed in making the Irish a loyal, a prosperous, and a contented people. - (Cheers from the Opposition.) Sir WINSTON BARRON and Sir CHARLES NAPIER, Mr. M. J. O'Cox- bms. and Mr. MUNTZ opposed the measure.

Mr. HARDY defended the bill— He quoted encomiums on the Duke of Wellington—" a man raised up by Providence to confirm thrones, to reestablish altars, to direct the councils of England at a crisis most difficult, and to staunch the blood and heal the wounds of the country which gave him birth "—from a pastoral address issued by the -Roman Catholic Bishops at the time of Catholic Emancipation. The address said to the people of Ireland—" Labour in all things to promote the end which the Legislature contemplated in passing this bill for your relief, to wit, the pacification and improvement of Ireland." And, quoting passages from the Donay Testament, he asked if the Roman Catholics could he trusted ? Mr. ELLICE had at first supported the bill; but he explained that he could no longer do1so- The bill was now accompanied by Sir. James Graham's declaration that concession had been carried to the utmost extent. He agreed with Mr. Rue- buck, that the difficulties of the tenure of land and the Church establishment must be met ; and be would devote the property of the Church to the edu- cation of the people. The excitement should be quelled by repressing the party accustomed to ascendancy in the country. To repress either party, mea- sures of precautlon must be taken ; but did any man suppose that Ireland could be governed by coercion bills, without remedy of evils or redress of wrongs ?

Mr. Mums did not regard the Church Establishment as a practical grievance in Ireland; but the prominent error in the Government of Ireland bad been the total disregard exhibited towards the Roman Catholic community. They could not read the history of Ireland with- out feeling that if there was one thing more than another which had successfully confronted the sceptical, the infidel spirit of the age, it was the religious feeling of the people of that country. (Cheers.) Mr. LANE Fox, not expecting to be able next night to bring forward the motion of which be had given notice. proceeded at once to state his -views on the subject of Repeal-

. He bad said, that when Repeal was granted, the Protestant Church - In Ireland must fall. He believed that our Protestant constitution, that ..Protestantism in which Rome made so great a breach in 1829, was as much the law of God as the law that was delivered to the Israelites from Mount Sinai. (Laughter, mingled with expressions of disapprobation.) He would have to quote Scripture in defence of his argument. (" Ohl") Yes, it had been stated to him that if he did so he would be laughed at. (Laugh- ter.) But he had a better opinion of the House. He did not believe that they would treat his quotations in any way but with the reverence which such a subject demanded. He agreed with the right honourable Baronet the Home Secretary—(" Hear, hear!" and laughter)—that the time was arrived when there could be no further concession; for his conviction was that the time was arrived that was pointed to by Christ himself, when he said that the sword Inuit be drawn in defence of the Church. (" Oh, oh ! ") He believed that no- thing but war could now settle the question between this country and Ireland. (" Oh, oh ! ") He believed the time had now arrived, when be that bath no sword must sell his garment and buy one. He went on to quote several pas- sages of Scripture, indicating, as he contended, the relative position of the Pro- testant Church of England and Popery, and the solemn obligations imposed on the former to combat until she overcame the latter : but the noise in the _Rouse, mingled with loud bursts of laughter, put the reporters to much diffi- culty in following him. To show that it was with the Roman power that the '-Church of England had to war, he must go back to the French Revolution. (Laughter.) France was an emanation from the Roman power, when she shook off Christianity altogether ; and it was to Rome that Israel was in sub- jection 14 hen the Saviour came. The Emperor of the French was the seventh head from Rome. (Loud laughter.) He acknowledged Mars as a god- (Laughter)—and a mighty god he found him, for Le left him in the lurch at last. (Great laughter.) It the Reformation was not of God, the Church of England rested on a very slender foundation : if it was, the admission of Roman Catholics to seats in that House could not be justified by any jesuitical arguments whatever. (Continued laughter.) After some more remarks in the same strain, Mr. Fox stated his belief, that Rome was now more terrible than she ever was since the days of the old she-wolf the wet-nurse of Romulus and Remus. (Roars of laughter.) Lord Eldon said, when Catholic Emancipa- tion was passed, that England's sun would set. That act was the abomination of modern legislation ; but " Elias, who must come and restore all things," could not be far off. (Great laughter and confusion, amidst which .& r. fox resumed his seat.) The House divided on Mr. Wyse's amendment— For the amendment, 122; against, 276; majority, 154.

After some further opposition, the House went into Committee ; and resumed immediately ; the Committee to sit again on Friday.

ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS.

Lord WortmEr moved the second reading of the Commons Enclo• sure Bill, on Weduesday-

The main object of the bill was, to place the enclosure of commons under the management and superintendence ofthe Tithe Commissioners; whose qua- lifications not only point them out as suited to the purpose, but their conduct has proved them so. There are from one to two million acres of unenclosed land in this country, which might be brought into cultivation, including the cost of fencing and drainage, for 121. an acre; and the bill would prevent much needless expense and mismanagement : in one instance mentioned by Lord Woraley, the sum of 1,713!. had been laid out where only 500/. would have been necessary. The bill would provide work for labourers, more of whom are out of employment than has been the case for many years past. He had had several applications to extend the operation of the act which he introduced in 1836 for the enclosure of commonable and free tattle ; but there were practical difficulties, especially in a standing order of the House, which requires a cer- tain portion of the land to be set apart for public recreation, though in many instances the commonable land is too far from any populous neighbourhood to make the reserved land of use to any but gipsies. It also might be a question how much land ought to be allotted, or whether any at all should he so. lie proposed, that on the application of two-thirds of the parties interested to en- close the land, the Commissioners should send an Assistant Commissioner to the spot to inquire into the expediency of the enclosure : if it should ap- pear that one-fourth of the persons interested in the land proposed to be en- closed should object to such enclosure, power was given to them by the bill to make their objection within twenty-one days after the application to the Com- missioners, and to give notice of their objection; in which case the Commis- sioners would not make the enclosure until it was ascertained whether it ought to take place or not. The bill would reduce the expense of procuring an en- closure-bill from 4001. or 6001. to 40/. He believed that the measure would confer a great boon on the landed interest, and on the other interests connected with agriculture.

Mr. FERRAND could not agree to the second reading— There was not a single clause which declared in a distinct manner the rights of the poor, and gave to them a portion of the waste lands. Some such mea- sure, however, was necessary to ward off a revolution in this country ; for the increase of machinery throws numbers out of employment month after month. A new combing-machine would throw 100,000 out of work. He recommended, that with the present measure should be incorporated the principle of that which he had proposed for the allotment of waste lands to the poor ; and then be would support it.

The measure was advocated by Sir CHARLES BURRELL and Mr. %want MILES (Somerset.)

Mr. ROEBUCK objected to it— He could not discover from the bill whether common lands were to be divided among the neighbouring hod-owners, to the exclusion of the commonable rights of other neighbours, or whether certain fractional parts were to he given to those who had a right of common. The consequence of such a proceeding would be to render these fragments of land utterly useless to those who pos- sessed them. In a neighbouring country, these rights to minute portions of land created a pauper population, and hence arose all the miseries of that country. He wished the population of this country to depend upon wages and not land. Let the House mark well—the moment the allotment system should be adopted in England, they would have a pauper agrarian population; the most dangerous state for any community to be iu that could be contemplated. He did not wish to are the people confined to small patches of land by the road-side, where they could merely grow a few cabbages, carrots, and goose- berry-bushes. On the contrary, he would have them go forth on the open commons with their wives and children, and enjoy the healthy recreations which the games of cricket and other national pastimes afforded. On reading the bill itself, he was puzzled to find out what it was. He certainly foresaw in it many lawsuits.

Lord JOHN MANNERS thought that Mr. Ferrand's bill would more effectually have protected the rights of the poor— He was as desirous as Mr. Roebuck to promote the healthy sports and re- creations of the people ; and he also desired that the population of this country should be supported by wages to the fullest extent : but it was impossible, in the present state of the country, that a poor working-man could maintain himself and family upon manufacturing wages. He wished the bill to be postponed until the Committee on the Allotment system had made their report.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER defended the measure, as calculated to bring into use large tracts of marsh land, the cultivation of which is pre- vented by rights of property so complicated that no one will go to the expense of getting an enclosure act. The enclosure of land required for the recreation of the peasantry was carefully guarded against in the present bill. Lord SANDON, Mr. Diem, and Mr. AGLIONBY, argued on the same side. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD opposed the mea- sure, as invading the rights of the poor.

The House divided; and the second reading was carried by 64 to 4. THE SAILING COFFINS.

Captain BERKELEY drew attention, on Tuesday, to the danger and inexpediency of reestablishing the old class of ten-gun brigs as sloops of war— Successive Boards of Admiralty, with the concurrence of Sir William Symonds bad condemned the class of vessels in the strongest terms possible. lie denied the expediency of sending out such vessels, which could neither fight, sail, nor swim, to the coast of Africa; where they would have to cope with our great naval rivals the Americans, with whose fast-sailing ships the contrast would he most disadvantageous. The employment of such vessels on our part would lead to an increase of the slave-trade. The slaver, when dis- covered, would sheer off as fast as possible. She would be followed by the American and the English cruiser. The American would soon ontsail her English rival; and as soon as the slaver found that she was only followed by the American vessel, she would hoist English colours; the American would refuse, or would not dare to exercise' the right of search over her ; and the consequence would be that her escape would be successfully accomplished. A crew of sixty-five men were to be stowed in a space of 48 to 50 feet in length, 24 in breadth, and 4 feet 6 inches in height ; and that, too, OD the coast- of Africa, where the thermometer ranged from 80 to 90 degrees, and where the necessity of spreading the rain-awnings perpetually would prevent a free current of air descending the hatchways. The accommodation for the crew, too, was so miserably scanty that the commander of one of these ships had actually removed the benches and tables, and had made his men mess on the floor. Of twenty-two vessels lost in the Navy since 1816, eleven were gun- brigs—all foundered at sea, with all bands on board. He concluded by moving a resolution condemning the use of such vessels.

Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT opposed the motion— If former Admiralty Boards had condemned the use of these vessels, he found no record of the fact;, and by new regulations the vessels had been im- proved and lightened in weight by one ton. Captain Berkeley was mistaken in saying that the present Board were resuscitating ten-gun brigs ; for they were actually reducing them. Nothing but the pressure of the service would have induced the Board to employ the three vessels of this description which were now in commission. They were now building others of a larger class ; and the old ones would soon be extinct, not because they WIC now dangerous,

as he admitted they were formerly, when over-rigged and over-weighted and under-manned, but because they were slow sailers.

The motion was supported by Captain PECHELL, Captain PLUM- RIDGE, and Sir CHARLES NAPIER; and opposed by CHIARIII GORDON On a division, it was negatived, by 75 to 41.

DANISH CLAIMS.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. HAwEs moved-

.' That on Monday next, the House do resolve itself into Committee to con- sider of an address to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty would be gra- ciously pleased to advance to the claimants for losses sustained by the seizure of British ships and cargoes by the Danish Government in 1807, the amount of their respective lone., as ascertained by the Commissioners appointed for the in- vestigation of Danish Claims, and reported upon the 12th day of May 1840; and assuring her Majesty that this House will make good the same."

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER resisted the motion— In 1807, the Government of this country, understanding that the combined Continental powers were about to seize the Danish fleet, required the Govern- ment at Copenhagen to surrender it to this country; and the Danish Govern- ment refusing, the British fleet attacked their capital. The Danish Govern- ment retaliated. They resorted to extraordinary measures of annoyance : first, they compelled all their subjects who were indebted to British subjects to pay the amount into the Danish treasury ; and they confiscated those debts for the service of the Danish Government. In the next place, they seized all the property belonging to British subjects within the limits of their territory, and confiscated it. They also resorted to the ordinary measures of warfare; and on the 19th August, a proclamation was issued at Schleswig, announcing that certain persons were authorized by the " Prince Royal, as Governor-General of the Dutchies of Schleswig and Holstein, on account of the present war between Denmark and England, to grant letters of marque against his Bri- tannic Majesty's ships and all English property found at sea." On the ces- sation of the war, no provision W88 made by the Danish Government for the settlement of these claims. In 1834, the claimants urged a distinction between claims for losses on account of the ordinary operations of war, which they did not press, and claims for loss under extraordinary measures; and with that limit the Government of the day entertained their claims. But the present application went to demand payment for the ships and cargoes which were captured at sea after the declaration of war by Denmark against this country, and at a time when, no doubt, the two parties were engaged in war: and to these claims he was prepared, with those who had preceded him in office, to give his most decided opposition. In the case of the war with the United States, a large amount of British property was seized, after the declaration of war by the States, but while parties in this country were in ignorance of such a declaration having been made ; and the parties who then suffered from the capture of ships and property, and in other cases, had as strong a claim to compensation from the British Government as those on whose behalf this demand was advanced. He could not, therefore, sanction so dangerous a precedent.

Mr. IlAwEs replied— He referred to the care of the Danish ship Orion, in which it was declared by Sir William Scott, that the ship, taken on the 10th October 1807, was captured prior to the declaration of hostilities. It was the understood policy of this country to avoid war; and the very expedition to Copenhagen was undertaken to prevent it. The sum of 1,200,000/. was obtained by the Treasury from the sale of Danish ships in this country, (250,0001. being the amount of the claims,) and the demand ought to be met from that. Dr. Lushington had supported the claim; and the Solicitor-General bad given a professional opi- nion in favour of it, though he now sat silent.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL supported Mr. Gonfourn's arguments ; ex- plaining that his former opinion was given under imperfect information as to the facts in the case submitted to him. Mr. HUTT contended, that what Mr. Goulburn called a declaration of war was simply a pro- clamation warning the Danes that a British armament was on the coast : a formal declation of war was not made by this country until the 4th November. Mr. AGLIONBY and Colonel SIBTHORP advocated the claims.

On a division, the motion was rejected, by 57 to 42.

TOWNSHEND PEERAGE.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. J. WORTLEY moved the second reading of the Townshend Peerage Bill. He was relieved of one difficulty in doing so, since he had a right to assume from the Marchioness's silence that she assented to the measure. He went into a history of the case as it was stated in the House of Lords.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months— He threw over the whole of the evidence, and objected to the bill on general principles. He sympathized with the Townshend family, who saw their here- ditary honours slipping from them through a defect in the law ; but he sym- pathized also with other persons. He never saw a case in which be more lamented the evils that illegitimacy brought upon children who were illegiti- mate, in this case solely and simply from a defect of the law. Who could re- flect upon what kind of a man this Marquis was—his marrying this lady for her money, his conduct to her from the beginning, the aversion she must have felt for him, and not feel that the law of this country was scandalously unjust, not tolerated in any other state in Christendom, if it did not give her the remedy she asked for by divorce ? The law bound her to this man, whom she could not but loathe, and from whom she made every effort to separate herself. She appealed to the courts of law, but they gave her no remedy. She left him, and united herself to one man, towards whom she seemed to have discharged all the duties of a constant wife. She had a family by that man. He felt for her when she said, that their children should be illegitimate was a monstrous hardship ; and he thought he could feel with her in saying, " The law made them illegitimate,' the law shall make them legitimate : the law that made the Marquis of Townshend my husband shall make him the father of my children." He objected to the bill as a partial measure, granting to a Peer's family a remedy which they did not grant to other subjects. Did not Mr. Wortley know the case of a certain Baronet, with an estate better than that of half the House of Lords, and with a family better also than half the House of Lords. having a child evidently not his own, and yet being refused even a divorce? No remedy was given to him to bastardize that child. A. bill had been introduced in another place founded on the Scotch law, which provided as a general remedy foe same rule which formed the ground of this special measure : then why should not the Townshend family wait till the bill came down, and then take advantage of the general law ?

On a division, the second reading was carried, by 153 to 49 ; and the bill was referred to the Committee of Selection.

On Thursday, the Earl of LEICESTER corrected some misstatements— The supposition that the Marchioness of Townshend had given her assent to the bill was unfounded. The communication which Lord Brougham read in the other House was not from the Marchioness, as his words implied, but from an agent—en honest man, be believed, but still an agent interested for the Marquis. It bad been mistakenly said that no property depended on the issue ; but the would deprive him of the entailed property, to which he had always consideret. himself entitled. With respect to the evidence, a great deal of it was founded upon mere hearsay. The Earl was proceeding to criticise the character of some of the witnesses, when he checked himself ; observing, that perhaps he had better not take that course. Further remarks he reserved for the Com- mittee on the bill. [ The Earl seemed much affected, and he sat dawn amid very general cheering.]

MISCELLANEOUS.

THE DUKE OF CUMBERLAND. Mr. BLEWITT asked on Monday, whether, consistently wills the constitution, the King of Hanover could exercise his con- flicting rights as a Foreign Potentate and at the same time as a Peer of the realm and Councillor of the Queen ; quoting Blackstone to show that the duties were incompatible. The ATTOR NE V- ENERAL thought that he should best discharge his public duty by declining to answer the question.

SHORT PARLIAMENTS. In the House of Commons, on Monday, Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the Act of the 18th Geo. 1., statute 11, c. 38, for extending the duration of Parliament to seven years. He reviewed the several acts on the subject, and proposed to recur to the period fixed in the time of William and Mary—three years. If the Members of that House had been more subjected to popular opinion by a shorter tenure of their seats, a great part of that unjust and mischievous legislation which bad so oppressed and injured the people would never have been ventured upon. Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion. Sir JAMES. GRAHAM briefly defended the existing system ; remarking, that practically the average duration of Parliaments was not more than four years. On a division, the motion was rejected, by 46 to 23.

COUNTY VOTES AND THE POST-OFFICE. Mr. AGLIONBY said, on Wed- nesday, that the new Registration of Voters Act enables notices of claim to county votes to he sent through the Post-office, provided they were stamped with a seal specially furnished to all the money-order offices for that purpose : but on Tuesday notices of claim were taken to the Post-offices and refused, the Postmasters saying they bad received no instructions, and been furnished with no stamps. It was feared that many persons would in consequence be disfran- chised. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that on Tuesday even- ing the Secretary of State for the Home Department wrote to the Postmas- ter-General on the subject.

FORGED SIGNATURES TO ANTI-CORN-LAW PETITIONS. Mr. CHRISTOPHER drew attention, on Monday, to a petition presented from Hepworth, an agri- cultural town in Lincolnshire, on the 9th May, praying for repeal of the Corn and Provision-laws, and purporting to have 213 signatures. An inquiry had taken place ; and Mr. Christopher read a declaration, which had been read before the Magistrates, stating, that "only three persons had signed knowing its prayer, and ten more bad signed because they were informed it prayed for cheap tea and sugar : one of the three also was now a prisoner in the House of Correction, and seventy or eighty were the names of parties not known in the parish at all ; while the residue of names were positively forged." He moved for a Committee of inquiry on the subject. Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND had; written to some of the parties whose names were appended to the petition, and their answers confirmed the statement of Mr. Christopher. The Doncaster Anti-Corn-law Association had sent up the petition, and they said that they had employed a very respectable person to obtain signatures, and their secretary could not guess what had induced that person to commit such a fraud. (Laughter.) The agent himself, however, stoutly denied the fraud ; adding, that most of the names he had obtained were given under a promise that he would not disclose them, for that they were fearful of the fact being discovered. Sir George supported the motion ; which was agreed to.

THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND BILL was taken in Committee in the House of Lords on Thursday. Lord ABERDEEN (who spoke so low as to be almost inaudible) was understood to announce these amendments-1st, That the ob- jections to a presentee were to made by a parishioner, "being a member of the congregation ; 2d, That the objections should be confined to gifts and quali- fications, having reference to the particular parish to which the presentee was appointed; and3d, That in case of rejection, the patron should have six months for the presentation of a new presentee. The House then resumed, the Com- mittee to sit again.

THE CANADA WHEAT BHA. was read a second time in the House of Lords- on Thursday; to be committed on the 3d July, and discussed then.

IRISH SPIRIT-EUTIES. On Wednesday, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE- QUER gave notice, that on Friday he should move to repeal the additional. Excise-duty of Is. per gallon imposed on spirits in Ireland ; which, he admit- ted, had led to a progressive increase in offences against the Excise-laws.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, Lord MONTEAGLE, proposing certain resolutions, expressed a hope that Government would make the retrogade movement effectual, and act upon the principle that the only proper limit of a duty on spirits is the greatest amount that can be collected with least diminu- tion from checked consumption or illicit distillation. With that view, he re- commended the repeal, not only of the Is. but of the 4d. previously added ; fixing the duty at 2s. 4d., at which it stood in 1834. The Duke of W ELLINA- TON promised attention to the suggestion. The motion seems to have fallen to the ground.

IRISH IN THE ABMY. Questioned by Mr. WYSE, on Thursday, Sir HENRY HARDINCE denied that any new order had issued to ascertain tho number of Irishmen in each regiment of the Army. A return is made yearly,. showing from what part of the country every soldier comes.