Debates an Aprotetbirtss fit varlfament.

REFORM OF THE REPRESENTATION.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, in anticipation of Mr. Hume's motion, a number of petitions were presented in favour of extension of the suffrage, he. Among them, one was presented by Lord ASHLEY frorn a body of persons who represented themselves as delegates from 200,000 artisans and mechanics in London: although not concurring in the views of the petitioners, he claimed to state the substance of the document The petition represented 200,000 mechanics and artisans in London; two_ thirds of whom might be said to be in fall employment, and one-third not They complained of the usurpation of the land and political power by the aris_ tocmcy ; of the restriction of the circulating medium to gold; of the competition of untaxed machinery, foreign imports, and the labour of the inmates of work- houses and gaols; and of the neglect of the Legislature to make arrangemento for the employment of the destitute. As a remedy for these evils, they suggested, that as there was a large extent of unoccupied land in the country, the Govern_ meat, as a first step, should institute home colonies. They also asked for a Labour. protectionBoard, with a member of the Cabinet for its President, a graduated property-tax in lieu of all other taxes, fixed limits for a day's work and a day's wages, repeal of the Union between England and Ireland, and the adoption of the People's Charter.

Mr. Hume rose to move the following resolution, somewhat altered from the terms of his original notice-

" That this House, as at present constituted, does not fairly represent the po. pnlation, the property, or the industry of the country ; whence has arisen peat and increasing discontent in the minds of a large portion of the people: and it is therefeee expedient, with a view to amend the national representation' that the elective franchise shall be so extended as to include all householders; that votes shall be taken by ballot; that the duration of Parliaments shall not exceed three years; and that the apportionment of Members to population shall be made more equal."

At the beginning of his speech, Mr. Hume referred to the spectacle exhibited on that and the two previous days—the presentation of so many petitions; and he took occasion to deny that the petitions had been got up by any party connected with the Committee, at whose instance he brought forward this motion: there had been no organization whatever. He glanced at the state of public feeling in this country—the general dis- position, amid the disturbance of Europe, to maintain order, and especially the maintenance of order on the 10th of April last. It was for the House, how- ever, to consider whether those who had manifested at that crisis such a determination to obtain an extension of the suffrage, had just cause of com- plaint. He believed that if the Reform Bill had not been granted, much more serious disturbances would have happened. Our position, however, had materially altered within the last three or four years; events had changed the condition and relative situation of the working classes with other classes in this country. We formerly boasted, that while in other countries despots maintained themselves by large armies, we could maintain the peace and wel- fare of the country by the agency of Parliament, without the aid of military mea sure; But whereas we were formerly a civil nation we have now become a mili- tary nation, with a great expenditure; and the discontent in the country has be- come general. It was upon that ground that he felt it to be his duty to submit to the House what he thought to be a remedy for existing evils.

Reverting to the Reform Act of 1832, he contended that it had failed to answer all the purposes for which it was intended. Parliament purports to be an engine for governing a constitutional country, all classes being represented: is that so flow? Taxation and representation should go together. Every man should have his share in sanctioning the laws by which he is governed—the sole difference between a freeman and a slave. The Crown, Lords, and Commons, form but the beat method of giving effect to that constitutional government: the House of Commons, therefore, ought to be invested with the highest authority and interest in the country: no act of the Crown ought to be valid without ita sanction; and the large classes of the community ought to be represented. But what is the fact? Five out of every six male adults In this country are without any voice in the election of the representatives to that House. The population of Great Britain was 18,500,000 in 1841 : out of the male adults above twenty-one, taking the average—some individuals being registered for more than three, four, or five, different places—the number of registered electors does not amount to more than from 800,000 to 850,000. All others, then, of the 5,000,000 or 6,000,000 adults who have not the privilege are placed in an inferior situation, and deprived of that right which by the constitution they are entitled to enjoy. At eighteen, or even sixteen, a man can be drawn for the militia and called out to quell riots. Yet classes of workmen distinguished for their industry, intelli- gence, and ability, are excluded from the franchise. Mr. Hume cited the oath taken by Cabinet Ministers to maintain the peace of the country, and, in the words of Earl Grey when introducing the Reform Bill in 1831, maintained that the way to do so is by giving to the people "a full, vigorous, and efficient" repre- sentation. He quoted various definitions of household suffrage: Sir Thomas Smith's dic- tum, in the time of Elizabeth, that in one way or other "every Englishman is intended to be present in Parliament, either in person or by procuration," &c.; the declaration of the Hampden Club in 1814, that every adult male who paid taxes had a right to vote for Members of Parliament; with other declarations of a similar kind. He then quoted a number of statistical details from various sources, showing how partially and unequally the franchise is distributed. Hunt- ingdon, Westmoreland, and Rutland, with 26,000 adult males and 9,000 electors, return 6 Members, and thus neutralizes the 6 Members of Middlesex, West Yorkshire, and South Lancashire with a population of 816,000 adult males and 73,000 electors. The Tower Hamlets, with a population of 400,000, are neutral ized by Harwich, with a population of 8,700. Some large towns have no repre- sentatives. Mr. Hume cited statistics advanced by the late Mr. O'Connell, showing the scanty representation of Ireland; and others from a pamphlet by Mr. Alexander Mackay, illustrating the general inequality. To prove how unequally different interests and populations are balanced in the House of Commons, Mr. Mackay took twenty-two boroughs, the aggregate population of which was but a fraction above 100,000, and found that they had 42 representatives in the House of Commons,—that is to say, one Member for every 2,390 persons; while twenty other cities and borough; with an aggregate population of 3,780,000, also re- turned 42 Member; being one Member for about every 90,000 persons, "The Metropolis, including all its Parliamentary districts, with a population of 2,900 000, is represented by sixteen Members in Parliament. The eight boroughs of Bridgenorth, Honiton, Harwich, Thetford, Richmond (Yorkshire), Totnes, Stat.- ford, and Lyrnington, with an aggregate population falling short of 40,000, return the same number of Members." One evil is the great diversity of the franchise. Although the ten-pound rental was the standard for boroughs, and the forty-shilling freehold the standard for counties, there were, in truth, no fewer than eighty-five different kinds of franchise. It is scarcely possible to appreciate the confusion, the delay, and the expense that such a system produces. What the House ought to do, is to ren- der the suffrage as simple, as general, as easily obtained, and as easily defended as possible. Mr. Hume enumerated many varieties of the franchise,—by estate m fee, occupation, marriage settlement, joint tenancy, promotion to a benefice, kaseholding, corporate right, &c. Want of confidence in the representation makes the people indifferent to the acts of the Legislature; and with that indifference the public expenditure is increasing. • Mr. Home explained, that in his notice the word "all was unintentionally omitted; and he now supplied this definition of household suffrage—" That every such person of full age, and not subject to any mental or legal incapacity, who shall have occupied a house, or part of a house, for twelve months, and shall have been rated to the poor for that period, shall be registered as an elector; and every lodger shall have the right to claim to be rated to the poor, and after such rating and residence for twelve months he shall be registered as an elector." There would be no difficulty in carrying. out this object. The apparatus all ex- isted. By the present law, every house is rated to the poor; and the act confer- ring this suffrage would provide that every man who so desired might, upon en- tering upon the occupation of part of a house have a right to be rated for a por- tion, whatever it might be, of the poor-rate assessed upon that house. Thus, re- gistration and residence both of which are important, would be secured, and a line would be drawn between the mere vagrant and the worthy and educated man who is now excluded from the suffrage merely on account of the nature of his oc- cupation. It might be argued that this proposal would not keep up the distinction between personal rights and property. He did not wish to draw that distinction too tight; but he mast say, that by the law as it stands too much attention has been paid to bricks and mortar and too little to brains, and the time has now come when common sense should prevail.

Mr. flume went over all the several parts of his proposition, maintaining that each is proper and expedient. Not desiring change for the sake of change, he would not cut up the country into electoral districts, and he would not disturb the distribution of Members for England, Ireland, and Scotland. He thought that duration of Parliaments for three years would afford sufficient control over Members. There is no property qualification in Scotland, and he did not see any reason why the English and Irish should not be put on the same foot- ing. He quoted copiously from Lord John Russell's speech on the 1st of March 1831, introducing the Refmm Bill. Lord John then held that it was necessary to reestablish confidence and sympathy between the House and its constituents; not wishing to encumber that particular measure with other matters, he left such qpestions as ballot and the duration of Parliaments to future consideration; and he closed with this declaration—" It is the only way calculated to insure perma- nanoyto that constitution which has so long been the admiration of foreign nations, op account of its popular spirit; but that admiration cannot be made to exist much longer, unless, by an infusion of new popular spirit, you show that you are determined not to be the representatives of small classes or particular interests, but that you will form a body which, representing the people—which, springing from the people—which, sympathizing with the people—can fairly call upon the people to support any future burdens, and to Mangle with any future difficulties you may have to encounter, confident that those who ask them so to do are united heart and hand with them, and look only, like themselves, to the glory and wel- fare of England."

Carrying these views further forth, Mr. Hume maintained that the time is corning when it will be necessary either to coerce the people or to grant them civil rights. This country had incurred a debt of 600,000,0001. or 800,000,0001. by the late war to stem the demand for popular institutions; a weight of taxation that would have been avoided if Parliamentary Reform had been granted before 1793 by the arch-traitor to Reform, Mr. Pitt. In conclusion, Mr. Hume promised that if he were permitted to bring in a bill, he should willingly submit it to revi- sion in the details.

Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion.

Mr. HENRY Dnuatatown assented to much that had fallen from Mr. Hume: the subjects now brought before the House had occupied his own attention many years since, and had even drawn from him a pamphlet in 1829. On the, other hand, he could not refrain from criticizing flaws in Mr. flame's plan and arguments.

Sometimes Mr. Hume had seemed to regard the Parliament as the Legislature, and other times as the Executive body:: he seemed at one time to regard the fran- chise as a trust, at other times as a right. The word "committee he seemed to use in quite a new sense; as if a Committee could be appointed to stand in the place of the Sovereign, and perform acts—draw up resolutions and the like—in the name of the People; as if, in fact, it could "send for" him and give him the highest important trust. As to enlarged franchise, Mr. Drummond thought the people entitled to it as a necessary step after the Reform Bill; a bill which he hated when it passed, and hated stilL He had no objection either to triennial Parliaments or to annual ones—he didn't care which, for both had been the prac- tice of the country; and he had no faith in new speculations. If "quinquennial" ones were proposed, he should object, because they were quinquennial and new,— reasons quite sufficient. The other points he would not go into in detail; but he ridiculed the representation of particular classes,—an idea the absurdity of which would appear the moment it was carried out. He suggested the extension.of the suffrage to every possessor of any definable sort of property. There was no prin- ciple in an amount—none in 101. that was not found in 91. 19*. 6d. u

Lord Jonas RUSSELL rose early in the debate, because' he thought the House entitled to an early explanation of his views, noi only with regard to this motion, but others akin to it. Mr. Hume had alluded to the petitions: it did not appear, however, that, ex- cept for the provisions calletruthe People's Charter ''' any large number of peti- tions had been presented in the early part of the see!Sion; and Lord John imputed the present movement in• great part to the induatrious misrepresentation of a speech which he made some time ago—it having been represented that he said the people required no reforms. "I have seen this done with each care, that, in some placards, all the words I used implying My belief that reforms ought to be made were carefully expunged, and in some cases asterisks were put in their place. What I said on that occasion was this= My belief is, that the middle and working classes desire that there shall be a gradual progress in reform; that this House should give its attention to the questions that are before it; and that in securing the peace and quiet of the country rests their true interest and pros- perity.' ("No, no!"frone Mr. Cobden.) Of coarse I do not deny that which has been repeated over and over again, and which is made the staple of the charge against me—that I said that I did not believe the middle and working classes were in favour either of the People's Charter or of the plan of reform pro- Posed by the honourable Member for Montrose. But that statement has been used as if it was a declaration against all reform, although, after having excluded these specific measures, I went on to say that the people desired a gradual pro- gress in reform. In using the word 'reform' I excluded no species of reform : I excluded neither Parliainentary reform nor fiscal reform, nor any other reforms that it might be useful to adopt." Knowing all this, Mr. Hame ought not to have moved a resolution, in Marylebone, imputing to Lord John the opinion that tLe

people required no reforms: Mr. Hume ought to have declared that that resolution was not consistent with the fact.

Mr. HUME—" It was consistent with the fact, and I knew it." Lord Jails Hussmr.r, continued without noticing the interruption. He ob- served, that at many of the meetings called to support Mr. Ilume's motion, in large towns, the Chartists carried their own proposition. So that the movement was in a great degree founded OD a misrepresentation of what Lord John had said; and in the next place it was not a movement in support of Mr. flume's motion. Mr. Hume admitted that the effect of the Reform Bill had been mainly instru- mental in preserving the peace of this country daring the present year. " I ac- cept that testimony of the honourable gentleman as a proof that the plan of re- form to which he referred has been useful in averting discontent and in preserving tranquillity, and that it has therefore been a great and effectual measure of re- form. The honourable gentleman, indeed, afterwards said, that if the people, acting on their present rights of election, chose those who would fitly represent them— if they attended themselves to their own interests, in the manner in which he thought they ought to do—they had the means in their own power of carrying into effect measures which would be most conducive to the public benefit. Why, if that be the case, I think it may make honourable gentlemen pause before they admit the necessity of any great measure of reform to enable the people to obtain a fair representation in the House; because, according to the honourable gentle- man's own statement, it was only by their mistake of their true interests that the present House does not fairly represent them, and therefore they have an oppor- tunity, at a general election, of being fairly represented. The electors, indeed„.. may reply to the honourable gentleman, that they have this power, but that they do not choose to use it in the manner he recommends; that they have a better view of their true interests than the honourable gentleman himself has—(Load cries of " Hear, hear! " from the Opposition); and that they have chosen their present representatives believing—according to their own notions of public policy—that the views of those representatives are sound, although they may not be similar to the views entertained by the honourable Member for Montrose." Mr. Hume began his complaints to the House by a declaration that every man who is a contributor to the taxes in any way should have a share in the repre- sentation and that every man of full age who in any way contributes to the taxes has positively a right to vote. " Why, if this is a true position, there will be an end of all disputes about the matter; there will be an end to any question as to the proposition of the honourable gentleman—his limitations, his restric- tions, and his qualifications; arid he will have nothing to do but by an act of Parliament, to acknowledge that right which he says exists in every male person of full age, and at once admit them to vote. But the honourable gentleman, in his plan, does not make this proposition. He proposed to include all persons with a fixed residence, even lodgers, placed on the rate-book for the relief of the poor. Why, this is a restriction, a qualification, and a condition which, if the honour- able gentleman was right in his former proposition, you have not the smallest title to impose." It was a very vague qualification, which would exclude large classes—such as sons living with their fathers. And if no man had a right to vote without being rated or registered, that would exclude come two or three millions. What then became of Mr. flume's complaint that those are now ex- cluded who have a constitutional right to the franchise?

"I must say at once, that I differ entirely from the honourable gentleman as to the foundation of his proposed representation. In my opinion, that which not only every man of full age but the whole population of the kingdom have a right to, is the best government and the best kind of representation which it is possible for the Legislature to give them. The main objects of our institutions is good government and the welfare of the people; and we ought not, for the sake of some abstract principles, to lose sight of that great object." This country forma a great and singular exception to the sagacious remark of Tacitas, that a government• compounded of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, might be easily raised, but would be difficult to maintain. "Whenever I have had to discuss or treat of this subject., I have always felt—having had much to do since 1819 with proposing some measures of reform and promoting others—how nice a matter it was to alter in any way the adjustment of the different parts of the constitution. I remem- ber, on the night before I was about to bring forward the Reform Bill, speaking to an American of distinguished talents, who then represented his country at this

court: I said to him, cannot but feel great anxiety in proposing to make an alteration in a constitution which has lasted so long.' Yes,' he replied, 'so long and so strong.' That is in fact the truth with regard to our constitution. It has lasted long; it has been very strpng; and we should therefore apply ourselves with the utmost care and deliberation, and I will also say with the greatest anti-' ety, to any plan which proposes to alter the representative body in this House. "Let us see, then whether a Parliament elected by the householders and lodgers would be a better Parliament, would afford a better representation of the people, than the present Parliament. It appears to me, that if you establish a really household suffrage, the objection to which the honourable gentleman alluded —that you get a representation of brick and mortar—applies; and it would be a ground of complaint that many persons superior in property and intelligence to the small householders were excluded from the franchise. I do not think it is an objection which can be fairly made to the present mode of suffrage; because that mode makes a choice amongst the householders—it takes property of a certain amount, it takes rating combined with that property, and there fixes the franchise. But if you would admit all householders without any other qualifica- tion, I think such a plan is open to the objection. But then, if you are to make it more general—if you are to make the suffrage universal—I do not see that, having universal suffrage, you could well act upon the plan proposed by the honourable Member, of keeping up the present cities and all but the smaller boroughs of the country; you could hardly avoid that division into equal districts, of equal population, which it is the proposal of the advocates of the Charter to introduce. Now, if I am asked whether such a division into districts and univer- sal suffrage—the suffrage of every male person of full age—would give a better representation of the .people at large than the present, and more conducing to the people's interest, I must deny that it would do so. You would have a great number of representatives of the large towns— some 50 representatives for this Metropolis, some 10. or 20 for other large towns—all of them imbued with the spirit of those towns and the excited feel- ings of the population of those towns; but on the other band, destroying the smaller boroughs and the middle-sized towns in the country. You would have representatives of the agricultural class of a totally different character; firmly • attached, perhaps, to the present institutions, but unwilling to adopt reforms which this House, and other Houses of Parliament framed under the Reform' Act, have been willing to adopt. I should fear, with a representation Re composed, of men totally differing in their political views—one too much inflamed with ideas. of extensive amelioration, the other adverse to progress and improvement— you would have a collision and a contest which would be dangerous to its opera-. tion, inl above all would not fairly represent the country which it would affect to represent. It is very easy to say—and nothing is more at hand than the arith- metic which the honourable Member has used= Here are half-a-dozen boroughs with 200 or 300 voters in each, and here are half-a-dozen great districts each as Marylebone and Lambeth; so that you find a million of persons with no more representatives than a few hundreds have.' The arithmetic is perfectly clear and plain; but when you come to examine the operation of the system, and the reason- of those differences, you will find, I think, that the representation upon the whole' is better from your having a large variety of that kind, than it would be if you had • one sole kind of representation, and that a representation of numbers." Lord John:' cited the opinion expressed by Mr. Praed at the time of the Reform Bill, ini moving that two Members be. given to each borough in schedule B: Mr: Prue& argued most ably, that men of retired habits, who would not face a large body of constituents—who might be men of science, men of talent and information, men of historical knowledge—would be sent to Parliament by those small boroughs; but that they were not people of property in counties who were likely to be sent by any division of a county, nor persons of those opinions or those stirring habits who would be likely to be sent -by great towns. And on another occasion, Sir Robert Peel used a similar argument, calling the small boroughs " the ballast of the state." " Sir, I thought those were just sentiments. I said at the time that I thought they were founded on just views of policy; but I conceived that, in giving forty members to the boroughs in schedule B, and giving, I think, sixty members to other small boroughs, we were providing sufficiently for that class of representatives. I have not in any way changed my opinion that this country would not be fairly represented—that, considering that this is a country. which Las not only commerce and agriculture, but which has in it men of every kind of information, men who have studied the constitution of their country—that there are many in active and many not in active life whose intelligence fits them to be representatives in Piutiament, but whose habits do not induce them to seek or qualify themselves for either county representation or the representation of such places as Manchester or Birmingham—the country would not be fitly represented if we merely had representation attached to a certain amount of 'population. Now, if I am at all right in that view, it disposes very much of the whole of that argument which is put forth in the petitions, that small places return as many members as large towns—that you can make out that there are 10,000 votersin one place and only BOO in another. If I am right in saying that mere numbers ought not to constitute the basis of your representation—that you should endeavour rather to have your House of Commons like the country itself, composed of various classes and men of various occupations—if I am right in that, the whole of this argument founded on the disparity of numbers falls at once to the ground." But Mr. Home did not at all get rid of the disparity : under his plan, there would still be ten or twenty thousand constituents in one borough, and three or four thousand in another; furnishing the same ground of complaint on the score of disparity. The discon- tented might still call his plan "a mockery of reform." It would not settle the ques- tion: the advocates of "the People's Charter," who are at all events more nume- rous than his constituents, would still ask that every male should have a vote, and would still ask for equal electoral districts, which he does not pretend to establish.

"As to duration of Parliaments, I think what you want is, not the power of dismissing members when they behave ill, as the honourable Member supposes, for cases with respect to the dismissal of members are not always on that ground. Every one knows that Mr. Burke was rejected at Bristol, not on account of his behaving ill, but on aceount of the support he gave to civil and religious liberty in various measures that came before the House. It is not, as I think, a frequent change and the dismissal of the servants of the people that you ought to have in view; but, along with something like confidence between representatives and their con- stituents, and a free interchange of sentiments, you should have in view some kind of stability in the policy of the country. That, I believe, is secured by the present mode of having Parliaments endure at the longest for six years. But I think, if you took a period of three years, you would find your whole constitution unsettled; that the period of three years just gave time enough for peolle to con- sider that they would make a change, while there would not be, as there might if it were yearly, a sort of renewal of a trust which they would be ready and willing to make. I think that if we are to have any change in this respect, it would be better to fix upon one year than three: indeed, I am of opinion that the proposal to limit the duration of Parliaments to three years is about the worst that can be made. (Laughter.) Although I once gave an opinion in this House in favour of Parliaments being limited in duration to five years, I am satisfied with their duration as at present limited by law, and I certainly will not give my vote in favour of a proposal to alter it."

Lord John maintained, that since the passing of the Reform Act Parliament has obeyed the wishes of the people; citing in proof, Negro Emancipation, the opening of the trade with China, the Tithe-commutation, the Marriage Act, reform of the Municipal Corporations, recent changes in the Tariff, and repeal of the Corn-laws —all proving that the House is not under the dominion of the aristocracy. Al- though such great and important measures have been carried, it must be remem- bered that debates are proportionally protracted, and that the difficulty of carry- ing measures in a single session of Parliament has increased.

Lord John quoted passages from his letter to the electors of Stroud, in 1839, to show that even at the time when be was most attacked for regarding the Re- form Bill as a final measure, he had spoken very differently: one extract would show the spirit of what be said—" There are doubtless many defects in the Reform Ac i- which require to be remedied. The ten-pound franchise is too much fettered by regulation; the annual registration is made a source of vexation and expense; the freemen might be made the pride of the working classes instead of their op- probrium. But changes such as these, introduced when the public mind was pre- pared for them, and the proposals had been duly weighed, differ entirely from the proposals to found a new Reform Bill on the basis of triennial Parliaments, house- hold suffrage, and vote by ballot." "From 1839 to the present day, I believe that neither the honourable Member for Montrose nor any of those who concur with him in opinion on this subject have thought it necessary to moot the question of the constitution of the House of Com- mons. For myself also, neither officially as a Minister of the Crown nor when I sat on the other side of the House, have I thought it necessary to introduce any measure of reform with reference to that subject. But, now that several other questions are in the course of settlement, and seeing that public attention is drawn to the question of Parliamentary reform, I think that a time may come—perhaps it is net distant—when reforms of the nature to which I adverted in 1839 may be usefully introduced and carried into effect for the improvement of the representa- tion. I think that the inquiry which we propose to effect by the bill introduced in the present session with respect to certain boroughs in which it is alleged, and indeed has been proved, that elections have been carried by corrupt practices, may give us further information than we now possess as to the character of the free- men, and will enable us to determine whether some boroughs ought to be alto- gether disfranchised, and whether we ought to adopt with respect to others the course which has been taken in the case of Great Yarmouth, namely, that of dis- franchising the freemen alone. I, however, would be sorry to adopt either of those courses without accompanying measures. I would not wish to see the number of the members of this House reduced by the disfranchisement of boroughs; and I would be sorry to see the freemen disfranchised without establishing some other right of voting, by means of which the traders and mechanical industry of towns would be represented as they formerly were by the freemen, the retention ofmehose right of voting I have more than once admitted to be a defect in the Reform Act." 111r. Home bad rtade it a complaint that there should be so many as eighty- five varieties of suffrage: Lord John, on the contrary, thought that the old va- rieties of the suffrage had been reduced by the Reform Bill to too great an uni- formity: He thought that by making the franchise depend in some cases upon proof of the investment of money in the savings-banks, he might be able to obtain a class of voters in whose prudence and good conduct we might depend. ".1 am not disposed to say, as I was not when most attacked, that you cannot usefully and beneficially improve the Reform Act; but if honourable gentlemen ask me whether I am prepared at the present moment to introduce any bills for that pur- pose, I must say that I do not intend to introduce any considerable measure of that ldnd." A very large measure of reform was adopted not more than sixteen years ago • it cannot be denied that the House has carried measures of great pub- lic importance; and he produced a return showing, by the divisions of the House, that it had not acted against the opinions of the people. " I Sad on the question

of the limitation of the Income-tax to one instead of three years, the number of electors represented by the majority was 668,038; the number represented by the

minority was 346,689. In the division of the 20th of March on Mr. Hume's motion for a redaction of the men in the Navy, the number represented by the majority was 716,278; the number by the minority 171,317. On the motion for reducing the men in the Army, the numbers represented by the majority were 600,788; the minority, 165,255. Now after this it cannot be said that the small boroughs overpower the large constituencies." With regard to time, the present is not the moment to risk great organic changes. rep rd such dangerous theories are afloat as some of those which we have heard tonight broached in the petition presented by the noble Lord the Member for Bath—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear!")—when views of capital, of property, and of labour, which I believe to be most erroneous, are afloat--I be- lieve, Sir, that that fact constitutes one reason why I should hesitate as to mak- ing at this particular time any great change." Lord John denied the popular and common charge that the 'Government is carried on for the benefit of the aristocracy: the people at large enjoy the benefits of government On the other hand, be could not allow that persons belonging to the aristocracy are to be de- prived of their right of assuming their part in the direction of public affairs and in the debates of Parliiment. He could never allow that because a man happens to be called Stanley or Howard, he is not as well entitled as one who bears a name less ennobled or less illustrious in the annals of his country. The events that have happened in other countries of Europe within the last few months ought to prove that our free constitution has been of inestimable advan- tage. " The stability you have shown amid these changes—the mode in which the institutions of the country have operated—have excited the admiration, not only of those who are attached to the fortunes of this country, but even of those who, having no connexion with LIB, like to see public order and public peace main- tained. Nay, the position you have thus been enabled to preserve has brought you the respect of those who are hostile to the name and fortunes of England. I hope, then that this House will do nothing to lose that admiration—to forfeit that respect! You have stood like a great sea-mark, the guide of those tossed in the tempest. I treat that you will maintain that position, preserve that charac- ter. I trust that you will not choose this time to accede to a vague and indefi- nite proposal for reform—a proposal which apparently stops short of the People's Charter, but which cannot actually stop short of the enactment of that great change. I hope that you will rather think that it is due to the institutions which you have the happiness to cherish—that it is due to the other branches of the Legislature—and that it is due above all to that great people whom it is your honour to represent, to gip a steadfast and determined negative to the motion be- fore you." (Much cheering.) Mr. W. J. Fos thought that the broad question whether the industrial masses of this country were or were not represented in the House of Com- mons, had scarcely been touched on either by Lord John Russell or Mr. Drummond. From figures quoted lziy Mr. Fox it appeared that not more than 60,000 of the 850,000 electors of the kingdom are working men. He marshalled an array of facts drawn from the increase of newspapers, mechanics institutions, the works pub- lished by the booksellers the visiters of museams and reading-rooms, and the de- positors of savings-bank;, to bear him oat in his assertion that the people are capable of and now entitled to a large increase of the suffrage. He ran over the names of writers obscure and unknown in the House of Commons, but the rich, strength of whose English writings would enter into the estimate of the future historian of these times.

Mr. Fox had known the working classes in the best position for becoming ac- quainted with them—not as a master, not as a manufacturer, not as apatron, but as one of themselves; and be had found them honestly intelligent, industrious, and well-disposed, possessed of those virtues which keep alive one's faith in hu- man nature, and which, to him at least, were ample reasons for admitting them to participate in what, after all, was no great boon—that of having a voice in the selection of Members of Parliament There was no fear of the working people electing their own class to represent them; they would not do so, unless they had some strong inducement. How many of the working class had been elected in France? Why, about thirty-eight, out of nine hundred representatives. What would the working people do if they had votes in this country? They would look to the men who are local benefactors, and whose names have a national reputa- tion; and in doing so they would elect the men whom it is really desirable to have in the House of Commons.

Mr. DISRAELI desired to know how it was that so little of a prominent

feature of the meetings called by Mr. Hume and his friends—the topic of ,

Government expenditure and extravagance—had been introduced into the speeches of Mr. Hume and Mr. Fox? The country has for four months been told that an enormous increase of taxa- tion and in the expenditure of the Government are the growing abuses of late years. What are the facts? The ordinary revenue of 1828 was forty-nine mil- lions; that of 1848, but forty-seven millions: moreover, the revenue of 1828 was raised from a population of less than twenty-three millions' and that of 1848 from one of thirty millions. Taking the taxation at a sum per head, the pressure of 1828 was 21. 12s. 2d. on each person, and that of IL 10s. and a fraction per head: but again, the wealth of each person is greater individually: now than it was in 1828. What becomes of the fiscal plea for political change, in presence of theft facts ? Mr. Home's advocacy of his new franchise went to the extent of universal suffrage. Every Englishman has a right to a vote, Mr. Hume contends: if so, why is he to be required to live in a house to exercise that right? If in any one point more than another the act of 1832 was objectionable, it was its too rigid tak- ing of the qualification from property: but the proposed franchise recognizes property alone as its basis. The second point—the voting by ballot—would not be effected but by making or following a complete change of the character and habits of the people; sufficient reasons against it, on this occasion. The third point—the legal duration of Parliament—was taken from the old Tory creed and system, which Mr. Disraeli had ever supported: he would support it himself if any manifest benefit could be adduced; but no sensible man could believe that the policy or legislation or Parliament would be affected by such a change if it were now made. The fourth point is one that bases the representation of England solely on population. (Dissentfrom Mr. Hume.) Mr. Disraeli went intsa de tailed development of the working of this plan; taking Buckingham county, Lon- don, Glasgow, Dublin, sid"Offier leading instances, as his illustrations; and mak- ing dexterous use of the results. On a population basis, London would have as many members as all Scotland. He bumoronaly sketched the origin of Mr. Hume 's Reform movement, from the day of the meeting of a few veteran League agitators at their rooms—never permanently deserted—in Newell's Buildings, Manchester. He proclaimed the origin of a new profession in England. "An honourable gen- tleman the other night said that diplomacy was going out of fashion. Possibly it may be: many people think lawyers useless—they make their own wills, and die; then there are those who think doctors good for nothing—they take quack medicines, and die also; and there may be ministers of state who think that

they dispense dpense with the services of ambassadors and envoys. But those who

interested nterested in finding employment for the rising generation will be glad to learn that a new profession has been discovered, and that is the profesion of agitation. (Cheers and laughter.) Well, Sir, when honourable gentlemen cheer, do they deny my assertion? Do they recollect the observation-

' Quemvis hominem secum attulit ad nos. Grammatkus, rhetor, geometres, pictor, allptes. Augur, schcenobates, medicus, magus, omnia novit. &matins esuriens in ccelum jusseris ibit.'

Completing his sketch of the movement to the present time, he observed-" The remarkable circumstance is this, that the present movement has not in the slight- est degree originated in any class of the people, even if the people had been mis- led. It is possible that there might be a popular movement and yet erroneous; but this is erroneous and yet not popular. (Cheers and laughter.) But the moral I draw from all this-from observing this system of organized agitation, this piaying and paltering with popular passions for the aggrandizement of one too ambitious class-the moral I draw and the question I ask is this-why are the people of England forced to find leaders among these persons? Their proper leaders are the gentry of England; and if they are not the leaders of the people, it is because the gentlemen of England have been so negligent of their duties and so unmindful of their station, that this system of professional agitation, so ruinous to the best interests of the country, has arisen in England." Mr. OSEMINE moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord Joint RI:Jet- sam refuseeto grant one of the Government days for the continuance of the discussion. Mr. COBDEN thought this debate a hundred times more important than that on the West India question: he suggested a palliative to the inconvenience of adjournments, in a conventional abridgment of the speeches. The gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place; and the debate was adjourned to Friday, with little chance for it then. [On Thursday night, however, Mr. COBDEN announced that Government had "kindly given up" Friday the 30th.]

SUGAR-DUTIES: WEST INDIA DISTEE8S.

The discussion of the new proposals of Government on the Sugar-duties and the West Indian distress was resumed on Monday.

Previously, however, Mr. HAWES volunteered a further explanatory statement respecting charges which had been made against Lord Grey, of withholding from the West India Committee a certain despatch from the Governor of Jamaica.

The despatch arrived on the 27th March: Mr. Hawes received it on that day, with this minute indorsed [by a clerk in the Colonial Office]-

"This is a copy of the despatch for which the Committee on West India Distress have asked. We had a copy of the document which was required lathe votes of the House of Assembly. It was to be sent to the Committee today. Would It not be better to send instead, a Copy of this despatch, which is Important, with the report and evidence which we have got now for the first time? There are two copies. And so it is desira- ble to send it today."

There was also on it these words of Lord Grey-" I agree that this despatch ought to be given at the same time with the report and evidence to which it re- fers." Mr. Hawes added, "I agree." On She 30th March, Lord Grey made a minute to this effect-" This may be laid before the Committee as suggested." Mr. Hawes was not aware, until Lord George. Bentinck mentioned it in the house, that the despatch had not been laid before the Committee. He had made it his business to inquire why the directions so given, showing the in- tention of his noble friend and himself that the despatch should be communicated, were not followed; and he was told that the preparation of the answer to the de- spatch required some attention, that where the despatch was sent to have the answer prepared it was detained for two or three days, and that when it was re.. tinned to the department they neglected to act upon the instructions given to them.

On the motion that the Speaker leave the chair, Mr. ELLICE antici- pated Sir John Pakington, who had an amendment to propose, with en- deavours to elicit from Ministers the promise of more extensive measures of relief than they had announced. Before passing to the resolutions or the amendment, Mr. Ellice wished the House to look at the state of things before them- and he supplied the assistance of a re- trospect. The events immediately succeeding the Emancipation Act had been untoward: every practical suggestion then relied on to follow that great measure and assist in completing the change under it had been disregarded or rejected. It followed that the compensation granted, though regarded by many as a mag- nificent boon, indeed inadequate to the losses which the colonists sustained. Mauritius had ndeed secured some benefits, denied to the West Indies: such encou- ragement had been given to immigration thither, that the population of the island had been doubled and its produce in sugar enormously increased: but this only aug- mented the disadvantages of the West Indies. Then followed the acts of 1844 and 1845, admittieg free-grown foreign sugar to the English market The effect of those acts, from causes connected with the state of mercantile credit, was an enormous, competition with the West Indian Colonies. With regard to the bill of 1846, it was obvious that the previous acts had already- given as effective an increase to the consumption of slave-grown sugar as if they had admitted it direct: in addi- tion there had arisen treaty difficulties with foreign countries; and the re- sult was that the act of 1846 was an inevitable step, against the taking of which no government could contend. Mr. Ellice neither complained of the first admission of free-grown foreign sugar by the act of 1844, nor of the necessary result of that act in the subsequent one of 1846; nor did he now ask for a restoration of protection: but he must take these measures into ac- count in their disastrous effects on the West Indies. The distress and ruin of those colonies were undenied; they were unparalleled elsewhere in the world. A great majority of the planters had abandoned altogether the cultivation of their property. If Imperial legislation were confined to the measures now proposed, those colonists who were still cultivators would be involved in the common rum. Even measures of prudence and foresight would not now be more than partially Preservative, for the greater proportion of properties have been irretrievably ruined and cannot be restored. Mr. Ellice's own property he has for a dozen years re- signed out of his own hand, and let to his former agents, at rents equal only to the salaries they used to receive. Even those miserable charges are scarcely paid by these poor people, who have lost their hoarded earnings and with difficulty go Oust all. Their very instruments of industry are swallowed up: the machines and engines of manufacture are sold to persons from the Havanuah, to in- crease the competition. What, then, are the remedial propositions of the Government? They are chiefly, a email device to escape the dilemma of doing nothing or of altering the act of 1846; and a gift under the name of a ken of 500,000/. for a most useless and impracticable purpose. With re- gard to this loan, if alteration of the duties on colonial sugars by reduc- tion of them to 10s. per hundredweight could be made at the same charge, it would be a far more politic and more acceptable application of the funds. But with regard to both, were these two measures-in the present great distress and in answer to the urgent prayers for relief-the whole assistance to be expected 1.7 the West Indies? How would an affirmative reply to this question be received in those colonies? Would the Legislatures of Guiana and Trinidad continue to maintain their local Governments on the same scale of expense as at present-on the scale proposed and desired by the Home Government? They could not. .Already had supplies been stopped in Demerara: was it desired that the same thing should happen in Jamaica, where the annual amount of the civil government Penditnre is 300,0001., but where the merchants pay wages for making sugar every parcel of which they sell at a loss ? Paying high compliments to such Governors 23 Lord Harris in Trinidad and Sir Charles Grey in Jamaica, Mr. Ellice expressed his fears that the local Governments would lose the ability to retain and remu- nerate such eminent and efficient men. But indeed, a wiser course in all things respecting the government of the Co- lonies must be pursued, and the system of constant and petty interference in their local affairs laid aside; for neither Lord Grey nor any other man could give satis- faction under the present system. The colonists are driven to despeir, and say, "If you cannot redress our ills, leave us to ourselves: let us elect our own Gover- nors, and let us pay them according to our reduced means."

Mr. Ellice intended to support the repeal of the Navigation-laws; but he asked, had it been considered what effects would follow that measure after the cultiva- tion of sugar should have been abandoned in the islands? From that time the subsisting trade would full into the natural channel of a direct intercourse between the islands and the United States. Had that result been foreseen or desired?

In conclusion, he prayed that the colonists might not be shut out from all hope; and that Government would still come forward with more extensive measures for their relief.

Lord Jonw RUSSELL declined for the present to dishes the pined • raised by Mr. Ellice: it would be better first to take Sir John -Pakington's amendment.

Lord John made some remarks on the changed form of the amendment: the notice given on Friday night was for a resolution to increase the protection of colonial sugar to 10s.; now that was withdrawn, and a simple condemnation of the Government plan substituted. If the substituted resolution were carried, both the Colonies and Parliament would be seriously embarrassed; for the present law would be left to operate on the 5th of July, and reduce the existing pro-. tection from 6s. to 4s. 6d.

Sir JOHN PAKINGTON explained, that he had altered the shape of his amendment in order that the House might be enabled to express its direct

disapproval of the Government plan. He brought it forward with no party object whatever: he treated the question as not belonging to the category of Free-trade measures, and appealed as earnestly now to the supporters of free trade as to the advocates of protection. Sir John attributed by far the largest portion of the grievous depression of the West Indies to the act of 1846. In the debate on Lord George Bentinck's motion for a Select Committee, Sir Charles Wood was at pains to disclaim for the Mi-

nistry " the slightest intention of departing from the provisions of that act"; and on the 29th of last month, Lord John Itmesell stated " at once, that Government

did not intend to propose any alteration of the act, either with a view to increase the differential duties or continue them for a longer time." But the present plan is a deviation in both respects. What caused the change ?-The overpowering influence of the evidence, which made it impossible to maintain the act of 1846- In criticizing the details of the new plan, Sir John denied that 7s. per hundred- weight was really an effective protection. The frightful distress of 1846 had

occurred under that range of duty. He referred to the evidence ef M. Tolle-

mache and others, to establish the comparative cost of production in the English colonies and In slave countries. Mr. Tollemaehe stated that in one year when the crop was large, its cost of production was 198. per hundredweight: in 1847 his cost was' 17s. 8d after deducting rum and molasses; and he hoped hereafter to bring down his cost to 15s. 6d. But that was prospective; and he could not land his sugar at London under 22s. Oid. An average estimate of 138 estates throughout the West Indian Colonies gave a cost of 22s. 7d The Consuls' reennut from slave countries showed as the cost of production in Cuba, 6s. 8d., Bahia, 8s. 9d., and Porto Rico, 5s. 2d.; an average cost of about 6s. 10id. This deducted from 22s. 7d. gave a difference of 15s. 8/1d. against the English colonies. Of what avail was a protective duty of 7s. in such a case? The results of a struggle continued against such odds were similarly described by numberless witnesses. Sir John himself knew of an estate which sold at auc- tion in 1843 for 25,0001.; 10,0001. had been subsequently expended upon it in improvements; and it sold in April last for 2,8001. No fewer than eighteen houses in the West India trade had become bankrupt. Mauritius had seen the fall of firms owing 3,249,0001.; among the members of which there were gentle- men who had held seats and enjoyed friendships in that House. Lord Harris, on the 18th December, stated that Trinidad was in danger of lapsing into a state of barbarism if more than ordinary relief were not afforded to it. Governor Reid of Barbados stated that free labour would need lobe nursed by protection for a considerable time to come. Governor Higgin.son of Antigua, iii December last, stated that if the market continued at its then level, the culture of the cane must be abandoned, for sales did not pay the outlay on production. A memorial front the House of Assembly of Jamaica stated that 1,405,87SL had been laid out in cultivating 57,006 hogsheads of sugar and 26,711 puncheons of rum ; giving a

price for the sugar of 22s. 70. per hundredweight. But the market value of sugar being reduced to about 15s. in England exclusive of charges, there was a loss of 7s. 7id. on every hundredweight made-taking no account of interest on

capital to the value of 4s. 6d. more per hundredweight. Lastly, Lord Harris, on the 5th of April last, used these words in a despatch-" It is pitiable to witness

a fine colony daily deteriorating; a land enjoying almost every blessing under Heaven suffering from a shock from which it does not rally; but the deepest pang of 7 all to an Englishman, is to see the hearts and the affections of a whole population becoming gradually alienated from the country which he loves." The exports to the British Colonies for the nineteen months before 1846 were 5,988,5541., while those of a similar time after 1846 were but 4,856,286L: the

exports to the Slave Colonies in the same time had increased from 2,490,7701. to 2,946,1511. These reports and figures suggested inquiry whether, putting the ruin of the Colonies out of view, national interests might not suffer by the ade vance of prices when foreigners should have annihilated our rivalry. Considering the question in its bearings on the slave-trade, Sir John showed that the trade had nearly expired as regarded Cuba in 1846; but it was now revived in great activity, and carried on with cruelties unequalled. The prophecies with regard to the act of 1816 had been literally fulfilled, and the consequences of that measure, however undesired by the Government, had in fact been the most fearful increase of slavery and the slave-trade.

Sir EDWARD Boarox seconded the amendment, though possibly not altogether agreeing with the views of its mover.

Sir Edward objected to the immigration grant; which had been proposed in a tone implying that nothing towards Immigration had already been done. But Mauritius alone, independently of private means, had laid out 900,000/. daring the last ten years in importing 95,000 Coolies. Nearly 90,000 persons have been imported es-Jamaica, Guiana, and Trinidad, between 1834 and 1847. Sir Ed- ward quoted the despatches of Governor Harris in 1848, and of inisaionaries, to show that labour was already superabundant in Trinidad and Jamaica; and that the great want was that of money to pay, rather than of men to earn wages. Sir Edward added proofs of the increase of the slave-trade-proofs so notorious to all the world, that Mr. Calhoun, the American orator, used them to our preju- dice in a speech of this kind-" The whole Act of Abolition was now openly denounced in Parliament, and in language as strong as he himself had used. Great Britain was now resorting to the slave-trade itself as the means of pro- moting the prosperity of her plantations." Sir Edward would not despair that the House of Commons, having passed the act of 1846 under the impression that it would not increase the slave-trade, and finding that it had that effect, would retrace its steps, revive the innocent and free cultivation in our own colo- nies, and repress the vile and murderous cultivation of Cuba and Brazil. Sir CHARLES Woon was unable to learn from the speeches he had heard what were the measures which either of the preceding speakers desired in preference to those of the Ministerial plan. Sir Edward Buxton's notion had formerly been to enforce strictly the total ex- elusion of slave-grown sugar. But the House of Commons had decided against such total and perpetual exclusion; and if it were true that in 1834 a contract was made to preserve to the Colonies a strict monopoly of this market, that con- tract was definitively broken and set aside by the act of 1844. In 1846, Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Barkly distinctly expressed opinions in favour of free trade in sugar, free trade in corn having been attained. Lord George Bentinck's Committee 11.;d also voted that the British Colonies must ultimately depend on successful culture, rather than on protection, for the means of meeting slave- grown sugar in the market. Thus, protection had been surrendered on all influ- ential sides, as a means of permanent relief.

The question remained, whether its preservation was consistent with the put- ting-down of the slave-trade. On that point Sir Charles had no doubt- "I en- tirely agree with my noble friend near me, and with the opinion expressed by many gentlemen in this House, that you will never succeed in putting down slavery unless you beat it by the superior cheapness of free labour. You have been endeavouring to put down slavery by compulsory means; and the late Sir Fowell Buxton expressed himself satisfied of the inefficacy of those means. He pointed out, in an able publication, to what extent you had increased, as you are doing now, the horrors of the middle swears; and he proposed, what was after- wards carried out, an expedition up the Niger, which was attended with fearful loss of life, and which proved an utter failure so far as regarded any civilizing intercourse with the savage tribes of Africa. That was given up, and we are now stistainhig under treaty with foreign powers the strictest passible blockade of the coast of Africa. How far that is successful, evidence has shown. I believe it may be confidently stated, that hitherto that strict blockade, maintained with the cognizance of the French and the Americans,has been ineffective in putting down the slave-trade. What the ultimate effect of it may be I will not anticipate, but hitherto it has not succeeded in checking the evil to any considerable extent. If there be one course left open to us to produce such a result, it is by carrying out . the principle of free labour, and putting down the slave-trade by successful com- petition. This argument I have heard, time after time, from the friends of slave emancipation; and surely it can be no argument against the course we are now

• taking. If you tell me that it will not be put down by the competition of free labour, and say use another mode, then that is another question; but all I say is, that every means we have tried has failed, and unless the object can be gained by the competition of free labour slavery will continue." The question then arises, by what means can colonial free labour sugar be soon- est brought into successful competition with slave sugar. Sir Charles was confident not by high or lasting protection. Protection has never kept the planters free from great occasional distresses. At various times in the last fifty years, estates have • been abandoned in adverse times. Sir Charles touched lightly on the point of co- lonial extravagance; and proceeded to observe that the distresses have generally • been greatest in the new colonies, where fertile land was the rule. They had been the results of excessive wages; which in their turn had been the con- sequence of monopoly prices of sugar. Mr. Sarkis-, in his evidence, had distinctly • marked the effect of high prices in making planters compete reelthwsly for labour till wages rose to an excessive point. For that reason, lie had advocated the scale of 10s, protection for two years only; thinking that in a longer period the com- petition wages would rise and swallow up the whole benefit. • Sir Charles quoted evidence of despatches and witnesses, in support of his opin i - ion that a few more labourers would n many of the colonies effect a reduction of

exorbitant wages. He passed to a detailed explanation and defence of the scale of duties ptoposed in the resolutions; and to the new classification of muscovado sugar, into ordinary and brown clayed. He produced to the House samples of sugar showing the great range of quality—judged only by aspect—which the present scale admits at one rate of duty. On advice with the Excise-officers, he learns there will be no sort of difficulty in acting on the new distinction: brown rived sugar' now worth 368. 6d., will be the standard by which the duty will be fixed. The distinction is not to be extended to colonial sugar; as it will exist so few years. Sr Charles did not expect that the new arrangement would exclude any foreign is from this market for the ensuing year: the supply under the 208. duty s quite abundant; and the differential duty is a boon to the English colonists of which the English public does not feel the weight. Nor is it probable that prices will rise. The stock here and on the Continent is 40,000 tons greater than last year, and there is promise of unusually large crops. On the other band, there are good reasons to show that the revenue will gain more on the increased consumption than it will lose by the lowering of the duties. The consumption of next year, if it increase by 15,000 tons of colonial and 5,000 tons of foreign—an estimate probably below the mark—will give an increase of 50,0001. to the revenue. Sir Charles alluded to the reduction of the differential duty on rum from 9d. to 4d.—a sum fixed by the disinterested Head Commissioner of Ex- cise' Mr. Green. Judging by the experience of late changes, he thought it proba- ble that this change will cause such an increase of consumption that no loss to duties will occur.

Mr. Ens SEYHER reminded the House of the prophecies of the Pro- tectionists with regard to sugar and to corn—both now verified in our colonies by the consequences of the act of 1846.

As to the political economists,it would be hopeless to appeal to them: they were incorrigible. They seemed to view with great sangfroid the ruin of their fellow countrymen, provided they were rained according to rule. He recollected that the political economists said that free labour was cheaper than slave labour. He had no patience with these people: if they were right in their decimal fractions, • they were wrong in their millions. Mr. Horan opposed the Government plan; contending for more efficient tneasuree; and citing the opinion of Mr. Deacon Hume, that the West In- dies are beyond the pale of free trade; and he bitterly attacked the secret and arbitrary proceedings of the Colonial Office.

That office, in fact, is a nuisance. Better for the fortunes of the country -had it been locked up. "What could Lord Grey or Mr. Hawes know about it?" They were sharp men, no doubt, but had no knowledge equal to that of men residing in the colonies of what was best for colonial wants. Major Fagan had made excellent rules for the government of the Coolies—rules which had :worked well: Lord Grey cancelled them, however, and made a new code. The Coolies acquired wandering habits, took to the woods, and their skeletons were now commonly found there. To this hour the Colonial Office had opposed itself to

■ Anigration and the supply of labour to the colonists: the result is, that the Iilhacks are the masters and the masters the real slaves. If the African fleet were withdrawn, and half its cost spent in the West Indies, they would flourish again in a few years. If nothing were done, it would be as much as could be ex- pected if we avoided a St. Domingo in each island.

On the motion of Mr. MoNNarr, after some disputation, the debate was adjourned till Thursday.

At the reading of the order of the day for the adjourned debate on Thursday, Sir Looms O'BRIEN inquired if the Chancellor of the Exche- quer was determined to adhere to his proposed reduction of the differential duty on foreign rum to 44.? No Cabinet Minister was present; and Sir • Lucius, getting no answer, moved the adjournment of the House. This led to.a rambling contest, which lasted several hours.

Mr. HAWIVI objected, that notice of the question had not been given. Sir Lucius O'BRIEN and Mr.AwNrEv stated, that beyond a doubt full personal notice bad been given to Sir Charles Wood, by a deputation of Irish Members, who attend- ed to remonstrate' against the large reduction of the duty on ram, as injurious to the distillers of spirits in Ireland. After much squabbling about the adjournment, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, having taken his place in the mean time, said that Sir Charles Wood had conferred with him on the subject of the duty, and was not determined which rate to adopt-4d. as it stood in the Government proposal, or 6d. as the Irish distillers wished It to be. Something having been said about the "votes" and " speeches " of Irish Members depending upon the answer of Ministers, Loed John said he would make no declaration to alter the votes of Members: Members might take their own course. Lord GEORGE BEI:THICK complained of the extraordinary position in which Ministers placed the House. A bargain had been transacted out of doors between a Minister and the Irish Members, under which the differential duty on rum was to be 6d. instead of 4d. as announced; and then the Irish Members would sup- port Ministers on the Sugar-duties ! Lord JOHN RUSSELL resented this impu- tation, with some show of warmth. Sir CHAII.LES WOOD now entered the House, amidst cheers. Sir Charles stated, that he carnedown to answer the question that was to be put; found the House engaged on a railway bill; went to business at his office; and came down again as soon as he learnt that the Sugar question had come on. As to the rum-duty, the amount was still under consideration.

The quarrel proceeded. Mr. DISRAELI complained that after the explanation given the House was not a bit wiser than before. Mr. CHARLES BULLER rebuked Lord George Bentinck for the making of exceedingly reckless and unfounded charges and harsh imputations. Mr. Buller himself made a counter-imputation, that Lord George and Mr. Disraeli were by their present course endeavouring to catch a few stray votes from gentlemen who thought the West Indies would get too mach protection by the 4d. duty. Mr. NEWDEGATE adopted and reiterated the use of the word " bargain"; which be thought happily and fairly represented the case. The indignation manifested was significant: lie could not help being re- minded of the old quotation- " When caps-among the crowd are thrown, Each man picks out and Ste his own." Mr. FAGAN, as one of the Irish deputation, and Sir CHARLES WOOD, alike repu- diated the " bargain": but Sir Charles said he was still unable to state the deter- mination of the Government. Mr. theatinarer insisted that there was evidently a tacit bargain; and advised the House to adjourn, as it was impossible to proceedia the existing state of things: two hours had been wasted, and they were still left in doubt whether 6d. or 4c1. was the differential duty Government propft.w. After much more of this angry disputation, Mr. LABOUCHERE and Mr. 00m- i:wax spoke at some length, in a tone calculated to restore the House to a de- liberative temper. During their speeches Ministers were observed to be in de- liberation on their benches. When Mr. Goulburn finished, Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose and announced that the proposition as originally made by Government must be considered as the one now before the House.

Sir Lucius O'Brunw thereupon withdrew his motion; and the adjourned debate proceeded.

Mr. MoErarr opposed the Ministerial plan, even upon West Indian grounds.

Mr. GLADSTONE stated a difficulty under which he was placed by the forms of the House: he objected to the Government plan generally, on the ground that aa a measure of relief it was less than the necessity of the case demanded, and also open to finantial objections of an insurmountable nature; and therefore he could not give his consent to go into Comiiittee to carry it out: yet he could not, in negativing the motion that the Speaker leave the chair, refuse, under the pressure of a great necessity, to reconsider or modify the scale of duties agreed to in 1846. His conclusion -was that he mast vote with Sir John Pakington, but must explain his vote; which he did at considerable length.

He would not enter into the question as to the distinction that might have been maintained between free-labour and slave-labour sugar; because, although re- taining his fonner-opinien, he regarded that question as settled. Be could not view the question as one of protection to domestic or colonial interests; nor as one concerning a distinction of race; for unless you can show that the maintenance of the White class in the West Indies is not essential to the civilization and progress of those colonies, it is poor philosophy to say that only one-tenth of the population is suffering distress. He held that the West Indies, as a whole, have a claim of a nature distinct from protection—one founded on equity and justices and he avowed his belief that the West Indians are entitled to make a claim of money— to demand a sacrifice of public funds, on the ground that they have suffered at the hands of the British Parliament, acting under the influence of the British public. He reviewed the history of the claim. When slavery was abolished, Lord Grey, then Prime Minister, held that twelve years' apprenticeship should• be allowed to the planters: in the passing of Lord Stanley's Abolition Act, that period was reduced to six years, with the acquiescence of the West Indians; but after four years had passed, agitation in this country obliged the Government to abandon two years of that period which had been voted to the West Indians as part of their remuneration for the loss of slave-labour—thus one-third of the compensation in that form was retracted. As to immigration, the West Indians are now allowed great latitude: but, exhausted in their capital and means, they justly say that they have been arguing that point with the British Parliament for the last twelve or fourteen years, and were met with restraint and opposition in every quarter. The immigration of Coolies was first prohibited, then allowed under oppressive restrictions; and contracts for labour, now to be permitted, had been discountenanced. Such regulations and restrictions as went to prevent the migration from degenerating into a revived slave-trade were not to be con- demned; but he thought that on the score of immigration the West Indies had a strong case. The relief proposed is not such as the exigencies of the case demand; and he did not think that Parliament ought to entertain a measure of the kind at all, un- less it were sufficient for the relief required. He desired no reaction in point of protective duties, and therefore he could not concur in the recommendation of Lord George Bentinck's Committee to revert to the protective duty of 10s. The Negroes of the West Indies can claim no share in the relief which the House is called upon to vote, as their condition has already advanced so greatly in material comfort. and morals, that no stimulus is needed in that direction; but a reaction of high protective duties would only cause a corresponding and needless reactien towards high wages. For these reasons, in place of retracing their course as to protective duties, he should prefer to the cornplicatedplan of Government, such an allowance of time as should induce the capitalist to send out machinery and nil- prove the culture of sugar: he should prefer a uniform duty, say of 68. per hundredweight, for six years longer. He saw with deep regret the remains of jealousy existing in this country re- specting internal legislation in the Colonies on such subjects as vagrancy and squatting; and he had expected fuller proposals on those subjects from the Secre- tary for the Colonies. Lord Josue Roesai.s--" The proposals come from the Colonial Legislature." Mr. RAWES--" They have full power to legislate on this subject." Mr. GLausToNE thought not; and he doubted whether it would be wise to in- treat the Colonial Legislatures with absolute power on that subject. But they had Governors in the Colonies on whose humanity they might implicitly ref. Major Fagan recommended by the East India Company, made regulations for the management' of Coolies in Barbados; and they were confirmed by Lord Harris, the Governor. But they were disallowed by the Colonial Office, first on the tech- nical ground that Lord Harris had no sufficient power to give them the effect-Of law, and also because Lord Grey objected to some of the regulations. He ob- jected, for instance, to a regulation addressed to the planters for checking dna- enness amongst the Coolies. The Governor and Major Fagan saw the necessity of such a regulation, under the peculiar circumstances of the Coolies, and the fatal effects of drunkenness on migrants into the West Indies; and a Secretary of State in Dawning Street ought to have been very shy of enforcing his own opi- nions against those sanctioned by undisputed authority and local knowledge. Mr. Gladstone objected to the exclusive use of the loan for purposes of immi- gration. There is great diversity of opinion among the best-informed persons as to the amount of labour which is necessary, and fuller information is certainly re- nuked. But at all events, he thought it doubtful whether it might not be wise to ;minds with immigration, in the application of the fund, the improvement of cul- tivation on estates: for he had already avowed his belief that the West Indians are entitled to a demand for money. He regretted that he had heard no intimation that the Colonial Legislatures are to be left more to themselves in the management of their finances. He saw all the difficulties arising from difference of race; but as regards the expenditure of mo- ney, the Colonial Legislatures might have greater freedom than they possess. It is impossible to overlook the fact, displayed in recent returns, that there is an im- mense difference in the expen.ditnre between those colonies where they have Assemblies and those where they have no Assembly. The expenditure in Ja- maica, with a population of 400,000, is 289,0001. In British Guiana, with a po- pulation of 126,000, the amount is 269,0001.; of which nearly 200,0001. is inde- pendent of immigration. But in Barbados, where the expense of immigration is nearly 200,0001., the expense of government to that colony, with its Assembly, is only 53,0001. Running through the list of colonies, there is mach greater economy in those colonies where they have a Colonial Assembly; and it is there- fore presumable, that in giving to the Colonies more liberty in managing their own affairs, there would be a reduction in the expense, to the great relief of those who are engaged ingrowing the exported produce, upon whom a large proportion of the tax must falL Official salaries will be revised; and this suggests another mode of relief. In order to secure fit persons for the post of Governor, it is not de- sirable to reduce the salaries; but Mr. Gladstone thought that it might be a wise economy, during the operation of these exceptional measures, to pay the salaries of the West Indian Governors out of the Consolidated Fund.

He stated his financial objections to the Government plan; which he believed to involve a much larger sacrifice of money than they were allowed to see. Sir Charles Wood ludicrouslyiinderrated the burden to be imposed on this country. The reduction of Is. duty involved a loss of 240,0001. to the revenue; but the re- duction of is. in a price of 40s. would create no such increase of consumption as would compensate that loss. When Mr. Goulburn reduced the duty from 27s. to 24a, the increase of consumption was but 1,000 tons. Mr. Gladstone produced figures to show that Sir Charles Wood's calculation was based on partial and se- lected data. The prohibition of sugar in breweries—a reintroduction of prohibi- tory rules which Ms Gladstone strongly deprecated—would prevent a consump- tion of 12,000 tons, and would causes loss of 150,0001. to the revenue; making a total loss of 400,0001.—a large sum to sacrifice in times of fiscal difficulty. In the present position of affairs, our first concern is to restore the due relation between public income and public expenditure; secondly, to do that which our duty requires from the relation in which we stand to our West Indian Colonies. And Mr. Glad- stone concluded by calling for effectual measures to prevent the glorious measure ef Emancipation from being based on the wreck of private fortunes.

Mr. JA.MES WILSON combated Mr. Gladstone's views, as well as those of the Committee, and defended the Government scheme.

He enumerated several concessions to the West Indies as having swept away all injurious restrictions and practical grievances. Returns prepared in the City for Lord George Bentinck showed that the aggregate cost of West Indian sugar in 1846 was 4,500,0001.; the aggregate value realized was 4,336,0001.; a loss of only 414 per cent—not greater that the loss incurred by any interest in this country in that year. The distress was aggravated by the unusually small crop of 1846; in 1847 by unusual speculations of foreign importers to supply sugar to English dis- tilleries. The rapid increase in the produce of the West Indies from 1841 to the present time, except in 1846, proves a rapid increase of prosperity. (Laughter.) High protective prices only pass to the labourers in the shape of high wages. The increasing amount grown in the West Indies would have caused a surplus beyond the demand of this country to be sent to the Continent of Europe; the price commanded by that surplus would have been regulated by the price in Eu- rope; and that surplus, therefore, would have beaten down prices here to the Con- tinental level: so that the West Indians ought to be grateful to the acts of 1844,'5, and '6, for placing them in a safer position. He objected to Mr. Gladstone's sug- gestions, because they would involve a greater change than the Government plan; and all change is bad in commercial matters, as causing uncertainty. Recent re- ductions of the Sugar-duties have been attended with important additions to the revenue. The prohibition of sugar in breweries would not take effect for three years; but at that time the duty (118.) would not be an equivalent for the malt- duty. Consular returns refute the notion that the cost of production is so much greater in the West Indies than it is in the Slave Countries: in Ilavannali, the original expense is 138. 4d.; but that is increased by 2s.2d. tithe-tax and 2.e. 2d. export-duty, making the total cost 178. 6d.; and other returns state the average oust of production in the Slave Colonies at 15s. 10d. In fact, if the alleged differ- ence in the cost of production had been made out, Mr. Wilson would have looked upon the case of the West Indies as hopeless and impracticable. He concluded by recommending increased economy in management, as the only mode of restor- ing prosperity and enabling free labour to compete with slave labour.

On the motion of Mr. PHILIP MILES, the debate was adjourned, till Friday.

BOROUGH WRITS: CHELTENHA3L

On Wednesday, Mr. STAFFORD moved the issue of a new writ for Chel- tenham; urging on Ministers and the House the distinction in favour of that borough, that no special report had been presented by the Committee which unseated Sir Willoughby Jones for bribery.

Sir GEORGE GREY did not consider the case one in which Government was called to express any opinion. For his own part, till the House laid down some general rule on the subject, he should act on the plan of giving his vote for the writ in every case where the Committee had made no /win/ report.

Sir Joan HARMER expressed his regret. He had hoped that the sus- pension of these writs by the House was to be its pledge that the great question would be taken up and carried to some conclusion. Mr. SLANEY and Sir Joins FAEINGTON approved of Sir George Grey's rule. Mr. Mowers and Mr. SIIARMAN CRAWFORD declared they could not persist longer in the course of refusing to issue these writs, as there seemed not the slightest prospect of any general measure on the subject being carried this session. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD and Mr. ADDERLEY thought there was no sufficient case against Cheltenham. Sir DE LACY EVANS thought there was; and he would prefer inquiry prior to the issue: Mr. MORGAN Jorns O'CONNELL and Mr. NEWDEGATE warned the House against injus- tice; the latter observing that "the system of blisters which it *as apply- ing to these constituencies was likely to make them seek extensive changes in the representation." Mr. HENLEY exposed the doctrine of those who Opposed the writs by pushing it to an absurd extreme—" for one case of treating, the 30,000 voters of Yorkshire might be disfranchised indefi- nitely." Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. ANSTEY, and Colonel SIBTHORP, indulged in general strictures on the Ministerial course, and on Sir John Handier's bill. On a division, the motion for issuing the writ was carried, by 59 to 47.

FOOR-LAW AMENDMENT. On Thursday, Mr. CHARLES BULLER introduced four bills for the amendment of the Poor-laws. The first was a bill "to alter the provisions relating to the charges for the relief of the poor in unions, and the mode of payment thereof, and to provide for the relief of the poor in extra+ parochial places" ; the second, a bill to make provisions for the payment of parish debts, the audit of parochial and union accounts, and the allowance of certain charges therein "; the third, a bill "to amend the law for the formation of districts for the education of infant poor "; and the fourth, a bill "to authorize the payment of superannuation allowances to officers engaged in the administra- tion of the laws for the relief of the poor." To be read a second time on Thurs- day next.

lerszt FOOR-LAW. Oa Monday, Lord MONTEAGLE called the attention of the Lords to what he considered an excess of authority by the Irish Poor-law Com- missioners. Under a provision of the Irish Poor-law, relief, given to a wife or child- ren is to be regarded as given to the husband or father. By a provision called the Quarter-acre clause, no person may receive relief who holds more than a quarter of an acre of land. The combined effect of these clauses is, that no wife or child may be relieved while the husband or father holds land. A man refused to yield his land, and in his obstinacy died of want. The wife afterwards starved in similar obstinacy; several children were left, and these were about to perish like their parents rather than yield. They were relieved. On the 23d of May, the Commissioners issued a circular authorizing the relief that had before been considered illegal. Lord Monteagle moved a resolution condemning this circular, as an usurpation by an administrative department of the functions of the Legislature. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE explained, that the circular of the 231 May was hastily drawn up, on a pressing emergency, to meet a particular object—to prevent death by starvation. An order should be issued forthwith that no relief should be given to holders of land or those dependent on them. [It seems that the Law-officers in Ireland are of opinion that relief may be given in the case in question; and that the circular was drawn up on advice with them.] A conversation ensued, in which Lords Beotionam, CAMPBELL, REDESDALE, BEAUMONT, and STANLET, and the Duke of &mailmen, took part, and in general terms objected to the a,sumption that the Commissioners had acted il- legally. Lord MONTEAGLE did not press the resolution.

TENANTS-AT-WILL (IRELAND) BILL. On Wednesday, Sir Wrr MISS Bo- MERVILLE opposed the order of the day for going into Committee on the bill. The second clause, he said, was no less than a provision making it obligatory on a landlord to repurchase his own property on every change of tenancy. Rs moved as an amendment, that the bill be considered in Committee that day oil months. Thu speakers for the bill were Mr. DRUMMOND, Mr. FAGAN, Mr, SHAR3LAN CRAWFORD' Mr. FOULETT SCROPE, ANSTEY, and Mr. MON- SELL ; against it, LordCLAIME HAMILTON, Mr. H. A. HEanoirr, Colonel Co- sroux, and Sir GEORGE GREY. The amendment was carried, without division: so the bill is 10St.

COLONIAL GOVERNMENT. On Tuesday, Sir WILLIAM MOLESWORTH amended the notice which stood in his name for Tuesday next, as follows—" That it is the opinion of this House, that the Colonial expenditure of the British empire is ex- cessive, and ought to be diminished; and, that to advance this object and to se- cure the greater freedom and prosperity of the Colonies, the local Assemblies should be invested with greater powers for the administration of their local affairs. WINDSOR AND SLOUGH Rairavey. On Thursday, the third reading of the Great Western Railway (Branch from Slough to Windsor) Bill was carried, by 224 to 97; Mr. DIARAETI and Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE speaking at considerable length against it, as a breach of faith with the South-western Railway Company; and Lord Moniorru, Mr. Watrota, and Lord I:Wino VANE, in its favour.

OXFORD AND Buniarnasrear RAILWAY. On the same day, the third read ing of the Great Western Railway Company's bill for purchasing the Binning, ham and Oxford line was also carried, by 147 to 72, against the opposition Of Mr. LABOUCHERE.

THE SPANISH QUARREL. On Thursday, Lord STANLEY stated, that within twenty-four hours after the departure of M. Isturitz from London, on the 14th, despatches had arrived from the Court of Madrid, authorizing him to present those explanations borne hither by the Count de Mirasol, which from diplomatic etiquette he had not felt at liberty to take out of the hands of the Count and present personally to the English Government. Lord Stanley asked if any com- munication of these explanations had been made in any manner to our Govern- ment since the departures of the Spanish Envoy and Minister? Lord LANS- DOWNE replied, that none had been or could be received. He also replied to an ejaculation uttered by Lord BROUGHAM, that the Spanish authorities had had opportunity of making a statement, but had abstained from making it.