preferred for reduction to the more nutritive article of cocoa, and since the new Corn-law had passed, the consumption of foreign corn had decreased, 108,090 quarters having paid 23s. 8d. duty between the 29th April, and the 4th June, 1841; while, in the same period of this year, with a duty of 12s. or 13s., only 92,357 quarters were entered for home consumption. He objected altogether to the system of differential duties maintained in the Bill. He would vote for it, not because he was at all satisfied with the new Tariff on its own merits, but on account of the principles on which it was founded, and more particularly on account of the profession of those principles by those who propounded them. He relied upon Parliament for completing the reform of the commercial system which was now begun, and next year he hoped to see the Ministers proposing a reduction of the Sugar-duties, to be followed not long afterwards, as he was persuaded it must be, by an alteration of the Corn-laws.

Lord Monteagle followed, adopting a similar line of argument. Lord Colchester thought, that he might vote for the Bill without advocating the general principles of free-trade, as an improvement upon the present heterogeneous mass of Customs-duties. On a division, the amendment was rejected by 69 to 4, and the Bill was read a second time.

Two days afterwards the House went into Committee on the Bill, after some renewed opposition from Earl Stanhope. On Schedule 1, he moved as an amendment, to take the duty on bulls, oxen, cows, calves, lambs, and swine, by weight instead of by the head; but the amendment was negatived by 44

to 8. Other amendments, moved by the same noble Lord, respecting seeds, woods, and copper ore, on which he opposed the reduction of duties, were negatived without division, and the Bill passed through Committee, and was reported. Earl Stanhope again divided the House against the third reading, which, however, was carried by 52 against 9.

Our account of the financial proceedings of the Session would not be complete without noticing a debate which took place in the House of Commons, on a subject which had produced so much discussion, and such important results in the Session preceding,―the subject of the duties on sugar. The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, on the 3rd of June, the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained the reasons why the Government could not consent to the admission of foreign sugar at a lower rate of duty. He said, that to do so would injure the revenue without benefit to the consumer, and would be seriously hurtful as well as unjust towards our colonial possessions, besides giving an impulse to the foreign slave-trade. In future, there was little probability that the continental markets would be open to slave-grown sugar as they were formerly, on account of the protective duties which had been imposed on rival produce. At the same time, there was springing up in the slave countries, and in Cuba particularly, a public opinion adverse to slavery; and the holders of land in those countries depre. cated the slave-trade, because it helped to bring into cultivation new tracts of land to compete with their own. The number of slaveships which annually enter the

port of Cuba had decreased onethird. Now, no market would be so desirable for the producers of slave-grown sugar as the British market, and should we throw away an instrument which we possessed for promoting the suppression of slavery by giving an impulse to the trade in slave-grown sugar? As to the supply from our colonies last year, the quantity consumed, the largest yet known, 2,000,000 tons; and his information satisfied him that the supply this year would reach 2,300,000 or 2,400,000 tons: the present price, therefore, which itself was not exorbitant, would not be enhanced. Mr. Goulburn concluded by moving a resolution, that the present sugar-duties should be should be continued one year.

was

Mr. Roebuck observed that the consumption of sugar last year was 4,000,000 cwt., costing 7,000,000l. or 8,000,000l., and the duty levied was 4,000,000l. Sugar was, in fact, one of the necessaries of life, and its consumption was especially to be encouraged, because it tended to habits of sobriety. In 1841, the average price of colonial sugar was 49s. the cwt.; of Brazilian and Cuba sugar, 21s.; taking the difference, however, at only 20s., the people paid for their sugar 4,000,000l. more than they ought to pay. Suppose the loss to be only half that sum, why should the poor of this country be taxed 2,000,000l. to put into the pockets of the West-India proprietors? He quoted the authority of Sir Fowell Buxton for asserting, that our efforts to suppress the slavetrade had altogether failed; and with respect to slavery, he urged the impolicy of our attempting to interfere with the internal social relations of other countries. If it

were really desired to exert English influence on behalf of that object, it would be much more effectual, if we were united in the bands of commerce and habitual intercourse with the slave-dealing countries, instead of setting up separate interests. He moved as an amendment, that the duty on foreign sugars be equalised with that on colonial sugars-viz. 24s.

A short debate followed, in which the amendment was opposed by Mr. Godson and by Mr. Gladstone, and was supported by Mr. Cobden. On a division it was negatived by 59 to 18.

Mr. Labouchere then moved to reduce the duty on foreign sugar from 63s. to 30s., and on colonial sugar from 24s. to 20s. He admitted the injustice of suddenly and entirely withdrawing a protection under which great interests had grown up, but he would substitute protection for prohibition. The relaxations in the Tariff were considerable, but lamentably insufficient to relieve the wants of the people; and, next to corn, he knew of no article which entered so largely into the expenditure of the people for subsistence as sugar, and there would be this peculiar advantage in the relaxation proposed by him, that whereas reducing the duty on corn would not at once cause a great reduction in the price of bread, with sugar the effect would be the reverse. He was not so sanguine as Mr. Goulburn with respect to the expected supply; the imports of this year, up to May 5th, were 12,000 tons less than those of the same period in the preceding year. Nor, on the other hand, did he anticipate that a reduction of the duty would give so great an impulse to the slave-trade. Brazil was now angry

at finding that her diplomatists had betrayed her into exacting no more than 15 per cent. importduty on British produce, while we excluded her produce; it would be most advisable to anticipate the approaching expiration of the treaty with that country by placing our commercial relations on a sounder footing; and he thought that this Government would be more powerful for obtaining further commercial advantages, and for advancing the cause of humanity, after Brazil had tasted the benefits of a sounder and a fairer commercial treaty between the two countries.

Mr. Gladstone said, when it was complained that the relaxations in the Tariff bore so little on articles of subsistence, they should recollect what it was that Government had the power to give; and he thought that the best discretion had been exercised in relieving from taxation imported articles connected with the industry of the country. He then entered into an elaborate calculation by which he found that Mr. Labouchere's proposal would entail a loss to the revenue of 600,000l., even supposing that there were an increase in the consumption proportionate to the reduction of duty. The present price of sugar being 62s. 4d., Mr. Labouchere's duty would give a price of 54s. 6d. a difference of 78. 10d. the cwt. Had Mr. Labouchere included the month of May in his account of this year's imports, he would have found the deficiency to be only 6,500 tons, and that would be more than made up by vessels already on the voyage; and if the estimate of the Government were as correct this year as in the year preceding, the total quantity would not be less VOL. LXXXIV.

than 218,000 or 220,000 tons; so that the price would be diminished, while, in fact, the quality of the sugar would be better. He did not agree with Mr. Labouchere that it would be expedient to make any sacrifice on our part before we required concessions from Cuba and Brazil. He quoted a recent work by Mr. Bandinel, which showed that the efforts of England to check the slave-trade had been so far successful that the insurance on slave-ships had risen in Cuba to 40 per cent., while the yearly importation of slaves had decreased from 40,000 in 1832 to 14,470 in 1840.

Mr. Hume said, that he demanded fair treatment on behalf of the people of England. Mr. P. M. Stewart made the same requisition on behalf of the WestIndia proprietors, meaning thereby a differential duty of 15s. to protect them, after negro emancipation, from being forced into competition with the produce of slavelabour in other countries.

Lord John Russell ridiculed the pleas successively put forth for particular duties. Former Parliaments had granted relief on various articles of importance to the working classes, salt, leather, coals, and candles; but now they had great articles of subsistence under consideration. With respect to those great articles of consumption which the House had now to consider, and which formed the necessary articles of consumption among the labouring classes, they had begun with bread, and they had found they could not make any great reduction. They had found that it was necessary to be independent of foreign nations— that, unfortunately, much as they wished to relieve the people in [K]

that first great article of food, they were not able to make a great and important alteration. They had They had then come to articles forming part of the weekly expenditure of the people, such as cheese and butter; but, unfortunately, they had found that the interest of the revenue was so much concerned that it was impossible to make any alteration. There was one article, indeed, in which they had been able to make an alteration-in the article of cattle and meat they had been able to exchange high and prohibitory duties for those which were lower; but, with respect to cattle, they had unfortunately heard the assurance that the people were not likely to derive present benefit from the reduced price of meat. Another article of great consumption was then before them, namely sugar; an article most important, considering the improved habits of the people-habits which the Legislature undoubtedly ought to encourage. He was sorry to hear that upon this article the people must be contented with the good wishes of the Legislature, and the proclamation that had been made of an anxious desire to reduce the price of subsistence. Although Mr. Gladstone had made light of the proposed reduction in the price of sugar, saying that it would only amount to 4d. a pound, yet even that was an important consideration in the weekly expenditure of a poor family. Lord John Russell could not comprehend the humanity which admitted coffee or copper produced by slave-labour, but refused to receive slave-grown sugar it was not immoral to encourage the slavetrade in the one case, but it was denounced as inhuman in the other. He trusted that the people, in sub

mitting to the Income-tax, would not find the promise that the Tariff would reduce the cost of subsistence to be illusory.

Mr. Roebuck blamed Lord John Russell for speaking as if the party in power alone were chargeable with retaining the high price of food; whereas, the Whig party were not in favour of free-trade in corn, but merely advocated one of those mystifications so common on their side-an 8s. fixed duty. He himself had tried to equalise the duties on sugar, but Lord John Russell supported a 10s. discrimi nating duty-a proposal very like the 8s. corn-duty; for if it would be effectual as a protection, it would be effectaal in shutting out competition. Mr. Roebuck then launched out into a vehement condemnation of the sacrifices that had been made to the West Indies, Of what advantage, he asked, were those colonies to us-a set of barren islands dearly bought with the pith and blood of this country? Jamaica at the bottom of the sea

aye, and all the Antilles after it-and where would be the loss to Great Britain? What benefit did the weavers of Yorkshire and Lancashire derive from these boasted possessions?

Mr. Bernal said, he had always been taught to believe that the welfare of the whole empire depended on the prosperity of its parts; and he enquired, if Mr. Roebuck was prepared in his submersivo projects to sink the East Indies also with the West?

Sir Robert Peel interposed to pour oil on the troubled discussion, by suggesting that the House should come to the practical conclusion to vote for the Government proposition; for it was evident that the adoption of either of