and he now bade adieu to it, with an earnest hope that the object of the present Government would be answered, and that, doing as little individual injury as possible, the ultimate result would be to promote the commerce of the country, and to give new openings for its domestic industry. Such was his earnest hope; and if that end should be attained, he felt that all their labour would be more than recompensed by such a desirable result.

Viscount Howick said, that the great advantage of the Tariff was, that Government had admitted the soundness of certain commercial principles, and that a beginning had been made in the right direction, and the House would thereafter have to proceed in the

same course.

Mr. Craven Berkley enquired whether Sir Robert Peel had received any information relative to the French ordinance for raising the duty on linen-thread ?

Sir Robert Peel deeply regretted, not merely on account of commercial considerations, to say that the accounts which had been published respecting the French ordinance were true. With regard to the German League there had been no opportunity of raising the duty on mixed cotton and woollen goods, and he hoped that it would not be raised. Sir Robert Peel subsequently stated, that communications had been received from the Prussian government, intimating its satisfaction at alterations in the British Tariff, which this country had voluntarily proposed without exacting any conditions whatever, and giving assurances, in general terms, that they would be met in a corresponding spirit. In respect to iron, these assurances had been

realised, by resistance to some pressure on the Prussian Government on the subject.

The question being put from the Chair, the Bill was read a third time, and passed amid loud cheers. Two days afterwards it was read a first time in the House of Lords, and on the 5th July, the Earl of Ripon moved the second reading. He observed that, although much objection had been threatened to the measure, it did not now seem likely that the opposition would be seriously pressed. He then entered into the general grounds of the measure. He went back to the twenty-five years of war, during which strong protective interests had grown up. The complete restoration of the peace in 1818, followed in the next year by the alteration of the currency, and the consequent alteration of prices, drew attention to the importduties; but the difficulties in the way of a change were then very great, though the principle was admitted on all sides that a more free commercial intercourse should be aimed at. In 1825, the Earl had cooperated with Mr. Huskisson in propounding measures founded on that principle, and successive Governments had carried out the principles still further. On entering office, the present Government found that the principle had received the sanction of the Parliament, under circumstances which made it imperative on them to take a general view of the subject, in order to carry the principle into more extensive effect. He went on to explain the principles of the measure-the low duty of 5 per cent. on raw material, of 10 per cent. on articles partially manufactured, and of 12 to 20 per cent. on manufactures;

the object being to substitute protection for prohibition. England expected foreign countries to admit her manufactures at 15 to 20 per cent.; and the admission of foreign manufactures at 15 to 20 per cent. placed them on a fair footing. Lord Ripon alluded to the exceptional cases in which no alteration could be made in consequence of negotiations with foreign countries; and he especially alluded to some of the principal articles included in, or excluded from, the Tariff, such as the timber-duties, and the remission of duties on victuals used for shipping; provisions generally, and particularly cattle and sugar; giving the usual reasons for the mode in which those items had been treated.

During the progress of the measure, several had told him that they went too far, and others that they did not go far enough; but after all he had heard on all sides, the result generally was, that he was satisfied that Government had done the best-enough, but not too much; and he believed that many objectors had come to the same conclusion.

One person in particular, who had strongly objected to the reduction of an article in the production of which he was interested, had recently waited on him and frankly told him, that he had been in France and had carefully looked into the matter; and that he had come to him, not as he did formerly to object to the proposition, but to tell him that he thought that it would not prove injurious, and that at the same time the reduction of duty of duty would have the effect of putting an end to smuggling. Lord Ripon concluded by calling upon the House to read the Bill a second time.

Earl Stanhope said, he was not convinced by Lord Ripon, although he expected to be defeated. He would say of his noble Friends, as Milton said of kings, that "they were weak in argument, strong in legions." He compared the present time with that of 1825, when similar measures were introduced, and when the year began with prosperity and ended with most disastrous distress. He attributed the increased price of cattle to a disease among the beasts, and to the reduced imports from Ireland; and he contended, on behalf of the graziers, that in no trade or profession were the profits so low. He charged Lord Ripon with borrowing arguments from the AntiCorn-law League; such as, that it is necessary to provide food for the increase of population. If, as Lord Ripon asserted, so many countries import cattle, what were the countries from which the exportation was made? He supposed they must be those places which are marked in the old maps as terra incognita. He predicted, however, that both the royal and mercantile navy would be supplied by American and other foreign beef. He referred to several other items, contending that the consumers would derive no benefit, although particular interests would suffer injury; he did not know, for instance, whether Apothecaries' Hall would be illuminated on account of the proposed reduction upon drugs; but he was sure that not one of the public would benefit to the extent of a farthing thereby. Free-trade, he contended, could not be introduced into this country on account of the habits and prejudices of the people, but this Bill would go far to introduce that system.

With respect to this measure, (continued Lord Stanhope,) he wished to hear from his noble Friend "a frank and explicit declaration," to use the language of the head of the present Government. That declaration he had never yet heard. He should like to know whether there were to be large or small importations; if they were small, there would be no benefit to the revenue; if large, what would be the injury to the present traders! In another place -where he would not say there was base servility-he was surprised that the majority should be content with the vague promises of a Minister who was thought to be infallible. Yet this was done in an assembly that did not represent the working classes. This was a measure that came forth like a thief in the dark; it was not mentioned at the late election, and it was not greeted by any portion of the working men. He would not call it a farthing-candlemeasure, but it was an ignis fatuus, which would destroy the political power of the man who introduced it: he did not regard that result with much emotion; but it would also tend to the utter destruction of the country which had the misfortune to be governed by him. He had been told, not by a Revolutionist or Chartist, but by an old Tory, that the feeling in his part of the country was that of great indifference, owing to the opinion, in which he agreed, that a great change was at hand. Lord Stanhope concluded by moving as an amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. The Duke of Richmond supported the amendment. He pointed to the inconsistency in Lord Ripon's argument, that cattle could

only be obtained from Denmark and Holland. If the price of meat be not much affected, it was useless to make any alteration, or to hold out fallacious hopes to the consumer. The foreign farmer only employed as many labourers as he thought fit, while the English farmer, if he did not employ the labourers, was obliged to pay for their maintenance by the poorrate. So long as they put these charges upon the English farmers, it was impossible that they could compete with foreigners. With the exception of the reduction of the duty on a new manure, which the farmers were anxious to introduce, all these alterations were against them. He would support Lord Stanhope's amendment, though his advice would have been that the five, six, or seven, who thought with him, should have got up and explained their objections to the measure, and not have shown their weakness by dividing. If the measure had been brought forward the year before, he would have had much more confidence in being able to throw it out. Seeing, however, that it could not now be prevented, he was not one of those who would throw any difficulty in the way of the Government by exciting, if he had the power to excite, the intelligent body of practical farmers.

The Marquis of Clanricarde supported the measure as a step to further changes, though he believed it would produce little practical good in lowering the price of food, and that it was calculated to give effect to the principles of freetrade in a manner as distasteful as possible to the middle classes of the country. The great articles of consumption, tea, sugar, and tobacco, were omitted; coffee was

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 com. mercial 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, adopt ing 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 deprecated 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 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