Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 27th June 1846, Edition 3 of 3, Page 1, . ,^a4'd«^/aiK* lf: ofc'fl'eu lo^eieadfa...

Page 1
Page 1
1 of 8

On this page

  • Departments (2)
    • TO-THE WORKING GLASSES
    • imperial ftarltamtm
  • Text (9)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      To-The Working Glasses

      _TO-THE WORKING GLASSES

      Tfy Dear Friends,-It Ig No* ' . Wflfib T...

      tfy dear Friends ,-It ig no * ' . wflfiB twenty nunuta of twelve o clock , _Wednesday night , . nd I feel more tresh after my weeks worh Ln if I had teen sitting on the Editors stool ten houre a-day . 1 know not exactly what those who have merely thought of our Land Plan may suppose , but I do know that all who have _witnessed its _^ progress continue to increase in delight- I have frequently wondered at the anomaly , B 8 y , at the crime , of precluding those who build _kousesand produce everything , lrom having a NEST

      { hat they can call tlieir own . As Cains Gracchus told the Roman soldiers , many centuries ago , the _^ gd beasts , and birds , and all animals , have som place of refuge , while these who fight the battles ot their country are denied shelter ; nothing so much tends to degrade man and to make him slavishly subservient as his actual dependence upon th e wealthy to allow bim & place of refuge from yihich he may be ejected at the will or caprice of his landlord atthe shortest possible notice . The man _vho can say , ' This is my own house , ' is esteemed an _^ de pendent man . Is he not distinguished anionu his class ? and even this poor privilege he has

      purchased at a destructive RETAIL PRICE . The many experiments that have been made by cap italists bave all failed for want of this precious gem—perpetuity of tenure , or lease for ever . In Belgium , where the natives understand the value td * social comfort better almost than any other people , the first and dearest object of the peasant is to pu ; - chase a spot of ground whereon be can erect himself a house , from which no earthly power can disturb him . The Belgian looks first to the bouse , and then io the means of living in it ; and hence , in numerous instances , the Belgian peasants live at a distance of a mile , two miles , and even three miles , from their plot ofground ;—and so with the French . This distance fwan the seat of work considerably

      reduces the value of labour , and increases the price of production . Tou , every one of you , will live on ¦ your allotments ; . aad with Ter ; trifling exertion will be able to manure your land ( the heaviest process ] at one-tenib of the expense that a fanner holding a thousand acres of land can accomplish the same work . Tbey will tell yon of the Scotch plan and the "Norfolk plan of folding cattle upon the spot . That is a mere make-shift—a substitute for tbe best principle of culture . A man living on his four , three , or tiro acres of ground , will do more at some of the most expensive processes of husbandry in one day , than a farmer liting at a distance on a thousand acres can do , with a pair of horses and fourmen , in a -week . This fact mnst enhance ihe value of close

      labour . Since I last wrote , I have refused £ 100 an acre for the detached two and a half acres that I mentioned to you in my last . I want the value of the timber upon it as well , and I WILL GET IT . We bave progressed wonderfully within the last week , and so we onght . Yon paid £ 352 on Saturday last for labour and _bufldins materials , and YOU ARE TIIE

      BEST EMPLOYERS IN THE PARISH-Labour employing its own class . "We bave now twenty carpenters , ten sawyers , _Sfieen bricklayers , six sand diggera , three well diggers , together with slaters , plasterers , and abont fifty labourers and horses at work . We have nearly a mile of a straight gravel walk , Tunning from wood to wood , from end to end of Labour ' s estate , with houses on either sido , look > img most "beautiful , in fact to my eye most heavenly , and on tbe 17 th [ of August _Jl will show such a sight to all who choose to come as never -was seen in England or in the world since Adam was a little boy . I cannot tell you how I long for that day .

      There will be an entrance with a single three room cottage at each side of the gate-way leading to the main road of nearly a mile In length , and then a double row of houses , with a garden of 21 feet in front of each the length of the house , and spring water within about 150 yards , the most distant that will be from any man ' s house ; some will have it on the spot , and all will be upon an average of about € 0 yards from it ; so that I am not unmindful of yeur comforts nor am I going to huddle yon into mud houses . It would be impossible to convey to ydu anything like a true notion ofthe amicable , the willing , the cheerful , and efficient assistance I receive from "M'Grath , Doyle , _Cullingham , our foreman , and John Dowlinj * our overseer of Bricklayers . In fact , bnt for those

      men Icould not manage atall . THOUGH I WOULD NOT GIVE IN . No , no , with God's blessing , and yonr Co-operation , I wulforce the House of Commons , and that ere Ion ? , to legislate upon this LAND PLAN OF OURS . I am full of it up to the very throat , _tacause I see the ease with which it might be made national . Mark me . and mark me well , my own dear fustian jackets , blistered hands , and unshorn chins , when I tell you that in all mere political movements great liars speculate upon the gullibility of great fools , as a means of making political powerachieved by their aid , a stepping stone to their own social happiness . But the devil a house have they , one of them , ever built for a poor man npon any other condition than that the occupant is to be their very humble servant , their slave .

      The Americans , with their political freedom , have been obliged at last to nut our social motto upon their flag ; they say THE LAND . The Pole Trill only fight for THE LAND . The French did fight for THE LAND . The Prussians will soon fight for THE LAND . In fact , it is the only one thing on earth worth fighting for , and if all the workingclasses saw its value as I do , they would fight for it to-morrow all over the world—EXCEPT ENGLAND , Mr . ATTORNEY-GENERAL , where we bave found out the knack of purchasing it . Now , my friends , what a great big bother some building societies do make to be sure , when they _purchase a . few PERCHES or LUGS of Land to build

      houses upon , ani here are we , not yet a year in real existence , and we have 230 ACRES to begin with , and we are now looking out for another PATCH . Shall I ever be able to convince yon of themagnitudc and importance of this practical turn that Chartism has taken ? Before very long we shall have 20 , 000 members , and can any man believe that 20 , 000 persons of one mind , speaking at one and the same time , and - _«* . ONE AND THE SAME TONE , will be long

      unheeded by the House of Commons . No—the thing is impossible , utterly , wholly ( impossible . It would be very desirable to make an impression upon the minds of Candidates at the approaching General Election , upon the Land plan , as a joint of Chartism ; and when 1 have about 500 located , which will not take long after the first estate is finished and mortgaged , then I will see and find my way into the House once more , and rest assured that the Charter and the Land shall ring through the whole world .

      Tou don't seem to consider that the wonders we are now doing are being accomplished upon the fnnds of the society without any thingreturning , and ihat , once in full swing , we shall then be able to mortgage and go on as rapidly as we can get estates to purchase . While some people are mortified flt our success , others , who wish well to the project , write to caution me against going on too fast . Jit Jwill give those sincere fiiends pleasure to learn , that , without

      mortgage or sale , we have now very nearly as much as will complete all our purchases up to this time , and build all our houses , and make all our improvements . That is , in less than a year wehave secured thc location of one hundred and fifteen occupants at two acres each . This is the only way I can put the question , for our calcu _l ation was made for two acres , and we have now two hundred and . thirty acres , ¦ which at two each would locate one hundred and

      fifteen .- The snobs in the neighbourhood of Garpendens say , they would subscribe £ 2 , 000 to purchase me off , as tbe Queen Dowager has recsntly taken a residence close to OUR ESTATE , but my answer is , tbat the people who support the lady are fit and proper and respectable neighbours for her . One thing I have now to impress upon every secretary of the Land Society—our payments are weekly and heavy . Last week , £ 352 , this week , perhaps , more . The Post-office people make so many alterations in their rules , that I am very mueh inconvenienced . I will give you one of many instances . They used to pay the orders if signed W . P . Roberts ; then they directed that he should sign his name in full . When I was at Manchester he did sign a large number William P . Roberts . They

      Tfy Dear Friends,-It Ig No* ' . Wflfib T...

      cashed some , and refused to cash a large amount , unless his name was signed in full—William Prouting Roberts . I have a large quantity of these not signed as they have directed , for which I cannot get cash . Moreover , the process of sending piles of orders to Manchester is expensive TO ME , and expensive to MR . ROBERTS , who returns and sometimes registers them ; besides , I cannot possibly insure his having time to sign so many . Now , to

      correct this inconvenience , I have to request that all monies , whether Post-office orders or bank orders , may in future be payable to me . . This will considerably lessen my trouble and inconvenience . I trust to all secretaries being - punctual in the observance of this direction : —All Post-office orders , whether sent through me or to Mr . Wheeler , to be made payable to Feargus O'Connor , with the name of the person who procured it written legibly .

      In conclusion , I trust that all who intend joining in the demonstration , on tbe 17 th of August , will notify the same to the Committee in time to allow of erfect arrangements being made for their accommodation , and , again , I say , that I will shew Labour such a sight as Labour never saw or expected to see . Henceforth , the working classes cannot be made brawlers for power for this party or that party , for this er tbat man , unless a House and Land and something substantial is at the bottom of it . If 2 have done no more good I have done THAT . You will believe that I am not a little interested in ' the Land Plan , when I tell yon that , on Tuesday last , an actionagainsfcme for libel , at the suit of Mr . William Jolr a O'Connell , Head Repeal Warden for ALL

      ENGLAND , was to be tried in the Common Pleas , and by a SPECIAL JURY too , what think you of that ? and the right hon . W . Gladstone , Cabinet Minister , was one of the jurors , and all the time I was too busy and anxious abont the buildings to attend . Yesterday being the last day for special jury causes , and the Court being occupied with a heavy railway case , the Lord Warden General was doomed to disappointment till November next . Now , most people wonld like to "know the result of such a trial , but I have had so much experience in SPECIAL JURY cases that I was satisfied with a guess . These are some of my LIABILITIES . Your faithful Friend and Bailiff , Feargus O'Conkor ,

      Ar00110

      T ¦ - And National 1 , : .Tiiilsljq-Uma ...

      ¦ - AND NATIONAL , : . _TIiilSljQ-UMA L _^

      Tvol. X, No. 450- London, Saturmivjff{Pg...

      TVOL . X , NO . 450- LONDON , SATURMiVjff _{ _pg || _piyy V : \ hm " _± E > g _ _Bggy _^ _S _,. _= - - »•• _MMI—

      Imperial Ftarltamtm

      imperial _ftarltamtm

      House Of Lords, Monday , Jose 22. Their ...

      HOUSE OF LORDS , Monday , Jose 22 . Their lordsbipsmet at a quarter to five o ' clock . CORN IN BOND . Lord AsHBtrRioN rose , pursuant to notice , ta move the following resolution - . — "That , whatever may be the alterations which it may be expedient permanently to make in the laws regulating the introduction of foreign corn , it is the opinion of this house that the sudden importation of the large quantity ol wheat now in bond at a very low rate of duty , while the prices are moderate , and the prospect of the approaching harvest in promising , may be . productive of great injury and injustice to the cultivators of the soil ofthe United Kingdom , and that some better provision against such a calamity should be provided than is contained in the bill now before the house . " His lordship said he would not enter into the general

      policy ofthe great change about to be made in our commercial law , after the opinion which had been twice expressed by their lordships npon the principle of the measure . BHt assuming they were right in the general policy and expediency of this great change , he wished to call their attention to the want of caution exhibited in the hasty , inconsiderate manner in wliich the measure had been conducted . Their lordships were about to take away every safeguard against the shock and oscillation of prices which must be occasioned by the vast _quantity of corn and flour now in bond coming at once upon the market . That quantity was some time ago not less than two millions of quarters , and since then foreign corn had been pouring in everv day from all parts of the world ,

      exceeding all power of absorption by the effectual demand in this country , where there was , moreover _, every prospect . of an abundant market . Upon an average of six years , we had required only about 100 , 000 quarters of foreign wheat in aid of our own produce , and they were now going to open the _floodgates , and let in _reckles-ly . without the slightest _jirecaution to prevent individual ruin , at least two millions and a half of quarters actually in bond . Ue suggested no particular plan ; he merely proposed a simple resolution , that , whatever their lordships did , they would take care not to expose the country to any unnecessary risk . The Earl of Dalhousie observed , that the speech of Lord Ashbnrton was dark in alarm and fruitful in

      prophecy , but a speech more bare in facts , or less _supported by argument it had never been his fate to hear . His noble friend had talked of some unheard of and dangerous amount of foreign corn that was to come into this country ; whereas the latest accounts from the _Custom-honse showed that the quantity of wheat and wheat flour togetber in bond is under one million nine hundred thousand quarters , and so far from there being any anticipation tbat tbis quantity would be unduly or inordinately increased by imports from foreign countries , the very reverse is the fact ; for from every quarter of the world thc Government had the same information as in the last year—namely , that there was a probability ofa short coming harvest ; Nature appearing to set herself in array in her various elements against us , by an excess of wet in one quarter and drought in another . He showed that the quantity of foreign corn in bond and actually admitted , under the existing law , had

      been greater than one million nine hundred thousand quarters . In reply to the complaint of Lord Ashburton ofthe hasty and reckless manner in which thismeasure had been conducted , he reminded their lordships tbat the measure had been announced a quarter of a year back , when Sir Robert Peel proposed that the same rule should be applied to the gradual admission of corn as it was customary to apply to other merchandise when duties werealtered . But this was objected to , and Sir Robert , finding it not according to precedent in respect of corn , withdrew the proposition , and Lord Stanley had given him credit for so doing . Whatever effect this measure might have been expected to produce upon prices had been produced _^ already ; and if their lordships intended to make this change in tbe Corn Law , it should be done as much as possible at once ; for experience had shown that the worst _tiring that could be done was to haug up such a measure over the heads of those who were affected by it .

      After speeches from Lord Kinnaird , Earl Urey , Lord Redesdale , the Earl of Ellenborough , and tbe Earl of Wicklow , chiefly deprecatory of the delay which the pro posed resolution would cause to thc passing ofthe Corn Bill , Lord AsnnuRTOX shortly replied , and their Lordships divided , when there appeared—For tlie resolution ... ... ... 47 Againstit ... ¦ 70 Majority against theresolution ... 23 THE SILK DUTIES .

      The Duke of Richmond then rose to present a petition from certain silk manufacturers and weavers at _Jfcedesfield , complaining of the effects of the reduction of the silk duties some years since ; it had caused distress among them from which they had never recovered ; their condition has _^ _' _» 1 'y tended downwards ever since . They stated that the quantity of silk wmked np in this country had not materially increased of late , and that all tbe ftner branches of tbe silk manufacture were passing into foreign lands ; articles of luxury like these were proper subjects of taxation . They prayed that this branch of industry mieht receive protection . Ihe uoble duke added , _thatThe had another petition from th * silk weavers of _Snitalfiidds _. very numerously

      signed , praying to be heard by counsel at the bar ot the house . He professed himself unable to state tlieir case properly ; there were technical terms to be used , -ind a great deal had to be stated ; but a learned counsel had been instructed , and ought to be heard . The petition from Macclesfield said nothing against free trade ; it only stated that this branch of industry would be found on inquiry a proper exception to the general rule . If the house was prepared to p lace in jeopardy the landed interest of the country , and give way to the clamour of the League , that was no reason for abandoning tbe operatives of the country and thiprinciple of protection of domestic industry ; thoug h ihe keystone ofthe arch was thus being taken away , he trusted it would be only a temporary triumph , and he should be as eager as ever to maintain protection

      House Of Lords, Monday , Jose 22. Their ...

      to-other departments . ( Hear . ) He did not ask to have witnesses examined—that might be supposed to lie for delay ; he only asked the house to do what they had heretofore done—what they did not refuse to the municipal corporations of England and of Ireland —to grant that which every Englishman had a right to expect , ay , to demand—a fair hearing . There were several precedents for this in former years , in 1779 , 1789 , 1790 , and since . There had been great distress among the Spitalfields weavers ; but they had borno their lot with a resignation and forbearance which was very much to . their credit as good _Bubjectand as members of a Christian community . ( Hear , hear . ) He moved that these petitioners be heard in the committee on the Customs Duties' Bill against that clause which affected their interests . *

      TheEarlofDAtHonsiB said it was an ungracious task to oppose this motion , but with reference to convenience and to precedent , their Lordships should hot agree to it . The usage and practice of the house precluded the hearing of counsel on a Customs bill , or a measure of general policy . Lord Brougham denied the existence of such a rule , and appealed to the precedent of the orders in council , when he had been heard as counsel in the house . The Earl of Ellenborough said it would be dangerous and obstruct business . TheDuke'b f _WiiiaiiifaroN reminded their Lordships that they could not consent to any alteration ofthe details of the Tariff Bill in committee , without an infraction of the rules of proceeding between tho two houses . " - _"¦&

      The Duke of Richmond _indignantJy _^ -prote | ted against this doctrine . "If this , my Lords , " he said , ' * is to be the constitution of Parliament , is it not a mere farce that these Bills should be brought here at all ? Are we to be called on here night after night to go through the several stages ofa Bill , and then , forsooth , after all to be told that we must not alter what tbe House o f Commons has done ? I contend that these petitioners have a right to be heard , and I will not detain your lordships by saying more than this—that if this is to be the future course of the government , I hope tbat they will alter the standing orders ofthe house , and say at once that the Queen ' s consent and the Commons is sufficient—for that must be the result . "

      Their Lordships divined . For the Duke of Rich mond ' s motion—Contents—Present 43 irroxies _iiMMitnt _. tiMtiftttitti oi

      Ti Non-Contents—Present 42 Proxies 36 78 Majority for Ministers 4 Lord Brougham denounced the use of proxies , in such a case as this , as most unwarrantable . " The Peers present had , by a majority of one , declared their desire to hear the case of the Spitalfields weavers stated by Counsel , had yet the votes of Noble Lords who were absent in Ireland , on the Continent , in Madras , and elsewhere , were put in operation to decide that those who . were willing to be informed should notobtain the desired information . Such a use of proxies dealt a serious blow at their use in their Lordships' House .. The Earl of Glekgall questioned the validity of the vote given on this occasion by the Duke of Buccleuch , on the ground that the noble duke was not " in the house" at the moment the question was put from the Woolsack .

      The Duke of Buccleuch pledged his honour that he was present in the house when the question was put , although perhapshe might not he , strictly speaking , within that limit which was technically called "the House . " The Lord _Chancellor ruled that a Peer who was within the four walls as the Duke of Buccleuch undoubtedly was , had the right to vote as one present ' The Earl of Glexgall similarly questioned the right of the Earl of Home . The Earl of Home pledged his honour he was present and heard the question put . The Earl of Wicklow thought that should such injudicious use be made of proxies as that just witnessed , it would be advisable tor some Noble Lord to propose their abolition altogether . Earl Geet promised such a proposal his hearty concurrence .

      Tne Du & eot kichmond assured their lordships that though they had , by their extraordinary use of proxies , prevented the Spitalfields weavers irom being heard by counsel , he would feel it his duty to read the brief which" had been prepared for the instruction of the Learned Sergeant who was prepared to address them at the bar .

      CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL . On the order ofthe day for the committee on this

      bill , Lord Stanlet rose to offer some observations to their lordships on the subject , but commenced by referring to thepreYious conversation . He also thought that proxies had been improperly brought into the vote . His lordship then proceeded , at considerable length , to object to the Tariff on financial grounds . With so small an estimated surplus it was most dangerous to reduce duties , many of which were taken off luxuries : and the changes . ' proposed by the bill would be most injurious to the native artizan . He should first notice the articles of boots and shoes ; and he begged to call their attention to those articles in the first place , because whatever advantage the consumer might derive from the reduction of the

      duty on the importation of foreign boots and shoes , that advantage would be derived exclusively by the higher and n » t by the lower classes : while at the same time it would have the effect of throwing out of employment a large number of workmen in tbis country . { Hear , hear . ) Before 1 S _42 the duties upon the importation of foreign boots and shoes was £ 2 14 s . a dozen . It was lowered in 1842 to £ 19 s . 4 d . a hundred ; and the importation immediately rose from 4 , 820 to 8 . 353 pairs ; and they had continued to increase from that to 12 , 220 , 13 , 261 , and 14 , 3 . 87 . He repeated , that whatever advantage their lordships , and those in circumstances like their lordships , might derive from a reduction in the duty on French shoes , the lower classes would derive none , lie was

      utterly at a loss , then , to conceive upon what ground it was now proposed to reduce the duty to 14 s . a dozen . ( Hear , hear . ) It was the same with women ' s boots and shoes , the importation ot which had risen from 39 , 000 pair in 1841 , to 82 , 000 pair in 1845 . He would notice only " two _roorearticles , viz ,, stained paper and pillow lace . The importation of stained paper had risen from 13 , 479 yards in 1841 , to 30 , 000 yards in 1845 , and yet , with the fact of the importation having doubled in five years , it was now proposed to reduce the duty from ls . to 2 J . a yard ; and if it was hardly possible at present to compete with

      the foreigner with a duty of Is ., he begged them to consider how it was possible for the British producer and manufacturer to compete -with the foreigner under the protection of Is : reduced to 2 d . ? ( Llear , hear . ) Then take the article of pillow lace , which was a manufacture exclusively conducted by women and children . One could see no particular reason why the duty was reduced upon this article , which , if there was a luxury in the world , was a luxury ; but it was easy to see strong reasons why it should not be reduced , considering that it would confer an advantage alone to the rich , while it would throw a large number of the poor out of employment .

      The Earl ot Dalhousie denied that this measure was introduced . as a free trade measure , He had admitted that there were various anomalies and exceptions to the principle of free trade in the bill , the object of" which was to remove all duties from articles of food and of the first necessity , as well as from raw materials ; and with respect to articles not of prime necessity , but which entered largely into consumption , to reduce the rate of duty as far as practicable . Upon some articles , for various reasons , the principle was not worked out , and he admitted that the tariff did not profess entirely to depart from the principle of protection . The noble Earl then replied in detail to the specific objections of Lord _Staslet , observing that it did not follow because the importation of an article was increasing , or the revenue collected upon it augmented , that this was a healthy increase ; high duties created an illicit trade , wliich deranged all calculations .

      Earl SrANnoPE , whilst he predicted the most ruinous consequences fo British industry from the operations of the Tariff Bill , expressed his conviction to be tbat the full principle of free trade hail not been carried out in it , simply because , though the agriculturists allowed themselves to be Jed like cattle to the slaughterhouse , the Ministers durst not treat the manufacturers in the same way . The Earl of Ripon neutralized tbe apprehensions of Lord STANHorE , by exposing the groundless vaticinations with which he had been overwhelmed at the introduction of the tariff of 1 S 42 , by deputations from tbe glovers , the dealers in salt provisions , and the milling interest , some of whom had since assurred him they had found that he ( Lord _Ripox ) was right and they were wrong . After remarks from Lord Monteagle , Lord Salisbury , Lord Colchester and Lord Ashburton , their Lordships went into committee on the bill . On the second clause , which reduces the duty on timber .

      House Of Lords, Monday , Jose 22. Their ...

      Lord' Stanley moved its omission , because he _considered it an absolute and uncalled-for throwing away of revenue _*^ Tbe Committee , after a short discussion , divided , For the clause' Contents ..... 64 Non-contents . 52

      Majority for the Government ; ....... 12 The clause , as well as clauses 3 , 4 , and 5 , were agreed to . The Duke of Richmond objected to proceeding further . Lord Stanmt announced that he , and those with whom be acted , would not oppose the third reading ofthe Corn Importation Bill , contenting tnemselves withentering their protest on the journals against it ; he , " therefore , suggested that the _tariff should be proceeded with in committee en Tuesday , and that tbe Corn Bill , which stands on the paper for to-night , should be adjourned to Thursday . The suggestion was acquiesced in by the Duke of WBJ _& rooTjW _, ithe Chairman reported progress , and their Lordships adjourned at a quarter to ten o ' clock HOUSE OP COMMONS , Mosdav , June 22 . The Speaker took the chair at the usual hour .

      NEW ZEALAND , _; Mr . C . _Bullkr inquired what were the ' intentions of . the Government as to the introduction of any measure in respect to this colony ? ' Sir ft' PiKL said , the Secretary for the Colonies and himself had given great attention to the subject . Some of the / objections which he had telt to the disclosure ot any opinion on the subject had been ' removed by the . recent accounts from tbe colony , whence it appeared that the authority of the Crown was re-established . ( Hear . ) He had no longer , therefore , any objection to declare that it would be highly desirable to introduce in the course of this session a legislative measure in respect to the Government of the colony .

      THE SUGAR DUTIES . _# Alderman Thompson asked what were the intentions of Government as to the sugar duties . The Chancellor ofthe Exchequer stated , that he had . intended to make that proposition tonight , in pursuance of the notice which he had given last Thursday ; but late yesterday evening he had received an intimation from Lord G . Bentinck , that he intended to move , as an amendment on the proposition for going into committee , a resolution to ihe effect , that it was the duty of the Government to have introduced a bill for the continuance of the sugar duties at an earlier period of the session , and that the introduction of it at so late a period was calculated to injure the commerce of the country .

      If the noble lord persisted in tbat intention , it would be an interruption in the very first step to the progress of the temporary measure which he wished to press with some rapidity ; and if the debate on his amendment were adjourned at a late hour that evening , the- discussion of the original resolutions must be postponed till Friday next ; and , if so , there would be no possibility of passing this temporary measure before the sugar duties expired . He therefore appealed to the noble lord , and asked him to allow the resolutions to pass that evening in the Committee of Ways and Means without proposing his amendment . The noble lord ' s acquiescence in this request would not prevent him from bringing forward his amendment on another occasion . Lord G .- _Bkntinck replied that it was not his intention to put an end to tiie present sugar duties , or to cause a large defalcation to the revenue : his

      intention in moving his amendment was to cast a censure on the Government for allowing so late a period ofthe session to arrive before asking for the removal of a measure upon which between three and four mil . lions of revenue were annually raised . We are asked now , said his Lordship , to pass a Sugar Bill for a month ; but in the present position of political affairs in this House , there are sufficient indications that probably moro than a week will not elapse before the Right Honourable Gentleman now at the head of the Government will he so no longer , and then his successor will have a right to ask a considerable adjournment for the purpose of making the usual arrangements and procuring seats for the members of his Administration in tbis House , under which circumstances he also will be obliged no doubt to ask another month . Now , is it right so to derange the trade , and to put in hazard so large -an amount of

      revenue ? -. ' -- „ .. - After a short debate in which Messrs . Hume , M . Gibson , G . Bankes , M . Bernal ; Lord J . Russell , Sir R . Inglis , and other members took part , the propriety of going at once into the committee ot ways and means on the sugar duties was generally concurred in , and the house went into committee , and agreed to a resolution to continue the existing sugar duties for a month from the Sth of July .

      PROTECTION FOR LIFE ( IRELAND ) BILL . The Earl of Lincoln having moved the order of the day for the resumption of this debate , Mr . S . Crawford rose to oppose the bill though he was concerned to vote in opposition to the right hon . gentleman , at the head of the government at a time when , in his judgment , he had been unjustly assailed and unnecessarily persecuted . He congratulated tbe right hon . gentleman , however , on the triumphant manner in which he had disposed of these most undeserved attacks . He would , indeed , go into the same lobby with several hon . gentlemen opposite , but he had not any feeling in common with them , who had upon

      every occasion supported measures which he deemed oppressive to Ireland , who had always opposed any enlargement of the rights of the Irish people , and who , failing to damage the measures of the Prime Minister , had tried to damage the man . He then proceeded to point out the defects of this bill , and to explain what he considered to be the causes and the remedies of crime in Ireland . Remedial measures would be more effectual than coercive measures in restoring order and tranquillity to Ireland ; and among the remedial measures which he recommended were a well organised Poor Law , a more effective system of police , and the establishment of agricultural schools in every district of Ireland .

      Mr . Setmer explained the reason why he felt it to be his duty , though a strong Protectionist , to support this bill . It was a temporary measure , and only applicable to certaiii districts in Ireland j and though it placed in the hands of the government extraordinary powers , he did not think that those powers would be abused ; for , in their conduct towards Ireland , it appeared to bim that her Ma jesty _' s Ministers bad acted in a just and generous spirit . Had he been able to place Government in a minority on any question relative to protection , he should have been delighted to have done so ; but he could not see why he should oppose thc government on a question where he believed them to be right , merely to bring in another government , which he believed on all questions to be wrong . Mr . C . Powell , Mr . _lluisey , and Mr . V . Stuart opposed the bill . Mr . W . Collett supported it .

      Mr . Koebuck was bound , to look at tins bill in another point of view than its own merits , and to ask several disagreeable questions before he could make up his mind to vote against it . Lord G . Bentinck had declared , that he had no confidence in the Government , and had , therefore , determined to vote against this bill ; but after the speech he had made upon the first reading of it , it did not follow that , if he could get rid of the present Ministers , he would not propose the very same measure , and seek to administer it by an executive Government of protection members . But why had not Sir R . Peel the confidence ofthat noble lord and his party ? Merely because he had passed a Corn Bill which the people of England had long desired . ' Leaving Lord G . Bentinck

      for a short tune , he turned to Lord J . Ru 9 selliuul his friends on the O pposition benches . He traced the history of Coercion Bills for some years back , — showed that Earl Grey ' s Coercion Bill , with its court-martial clauses and its domiciliary visit clauses , was the severest Coercion Bill ever placed on the statute-book , —and complained that Lord J . Russell , who had now changed his opinions on the subject of coercion , bad never expressed auy regret for the cutting censure which he hud cast upon those who then opposed that measure . He then alluded to the Coercion Bill intro iuced in 1835 , which was quite as severe as the present . Owing to these circumstances , he wanted to know , before he

      ousted Sir R . Peel from office on account of this bill , whether ho was _ousting him for tho benefit of those who would reintroduce it as soon as confidence in them was restored . He would , therefore , ash Lord J . Russell what thc house was to expect from liim with regard to the administration of the law iu Ire . land , provided this bill was successfully opposed on the prescnt . occasion ? It was well known that , last _, winter / Lord J . Russell had been called on to form an administration . It was ' said tbat the Earl of Eesborough was to be Lord Lieutenant of Ireland , and that he was to be so on the express condition that he should be armed with a Coercion Bill . Lord J . Russell : That is not true .

      Mr . Roebuck admitted tliat after that answer tue _ar-iument wliich he had intended to raise on that rumour was at an cmi ; but he must remind the house that this bill was first introduced in the House . of Lords , and that the most marked supporters of it in that assembly had been the political friends of Lord John Russell . He had ,

      House Of Lords, Monday , Jose 22. Their ...

      therefore , every right to believe that they , too , would sanction a bill like the present if the Administration were changed . Unless he should receive a distinct intimation from Lord J . "Russell that he would no longer adopt towards Ireland the wild and severe measures which the Whig Government had formerly enforced , be should certainly not vote against tbe second reading of this bill now ; and if he did receive such an intimation , he should say that the change of opinion which it would display was expressed at an inopportune time , in an inopportune manner , and for an inopportune object . For if the opposition which he should then be compelled to give this bid should be successful , it would unsettle the present Administration , without giving the country a chance ofa strong and beneficial Administration

      in its place for many years to come . Lord J , Manners observed tbat his objection to this measure was one of principle and not of party , and that if it had not b . een for insinuations spread out of doors , he should " have been content to have given a [ silent vote against it upon Tory principles . This bill was neither novel nor necessary ; but if it had been either novel or necessary , it was . not calculated to meet the . evil of Ireland . Sir James Graham , in defence of this * ; Bill , replied to tbe observations in which Lord John Russell had bund fault with the Government for their delay in forwarding this Bill in the House : of Commons , and showed Ihat nothing could have been move injurious to the country than both the two courses recommended in lieu of that taken by the Government .

      He admitted that this bill was unconstitutional , and that ministers were bound to prove the necessity of the case before they asked the house to consent to it . As attempts had been made to cut down thc facts of the oase originally made out by the Irish Government , he re-stated many of them , and established by reference to the criminal returns , that in cerUin parts of Ireland , crimes , dangerous to life and property , were increasing to a fearful extent . He then referred to the appeal which Lord John Russell had made to himself personally respecting the conduct which he had formerly displayed towards the "Whig Government . When the noble lord asserted that the partisans of Sir Robert Peel had overthrown the Government , by opposing the fiscal measures which they had afterwards supported , be must remind him , that

      having overthrown the Government of Sir R . Peel in 1835 , by means of the appropriation clause , he had afterwards abandoned it in a manner which he ( Sir J . Graham ) would not characterize . Then as to the doctrines of free trade , he must repeat tbat tbe noble lord and his friends had been but sudden converts . Let any man read _:-Mr . Labouchere ' s speech on _proposing the sugar duties in 1840 , and he would see that the demarcation between free labour sugar and slave-labour sugar was asi strongly laid down in that speech as ever it had been by her Majesty ' s present government . As to free trade in corn , not iong before his abandonment of office , Lord Melbourne had declared it to be downright insanity , but a change of opinion suddenly came over his lordship and the members of his cabinet , and at a

      particular moment when power was fast departing from their hands . There was this difference between the policy of Sir R . Peel and of Lord Melbourne . Sir E . Peel asserted the principles of free trade , and thereby sacrificed his influence , and it might be his office ; whereas Lord Melbourne asserted them in order to gain influence and retain power thereby . Suchbeing the case , retraction of his former censures was impossible , though if those censures had been conveyed with too much bitterness he was sorry for it . Ad-Verting to tbe question put to him by Mr . Colquhoun , he declared that it was the intention of the Government to adhere to the curfew clauses , and not to recede from them on any account , in case thesecond reading of the bill should'be carried . He implored the house to consider the serious consequences

      which were likely to ensue next winter in case this bill should be rejected . Those who doubted of its necessity ought to resist it ; but those who were sa » tisfied of that necessity , ought to give it their , cordial support , independent of any confidence they might or might not have in her Majesty ' s Government , and not reject it on account of any other secondary considerations . Mr . Lmjouchkre commented on the singular fact , that Sir J . Graham should have ventured to give thc house a lecture on consistency , and denied that he had ever drawn the demarcation between free-labour sugar and slave-labour sugar , on whieh Sir J . Graham had insisted . He was grateful to Sir R . Peel for having introduced the Corn Law , but he 2 ouldnot on that account grant him complete control over the liberties of . Ireland .

      After a few words from Sir J . _Gratiam in explana tion , the debate was adjourned to Thursday next . The house then adjourned .

      HOUSE OF LORDS .-Tuesday . Jusb 23 The House met at Five o'clock .

      VISCOUNT HARDINGE AND LORD G 0 _UGITS ANNUITY BILLS . The Earl of RiroN , in answer to a question put by the Marquis of Lansdowne , stated that he proposod on Friday next , to ask their Lordships to reconsider the opinion they had lately expressed by vote on the annuities to Lord Hardinge and Gough . Discussions of some length ensued on the presentation of petitions by Lord Brougham and Lord _JRodeii , from two clergymen , complaining of the oppression caused by the present constitution of the Ecclesiastical courts .

      THE TARIFF The order of thc day for resuming the discussion , in committee , ofthe schedule of articles from which the duties are to be removed , or reduced , by tlw Customs'Duties Bill , being read . The Earl of Uardwjcke moved the omission ofthe articles of butter and cheese from the schedule . The revenue produced by butter in 1845 was 247 , 0041 . , and that b y cheese in the same year was 141 _. S 1 SZ ., they were increasing duties , and it was , therefore , most impolitic to reduce them , To lower the price for the benefit of consumers was tbe avowed design ofthe Government , but the reduction in price would be so small as to be felt by no one , whilst the pro . posed remission of 10 s . duty would take from the poor Irish producers 509 , 00 _'U . a year . The Earl of Dalhousie replied tbat the _ Government did not frame the schedule upon a consideration of revenue only . Ile argued , that if the price to the consumer would not be lowered by the reduction of duty , thc poor Irish farmers could not be injured .

      After a speech from Lord Stanley , their Lordships divided . For retaining the articles in the schedule—Contents 50 Non-Contents 33 Majority for Ministers —17 On the article of hops , The Duke of Richmond objected to any remission of duty on this article as a gross injustice to the _hopgrowers . In Kent there were 23 , 000 acres of hop plantation , in which capital to the amount of 2 , 000 , 000 / . was sunk , and upon which additional capital to the amount of 900 , 0001 , was annually

      expended in cultivation . A large and increasing labouring population were comfortably supported by means of these plantations ; for the sum paid annually for manual labour was 230 , 000 _^ ., which exceeded the usual amount /' or the same number of acres by 160 , 000 / . Under that state of things a large population had grown up , because that branch ot agriculture found them constant employment ; and now they were about , not only to cripple the resources ol those domestic producers , but to leave them burdened with so large an amount of population that they would not be able to employ it in other ways .

      A debate followed in which Lords Dalhousie , Wicklow , Colchester , Stanhope , and Ripon took part . The Duke of _Richmond urged that the only sure means of giving tho people cheap beer was to repeal the duty on malt . Lord Fitzwilliam concurred in this suggestion . Beer was Just as much part of the food ofthe people as bread , and the repeal of the malt duty would be a great boon conferred upon the landed interest . Lord Radnor supported tbe reduction ol the duty upon hope , and the amendment was negatived without a division . Lord Stani'RY objected to thc reduction of tbe duty

      upon thread-lace and pillow-lace , which would destroy a branch of domestic manufacture carried on in cottages by poor industrious women and children _, lie declared his determination to take tho sense of the committee upon this item . The Duke ol Richmond likewise deprecated the sending the cottage lace-makera into cotton factories . Lord Dalhousie considered that the effects which the two noble peers bad ascribed to a reduction of duty from £ 13 2 s . Od . per cent , to £ 10 per cent were extravagant . These were articles of great value , easily smuggled , and the effect of the reduction would be to prevent their illicit introduction .

      Lord Stanley ridiculed the idea that a reduction of three per cent , could check smuggling . The reduction was unnecessary , whilst it took away pro tanto a not extravagant protection from an humble but deserving class of manual labourers . The gallery was' then cleared for a division , but none took place , and the item passed . Upon the item of paper-hanging : * , Earl Stanhope objected to thc reduction of ls . to 2 d . Lord Ashbubton could not see what possible objection could be gained by this reduction . The ma-

      House Of Lords, Monday , Jose 22. Their ...

      nufacture of the higher and tasteful descriptions or ornamental paper had been entirely given - up , in ibis _countryi ; lie ; entered his protest at the' ' lUaiiVipr in which this measureiwas carried out for the mcit pe _» dan try of _political economy . _, Lord Dalhousie could only meet this sweeping assertion by a general denial . On the article silk , — -

      'the . Duke of Richmond rose to move its omissionfrom the schedule . The noble duke held in his . haiid the brief which had been prepared for counsel , _' !!' the silk weavers had been allowed to be heard at tha bar , and which he said on the previous evening hewould himself read to the house . Those noble-lords who had re used to agree to his motion that the silk weavers be heard by counsel atthe bar , but _who-weresc . eager to plunge into tree trade , had been ; _actuated in their refusal to hear the petithneraby , j ' o " _ac _* $ | J having their case brought forward , ; _ijjwaus _^ i _^ y knew that it could be proved that the reductions made in silk duties in 1824 had been ruinous to those engaged iii l he t ) ade . The wages of the weavers had been so enormously reduced that many of them had hardlv ' enough -to maintain themselves and their

      families , and the employers had , in many cases , given t ' _ler-. i notice tliat . when the bill passed , they wouldrcdiice their wages still further . ( Hear , hear . ) To reconcile their lordships to the abolition of the corn duty they had beeu told that , notwithstanding the measure was pending , such an estate had sold tor so much , and such a form had let for so -much' forgetting altogether what the landlord might have undci taken to do ; but such pleas could not be put forward as regarded propel ty employed for the manufacture of silk . It had become much depreciated . Tbe silk mill ef Messrs . Kay and Co ., at Tringy which cost £ 30 , 000 , bud heen offered for £ 200 a year rent , and refused by one party ; but was now let at that rent to another . Messrs . _Brot'lehuvst , too , had

      sold six mills since 1824 , at one-third of their cost ; _, ami another beautiful and celebrated silk mill at Manchester had been sold at less than its value . His noble'friend opposite ( the Earl of Dalhousie ) argued that these duties could not be maintained _,, because the manufacture was one that depended on fashion . Why , that was the very reason it ought to be protected . A noble earl opposite , who was a recent convert to free trade doctrines , bad argued against the lace duties , on the ground that ' the morals ofthe children employed iu the lace cottages in Buckinghamshire would be improved by their being free to be sent to school . But how were their parents to be able to send them out of their wages ? The Earl of Gallowat—By their having cheaper

      provisions . The Duke of _Richmokd—That waa the fallacy ofa new convert . How were tbey to get wages to buy those cheaper provisions ? He believed that their wages would be reduced one-half ; and ~ hew ] 'V ' ere they on such wages to buy the provisions , however cheap they might be ? The noble earl ' s argument would imply ihat it was better that the children hitherto employed in the lace cottages sbould'be sent to the cotton factories , where they could get some _, schooling ; but he ( the Duke of Richmond ) would prefer the morals they would learn in those cottages than where they were exposed to the fearful scenes they at present witnessed in the large manufacturing towns . ( Hear . ) The petitioners alleged that they were not about to receive a protection of 15 per

      cent , as the _tiovernment professed that they would ; at least , not in the finer and more weighty articles ; as to these the protection would not be above 9 - per cent . They laughed also at what the Government put forward on the subject of smuggling . They de-Scribed those arguments as being " either shear folly or intentional delusion , " and argued that the fpublication of the names of the shopkeepers who _scldfcha smuggled goods , and a refusal to them of a license to sell in future , would effectually stop smuggling in articles of the kind , which were usually purchased by persons of good condition who would dread « xposure . He wished thatthe arguments ofthe petition had had fa better advocate than he was . De could not hut regret that their lordships had refused to

      hear them . They had been treated in a manner which he never could havesupposed that house would have adopted towards any class of well-conuuote _? operatives . : The noble duke concluded by _mbvUrv that the article " silk'' be struck from the schedule . Lord Dalhousie expressed his regret that he hag been constrained , upon precedent and public _conve _» nience , to resist the prayer ot the petitioners , whose case , however , had not suffered in the hands of the noble duke . The petitioners had complained , that whilst the bill professed to retain a cuty of 15 per cent , upon foreign silks , on many articles it amounted to only nine per cent . The noble lord explained the difficulty of adjusting exactly _thfc duty upon so large a number of articles , varying

      so much in value ; but he believed that 15 per centwas , as far as it was possible to fix it , the general amount of duty . With respect to thc allegation of the petitioners , -that twenty years ago the Legislature began that alteration in the silk trade from which they dated their depression , if , the noble lord observed , capital had been withdrawn from' this trade , the importation of the raw material baddiminished , and thc demands ofthe home market and of the foreign trade bad decreased , the petitioners might have a case founded upon their past history ; . but if in all these respects the very reverse was the fact , tbe petitioners were not borne out in their statement , and tlieir prophecies were groundless . The fact of silk manufactures being exported from ,

      this country to France , which excelled in silk fabrics , was itself a triumphant proof of the ability of our manufacturers to maintain a competition with foreigners . The noble Lord showed that our silk trade had prospered during the last three monthB , since the reduction of duty had been actually in operation , and stated that there neverwas a time when , as a whole , those who were employed in the silk trade were in a greater state of prosperity . Ia Spitalfields itself , advertisements for hands were put up , and the throwing-mills in the country could not get them in sufficient number . The very night on which the Duke of Richmond waa to have presented the petition of the silk weavers ( a fortnight ago , ) a meeting of those weavers was'held to consider whether

      tbey should not ask an increase ot wages ; the meeting was held , a rise of wagts asked , and many masters in Spitalfields had acceded to the demand . Lord Stanley , asked , if the silk trade had been soprosperous , why it should be interfered with ? But he differed with Lord Dalhousie as to the facts , and as to the effect , said to have been produced , having been produced not by diminishing the duty upon the raw material , but by the concurrent reduction of duty upon the manufactured article . Lord Stanley then produced counter statements of the silk trade since the year 1824 . Lord Dalhousie , he observed , had spoken ofthe vast increase in the importation of raw silk ; but whilst the quantity had increased froml _, 38 S , 0001 b ., the average of 1 S 15 , 1 S 16 , and 1817 . to 3 , 884 , 0001 b . in 1824 , in 1844 it only reached 4 , 600 , 0001 b . —an increase of 800 , 0001 b . iu twenty

      years , instead of 2 , 000 , 0001 b . in six years ; and of this quantity _^ great part consisted of knubs and husks—a specimen of which his Lordship exhibited , observing , that of this rubbish the largest portion of tl » c boasted exports to France had been made . Tho noble Lord in like manner , showed that , in the export trade and the imports of finished goods , the evidence ofthe success of Mr . Husldsson _' s measure in 1 S 24 was equally equivocal . After pointing out various instances of the practical inequality of the silk duties , he stated that there was only one article in this trade in which wages had not fallen and were falling , and that was figured velvet , which had a high protective duty of 11 . 7 s . 6 d . per lb ., and that waa now to be reduced to 9 s . The noble Lord contended that the alteration was neither called for by policy , nor justified by the arguments of Lord Dalhousie , and its eftect would be to injure the revenue by reducing one-half duties which now produced

      300 , 0002 . For the amendment .. .. 50 Againstit .. ,. ., 75-Majority against the amendment 25 After a smart dialogue respecting a deputation from the silk-weavers to the Board of Trade , the schedule was agreed to ; the bill was reported without amendments , and ordered to be read a third time on Thursday . Their Lordships then adjourned at a quarter pasfc twelve . HOUSE OF COMMONS , Tuesday , June 23 . The house met at four o ' clock . The report of the Glasgow , Dumfries and Carlisle Railway Bill was carried by 16 G against 100 ; thus reversing the decision of the house on a _foimer di « vision . Mr . F , Maule pave notice that , 'he would endeavour _tojhave this decisio nreversed on the third reading .

      SUGAR DUTIES . Public business commenced by The Chancellor of the Exchequer moving that the report on the resolutions on the sugar duties agreed to by the Committee of "Ways and Means , should be brought up . ' It was brought up accord * _iugly . On the question that the house agree to thc said resolutions , some conversation took place between Mr . B . Escott , Mr . Hume , the _Chascellou ef tha Exchequer , Mr . Mofpatt , Mr . James , Lord John Russell , and Mr . '; Thornley , on the question whether the temporary bill should continue the existing sugar duties or the reduced duties , of which

      notice had been given some time ago by Government . It was ultimately agreed that it would not be possible to carry any other bill , save tbat for continuing the existing duties , without opening the whole wide question of the sugar duties . The resolutions were therefore agreed to without - amendment ; and » bill founded upon them was ordered to be brought in , _Jbjjji tho Chancellor of the Exchequer was brought in , read a first , and second time on Wednesday . Mr . C . BoXLER then moved Select Committee to inquire providing a general record _iw * _fContinuedto the

      "I I 0,:

      "i I 0 ,:

      . ,^A4'D«^/Aik* Lf: Ofc'fl'eu Lo^Eieadfa...

      . _, _^ a 4 'd _«^/ aiK _* lf _: _ofc'fl'eu lo _^ _eieadfa _/^ _'J _?^ * _vM _£ ' _^ me _^ _ajp _^ oir _^ entofa in | tt _> tHq _.. be . st _thfid _^ _pjf i office fo'd _^ _nsIandTindr _I _^ _SsSf _^' _EiohthPdOe . J ' _-Ty- ' _-Z' _^ /¦ id m _^ i _^ _gMigpZ _* ' ' - ' , _jfiwtiWf , '• ¦ _*^ W 2 _^/\ t me appo _* _njmentoia-vy , iii ) . ' _tliq- bejst , iiij ) "d _^ ' ' _^' /\ _iffice _Vfoti _^ _feland _^ nd _^ _rj _^^ _^~ - _*• ¦ " _/& _$ ¦ < % . . _n _*****

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), June 27, 1846, page 1, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns3_27061846/page/1/