Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY,…

News
Cite
Share

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY, MAY 13. Mr. Muntz brought on a motion for an inquiry into the con- duct of Lord Cardigan, especially with reference to his recent flogging of a soldier on Easter Sunday. Whatever his other good qualities might be, it was clear that the noble earl had not that command of his temper which was an indispensable requi- site for the command of men. The proportions of courts-mar- tial and punishments under his colonelcy had been unusually large and if he had really a valid defence, he would seek, not shun, this enquiry. The hon. member then read a statement referred to, which amounted in substance to this:—that in the course of two years, while the regiment of the noble earl was 350 strong, there had been 105courts-martial, 750 punishments, and 90 imprisonments at the same time in Canterbury gao) that during the 20 years the regiment had been in India, and 700 strong, the punishments had been less than during the two years it was under his command that during one month of his command there had been more courts-martial than in the pre- ceding twelve months, and that in the six following months, during which time the regiment was not under the noble earl's command, there had been only two courts-martial. It ap. peared, also, that the Doble earl had exercised the greatest ty- ranny over his officers and men, and was even in the habit, at the head of his regiment, of giving the lie to his officers. If he (Mr. Muntz) were placed in the noble earl's situation. he would court inquiry on this subject and if the noble earl did not do so, it was a proof Ihat inquiry was needed. Mr. Scholefield seconded the motion. Mr. Macaulay objected, on constitutional grounds, to the in- terference of the house with the control of the army in any but \ery extreme cases. He would not now discuss the merits or demerits of Lord Cardigan but it would be a very dangerous precedent to interfere on mihtary questions, in cases where the complaint would not be cognizable by a court-martial—to go through the history of an officer's whole life for the purpose of ascertaining whether he were, or not, a fit person to remain in the army. One statement was, that the Earl of Cardigan was in the habit of giving the lie to the officers while at the head of the regiment. Now he (Mr. Macaulay) could only say, that in all the conversations he had held on the subject with the of- ficers of that regiment, he had never heard the slightest whisper of anything of that kind. It might be that they had omitted that portion of the case, but it was his belief, that if Lord Car. digan had been guilty of such a practice, it had not been com- plained of at the Horse Guards and without knowing that it had been so complained of, and that no attention had been paid to the complaint, he did not think the hon. member justified in bringing forward the present motion. Lord G. Lennox and Col. Verner resisted the motion. Mr. Ewart and Mr. Warburton supported it. Lord Howick concurred in the constitutional objection, but not in the opinion that an officer ought never to be displaced except where the complaint against him would be cognizable by i court-martial. Any pecuniary hardship might always be ob- viated by the Crown's permission to him to sell out. Several other members said a few words each, and after a reply from Mr. Muntz, the house, on a division, negatived the motion. Lord J. Russell moved that on the Thursdays after the 1st of June, orders of the day should have precedence of notices. —Agreed to. ADJOL'RNED DEBATE. Mr. Brotherton expressed his opinion that mammon was at the bottom of the pretended zeal against slavery. The distress in the manufacturing districts was greater at this time than at any former period within his memory. He condemned the corn-laws, as working injustice to the poor, and as imposing a tax of forty millions a-year. Capt. Hamilton censured the government for having brought forward a budget which they could have had no expectation of carrying. It had been introduced by Lord John Russell in a speech which, with all its ability, was in many parts of it fitter for the hustings than for the House of Commons. He did no* agree with those who contended for cheap bread because cheap bread would be attended with low wages and he thought the wages of the agricultural labourers too low already. Mr. Alston said it was the duty of the house to inquire into the existing tariff, with a view to its modification. He admitted that to cheapen bread was not to benefit the poor, and he should oppose any attempt to remove the protection now enjoyed by Agriculture. He was an enemy to slavery, but he did not see how slavery was promoted by the uow-proposed duties on sugar. He cited the opinion of some members of the Anti-Slavery So- ciety, that these measures had no such injurious tendency, and declared his intention to vote with the government. Mr. llarland objected to make this extensive change for the purpose of meeting a temporary deficiency of revenue. That deficiency had mainly arisen from the Post-office reduction hut the parties who had demanded and obtained that reduction had not been the colonial or the agricultural, but the mercan tile, interests, lie believed that the present proposal would in- jure the colonists, would retard the improvement of the negroes, and would be unattended with benefit to the working classes at home. Mr. Hastie believed that the traders connected with the East Indies were not, as had been supposed, unfriendly to these changes, with the exception of the East India Company. Mr. Paltrier, of Essex, as connected with Last Indian com- merce, took a view opposed to that of the- preccdmg speaker. He was no friend of monopoly, but he could not approve such freedom of trade as the ministers were recommending, which was the free trading of the highwayman, or of the Arab of the desert. He entered into a variety of commeicial details for the purpose of disproving the ministerial theories. I Mr. Clay observed upon the inconsistency of the Opposition, who at one moment inveighed against this measure as encou- raging slavery by the admission of stave grown sugars, and ai another asserted that not a single pound of such sugar would ever find its way to our markets. Ministers provided for both events; if the supply from our own colonies should be suffi- cient, that supply would yield the required revenue if that supply should fail, the revenue would be raised from the sugar of foreign states. He thought it peculiarly ungracious in the East India Company, whose territories had just been relieved from the colonial monopoly, to quit their vocation of sovereigns, and join in the cry against free trade. He denied that the sac- charine value of foreign muscovado sugar was greater than the saccharine value of the muscovado sugar of the British colonies, but the contrary and maintained that the proposed difference of duty was, therefore, a sufficient protection to the British co- lonial sugar. It had been argued by Lord Stanley, that the principle of the government was not that of free trade, hut that of protection. So it was; but of protection at much lower rates than those of the present system. Mr. Chapman said his objection to these measures was, that they went to destroy the ships, the commerce, and the colonies of this country. Sir E. Lytton Bulwer considered this as no question of hu- manity, but as a purely commercial question, between freedom of trade and monopoly. He renewedthc imputation of hypo- crisy upon those who protested against the consumption of slave-grown sugar in England, while they assented to the im- portation of it for refinery and re expoitation, and to the con- sumption in England of slave-grown coffee, tobacco, and: cotton. England would have moie influence to reform the malpractices of Brazilian slavery, by becoming the customer of the Brazils, than by refusing to deal with them at all. He was the representative of an agricultural constituency bul he would not therefore band himself with the euemies of all freedom in trade. Mr. Hume began by stating that he hadtaken great pains to make himself master of this subject. The resistance 10 the measure of ministers was a mere party movement for the purpose of turning them out. He Nished Ihat those who professed so much sympathy with the negroes would think of the white slaves at home. No man disapproved more than he did of the policy which had led to the present deficiency of revenue but this was not the time to find fault with the cause, but to find means for applying the necessity. Complaint was made about the deficiency in the revenue of the Post office, but that had been more than compensated in other branches of income. The greatest deficiency had been in the proceeds of these very sugnr duties. The present proposal had been represented as a sudden one, adopted on the spur of the occasion but it was one which the. country needed, and he was therefore indifferent whether it were the growth of a year, a month, or a day. The accusation, however, of sudden and groundless change of opi- nion came from no man with worse grace than from Lord Stanley. He admitted that the present proposal was one of protection, and not absolutely of free-trade. The question was, whether the existing protection were not too high. He was not afraid of the influx of slave-grown sugar, for he believed that free labour would expel the labour of slaves. He was greatly dissatisfied with the course taken by Dr. Lushiugton but he was happy to learn that there were other anti-slaveiy champions who would support the ministers. Not that he agreed with them in their precise amounts of duty; but those were points which could be altered in committee. He denied that cheap food was usually attended with low wages. More- over, the tax on food did not go into theconersof the state, but into the pockets of the landed interest. If these proposals were rejected, the only remedy would be to tax the landed interest though even that was attended with difficulties. The hon, member then entered at great length into arithmetical details, derived fiom the books of the Custom-house, from which he argued the practicability of raising a sufficient revenue on sugar, by the plan of the government. The advices yesterday received from the West Indies induced an apprehension that their sugar supply of next year wsuld fall short, by one third, of their sugar supply in the year which had just elapsed and it became necessary, therefore, to provide for the deficient) from the sugar of foreign plantations; for the produce of tin | Indies alone would not mffice. Lord Stanley had quoted a Liverpool price-current, stating that the measure could never be carried. Air. Hume begged toquoteaootherptiee-current from the same grcaf town, expressing the strongest hope of the measure's success. Ministers had rww begun to do well, They began late, it was true but it was never too late. As long as the House of Commons was composed of the landed interest, ministers would never have its support. Let them side therefore with the millions let them not be alarmed at losing this divi- sion, but persevere in the popular course which they had now commenced. FRIDAY, MAY 14. The Speaker took the chair at the usual hour. Viscount Morpeth presented between twenty and thirty peti- tions from various places in Yorkshire and elswhere, in favour of an alteration in the corn laws (some for a total repeal, and many for a moderate fixed duty) and in favour of the proposed modifications of the timber and stigar duties. THE SL'GAR DUTIES. Mr. W. E. Gladstone and Lord Howick mutually explained respecting an attack on Mr. Gladstone's father. The adjourned Debate was resumed by Mr. Philip Howard, who said he was assured that ministers would not resign without an appeal to the country—(hear, hear)—for the people of Eugland would rather have reform carried out by single-hearted honest reformeis than by the Tories. (Hear). Sir H. Vivian showed very forcibly the almost incalculable injury which our manufacturers have sustained in every part of Europe by the operation of the corn laws, and said the time had come when it was impossible to stave off that great question any longer. Sir C. Douglas said, that if the ministers had a majority upon which they could rely, the country would never have heard a word about these measuies. (Cheers from the opposition-) Sir Henry Parnell supported, at great length, the ministerial propositions. The protective duties hitherto imposed on articles of commerce and consumption, had always been productive of an enormous amount of indirect taxation. Sir E. Wilmot and Capt. Berkeley opposed the new sugar i dutiesonanti-siaverygrounds. Mr. J. Parker reminded those who opposed ministers that they were not there for the negro alone, but for the suffering millions at home also. Many of the Anti-Slavery Associations in the kingdom had refused to join in opposition to the minis- terial measures, for they thought that the true humanity of the case lay with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear). Mr. B. D'lsraeli and Sir Harry Verney, followed, the foimer in opposition to, and the latter in support of the go- vernment. After a few words from Mr. Kemble, the Chancellor of the Exchequer adverted to the arguments advanced by the oppo. nents of government which ho said were irreconcilable with each other. One class said that no revenue would be derived from the importation of foreign sugar, because none would be imported, whilst the other said that the country would be inun- dated with it. (Hear, hear). He ivj? t.dd that he would not get the £ 700,000. he looked for, but t.«- th-iu^hi differently, For many years past as the price had <1 ne^ed so had con- sumption increased and an increased consumption of 560,000 c«t. might be expected. If it were reasonable to calculate that a certain fixed price would be paid for this, then an increased revenue of £600,000. might fairly be expected. The right hon. gentleman then entered into calculations of the estimated consumption per head in each year from 1830 to 1840, for the purpose of showing that he might rely on the anticipated amount of increased revenue. The gain from the refusal of adulterated sugar that would follow on a reduction of prices, must a100 be tak< n into account. As to the arguments respect ing tne anticipated depreciation of free-labour produce, he heartilj believed that the only way to give a fair, free and healthy scope to free-labour was to allow it to compete with slave-labour. The tight hon. gentleman, then proceeded to answer in detail the various other arguments of those who had spoken against the budget, and concluded by stating his firm and unaltered belief, that the mode he proposed for increasing the revenue in the present financial and commercial crisis, was preferable to doing so by imposing allditionallnlllhcns on the alieady overtaxed people of this country, and by his expressing his conviction that the policy now recommended by the govern- ment, must eventually govern the financial operations of the country, but whether its principles were to be carried into effect by the present ministry, or by those who now sit on the opposition side of the house, was to him a matter of perfect indifference. (Loud cheers). Sir Edward Knatchbull, then moved the adjournment of the debate, which was agreed to, and the house soon after adjourned till Monday.

LONDON MARKETS.

LOVE'S ORIGIN ON EARTH.

THE FANCY BALL.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TIIUPSDAV…

FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE.

[No title]

MONMOUTHSHIRE

OUGHT THERE TO BE A DISSOLUTION1

[No title]

[No title]

LATEST CURRENT PRICES OF METALS.