guish the seeds of civilization in Africa, replunge that continent in the worst horrors of barbarism, and give a stimulus to slavery in Cuba and Brazil. The argument, that the exertions of the African squadron had been useless, was inconsistent with the difference that had taken place in the prices of slaves, the present high cost of a negro at Cuba and Brazil proving that a practical limit had been put upon the transport of natives of Africa across the Atlantic. Mr. Labouchere cited the testimony of Sir C. Hotham, a witness whose evidence had been invoked by Mr. Hutt, to the evil effects of withdrawing the squadron without a substitute; drew a very encouraging picture of the progress made in civilizing the races on the coast of Africa, chiefly through the influence of the republic of Liberia; and pointed out the inevitable consequences of the resolution upon our sugar-growing colonies, which, suffering from a dearth of labour, would have to contend with foreign sugar-producing countries commanding an unlimited supply of slave labour at a cheaper rate.

Mr. Grantley Berkeley, in supporting the motion, described the depression of our sugar colonies, and insisted that the only effectual mode of putting down the Slave Trade was to stop the admission of slave produce into this country.

Sir G. Pechell would not consent to a measure which must lower the station which this country had always maintained. Though the squadron had not been efficient enough, it had effected a large amount of good, and ships must be maintained on the African coast to protect the factories and legitimate

commerce.

Mr. Anstey maintained that our

blockade of the west coast of Africa, for the attainment of an Utopian object, was a violation of the law of nations. He concurred with Mr. Hutt in the expediency of removing the squadron, which had increased the exportation of negroes, and aggravated their sufferings in the passage.

Sir R. Inglis reduced the annual expenditure of the blockading squadron to 300,000l., half of which would be required for the protection of commerce, and asked whether the House was prepared, for this small saving, to set at nought the solemn obligations we had contracted in the face of the world. The capture of 600 vessels by the blockading squadron had been no slight service rendered to Christian humanity.

Lord H. Vane supported the motion, not on the ground of economy, but from a conviction that the treaties with Spain and Portugal had been inoperative, and that to make the blockade effectual it must be upon a vast scale.

Mr. Cardwell argued that this was a question whether we should at once and for ever surrender the policy of years, and with it the hope of civilizing Africa. The arguments founded upon the alleged futility of the operations of our squadron, and its expense, he undertook to refute from the evidence. He acknowledged that by a marine guard alone it was im possible to command a long line of coast; but there were two other agencies at work-legitimate trade, and the higher influence of Christianity; and how could these agencies continue to work if deprived of protection? He then showed on how large an extent of the coast of Africa the Slave Trade had ceased; that the price of

slaves had risen at Cuba through the interruption of the trade by our cruisers; that the number of slaves imported into the Brazils was not regulated by the demand, but by the facilities of escaping our squadron. The question resolved itself into this: make the Slave Trade easy, and it will be in the power of black, or Spanish, or Portuguese savages, to obtain better returns in human flesh than in palm oil. Finding such strong evidence of the progress of civilization and of legitimate commerce in Africa, he could not, as an honest man, take upon himself to paralyze the hands of those who had been instrumental in accomplishing these changes, by consenting to withdraw our squadron, and leave the coasts of Africa to the horrors of piracy as well as the Slave Trade.

Captain Pelham spoke in opposition to the motion, amidst frequent manifestations of impatience.

Mr. Gladstone, declaring his intention to vote in favour of the motion, observed, that it contemplated only the single treaty with France, which placed this country in a position so anomalous and preposterous as justified a motion to put an end to it. He joined with those who stigmatized the Slave Trade as a detestable traffic; but the system of armed repression had long ago been pronounced futile by Sir F. Buxton; it had been condemned by Lord J. Russell, and by the most responsible and credible witnesses.

Was this

to be made a permanent system? or would the House look the subject fairly in the face, and come to some decisive resolution? The opinion of Sir C. Hotham-who did not counsel the removal of the

squadron conditionally, but absolutely--was, that if the trade were stopped at one place, it broke out at another. The fact invalidated the argument founded upon the statement that parts of the coast were clear. Had the squadron extinguished the trade? No. Had it made a progress towards its extinction? That was the real issue; and Mr. Gladstone read statements of the prices of slaves, and of the percentage of captives in successive years, contending that the figures showed that there had been no progress, but rather a retrogression. Although the burden cast upon the people of England by this charge was not limited to 700,000l., that was not his main motive; he wanted to grapple with the question on the ground of humanity and philanthropy, and he had come to the conclusion, from evidence of which he gave the details, that the present system of repression did not diminish, but, on the contrary, had a tendency to increase, the sum of human wretchedness. Then he might be asked, what other course he would suggest? It was an indispensable condition, that there should be a general belief amongst other nations of our sincerity; but, having passed the Sugar Duties Act, he defied the Government to re-establish our reputation for sincerity. We must repeal that Act, double our squadron, obtain the right of search from France and America, with power to punish foreign crews; and lastly, we must force Spain and Brazil to fulfil their treaties. Without these conditions and they were almost hopeless-the success of our squadron in Africa would be visionary.

Lord John Russell said, the

House was asked, at the end of a series of triumphs achieved in the cause of humanity, to take a retrograde step, proclaiming to the world that we no longer meant to take measures against the Slave Trade or to offer a substitute, thereby spreading discouragement throughout the world, in which there were other nations admiring and imitating our example. The renunciation of our treaty with France would enable slavers to hoist the French flag, and the effect of the speeches of the mover and seconder was, "Let us have a free trade in slaves." Lord John questioned the correctness of Mr. Gladstone's facts; in the comparison he had made between the existing Slave Trade and that made under Sir William Dolben's Act, he had forgotten that the latter was a regulated trade. Sir C. Hotham and Captain Matson stated that the sufferings of the slaves in the middle passage would be aggravated if the trade were unmolested. In the matter of economy

it would be absolutely necessary to keep up some force upon the coast, for if there ever was a commerce which deserved protection it was that now springing up in the place of the Slave Trade. The removal of restrictions from that trade would destroy the hope of civilizing Africa, whilst it would so immensely increase the importation of slaves into Brazil, that our West India Islands would be unable to stand the competition. In reply to the question, what should be done to suppress the Slave Trade, Lord J. Russell said he did not despond. If the cause was good, and had gradually enlisted the nations of the world in its favour, he believed that it was anything but hopeless, and that nothing could destroy it but the want of moral courage on our part.

Lord R. Grosvenor stated, in a few words, his reasons for voting in favour of the motion; and Mr. Hutt having replied, the House divided, when the motion was negatived by 232 against 154.

IN

N the present chapter we propose to give a summary of the principal matters of discussion and legislation with respect to Ireland which engaged the attention of Parliament during this Session. They included the Ministerial proposition for advances for the relief of the distressed Unions, the Bill for the extension of the Elective Franchise in Counties and Boroughs, the proposed measure for the abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy, and the motion of Lord Stanley for an investigation of the circumstances attending the conflict at Dolly's Brae, of which an account has been given elsewhere. On the 16th of February the House of Commons, at the commencement of public business, having resolved itself into a committee upon the distressed Unions, and repayment of advances to Ireland,

Lord John Russell rose to state the general view taken by the Government of the existing state of Ireland, and their proposal with respect to the advances which had been made for its relief. After a few preliminary remarks upon the condition of Ireland during the last few years, and the important change now going on in its social state upon the disorganization arising from the anomalous position of the labouring classes subsisting upon potato-land instead of wages, which created a competition for land and provoked outrage and murder-this state of things, he observed, had nearly ceased. But, on the other hand, a great pressure had fallen on all who were connected with landed property in Ireland, and it was the duty of the Legislature to afford temporary aid in this transition from one state to another. In furnishing this aid the Legislature must steer between two

great dangers: one, of allowing the people to perish by famine; the other, of imposing burdens upon the land which it was unable to sustain. As evidence that there was a cheering hope that a beneficial change was taking place, Lord John referred to official reports from Ireland, which bore testimony to the facts of a growing desire to cultivate the land, of the adoption of better modes of culture, and of the satisfactory state of the fisheries on the coast. But the most remarkable change was perceived in the very great diminution of the pressure of the poorrates, the decrease of expenditure for the poor between 1848-9 and 1849-50 being no less than 180,000. The decrease in the amount of out door relief was more remarkable still. This diminution was attributable partly to the cheapness of food, and partly to increased vigilance in watching cases of imposture, and the determination of Boards of Guardians to restrict relief to the really destitute. It was, however, a prevailing opinion amongst official persons in Ireland that the loans of former years imposed a heavy burden upon the proprietors of land; that although they might

bear the rates for the relief of the poor, they would be unable to sustain, in addition, the charge necessary for repayment of the loans. His Lordship then read an account of the advances made to Ireland, from the workhouse loan in 1839 (of which 1,130,000l. remained unpaid), the grand total of debt for unliquidated advances in the ten years being 4,483,0001. The Government proposed to consolidate all these various debts, and to extend the period of repayment to forty years, subject to the same conditions of interest or no