to the British corn-grower. He had applied the test of experience to the two scales, that of last year and the present one, and he preferred that which was now proposed. The scale under the present bill was calculated to afford a better protection to the agriculturist. Though he, as well as others, had agreed to the measure of last year, he could not think it a safe one to continue, as it had not proved adequate for the intended object.

He repeated, that he supported the present bill because it would afford a more efficient protection. When the price of corn was from 60s. to 658., under the proposed duty, the importation of foreign corn would be checked: when the price was above 658. the corn from our colonies would come in free; and when the prices were higher, the duties would operate to prevent the importation of an overwhelming quantity of foreign corn. An honourable gentleman opposite had spoken in favour of a fixed duty. Abstractedly, that might look well enough; but when they regarded the circumstances of the country and the wants of the people, they would see the impossibility of adopting such a principle. If a high permanent duty were imposed, then, in periods of scarcity, the poor would be exposed to sufferings and miseries, the infliction of which no claims for protection on the part of the home corn-grower could ever justify. For the advantages, then, which the grower foregoes when corn is high, by the admission of foreign grain, he receives compensation by the imposition of a high rate of duties when corn is at a low price. He receives, in fact, only that remuneration to which he is justly entitled. When legislating upon this subject, they were bound to look to the different and varying circumstances of the country, and to the wants and necessities of its inhabitants. A perma nent fixed duty was therefore out of the question. The principle of the present bill was the same as that of the bill

of last year, and it afforded a more effectual protection to the British corn-grower. That principle had been laid down by Mr. Canning last year; it was contained in the memorandum of Lord Liverpool; and he could support it from documents in his possession. In the year 1804, a duty of 24s. 3d. was imposed, when corn rose to 63s. per the Winchester measure. That was, then, to the grower as effectual a protection, up to that price, as the present duty would be. For these and for various other reasons he would support the resolution before the committee.

The committee divided: For the resolution, 202: For the amend ment, 58.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN NEW SOUTH WALES AND VAN DIEMAN'S LAND.

April 1.

In pursuance of the notice which he had given,

Mr. HUSKISSON rose to move for leave to bring in a bill "to provide for the Administration of Justice in New South Wales and Van Dieman's Land, and for the more effectual government thereof." Owing to the lateness of the hour, he would not, he said, then enter into the expla nation which he had intended to offer, but would make that explanation when the details of the measure should be before the House. The House was aware that the administration of justice in those important colonies were now regulated by an act which would expire in 1829; the object of the bill which he was about to move for leave to introduce, was to provide for the continuance of certain powers contained in the existing act, and also to provide for future alterations in the mode of administering justice. From the peculiar situation in which the population of

those colonies was placed, about two-thirds of the inhabitants having forfeited their civil rights, it was difficult to have the law administered in the manner which prevailed in this country, by means of grand and petty juries. It had been found necessary, therefore, to suspend the system. pursued in this country, and provide a jury more peculiarly fitted to the nature of the population. This suspension of the English system he proposed to continue in the new bill, but he intended to make provisions that would gradually, if circumstances should permit it, assimilate the administration of justice in these colonies to that of England. They were not at present in a situation to admit of receiving a legislative assembly; but on the plan pursued with respect to Canada, before it had a legislative assembly, he proposed that they should have a legislative council, composed of twelve or fifteen members, with power to suggest amendments in the administration of affairs, which should be regularly transmitted to this country for approval. These measures would, he hoped, prepare the way for the introduction of a system founded on institutions similar to those of the people, from whom the inhabitants sprung.

Leave was given to bring in the Bill. It was accordingly brought in, and, on the 18th, upon the second reading, Sir James Mackintosh observed, that it did not provide for trial by jury, and that no mention was made in the laws relating to insolvency or bankruptcy.

Mr. HUSKISSON said, that the regulations with respect to bankruptcy and insolvency were omitted in the bill, because he thought the colonial legislature better calculated to regulate those subjects than the House of Commons could be. His great object, throughout the bill, had been to meddle as little with details as possible; which he was sure were always much better arranged upon the spot. As to the trial by jury, the truth was, that the system had been

tried in quarter sessions, and, from the peculiar state of society in that country, found altogether inapplicable. The time was not yet come in which the machinery of that valuable institution could be extended to New South Wales with effect; and to attempt to introduce it would only be to destroy an existing system which was suited to circumstances, and practically worked well already. No man could be better inclined than he was to give the colony the advantage of every institution which the mother-country possessed; but by attempting to go too fast at first, the progress of the good work would be retarded.

EMIGRATION BILL.

April 17.

Mr. Wilmot Horton moved for leave to bring in a Bill, "to enable parishes in England, under given regulations, and for a limited period, to mortgage their poor rates for the purpose of assisting voluntary Emigration." After the measure had been opposed by Mr. Warburton and Mr. Alderman Waithman,

Mr. Secretary HUSKISSON said, he should not have risen but for the appeal which had been made to him by the right honourable mover. He did not feel it necessary to discuss the state of the pauper population of England and Ireland, or to advert to the general principles of the emigration committee, because his right honourable friend had intimated his intention of proposing a grant of public money to give effect to those principles. His right honourable friend had assumed, that there was a redundant population which it was desirable to remove. But this general proposition must be looked at with reference to the circumstances of the country; for what might be very properly applicable at one period, was often wholly inapplicable at

another. For instance, at one period of the labours of the emigration committee, they were so impressed with the urgency of a public fund, that they had made application for a certain sum for the immediate removal of paupers in certain parts of England and Scotland. Whereas now, all those persons were employed, and no application had been made for assistance to enable them to emigrate. Thus the necessity of emigration always bore a relation to times and places, and to the purpose for which it was proposed to be carried into effect; in the same way that a redundant population bore a proportion to the means of giving it employment. There was no part of Europe, that was settled and quiet, in which the population was not increasing in the same rapid ratio as in this country; and when we complained of the increase of population, it should be recollected, that the number of paupers dependent on alms in the Netherlands was greater than it was in this country. In other parts of the continent there was the same redundancy and the same difficulties. He had been asked by his right honourable friend, whether he thought it would not be a beneficial use of the public money, to appropriate it to the emigration of a portion of our pauper population to the colonies? Before he could give a decisive answer to such a question, he should wish to be assured that the data on which his right honourable friend had grounded the assumption of benefit were clear and undoubted. He apprehended, however, that some of his grounds would fail him. If a plan of emigration were carried extensively into effect, might there not be reason to apprehend, that an extensive emigration to the colonies, by causing a glut of population there, and creating a production beyond any demand the emigrants could obtain for it in their interchange with other countries, might lead to an equal degree of suffering with that from which it was sought to relieve them by sending them out? If the advantages pointed out by his right honourable friend