The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER admitted, that it would be better not, in any way, to go into the general question of the Sugar Duties, or into the probable demand and supply of sugar, and he would confine himself simply to the Bill before the House. He believed that every one was agreed-and certainly every communication received by Her Majesty's Government, whether official or private, agreed-that it was most desirable, as soon as possible, for the question of the Sugar Duties to be permanently settled. He believed that all parties agreed in this tion of the Bill for eleven months instead | he feared would overtake a great number of one. His object in moving the Amend- of wealthy and substantial men if the meament was not to obstruct the Government sure of Her Majesty's Ministers should in any way, but to facilitate their move- pass, and the present duties be renewed ments; his Amendment would not interfere only for one month. with any permanent measure, if the Government should still see fit to introduce it; but if, upon further consideration, Her Majesty's Ministers should defer till another Session the permanent settlement of the Sugar Duties, this change in the date of the Bill would give them an opportunity of so doing, whilst it would be a great relief, and an act of mercy and justice, if they gave to the small producers a respite from the measure proposed by Her Majesty's Ministers. As to any apprehensions of a sugar famine, they were as visionary as those of a famine in corn. He had taken the liberty of stating on a-whether they supported the proposal of former evening that the quantity of produce likely to come from the Mauritius in the ensuing year was 60,000 tons, instead of the quantity of 40,000 or 50,000 tons estimated by his noble Friend the First Lord of the Treasury. Since these estimates were made to the House, the overland mail from India had arrived, bringing intelligence from the Mauritius, as the result of the present year, that 46,000 tons had been actually shipped; and estimates were given in the papers of the Mauritius that not less than 60,000 tons would be shipped in the ensuing year 1846-7. Supposing that 2,000 tons would go to the Cape of Good Hope, there would be 58,000 tons to be sent to this country. He presumed that the fine season, which had had the effect of producing this enormous quantity of sugar in the Mauritius, extended also to the East Indies; and then the quantity he took on a former night as the produce from the East Indies would be understated. So that, instead of the quantity of sugar on hand on the 5th of July next year being the smallest, it would probably be the largest which had ever been known in this country at the same period of the year. It was not his intention then to go into the general question in the absence of his noble Friend the First Minister of the Crown; but he thought he had shown sufficient reason for asking Her Majesty's Ministers to pass a Sugar Duties Continuance Bill, on the same principles and terms as the last, for eleven months, in order to afford to the merchants in the sugar trade in the East Indies, the Mauritius, and the West Indies, a small chance of escaping from the ruin which Her Majesty's Ministers, or whether they went further or not, all, even the West Indian body themselves, desired that there should be a permanent settlement. They all knew the term meant by a permanent settlement; and he did not believe that any one in or out of that House believed that the present Sugar Duties could remain on their existing basis; the proposal of the noble Lord, therefore, would defeat the very end he had in view; for it would leave the permanent settlement untouched for a long time, and instead of being a boon would be an injury. On Monday next it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to go on with the question of a permanent settlement, and he hoped their measure would receive the support of the House; but the extension of the present duties for a period of eleven months would be a great misfortune, instead of a great blessing, to the parties most interested. SIR R. H. INGLIS would not enter into the general question; but there was nothing in the proposition of the noble Lord the Member for Lynn which would at all interfere with the ultimate decision of the House on the proposition of the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown. The Bill did not omit the usual clause, that it might be amended or repealed, in the present Session of Parliament; and if it were not amended or repealed, the only effect would be that it would give to the Government a little more time for consideration, and to the trade a little more breathing time. The proposition could do no harm in his own view of the case; and if the Government were to have the triumphant majority of which they boasted (though he Elphinstone, Sir H. Gibson, rt. hon. T. M. Gore, hon. R. Maule, rt hon. F. Mostyn, hon. E. M. L. O'Connell, D. O'Conor, Don Oswald, J. Peel, rt. hon. Sir R. Philips, Sir R. B. P. thought they were grossly deceiving them- C. Hogg, J. W. James, Sir W. C. Smith, rt. hon. R. V. Stuart, Lord J. Sutton, hon. H. M. Wawn, J. T. Labouchere, rt. hon. H. Ward, H. G. Wood, rt. hon. C. TELLERS. Macaulay, rt. hon. T. B. Wyse, T. The House divided on the Question, that Allix, J. P. the blank be filled with the words, day of September, 1846:"-Ayes 121; Noes 38 Majority 83.. 5th Austen, Col. Benett, J. Cavendish, hon. G. H. Christie, W. D. Clements, Visct. Crawford, W. S. Cripps, W. Denison, J. E. Dennistoun, J. Dickinson, F. H. Duncannon, Visct. Ellice, rt. hon. E. Boldero, II. G. Cowper, hon. W. F. List of the NOES. Codrington, Sir W. Dick, Q. Disraeli, B. Douglas, Sir H. Houldsworth, T. Bill went through Committee. House resumed. Bill to be reported. THE STATUE OF THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON. On the Motion that the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a | had no right to give his consent to the Committee of Ways and Means, be now erection of the statue in the blind manner read, he did. It was, in his opinion, impossible to imagine anything more inartistical or in worse taste than to place a statue of the kind in the situation proposed. The hon. Member read an extract from a statement made on June 8, 1845, by Mr. Decimus Burton, the architect of the arch, to the Earl of Lincoln, in which he said— MR. CRAVEN BERKELEY said, he had hoped that the subject of the Motion of which he had given notice for that evening would have been taken up by a more influential Member than himself, and by one whose opinions would have been more regarded; but he considered the question was of so much importance that he had no hesitation in bringing it under the notice of the House. The real facts of the case were these: a number of individuals subscribed a very large sum of money for the purpose of erecting a testimonial of the military services of the Duke of Wellington; and the committee, without consulting anybody, or the majority of the subscribers, at once decided that the arch at the top of Constitution-hill was the best place on which to erect an equestrian statue of the noble Duke. That had produced the greatest dissatisfaction on the part of a great number of the subscribers; and in order that the House might be in possession of their opinions, he would read a few extracts from the correspondence that had taken place upon the subject, containing the remonstrances that had been made to the committee at the work having been commenced. The hon. Member accordingly read a letter addressed to Lord Melbourne by the sub-committee on the 8th of August, 1838 Requesting that Her Majesty's Government will suspend their consent to any plan which may be submitted for their approval until the whole question shall have been considered at a full meeting of the committee, and, if necessary, at a general assembly of the subscribers." He knew that his noble Friend opposite would tell him that he was bringing on this Motion too late, and that he should not have allowed the works to have progressed so far as they had: but the Papers upon which he founded this Motion had only been moved by the hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford on the 29th day of June last, and were not in the hands of hon. Members until the 11th of the present month. He had taken every opportunity since then of endeavouring to bring this matter before the House, but had not been able, for many Not that he was going to call in question the conduct of his hon. and galland Friend whom he then saw behind him; but the person whose conduct he did impugn was the First Lord Commissioner of that day, Viscount Duncannon, who VOL. LXXXVII. reasons. Third} Series "The Wellington Testimonial is a single equestrian statue of colossal dimensions, viz., about 30 feet high; its weight, exclusive of the plinth, about 40 tons. It would not be a satisfactory surmount for the arch; colossal as it is, the horse, when placed on so huge a pedestal, would present an appearance far too meagre and tall for the situation. Proportion and unity of design are the first and most important elements in a work of art; both of these would be wanting in this instance if such a statue were placed upon the arch. fact that the monument was not the design of one and the same artist, would strike the most casual observer.” The He would not trouble the House with any more opinions of architects; no one artist whose opinion had been taken but had condemned it in the strongest terms possible. There happened to be in this country last winter a most distinguished foreign architect, M. Canina, an Italian gentleman, astonished at the idea of placing the statue the Pope's architect, and he was perfectly on the arch, and said that if it were carried out it would be the "disgrazia d'Inghil terra." But he gave great credit to the noble Lord lately at the head of the Woods and Forests, and to his predecesor, for the endeavours they had made to prevent the intended plan being carried into effect. Lord Canning, in writing to the Duke of Rutland, said "I feel sure, therefore, that your Grace and the committee will not suppose that, in submitting for your consideration the proposal which I have now to make in the name of Her Majesty's Government, there is any wish to call in question the right of the committee to claim, as they have done, the performance of a promise made to them in 1838 by the Government of the day, or their undoubted liberty to act upon that promise, by applying the arch to the use for which it was then thought proper to concede it to them. At the same time it is my duty to state to your Grace, that the remonstranees which reach Her Majesty's Government against the proposed appropriation of the arch are so many and so strong; the representations of its architect, Mr. Burton, in the same sense, are so earnest; and the opinion of every other eminent architect, artist, or other competent authority who has been consulted on the subject, called upon not only to make a final effort to inis so decided that Her Majesty's Government feel duce the subscribers to reconsider the project of placing the statue on the site at present proposed, 2Z but to do all that lies in their power to facilitate a change in the design." It was quite plain that the committee refused to change their design. Then he said, that that House was called upon to interfere. They must remember that the arch upon which it was proposed to place this statue was the chief entrance to the palace of the Queen; it stood also at the entrance to this city; it was built at the public expense; and the House of Commons had a right to say they would not be made the laughing-stock of foreigners, as they certainly would if they allowed the statue to be erected as was proposed. He should therefore move "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to withdraw Her Consent to the placing of the Statue of the Duke of Wellington upon the archway at the top of Constitution Hill." the lion on the top of Northumberlandhouse was placed in the same position also; but his hon. Friend must forgive him if he said that neither the one nor the other could be looked upon as a classical authority. A monument was about to be erected to one of our greatest men. It was constructed of imperishable materials-it was the greatest equestrian statue in the world, and was calculated to remain for ages yet to come, not only as a monument of the great man whom it was intended to represent, but also as a monument of the taste and knowledge of the fine arts existing amongst the people of this country in the age in which they lived; and that eonsideration ought to induce the Government to pause before they gave their sanction to the further progress of a work which, according to the best authorities that had been consulted in this country, did not possess, as every one must admit, that first and most essential requisite in a work of art-unity of proportion and design. More ties to be a most striking error to convert a triumphal arch into a pedestal for a statue. He, therefore, said that, considering the report which had been made to the Woods and Forests on this subject by artists and men of eminence; considering also what was the opinion of the late Government, and he believed of the present Government, it was somewhat indecent on the part of the committee that they should be determined still to exercise what they called their right to prosecute a work which they knew to be distasteful to the public. MR. BAILLIE, in seconding the Motion, said that when this subject was last discussed in that House, it was stated that there was no authority for placing a sta-over, it was stated by those great authoritue in the position in which it was proposed to place this statue; and, in answer to that, the hon. and gallant Officer the Member for Scarborough said, that as the Duke of Wellington was the greatest general in the world, so it was quite unnecessary to follow the ordinary rules of art in placing a monument in so extraordinary a situation. He could not understand the force of that argument; but it occurred to him that in all probability the gallant Officer had been studying the works of the ancient Egyptians, and had seen in the curious pictorial representations they had VISCOUNT MORPETH said, with releft us, that it was the practice of the an- spect to his own private judgment, from cient artists of Egypt to confine themselves which even official responsibility could not within the strict rules of art in their repre- separate him, he partook to the full in the sentations of ordinary men, but to allow misgivings which had been expressed by themselves the fullest scope of imagination the two hon. Gentleman, and by his two in their representations of the great heroes noble predecessors in the office which he and conquerors of antiquity. But he must had the honour to fill, and which, he bedo his gallant Friend the justice to say lieved, he might add, had been backed by that he did look out for an authority; for, very many and competent professional auin a letter which his hon. Friend had pub-thorities; and, although they found that lished in the Illustrated London News, he informed the world, that upon a voyage of discovery which he had made in the agricultural districts, he had been fortunate enough to discover a great authority. Over a lodge gate, at the entrance of a gentleman's park in Hampshire, he had seen a statue of Marcus Aurelius placed in the same position, and that was a perfect and conclusive authority. His hon. and gallant Friend might have remembered that the consent and authority of the preceding Government had been signified to the persons who wished to erect this statue, to place it in the situation proposed, and that some progress had been made in the actual work, and some expense already incurred; yet he confessed that, even at that moment, he did wish very much that those who represented the subscribers could persuade themselves to accede to the offer made to them by the Government, to pro cure another site, and, if they did, he | blemen and gentlemen who formed the would assure them that no pecuniary difficulty should stand in the way. At the same time, he did not feel that he should be warranted in interfering in the work. He had only further to mention, that the only piece of the correspondence which was deficient from that which had been presented to the House, was the last letter from Mr. Burton, the architect of the arch, in reply to the last letter in the collection submitted to the House from the Commissioners of the Woods and Forests, in which they requested Mr. Burton, after carefully examining the plans and sections of Mr. Wyatt for strengthening the arch, to inform them whether he were perfectly satisfied that thay were such as would insure the perfect safety of the arch. He had only received the answer of Mr. Burton that morning, and he would read it to the House: committee made an application for permission to erect the statue, no objection was made either to the statue or to the site. The only objection that was made was as to the mode of selecting the artist. It was a mere contest who was to be the artist. The arch was decided upon as the site; Her Majesty had given Her consent, accompanied by the observation that it would give Her pleasure, whenever she came out of Her palace, to see the statue of so great a man in so beautiful a situation; and all the money that was subscribed by the public was subscribed for the specific purpose of erecting a statue of the Duke of Wellington on that arch. When the proposal was made last year for an alteration of the site, the committee took into their consideration what was their duty with regard to the public who had subscribed the money; and they were of opinion that they "6, Spring-gardens, July 24, 1846. could not adopt another course than that which was at first resolved "My Lord and Gentlemen-I beg leave to acIn May, upon. knowledge the receipt of the Board's letter (No. 1838, the committee received the first 3,380) of the 23rd ult., transmitting the plans and communication from Lord Melbourne, stasection prepared by Mr. M. Wyatt of the works ting that he had applied to the Queen to in the superstructure necessary to bear the eques-obtain Her consent to the erection of the trian statue at the required elevation above the top of the arch at Constitution-hill, and desiring statue; and on the 1st of June Her Mame to examine these, and to consider those mea-jesty received the chairman of the com. sures proposed to be adopted in their execution; and to inform the Board whether I am satisfied that they are such as will insure the perfect safety accompanied Mr. Wyatt to inspect the works, and I again inspected them yesterday, when I found Mr. Wyatt there. As I stated in my letter to Viscount Canning of the 16th of April last, transmitting to the Board these plans and sections, which I had procured for the purpose from Mr. Wyatt, the works proposed by them appear to me to be such as will insure the safety of the arch, and protect it against injury; presuming that proper precautions be used in the erection of the scaffolding, the execution of the masonry, and the raising of the statue itself. I find that no portion of the proposed stone pedestal is yet built. The scaffolding by which the statue will be raised is partly erected; but, although now about eighty feet high, it has yet to be heightened about twenty feet. of the arch; and to state that, on the 24th ult., I It cannot be denied that some difficulty and risk will attend the raising an equestrian statue of thirty to forty tons weight above 100 feet above the street, and when there in running it along a railway, carried on timbers of that great height; but, so far as I have yet seen, Mr. Wyatt and his men are taking every precaution to prevent an "The Right Hon. and the Hon. the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Woods, &c." SIR F. TRENCH said, his hon. Friend who had opened this case had made a most grievous mistake, for when those no mittee, and gave Her consent. On the 9th of June a meeting of the general committee was held, at which the consent of Her Majesty was notified. On the 16th of June the whole of the sub-committee waited upon the Duke of Wellington, announcing what was intended to be done, and expressing their "fervent prayer that he might live through many and many a long year to see from his own windows a proud testimonial of the gratitude of an admiring country." And on the 22nd of June and on the 3rd of July letters were sent from certain noblemen to the chairman, both expressing their disapprobation, not of the statue or the arch, but of the mode of selecting the artist. A meeting of the general committee was held, in conformity with the wishes of Lord Melbourne, the result of which was that the proceedings of the former committee were confirmed, only one individual raising any objections to the site or the statue. The committee also consulted the then Attorney General to know what their obligations were, and he gave it as his opinion that the committee had no power to do anything than carry into effect what they were pledged to do to the public. The House of Commons had nothing to do in the |