on,
was rejected. The items in the tariff were then taken _seriatim_.
Discussions took place, and amendments were proposed on the duties
affecting swine and hogs, foreign fish, apples, butter, potatoes,
timber, cotton manufactures, foreign silk, &c.; but in each case the
duties affixed by government were affirmed by large majorities. The
third reading of the customs' act was at length moved on the 28th
of June, on which occasion Mr. John Jervis moved a clause to grant a
drawback on coals proved to be exported for the consumption of British
steam-vessels. This motion was rejected; and on the question that the
bill do pass, Lord John Russell made some few remarks on its general
provisions, and Sir Robert Peel acknowledged the support which he had
generally received from both sides of the house. The question being then
put from the chair, the bill was read a third time, and passed in the
midst of loud cheers.

The customs' act was read a first time in the house of lords two days
after it had passed the commons, and the Earl of Ripon moved the second
reading on the 5th of July. Two days afterwards the house went into
committee on the bill, and every amendment proposed by opposition lords
was negatived without division, and the bill passed through committee,
and was reported.

The subject of the duties on sugar was brought forward in a committee of
ways and means, on the 3rd of June, by the chancellor of the exchequer,
who explained the reasons why government could not consent to the
admission of foreign sugar at a lower rate of duty, and moved a
resolution that the present duties should be continued one year; which
proposition, after a lengthened discussion, was confirmed.

MR. VILLIERS'S MOTION ON THE CORN-LAWS.

On the 11th of July, it having been moved to go into committee of
supply, the opposition party brought forward the subject of the state
of the nation. Mr. Villiers having moved as an amendment for the
appointment of a select committee on the laws regulating the importation
of corn, with a view to their total repeal, prefaced his motion with
a speech, in which he said that he brought the subject forward in
compliance with the request of the anti-corn-law delegates; and because,
in the late discussion on the state of the nation, a taunt had been
thrown out on the ministerial side, that, if the opposition thought that
a repeal of the corn daws would remedy the evil, they ought to submit
that proposition to