The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-02-19 00:00:00

Efot tibtrpool M tanbarb. TUESDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 19, 1833. • THE EMnAuoo.—lr has rarely happened to us to feel otherwise than proud of the title of Englishmen ; but, among the few cases in which the mind has been disposed to shrink from the pride of such an avowal, may be ranked that which is connected with a debate in the House of Commons on Friday last ; when, on going into a Committee of Supply, Sir Robert Peel, pursuant to notice, called the attention of the House to the ques tion of the Dutch Embargo. In a speech replete with good sense and sound consti tutional information—a Speech, as Sir James Scarlett said, with reference to its legal acumen, which would have done honour to the profession—the Right Honor able Baronet exposed, in strong colours, the lamentable course of policy which His Majesty's present Ministers have thought proper to pursue with respect to our ancient and sincere Ally—Holland. Tracing, with cool research, the great advantages derived to our commercial interests from the protection afforded to the persons and - property of foreigners, from the time of Magna Charta, through various important periods of our history, down to the last war, he plainly demonstrated, not only how inconsistent has been the course pursued, in this instance , with that which has been the general, as it has manifest• ly been the true policy of this country on former occa sions ; but as plainly exhibited 'that course ainne preg nant with evils of great magnitude to the country, not less by the general diminution of confidence in the character of the British Government, to which it must give rise, than by the establishment of a precedent of which other nations may hereafter avail themselves, to our decided injury. After promptly demolishing the argument—an argu ment falsely assumed—of the honorable and learned Civilian, the Member for the Tower Hamlets, used in a preceding debate, when quoting Lord Stowell's opinion on the subject of Embargoes, the right hon. Bart. laid down the line of policy adopted by this country on various occasions of actual or apprehended conflict with other powers. In the course of his observations on the constitutional character of 014 lets in Council, Sir Robert introduced the opinion of Lord Erskine in 1806, who entered his Protest against some measures, then in progress through Parliament, to"the effect "that the power of binding the people by any regulations belonged only to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and to the House of Commons, in Parliament assembled ; and that any order to the con trary was a gross infringement of the rights and liberties of British subjects." Not less happily did he quote a Work attributed to the present Lord Chancellor, in which it would be difficult to trace any resemblance to the max ims now acted upon with regard to Holland, by that Ministry of which the noble and learned Lord is so con spicuous a Member. It is, however, of little use refer ring to that noble and learned Lord's opinion on any question of policy, " Colonial" or otherwise, consider ing-the convenient faculty of perfect obliviousness pos sessed by his Lordship as to many of the sentiments of his earlier years. The second article of the Convention of the 22d Octo ber last delared, that, " If the King of the Netherlands " shall refuse to enter into the engagement mentioned " in the foregoing Article"—(that is, withdraw all his troops from what the high contracting parties arepleased to call the territories which are to form the Kingdom of Belgium, on or before the 12th of November,)—" Their " Majesties the King of the United Kingdom of Great " Britain and Ireland, and the King of the French, will " immediately cause an embargo to be laid upon all " Netherland vessels within the Ports of Their respective " dominions, and will order Their respective cruizers to " detain and send in all Netherland vessels which they " may meet with at sea; and a combined British and French squadron shall be stationed off the coast of " Holland, for the more effectual execution of this • " measure." • Upon this article the Order in Council was issued on the 6th of November, which detained all Dutch shipping in British ports, and authorized their capture wherever found. A quarter of a year has elapsed since this mea sure was adopted—Antwerp and its-dependent forts have been taken—the French army, having effected the grand ministerial Coup d'Etat, the chief - object of the under taking, has retired—Belgium has not evacuated one inch of Limburg, or the other places belonging to Holland which she occupies—no measures have been taken, either by France or England, to compel such evacuation by Belgium—no detention or capture of under the Belgian flag has taken placebut Holland still re mains subject to the harsh and unjust proceedings' of the British Ministry; for those proceedings are the act of that body of men, in defiance of the protest, and to the destruction of the interests of the merchants of Great Britain—in* subversion of her true policy—to the dis grace:of her good name, and in direct violation of the general Law of Nations. _ We will venture to assert, that, if the suffrages of the - whole oommercial body, and the general good sense of the United Kingdom were individually taken upon this question, an immense majority would subscribe to the opinions—strong though they be—which we have here expressed. Is it not enough, then, to justify the ex pression with which we set out, that we may rank this among the . few instances in which We hesitate to pride ourselves au being of a nation which is thus dragged by her rulers, in subservience to a foreign policy, from that straight-forward path of justice which has hitherto, thank God, been the established course of the British Government. What were the arguments opposed to those of Sir Rpbert Peel, and his able supporters, Mr. Baring, Mr. Pollock, Sir James Scarlett, and last, though not least effective, Sir Richard Vivy . -an? Neither the learned Civilian—Dr. Lushington—the member for that parti cular metropolitan district, more than any other in the British empire dependent -upon commerce = nor his learned brethren, the Attorney and Solicitor General, • 1,4:II • IN's 'ME LIVERPOOL STANDARD. took one single position from which they were not, in succession, dislodged by the first shot that was directed against them. The learned civilian doubtless acted wisely, and with great good taste and feeling towards his constituents, when he indulged in a contemptuous sneer at the great meeting of the mercantile interest which was held in London to express their opinion upon this iniquitous proceeding; a meeting of which it may not be too much to say, that, seldom has one more numerous, never one more respectable or unanimous been assembled upon any -question of public interest. The language of the three learned coadjutors of the noble Secretary, as well as his own, consisted, in no small degree, of lamentations that the right hon. bart. and his friends should have been bold enough thus to come forward, and endeavour to redeem the good name of England from the odium which their impolitic mea sures are calculated to fix upon it. Let us give a few of their arguments. Dr. Lushington "was quite pre pared to agree with the right hon. bart. that if an embargo was laid on without any intention of hostilities, it was contrary to law and justice;" but, "without giving any opinion on the wisdom or policy of the general question at issue, he would say that the embargo was perfectly justifiable." After quoting an expression from the treaty of 1831, to the effect that " any further delay in the adjustment of the question would tend seriously to affect the peace of Europe," the learned gentleman "concluded, therefore, that this country had a right to adopt every means, whether by embargo or by war, to maintain the peace of the country !" Further, the learned gentleman tells us, that " this embargo was not a civil embargo, but it was imposed in expectation of hostilities, and it was, therefore, no infringement on the rights of individuals." Once more,—" was it right, he would ask, that the right lion. baronet should, in the present state of that question—when Holland, seeing the position of England and Fiance, might think fit at last to yield to a spirit of concession—was•it right, he repeated, of the right hon. baronet to select this very•time for the purpose -of deprecating the policy of His Majesty's Ministers? Was this a time. for the right hon. baronet to complain of injuries and - injustice inflicted by Great Britain upon llolland Even if the fact were so, he (Dr. L.) conceived it to be the duty of every goad sub ject of the King, who 'had the welfare of his country, at heart, to refrain from indulging in observations that might retard conciliation, and thwart' the exertions of government to procure an adjustment of the differences." So—because England (we mean the English ministers) and France look big and bluster, " Holland may think fit, at last, to yield, and submit to the infliction of injuries and injustice." This .is the language 'of a learned civilian—a judge in 'Doctor's Commons—the ministerial interpreter of international law to the House of Com mons! Grotius, Vattel and Puffendorf, hide your diminished heads ! An English luminary outshines you all! " The next in turn on the ministerial side was His Majesty's Attorney-General. The only part of his speech which was not demolished by Mr. Pollock, Ivho succeeded him, was' alogical deduction, which,' from its proximity to the - Close of his speech, was, we presume, of the nature of a peroration. The learned gentleman describes what was do:ie by England and France under the Convention ;—we hate that word ; it smacks so much of Revolution ;—h - then tells us,—we here quote the Times—that " the first stipulation of this treaty between the two powers was a notice to the two separating powers to:withdraw their troops within their own territories, as specified in the treaty of 1831, by a certain specified day; explicitly telling them that, on their refusal to do so by a particular day, France would march a force by land, and England and it a conjoint naval armament, for the purpose of carrying the terms of both treaties into effect. Well, the Dutch refused to evacuate the Belgian territory, and, as a consequence, Antwerp surrendered to the French Arms." Excellent reasoner ! Admirable logician ! Now we, poor simple souls, have been all along labouring under the impression that the surrender of Antwerp was not a consequence of the refusal of the Dutch.to evacuate the Belgian territory—but that it resulted., from the friendly presence, during a whole month, of an army of 100,000 Frenchmen, with some 10 or 20 batteries of cannon and mortars. This shews to how little advantage we have studied the doctrine of cause and effect. Then comes Mr. Solicitor-General—who " for his own part, should have no difficulty in taking all the responsi bility of the measure upon himself, so convinced was he of its justice and propriety"—and he "referred to the Iliad to prove-the antiquity of reprisals:" This brought up the learned gentleman's father-in-law, Sir James Scarlett, who " contended that Holland had done nothing to warrant the commencement of hostilities on the part of this country, for we had taken Dutch ships and brought them into our ports ; and if that was not war it was piracy. Had Algiers or Tripoli acted in the same way, no one would have hesitated to declare it piracy." We suppose that Sir James, after the Iliad had been advanced as an authority, thought it would be quite anti-classical to imagine such a thing as that either antient or modern Greece ever encouraged piracy ; so he just steps across the Mediterranean for his hypothesis, and finds it at Tripoli or Algiers; which, by the way, considering the present position of the last-named place, was almost as hard upon the Government of the Citizen King as it was upon the argument of his own son-in-law. Lastly, the dapper Lord himself advances to the charge; and with all that elegant insouciance which distinguishes his Lordship, condescended—a—to inform the house—a —that "an embargo, as a measure of precaution, con sisting of the detention of ships, and reprisals, were two different things ;"—and " Vattel had laid it down, that one mode of obtaining justice from a foreign state was the detention of its ships ;. and if hostilities followed and those ships were condemned, then the reprisals were complete: But, at present, no measure constituting an act of had been taken. It had been contended by some hon. gentlemen opposite, that the embargo was an act of war. He denied the correctness of the asser tion: We were not at war with Holland; and the very existence of the embargo was a proof of the fact, for that was incompatible with a state of war. If we were at war, no embargo would be placed on ships ; they would be confiscated at once." His Lordship admiti, that " when the embargo was imposed it was not beyond the reach of possibility that hostilities might occur. He did not mean a war of retaliation on the part of Holland, but he intended to say that those differences which led to the imposition of the embargo might have rendered a recourse to hostilities necessary." Another piece of in formation which the Noble Secretary thought proper to give the House was, with reference to the embargo on American ships in 1812. When Sir Robert Peel stated that the embargo on the vessels of America was not placed until after a declaration of war on her part, his Lordship " admitted that the right hon. baronet was right, but to constitute a war, the consent of two parties was necessary." Therefore,—we presume that is the sequitur—and we still quote - the Tlmes,—if we could only obtain the consent of Holland, we should be engaged in a snug, comfortable war, according to the latest ver sions in the Salons FLAHAUT and DE Milo. His Lordship was somewhere reminded in the course of the debate, of his having used such an expression to his Hampshire friends, as that he would "take the Bull by the horns." We do not know, if, in his Lordship's modern vocabulary, "Bull' and "dilemma" are synonimous terms. If so, we epn understand what is meant by the expression—and all we can in that case cede to his Lordship is, to grant him our permission to choose his horn,—for upon one or the other he will very soon be fixed. In sober seriousness, this mummery was, last Friday, enacted in the British House of Commons. An enquiry is made into an act of his Majesty's ministers, the black est that has been placed upon the diplomatic annals of Great Britain for the last century—an act equally remote from the wishes, as it is from the interests of this coun try—undertaken, we repeat the words, in subserviency to a foreign policy, alien to those interests—an act which sets at nought all principles of honour, good faith, and the law of nations, and such an act is thus at tempted to be—we will not say justified, for justice has nothing whatever to do with the question, except on the side of Holland, but is thus attempted to be—extenuated by a British Secretary of State and his legal advisers ! We will close this summary by asking our Townsmen two simple questions. Suppose the government of Hol land were to issue orders for reprisals upon our ship ping, and grant letters of marque—and that we should receive intelligence of 5 or 10 British East Indiamen being -carried into Batavia, and some 30 or 40 West Indiamen safely lodged in the river of Surinam—would that be war or would it be peace ? And yet we appre hend that taking vessels bound from Batavia or Surinam to Amsterdam into the Thames, and there detaining them, is an act of much the same character as peaceably re quiring the same number of vessels bound from Calcutta or Demerara to Liverpool to anchor in Batavia roads or at Paramaribo. If this be so, to what are we indebted for an exemption from such _occurrences ? To nothing but the strict honour, pure sense of justice, and long forbearance of an old Ally—a monarch who, fortunately for our commerce, is capable of discriminating between the acts of a British Whig Ministry and the wishes of the British Nation. IRELAND.—We know not whether we should more la ment the folly or pity the weakness of the Government in sending Lord Anglesey to Ireland, to correct, if pos sible, in 1833, and by military coercion, the errors of 1831 and 1832. It is a painful commentary upon the former proceedings of the noble Viceroy, and one of a self-abas ing nature, to seP him undoing his own work, and draw ing his sword upon that agitation which he encouraged. Statesmen are liable to err like other men; but in the whole history of Ireland, inglorious as that has proved to be, there is not another instance of such afflicting humi liation. On the one hand Lord Anglesey is made the instru ment of sequestrating the property of the Protestant church, and nullifying nearly one moiety of its dignities —that church which the King on the throne, and the mi nisters who surround the throne, have sworn to maintain inviolate, while, on the other, he is deputed to suspend the laws and erect military tribunals in every district of that unhappy country: This is the price of " agitate ! agitate ! agitate r —this the reward of loyalty and rebel lion. For your loyalty, says the King's Lieutenant to the Protestants of Ireland, we deprive you of your bi shops; and for your agitation, which we ourselves en couraged, you, the whole people of Ireland, are placed beyond the pale of the constitution, and are liable to transportation for being found beyond the threshold of your doors between sunset and sunrise! What a lesson is this to the wise men of our times ! What a delightful proof of an enlightened age ! We admit the necessity for strong and arbitrary measures— we do not say that Lord Grey's bill goes too far—perhaps in some respects it hardly goes far enough—for it does not touch the priests—but while we admit the necessity of the case we cannot help lamenting at the same time the fatal and mistaken policy, and the illjudged and con ciliatory measures, which led to those crimes and dis turbances, now to be punished so severely, and in which the innocent are doomed to suffer equally with the guilty. The secret, however, is out at last; Lord Grey dis closes-it in these few bitter words of self-reproach and self-condemnation. " I had fondly imagined," says the noble Earl, " at one period, that the redress of grievances under which the Roman Catholics of Ireland so long and unjustly laboured, would have led to the pacification and prosperity of Ireland, but it is .with pain I feel myself obliged to admit that all my hopes havf3 been disappointed —greviously disappointed !" Ay, this is the sore point. For more than thirty years have the Whigs and liberals been constantly telling us that Catholic emancipation would heal all the wounds, correct -all the vices, and drown all the discords of Ireland. The "healing measure," as it was called, was to convert a turbulent country into the most tranquil and happy country on earth. It was to he governed without a standing army by the mere force of moral influence; and we were further assured that the gratitude of the emancipated would be so unbounded towards protestants of all grades, that the voll dissension and agitation would speedily become iI in the sister island. Alas 1 alas ! words of more al ing folly never were uttered even by whig statesoi this even Lord Grey is now convinced. He 10J galling feelings of shame upon the past, and with apprehensions upon the future. He sees a faith! ungrateful, and an unprincipled people, taking acll of every concession to increase the disorder and sI catalogue of crimes in Ireland. He and his par them a coat, but they instantly demanded a clod and now that the cloak is given they seek the the remaining vestments. They are not cont participating in the constitutional liberties of they insist upon a parliament of their own, toe tion of protestantism, and a dismemberment British empire ! All this was foreseen by those who courage , posed the unfortunate bill of 1829. Since that sed, Ireland has been in a more disturbed state t. she was in before. It has truly been a land of crs blood; for, says Lord Grey, " the extent of insu ation and outrage against the law in Ireland has so fearful a height, that neither for life nor pri there any security there, and unless some speed dy is applied, the most fatal consequences are th TO THE VERY EXISTENCE OF SOCIETY"! The me this is, that unless the priests are put under and the demagogue, who is the instrument of the is effectually silenced, there can be no security f' life or property. Why, this is precisely what tb nents of concession told us in 1829. They have been opposed.to the admission of Roman into Parliament if they could have been - convin. such concession 'would have tranquillized the and given to it peace and prosperity. Their con were adverse to these inductions. They belies' concession would only lead to fresh claims, a nd rate the existing evils. And is it not established most irresistible evidence, and the most heart facts, that all they believed and feared in 1829 has pass in 1833 ? In short, the Catholic Bill has wonders—it has annihilated ten Protestant Bi s ho' introduced martial law into Ireland; and the 1• all, is the only "healing measure." But will the extraordinary powers with whi: Anglesey is to be invested be an effectual remedy are not quite satisfied that they will. Unless t tary are strong enough to post a squadron 'of dra' the door of every chapel, the work of secret agitat go on. It is notorious that these chapels are i places converted into political assemblies, wh objects of O'Connell and his party are explai. enforced from before the altar. However, there an end to the night work, and to public meetin: all the oratory, and the inflammatory tirades of So far well; but, unless the suspension of the Corpus act be enforced generally and contin some considerable time, without intermission, parently quenched fire will burst out again with, . greater violence than before. Indeed, wvare to think that it will take ten years of martial restore tranquillity, security, and prosperity to Irt His Majesty's ministers have generously cons l suspend their proceeding s re l a ti ve t o t h e W es t or, in other words, have agreed to tantalize the P i concerned with a few days more delay before they consign them to their fate. This, perhaps, will be mercy,—we call it cruelty. The gentlemen representing the colonial iil have implored the government to renew the pa rl iao committees of last session, in order that the fullest ] tigation might take place previous to the introdoil what Lord Althorp calls th e " final, safe, and sati:o measure." This request has been declined, the 4 ( ment only stipulating that before they bring i n the they will confidentially communicate with the repro tives of the West India body. This, certainly, is mense stretch of liberality, and worthy of a NvIP nistry, for it amounts to this,—" Gentlemen," s 5 : l minister, "we cannot consent to any enquiry,---we your interests far better than yourselves, —we 11 3 ' in judgment upon you, and have resolved to inflict tarn punishment, but on the day before we infli shall, as a matter of grace and favour, make quainted with the details !" We are very unwilling to publish all we have well-informed quarters as to the nature of the C plated reform' in the West Indies, lest we should I apprehension without cause, or give circulation founded statements. Certain it is, too, that the gt pains have been taken to conceal the scheme fro° person belonging to the West India interest. But' invariably happened, that those least concern known most on this important question. It is quarter that we have lea rn t th e f o ll ow i ng parti therefore what follows must be taken reserVedly's tiously, for it is quite possible that it may prove curate. It is stated that a measure of emancipation of all children as well as adults, is resolved upon;'butth shall be snbjected, if refractory, to compulsory` 13 $ under the direction of certain official overseers - for, riodof three or five years, at the end of which fiv, the proprietor or planter can substantiate a loss, t 1 is to be made good by grants voted by Parliament. property which•t.he slaves have already acquired, 0r acquire during the compulsory system, is to be P under the control of these official persons and app the support of slave children, the aged, and infirm This scheme, certainly, is very crude, and will, VI. prove anything but satisfactory. The compensatio, alluded to is a mere fiction, which never can be into effect in an equitable manner. But we agai tion our readers against reposing implicit credit statement. The only thing in favour of its authe is, that no measure of folly is, and no act of conk , or injustice appears to be, too great for his Mal ministers. THE TOWN DuEs.—The important question which hl so long pending relative to the payment of the town ,z11 : 1(•, decided in the Court of King's Bench on Frid a y even° 3 , in favour of the corporation. The trial will be found in . column. It is impossible to conceive the sa ti s factioa which the decision has been received in Liverp o ol. As s .e o the mail arrived bringing the intelligence on Saturday es , the bells of the parish churches pr oc l a iM e d th e i m porto;. umph, and one general feeling of con gra t u l a ti on p e rriio community. Indeed, we believe that with the except), those individuals,wbo have themselves resisted the payli l the dues, there cannot be found'a single merchant in the who sympathises with Messrs. Bolton and Co. on their S LIVE lt rooL ;—Printed on Tuesdays and Fridays, in Union John Street, and Published at No. 7, High-street, •Excl,":, SAMUEL FRANCEYS, Stationer, of No. 7, Anson-street. 0,1;1 Advertisements are also received in London by Messrs. o , s & Co.. Warwick-square, Newgate-street ; land Mr. BA r. ' Fleet-street.