The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-01-04 00:00:00

1111111 i 4 :ali ? ' 1 4. IltLi THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. RECIPROCITY AND FREE TRADE. THE DUTCH QUESTION. been repeatedly acknowledged and ratified by express treaty with the Sovereign power of that country, which alone could have any pretence to interfere. As well might France. there fore, interfere between the Spaniards and English relative to the regulations of the navigation of the River Mississippi in America. Their interference relative to the Scheldt shews no less arrogance and injustice, than a rooted contempt of existing order and moral obligation." And Mr. Fox himself, the acknoW ledged leader of the opposition, only urged upon the House the policy of treating with the then Government of France, "as the best mode of preserving to Holland the monopoly of the Scheldt." TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Sta,—l am sorry to find, that treaties regarding trade, and commercial questions in general, receive so little attention from the Liverpool press. I am led to address you in consequence of Mr. Stanley's speech, the other day, to the electors at Lancaster, wherein he is reported to have made allusion to some treaty pending with France, which, when completed, would permit the exportation, to that country, of our cotton yarn. But NI hether we are to give some equivalent for this " boon," or that it is merely a tardy return for the liberality we have already shown, by ad mitting French productions at reduced duties, I have not yet ascertained. However, the idea of having a new market opened to us for the great staple of this district gave me inexpressible pleasure, and I pictured to myself a sudden rise in the price of Bowed Georgias of, at least, y 2 d. per lb. ; but guess my disap pointment, Mr. Editor, when I found, that the only yarn we should be permitted to send to our friendly neighbours was that of the finest description—numbers 180 or 200 at the very low est! Why, all the yarn they would want from us, in this case, would not increase our consumption fifty bags per annum.—. Besides, the French want this kind of yarn for their net & lace manufactories, and cannot do without it; in fact, they already get as much as they want from us, but then it is smuggled, and costs them dearer than if the importation was unrestricted. So, you see, Mr. Editor, that our friends on the other side of the channel know what they are about ; and their late free trade manifestoes, so much extolled just n.ow by some of our liberal press, have a tangible meaning ;—we are to be their dupes, but I hope that the cotton-spinners of Manchester will teach Mr. Poulett Thomson better. B. TO THE EDITOR OR THE LIVERPOOL STS.VDdIRD. Moral philosophy recals to the consideration of the inquirer the al most inestimable importance, as of other general rules of relative justice, so especially of national and personal fidelity, and the unseen and unbounded extent of the mischief which must follow from the want of it..—PALEY, Chap. 12. Sia,—l conceive from the authoritative tone assumed by Mr. Stanley, in his recent speech at Lancaster, that we may consi der him as Lord Grey's accredited agent : 1 think, too, we may infer that Lord Grey and his colleagues in office, startled at the increasing demand for innovation which the new elections had disclosed, were anxious for an opportunity of declaring their in tentions upon the chief questions which agitate the empire, and that they availed themselves of Mr. Stanley's speech-making position, as a candidate, to make their avowals to the British public. Conceiving this to be the origin and aim of Mr. Stan ley's address, there is consolation to be extracted from it, that ministers can no longer be identified with the movement party of this country : whether they can effectually restrain the torrent which threatens to overwhelm the land, whether Lord Grey, or Lord Brougham, can really prove himself a Prospero, and by a motion of his wand bring into subjection this Caliban of the state, is a secret in the womb of time. Suffice it for us, that if faith be kept with Mr. Stanley, ministers must oppose and counteract the schemes and machinations of the volunteer pledge-men, who, it is said, have been sent to parliament in such appalling numbers. But although there is, in this respect, a source of gratification from the speech of the right hon. secretary, yet upon the Dutch question the right hon. gentleman has not assigned one satis factory reason for the conduct of the administration; -and I therefore do not hesitate to charge them with a gross breach of international law, and with utter disregard to public treaties. On this subject Mr. Stanley said, " The trading, commercial, and manufacturing interests oI the country, have been urged and goaded on, (I confess not with much success,) to express their disappointment, by the party which first brought forward this question of peace. Let me remind the manufacturing and commercial interests what is the point for which the King of Holland is at the present time holding out. What ! ought we not to endeavour to establish a free navigation in the Scheldt, and the admission of British manufactures into the heart of Germany ? -Is this point not important to British statesmen ? Is this a point in contending for which we are to be charged with an endeavour to ruin the manufactures and trade of our country ?" Such are the triumphant, self-gratulatory inquiries of the right hon. gentleman ! Now let us briefly review the facts. The different interests of Holland and Belgium, after their disunion, being incapable of adjustment by accommoda tion, certain European powers (of whom Great Britain was one) undertook the office of , mediator between the two bellige rent states. Now " the office of mediator," says Vattel, " re quires as great a degree of integrity as of prudence and address. The mediator ought to observe a strict impartiality: he should soften the reproaches of the disputants, calm their resentments, and dispose their minds to a reconciliation. His duty is to favour well-founded claims, and to effect the restoration to each party of . what belongs to him." Has Holland, then, any well-founded claims, resisted by Bel. gium, which it was the duty of England as a mediator to favour? And has England effected, Or attempted to effect, the restoration to Holland of what belongs to her? We will answer this by a reference to what took place in this country in 1793, when republican France assumed to herself the right of dictating that the navigation of the Scheldt should be free. In a note from Lord Grenville (then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs) to M. Chauvelin, we find a recognition of the rights of Holland, in these terms : TIIE CHURCH ESTABLISHMENT. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Stn,—To confirm the position that legislation has nothing to do with religion, and that civil establishments of it are unlaw ful, it is confidently asserted that Christ has prohibited them, and the text on which, I believe, the chief reliance is placed for proof, is the following one in St. John, (xviii. 36,) " My king dom is not of this world." But I think that any one who ex amines this text will see that it really does not bear on the sub ject at all. The Saviour was brought before Pilate, and accused of usurping the title of King, and the people said, " If thou let this man go thou art not Cmsar's friend : whosoever makelh himself a king speaketh against Caesar." Pilate, evidently thinking the accusation an absurd one, said, " Art thou the king of the Jews ?" To which the Saviour replied, "My king dom is not of this world, else would my servants fight ;" or, in other words, my kingdom is a spiritual one, of a nature totally different from that of Cwsar, and therefore need give him no cause for jealousy. Now, how does this prove that the civil magistrate has nothing to do with religion ? How does it prove that civil establishments of religion are unlawful? Our Lord, it is true, disclaims all temporal power to himself; but does he define the limits of temporal power in others ? He disclahnS all interference with Caesar; but does he say that Caesar has no right to interfere with him? Quite the contrary. He submit ted to the sentence of Caesar's deputy; he foretold his apostles that they should be brought before kings and magistrates for his sake ; and his apostles exhorted their followers to be subject to every ordinance of man. The foregoing, and all other texts which are quoted on this subject, only prove that our Lord did not claim, as head of the church, any temporal dominion, or any right of judgment in civil and criminal cases ; and his apostles practised and enforced obedience to the civil power, without at all defining how far that power should extend. Whereas, the prophet, speaking of the future destinies of Christianity, says that Kings are to be its nursing fathers, and queens its nursing mothers; which would seem to decide the question quite the other way. Religion, therefore, is incorporated with civil government, not to render religion political, but to render government reli gious ; or, in the language of common use, church and state arc united not to secularize the church, but to spiritualize the state. A national church is established for the national religious in struction of the people,—to add the sanctions of religion to the terrors of the penal law,—to deter men from crimes which the temporal law cannot reach,—to enforce duties over which the temporal law has no control,—and to supply the people with that religious education which otherwise they would not re ceive at all. In 1793 England joined Holland in a war against France, to maintain the title of the Dutch to the Scheldt., against the then Republican cry of Free Navigation. In 1832 England joins France in something like a war against Holland. For what purpose ? We will answer the question in Mr. Stanley's own words, to endeavour to establish a free navigation in the Scheldt, and the admission of British manufactures into the heart of Germany. " Is this a point so important to British Statemen" as to justify them in their disregard of all the old treaties with Holland, by which the Scheldt was secured to this latter power? And can it gloss over the inconsistency of Dag ; England's public declaration in 1793, of Holland's mo nopoly of the Scheldt both by the law of nature and ua nations, and her acts in 18.32, by which she denies that right, and endeavours to deprive her old ally of it by force ? But Ant werp is not the only route through which British manufactures might reach the heart of Germany. Amsterdam and Hamburgh are both convenient ports, and had it been otherwise, it would have been better for England, that a little inconvenience should have been suffered as to her goods reaching a market, than that her character for scrupulous fidelity to public treaties, and to old alliances should be thus sacrificed. But it will, perhaps, be said, that as Holland joined Buona parte in his wars against England, Holland has voluntarily set herself in array against us, and is, therefore, no longer entitled to the benefit of the treaties and declarations which England made in her favour before the war. " I am unwilling to leave without a more particular reply what you say on the subject of the Scheldt. If it were true that this question is in itself of little importance, this would only serve to prove more clearly, that it was brought forward only for the purpose of insulting the allies of England, by the infrac tion of their neutrality, and by the violation of their rights which the faith of treaties obliges us to maintain. But you cannot be ignorant, that here the utmost importance is attached to those principles which France wishes to establish by this proceeding, and to those consequences which would naturally result from them; and that not only those principles and those consequences will never be admitted by England, but that she is, and ever will be, ready to oppose them with all her force. "France can have no right to annul the stipulations relative to the Scheldt, unless she have also the right to set aside, equally, all the other treaties between all the other powers of Europe, and all the other rights of England or of her allies. She can even have no pretence to interfere in the question of opening the Scheldt, unless she were the sovereign of the low Countries, or had the right to dictate laws to all Europe, " England will never consent that France shall arrogate the power of annulling at her pleasure, and under the pretence of a pretended natural right, of which she makes herself the only judge, the political system of Europe, established by solemn treaties, and guaranteed by the consent of all the powers. This government adhering to the maxims which it has followed for more than a century, will, also, never see with indifference, that France shall make herself, either directly or indirectly, sovereign of the Low Countries, or general arbitress of the rights and li berties of Europe. If France is really desirous of maintaining friendship and peace with England, she must show herself dis posed to renounce her views of aggression and aggrandisement, and to confine herself within her own territory, without insult ing other Governments, without disturbing their tranquillity, without violating their rights." In the House of Commons in 1793 there seemed to be but one opinion as to the aggression of France upon Holland, and the only contest between ministers and opposition was, whether England should at once unite with Holland, her ally, in a war against France, or whether England should endeavour by nego ciation to induce France to withdraw her pretensions. Mr. Jenkinson (afterwards Lord Liverpool) observed that the French knew we were engaged to protect Holland in the navigation of the Scheldt, and their insolent threats of opening it in defiance of guarantees and subsisting treaties, mu st be considered as an intentional insult to this country, which could not be overlooked without the imputation of a cowardly and base submission." The willingness with which she embarked in those wars might, perhaps, be denied; but granting it—the deduction from it has no force, for Holland, being an independent state by ac knowledgement of all,•is entitled to all the privileges conceded by the law of nations to a civilized independent state, and by that law she has the dominion over all rivers within her banks ; and if that law was uncertain, which it is not, she has a right to avail herself of England's former declarations on that subject in all discussions with that power. The treaty of Vienna being only applicable to Holland and Belgium united, is on thii question a dead letter. One word more upon the subject of the mediation, and I will bring this long paper to a close. If England undertook the office of mediator with the pre-determination to find a pretext for in sisting upon the free navigation of the Scheldt then, as she could not be impartial in the execution of this office, she had aggravated her injustice as to treaties by making hypocrisy her confederate.;-if in the progress of the mediation she learns for the first time that her commercial interests were identified with those of Belgium, why did she not then withdraw from the office of mediatrix, and confess, as she ought to have done, in truth and honesty, that she could not act with impartiality. With the views expressed by Mr. Stanley, her continuance as a, party to the mediation is irreconcileable with the most common rules of justice. It used to be a favourite maxim of the Whigs, that what was morally wrong, could not be politieally right. They will perhaps retract this position now, or justify their conduct to wards llolland.—Yours, &c. LiverpooliDec. 27, 1832. SIC DONEC. This latter position, however, is denied. It is said that the people would, upon the free trade system, supply themselves with religious education without an established religion;; and America is cited as a case in point. Now, in the first place, there is no analogy between America, a newly settled repliblic with a territory of two millions of square miles and a popula tion of 6 to each square mile, and England, an ancient mo narchy, with a population of above 220 to each square mile; but if this were not so,let us see whether America is a case in point—whether the experiment it has tried furnishes an example which other nations should follow. Dr. Dwight, (an American, ) comparing Connecticut, where there was a tax for the support of religious worship, with the States south of New England, where there was none, says, "In Connecticut every one may hear the gospel, and celebrate public worship every Sabbath. In the others, it is not improbable that a number of people, se veral times as great as Connecticut, have scarcely heard a ser mon or a prayer in their lives." Of Rhode Island, he says, "The places of ministers are filled by ignorant individuals, farmers and mechanics, who push themselves into the desk for two reasons,—. sloth and spiritual pride; who distort doctrines, pervert the scrip tures, and murder arguments; who are coarse in their manners, and clumsy and ridiculous in their discourses," In this state a turnpike company having applied to the legislature for a sum of money to complete a road, was refused, and one of the meth hers alleged the following reason : that turnpikes and religious establishments had their origin in Great Britain, the govern ment of which was a monarchy, and its people slaves, and that free-born Rhode islanders ought never to submit to be priest ridden, nor to pay for the privilege of travelling on the high way. Dr. Dwight also tells us, that, in 1812, there were proba bably three millions of souls in the United States destitute of religious ordinances. Dr. Mason, in his plea for Catholic Communion, says, "we have already some millions of our own colour as destitute of evangelical mercies as the savage who yells on the banks of the Missouir." Mr. Flower says, "when I arrived at Albion, a more demoralized state of society never existed : the English played at cricket, the back-woodsman shot at marks, and the Sunday ended in riot and fighting." Fearon, in his sketches, says, " whatever religious information exists in Philadelphia is confined to the clergy. The countless sects differ from English sectaries in being more solemnly bigoted, more intolerant, and More ignorant of the scriptures." Ido not refer to Mrs. Trol lope, because I think the above quotations will suffice to show, that the American experiment is, to say the least of it, still somewhat questionable ; that its success, at least, is not yet sure; and that we, in England, need not yet overthrow our religious establishment in imitation of republican America; and, indeed, looking at both pictures, perhaps it will be admitted by mode rate men, that we had better, for the present, bear the ills we have, than fly to others that we know not of: Having attempted to show, that a religious establishment is not unlawful—not un scriptural, but, on the contrary, essential to the religious edu cation of the people, I will enquire in my next how far the Church of England is effective to that end, and by what means it may be rendered more so.--Your obedient servant, PRESBYTER. And Mr. Grant, (afterwards the eminent Master of the Rolls) added, " all the celebrated writers on the Law of Nations, had laid it down as a clear and indubitable principle of propriety, that Rivers belonged to those who inhabited their banks, just as far and no farther than those banks extended. If the hanks belonged to different people, then the dominion over the River was divided, each people possessing the part that was conti guous to their domain; and such was the policy of this .distri bution, that if it had not been so laid down by the: ablest writers on the law of,nations, it would have been a positive sti pulation indispensy necessary. under the Law of Nations, for without it no state icould be secure. If the course' of rivers was, as is contended for by the French, as open and common to mankind as the sea itself, a fleet of French, and Spaniards might sail up the Thames, and we should have no right to molest them until they actually began hostilities. Agreeable to this Law of Nations, we find every other civilised state had invariably acted. The Mouth of the Scheldt, therefore, being between the Banks of Holland; gave them, under the Law of Nature and Nations, a most incontrovertible right to the exclusive possession of that river as far as their banks ex tended: but, independent of general doctrine, that „right has THE OLD FREEMEN :-THE CHARGE OF BRIBERY. TO THE EDITOR OP THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. SlR,—Aithough when I left the Blue Coat School, about 20 years ago, I considered myself something of a scholar, I have not since had much practice in writing, and, therefore, if you'll put what I am going to say into a ship-shape .form, I'll thank you. . It seems, that because we, old freemen, brought Lord San don in by our votes upon the second day of the election, we are called' by the radicals and their crew all the , hard names that they can think of. As I consider that we have been abused without any good reason, I 'wish to say a few words iu our de fence ; and, first, I must tell you, plainly, that 1 was one of those who, at Ewart and Denison's electicut, got a sum of mo .ney given me for my vote; and I will tell you why I and many others did not hesitate at receiving it. Both the gentlemen were strangers to us, and both of them said that they should do as Canning and Huskisson had done before them. Now, we have been told by our masters, and the merchants, who ought to know better than us, that Canning and Huskisson had been very good members for the town ; and as we did not know that there was any great difference as to the talent of Mr. Denison and Mr. Ewart, and as we saw that both were supported by many respectable gentlemen, we did not care a straw which was to be the member. Well, feeling in this sort of way, when both parties came and offered us mo ney to vote as they wished us, we began to. say, " One man will, per"aps, make as good a member for the town as the other, and is oney will be a great thing for us ;it will help us to pay on nt, and to buy a load of coals, and to do many other things ; and we thought, therefore, that we did right in taking it. But, at the last election, things were very different : we saw Dird Sandon and Sir Howard Douglas supported by all the shipowners and master-tradesmen in the town, and we felt not only that those two were the properest men, but that we ought to support those who support us. We also saw the other two candidates were radicals, and had nobody to back them but a parcel of what we call "the young chickens," who, I think, ought to have known better than to fly in the faces of their em ployers,—but that's their business. And now let me ask you, whether those people who abuse us so were not the people who tempted us ? Weren't they what we called reformers; and did not both Ewart and Denison vote for the reform bill? If we had voted for Thornely, I suppose, we should have beeA called all sorts of fine names by these fellows ; but it doesn't matter, we had rather be blackguarded by them than praised. They seem to think, that because they have to do with newspapers, they may say what they like ; but I can tell them this, that we think ourselves quite as honest, and, therefore, as respectable at any of them;—and I can tell them, further, that nobody who called td canvass us met with any incivility or disrespect which, if what I have heard is true, cannot be said for some people who keep shops in Byrom-street and Whitechapel s —l am, sir, AN OLD FREEMAN. Naylor-street, December 29, 1832. • By accounts frota.Turkey t we are informed that a detach ment of the army of Ibrahim Pacha, in an attempt to pass Erigle, had boon repulsed, but that another column, directing its advance northward, had met no resistance, Tahir Pacha had been formally appointed to the rank of Grand Admiral, in place of Halil The Earl of Derby is at present residing at Knowsley, to the great delight of his tenantry. His Lordship's hospitalities arc unbounded at this season of the year. PAST liiniNG.—On Wednesday, in the Insolvent Debtors' Court, a Mr. Hutchinson swore that he rode from Canterbury to London, on his own horse, in'two hours and twenty-five minutes (distance fifty-six miles) and obtained the freedom of the city of Canterbury as a reward for his exploit. It was a most extraordinary performance. RRESPONDENCE. LECTION SQUABBLING. matt OP THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. been amused in perusing the various letteP fired in the local press, bearing upon the lal e , borough; and though most of the writers °' y feel justified in having obtruded upon tk . fence of the direct allusion which may ha le tent; yet I cannot trace the object which ink' names no mention has been made, can Flo' unteering their effusions. An individual, irk ° ohn Twiname," in Gore's paper of yesterday' ole sort of conversation which took place 1 1l ise, relative to his having been canvassed be interest of Lord Sandon, and the groun d mself upon the public, seems to be au idea find, that He was the Merchant in Brunswick' ,een so canvassed. Doubtful, however, of letailing the conversation correctly,. he is at' ;h very clumsily) by another individual, Who .n, for the names of the one or the other of thog e ages having been mixed up publicly with th e " :titan: I search, in vain, for any new light whio upon the various rumours which have given ris e :tions in the espousal of one side or the other Lt a loss even to guess the object which thes e n view in appearing before the public; exceP S Lion of their own vanity, by endeavouring to tbitants of this town, their deep sense of th e laws, and, at the same time, their utter disre amatical laws established by Lindley Murre).' in, and do not wish to have the taste of 14 itiated by their reading such productions, eve" a common newspaper; and I would therefor:, nmend "J. Twiname," and " F. Maxwell , Ives, as heretofore, to the sifting of m atter / their trade in grain; and to abstain, for th e , npting to winnow the unsound from the sane )cality. 28, 1832. SANDON lAN• RT :-THE SLAVERY QUESTION. TOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STiIdVDdIRII istency of Mr. Ewart has been called in que . , r rticularly by yourself. I have only to exPr e7 : l will continue to contrast his declarations al l nents one week with those of the next. be I be tedious ; but it is one from which it ' 'bile Journalist, not to shrink. ne forward as the disciple of Canning °t is admitted. But," that he has deserted teal !s only a general charge of inconsisteneY• ' der your notice a particular one. The foli o. From his speech, on his first appearance befo g the Town, on the 15th October, 1830: of testion connected with another hemisphere, nt interest to our Town. Gentlemen th e ars me, none, lam sure of the great owner s hest India Colonies, who is not an advocate Yet there is no one, I hope, so infatuate d 3edom is licentiousness, or that . hasty a nd r are consistent with the happiness of the sla y h e ' interests of the master. The interests of t : opinion, pari passu. No amendment, i° s 4 : , can be otherwise than gradual, and we coon * -to the freeman and the bondsman—if tee l , l°' ich we ourselves have sanctioned, and which , own legislation. RIGHTS so long acknowledg e vay without a liberal compensation?' )ur readers to contrast the above with y tr ' its as so recently declared on our hustioe . themselves, dispassionately, what descrifo an be safe in the keeping of a legislator O h 1 : steps to be a violation of property, in 181 tres his readiness to mount those steps,- -4 ; h e ; .dges a right which he disavows in 1832. min France is not forgotten by all. Hist c ' ti i, .e not treated, by all, as of no worth; an d t o, I a serious one, and one which affects fat Mr. Ewart's consistency, or of his regard 0-, luestion will, no doubt, be satisfactorily 0, of Mr. Ewart, by some of yout able conl e e . disinterested mouth-pieces, doubtless. 11 ' 3' 4 myself to a most abject apology to tb e :j, for bringing this question under notice, af`l at I shall be most satisfactorily answere d ' tvour of their saying what penance will ° t° li t, )n. I shall, perhaps, be told that I 1 314 di h and justice, question the veracity of an .ncy of Mr. Ewart : but no matter, Yours, &c. A TOWNSMAS. ASSESSED TAXES. roR OF THE LIVERPOOL ST./MD.41 0 0 0 lave given in your paper of Fiiday la s t isll 'uardian and Public Ledger, remarking - ,0 n the operations necessary to make the 10 : , charging those who are not assessed so bir i •s; and as the same article in perempt°,f,t oust have the Assessed Taxes repealed ; order that your readers may have a CO t, to examine the items of which the Asse 6s d. .... £1,295,972 £1,357,000 .... 1,164,355 1,178,300 2,460,327 2,535,300 £2,53 5 P ' 277,859 295,100) 352,579 393,000 340,771 417,800 59,946 S "£1,5 26 ' 182,990 181,000 1950 19, 4, 096 ... 161,647 239,100 y.. 31,569 ngs 50,770 £3,952,504 £4,061300 . of not sanguine enough in the present fit s fo' in immedtate repeal of this branch of l' r e , Loxious part of it may be ; but if to e i , nount as has been rumoured, is to be s u y tax, it will be necessary to be very atte9 tJ9 as it .occurs to me, that those - who er e " the repeal, would be the most stre o of tx that should make them contribute WOO :1,526,000, which may be considered tv as distinguished during the latter part 01 : ). , as understood to be exclusive of income , ol t se rent or value of all hoises, land°' tf the rental value of the kingdom to bel .equire a tax of above four persat. W w indow duty,—and two and a half Pe r ? .e duty on luxuries,,—making . in the ' spon the rent or value.—l am, Sir, yo , fi , IN DAGO° AN ODD COMPLAINT. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD SIR S I see in last Saturday's Liverpool Chronicle a pathetic complaint, that you have two days a week to perpetrate evil, while they have but one to expose it. Let the Editor then likewise take two, or three if he pleases! Why does he not? Surely it cannot be that the public would Sot support him in his benevolent purpose—that his readers are not yet sufficiently alive to the beauty of his style, or to the purity of his principles ?—Yours, &c. January 1, 1833. THE WEEK. THE MERCURY AND THE ALBION. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL ST.IND4RD. SlR,—The Liverpool Albion of last Monday contains many things that might challenge remark, if it were worth while to notice an Author who is evidently taking so much pains to write himself down. It is, however, curious to observe this among the various anomalies of the day—the Editors of the Mercury and the Albion arrayed on the same side, and upholding the same poli tical opinions. A few years back, and these gentlemen of the press, encountered each other in almost mortal strife; they are now united in efforts to alter, if not to overthrow, all our exist ing institutions. The one is perfectly consistent in this; the other is about as consistent, as he is honest, in talking of Tory corruption and Tory intimidation at the late Borough election; Whilst he omits all mention of certain great land-owners, in our immediate neighbourhood, who are said to have commanded their tenants to vote at the county election, fur Lord Molyneux and Mr. Wood. When such a man talks of his integrity, I -can only feel disgust. Whilst musing upon this strange conjunction, a Picture arose to my mind's eye of these tu•a Editors, steering the vessel of the Constitution upon the rocks, and themselves escaping to the shore by means of a double Cork Collar.—Yours, &c., Jan. 2nd., 1833. Q. MR. STANLEY :-.1tE1 , 011,N :-CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES : TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. • Sir,—lf there are times "when boldness is really caution," there are times too when courage is really rashness :--such courage is eminently 'possessed by our ministers. The right hon. gent. Mr. Stanley, need not yet pride himself and colleagues on the Working of the reform bill. They have opened a sluice, and the rush of "men of known character and opinions" to get into Parliament was immense, and, had not the horror-struck go vernment exerted its influence, by encouraging conservatism on the one hand, and, through the instrumentality of its press, de- Ooiracing and threatening radicalism on the other, we should have had a monster of a House of Commons, which no one Would have thought of depriving the whig ministers of the cre dit of having called into being. As it is, they have created a Power, which they will find it difficult to control, if, indeed, they tall not powerless before it. What between English reformers, (gentlemen, who I hope will bear in mind that the able but un fortunate Earl of Essex, in Cromwell's time, little thought that io fighting for his country's rights he was traitorously preparing the way td the scaffold for his King) Irish repealers, and En glish radicals, we shall have a well-spiced House of Commons, , 4 8 productive of evils, I fear, as was Pandora's box. Does not Mr. Stanley, having so far debased the dignity of Parliament, foresee that a time may, by possibility, arrive, when the people, suffering under distresses over which no govern ofent could have control, may, at that precisely distressing and discontented period, elect men to parliament a fac-simile of themselves—men who would aggravate the distresses they could 4 0t cure ; who would sacrifice existing interests, by passing measures "of expediency, though unavailing, for temporary re lief; who would adopt the theories of their own trade and 4 voccrtions as applicable to the government of the state; whose kateiials for government would be found in the democratic effu 4irens of a free press,—and who would estimate the value of go l'ernment only by its cheapness, —men who would consider a monarchy too expensive, and an aristocracy too proud ? For the present, such danger does not, I hope, exist; but it is the duty of the government to provide against even such imaginary danger. The British constitution should have been protected, and not i nconsiderately touched. It is the work of the wisdom of ages, and should not, therefore, be treated as a child's toy, to be Dulled to pieces, that the crude ideas of visionary men may be employed to re-construct it. We should not destroy even the B Yormetry- of any of its parts, lest we destroy the usefulness and beauty of the whole. We may, sir, congratulate the country all the fact of the government being prepared to admit that the c onservative principle is the palladium of British liberty : and, although Mr. Stanley's eloquence is of an order that would almost prove "the worse to be the better cause," he may as Well attempt to convince us that black is not black, as that the conservative principle 'is not the tory principle. Mr. Stanley is becoming a tory. Let him ask the "people." The tory's opinion is that abuses, which obscure the beauty of the British constitution, should be removed, but with a cautious hand, as You would brush the dust from a specimen of fine art. The language of Mr. Canning was :—" Let any man say that tiis views of reform go no further than to the removal of blots, and lam with him. But it is because the arguments of reform tend much further; it is because they tend not to remedy but destroy." Are not these, Sir, conservative principles ? &re not they the principles of National Reform ? Away then vith the fallacy of the argument--that the tories ever were, or are opposed to measures of reform. The tory principles I imagine to be simply these. To make the constitution the basis of government, as we make the bible the basis of our faith ; ilever to bring forward or pass a measure which is not purely c onservative, and for the good of the country ; never to sacri ke security for popularity, by bringing forward doubtful mea lures o f policy, however brilliant; and, indeed to conduct the Rovernment as a chess-player would his game, with tact and de liberation, checking hasty and visionary movements and dis couraging confusion. The tories had not, as the whigs have h ad occasion to do, to go back to their boyish days, for mea sures which were then the objects of their delight, and of Which they have been dreaming ever since, and which th cY were determined to bring forward and carry, regard less alike of their inaptness and their danger. The to- Il es knew well that there was water sufficient to enable We vessel to swing round with the tide, and that there was suf • ,cient strength of cable to enable her to stem the current, by ' l4 4.eki ng a little of it out. They would not, from the imaginary tear of her "being stranded," have cut her adrift, and in the Nrfusion and bustle of inexperience, " hoisted all sail and % tatted her over the shoals," with neither anchor, cable, nor com pass on board, with a mutinous crew, inexperienced officers, a nd a bad pilot. From the state she is now in, and at sea, it is 'iteult to conjecture what will become of her; she has been I poken, and it is understood they are attempting to beat home ; Pain, fearing stress of weather; and, if they cannot weather acobio point, they. intend to put into Conservative hay for W elter. Whether they will succeed in any of their objects, Z i ae alone will tell; however, we may predict, that unless Mr. 'lanley is associated with men more able to command, and ,o re experienced, the crew will mutiny, take the command Z e raselves, and throw him and his comrades overboard. The Picture," Sir, which Mr. Stanley has drawn at Lancaster, a ppears to me to be too bold and vivid in the foreground, thick 4 , 1 _ 11 Confused in the back ground, whilst he has shrouded the 'Lance in vaist.—Your obedient Servant, J. M.