The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-05-28 00:00:00

Enzprrial Parliamcnt. HOUSE OP LORDS, WEDNESDAY, MAY 22. Lord Polo , took the oaths and his seat. Petitions, praying for the abolition of slavery, were presented by Earls Cawdor, ife, and Gosford. The Earl of MEATH presented a petition from a parish in Dub lin, complaining of taxation, and praying for relief. Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, WEDNESDAY, MAY 22. Strangers were not admitted into the gallery until half-past four o'clock, on account of the balloting for a committee on the Montgomery borough election, which took place to-day. The Gravesend Pier Bill was read a third, time and passed. Lord CLIVE presented the report of the Dover election com mittee. The committee decided that Mr. Ilalcomb was duly elected. Lord EasTriea presented the report of the Carnarvon bo roughs election .committee. The committee decided that Mr. Nanney was not, and that SirC. Paget was, duly elected for that borough. REFORM BILL. Mr. Theme moved for the appointment of a select committee to consider and report what alterations and amendments might be made to the act passed in the last Parliament "to amend the representation of the people in England and Wales," with the view of facilitating the working and lessening the expense of its operations. The hon. and learned gentleman said his ob ject was not to infringe on any of the great principles of the ad, but to get rid of those objectionable parts which had led to such enormous expense at the late registration. Unless some amendment was made to the Reform Bill, he was afraid it would not be found to work so well at an ensuing election as at the last, because its defects would be more known, and persons would be found to take advantage of them for electioneering purposes. Lord J. RUSSELL objected to the motion, on the ground that it would he highly inexpedient to effect any alterations in the Reform Act, like those contemplated by the hon. member, till they had the experience of the further working of the bill. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL admitted that there were many de fects and many points open to much litigation in the Reform Bill, but contended that the experience of one session was not sufficient to warrant a remedy being adopted. Besides, the hon. member's motion was so vague that it would open the daor to the endless conundrums of Reformers. If necessary, Government would take up the subject uext session. Mr. C. BULLER hoped that this motion would be pressed to a division. They had, it was true, heard front the Solicitor- General that government would, in the next session of Parlia ment, take up the subject,. Now, he objected to this delay for four reasons_, —first, because his Majesty's ministers might not perhaps be his Majesty's ministers next session, (hear , hear) and therefore they might not have it in their power to redeem the pledge which they had hastened to give; second, because they had quite enough to do without adding this task to their burdens third, because they had managed so badly almost every thing which they had taken in hand, that he was not in clined to give them much credit for their future efforts (hear, hear); and, fourth, because he conceived that any alteration in the measure should rather proceed from that house than from his Majesty's ministers. (Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that the defects pointed out called for immediate revision; and he therefore was not willing to allow the present session to pass over without amending the bill, merely because the Solicitor- General had stated that something would be done in the course of the ensuing session. Mr. ELLicE said that his Majesty's ministers having . made, with respect to the Reform Bill, a most successful experiment, —having carried a measure which, with the exception of one hon. member, was admitted to have worked in a manner equal to the expectations of all who had given them their supports — having done this he did think that they were entitled to some credit for an inteution to deal honestly with such points of reform as might hereafter be proposed, in order to perfect their work. (Hear, hear.) Now, he should be glad to learn why, when evident defects were pointed out, defects which unques tionably called for alteration—he should be glad to learn, why, under these circumstances, a committee should be appointed to inquire into defects that were admitted? (Hear, bear.) Minis ters were anxious to remedy these defects as soon as possible, but they were called upon to do every thing in a moment. (Hear, bear.) Whv not give them a little tune? why not allow them to get through a portion at least o f that multiplicity of business which pressed so heavily upon them? He the more confidently called for an extension of time, because ministers had pledged themselves in the ensuing session seriously to entertain this question. Let gentlemen consider the number of subjects which ministers had yet to meet. There was the Bank charter, the East India charter, the West India question, and many others of great importance. Thus pressed with business on all sides, he thought it was not at all unreasonable for ministers to call on the house to extend towards them a little patience and forbearance. Ayes GEt Noes Majority The motion was consequently lost. The report on the Soap-duties Bill having been brou&ht up Mr. S. RICE, in answer to questions from Sir R. 'vv au an d mr. Lalor, stated that the drawback had been adjusted in a manner to satisfy the manufacturers—it bore precisely the same proportion to the new as to the old duty, Steps had been taken to remedy, as far as was at present possible, the inconve niences felt in the trade in Ireland. Mr. HAWES observed, that the soap-manufacturers generally felt satisfied with the bill. Report read and agreed to. Mr. BERN AL brought up the report of the committee on the Assessed Taxes Acts. In answer to a question from Sir R. Vvvvan Mr. S. Rica stated that government w . a.s . chsPosed to give the case of the licensed victuallers not only its serious, but most fa vourable consideration. It would b e better, however,' not to p re ss the subject at present—meanwhile ministers would be engaged between this and the bringing in of the bill in ascer taining how far they could go in the way of exemption or re mission. JEWISH CIVIL DISABILITIES BILL. On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill, The LORD ADVOCATE begged to be allowed to present a pe tition in favour of it from inhabitants of Edinburgh; the peti tion was respectably and numerously signed, having appended to it the signatures of a num b er of clergymen an d university students. An hon. Member presented a petition to the same effect from Canterbury. Sir B. bloats rose to state the reasons which compelled him to oppose in every stage a bill pregnant with mischief in its principle, and in its effects certain to be attended by disastrous consequences. The question was, whether the legislature was to continue Christian, at least in name and form, or to consist, in part, of individuals who regarded the most sacred characters of our religion as plasphemers and idolaters, hateful to God and accursed amongst men. The present was not a light or tri vial question, and he regretted that none of his Majesty's Mi nisters were present, with the exception of the right hon. Pre sident of the Board of Control, who probably attended because the subject had been brought forward by his right hon. relative; the members of th e government should have attended, and it they were not prepared to take a decided course in relation to a bill so important, they ought, at least, to condescend to listen to what could be urged on the question.—(Hear, hear.)-- One great, and in his mind one fatal objection to a measure of this kind, was the exclusiveness of the Jews. They were exclusive in every thing. During the war it was necessary to send a Jew butcher down to Brighton, as the Jews there would not use the meat killed by a Christian purveyor. The Jews were, in fact, so exclusive in their principles, that they were complete strangers in whatever land they sojourned, and they never could be made Englishmen so long as they possessed a greater sympathy f or t h e J ews i n Paris or in Warsaw than for Englishmen in their next county town. Until, therefore, they relinquished their exclusive character, they should not be admitted to the rights of Englishmen. The Jews were not entitled to such rights, as they did not comply with the condi tions required by a Christian country. He would deny that the imposition of civil disabilities was peisecution. If the p resent boon was not a fit one for a Christian legislature to grant, it was not a tit one for the Jewish people to receive. There were two great divisions of the Jews, and the J ews o f a S cr iptu r e c haracter did not desire the boon proposed to them by his right hon. friend. Had any synagoguepetitioned in favour of the measure? Was the there any thing on table of the house to show that the Jews expressed any interest with regard to this subject? There were conscientious Jews who, on conscientious grounds, ob jected to this measure. lie would refer in proof of that state ment to a pamphlet on the subject by a learned Rabbi who was settled in one of our Universities. The hon. baronet here read an extract from the pamphlet in question (the production, we believe, of Rabbi Jacob), in which it was stated that it would be contrary to the will of the Almighty for the Jews to ask for such a measure, and that Christians in granting it would be acting against the ordinances of the Creator of the universe. The writer also called on the Jews to remember that no Jews could be freemen except in the land of Canaan. The hon. baronet proceeded to say that the right hon. gentleman had shown no demands on the part of the Jews for such a measure, and that even, had he done so, he had established no grounds for a Christian legislature to pass such a bill. There had been no examples of Jews being employed in high public stations in foreign countries, except the cases of Joseph and Daniel, where they possessed and manifested miraculous powers. The house was bound to resist the attempt of his right hon. friend to unchristianize the country. The hon. baronet concluded by moving as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. Siiacaa tit seconded the amendment. He contended that if they consented to admit the Jews to the privileges this bill 'sent to confer on them, it would be virtually admitting that Christ was an impostor. He felt it his duty as a Christian, whatever obloquy it might expose him to, to resist this measure. Mr. FINCH was entirely opposed to the bill. It hail been ad mit:ed by the right hon. gentleman who had proposed the bill that few or no petitions had been presented from the parties in terested in favour of the bill, which he (Mr. Finch) could not but regard as an innovation of the British constitution. The real question for the consideration of the house was not one as to the degradation, but of the exaltation, of the Jewish nation. In matters of right the Jews were already placed on the same footing as the rest of his Majesty's subjects; and. unless he as as greatly mistaken, they enjoyed the privileges of other subjects with reference to the protection of their lives and properties and the right of speech, and, indeed, all other rights that were en joyed by all other classes, with the exception only of certain conventional rights, in which respect they were only similarly circumstanced to many individuals who did not even vet enjoy the right to vote fur representatives in Parliament. "He must maintain that no man was a fit and proper person to fill the irn portant office of a judge in this country who denied a most im portant portion of the common law of the land. (Hear.) The proposition tended to the overthrow of the church establishment, and lie was inclined to believe that it was on this account that the bill had obtained the support of many individuals. How ever, he was convinced that the great body of the Protestants of this country were decidedly opposed t o th e p ro p os iti on , an d he should feel it his duty to vote against it. Dr. LuSIIINGTON could not hut think that the opponents of the bill, though professing christiauity, were forgetful of one of its first principles—that of doing by others as they would be done by; inasmuch us they s eeme d 'determined to continue a system of privation and exclusion from just rights toward a particular class of men, though, if they suffered in their onn proper persons one twentieth part of that exclusion, they would be the first to cry out that the system was intolerant and tnalig nant.—(l-lear.) Ile was of opinion that those who would not deny to a number of His Majesty's subjects the possession of the capability of being elected to seats in th a t h ouse , were b oun d to show that the exclusion was justified by some misconduct en the part of the Jews, or that mischiefs would arise from their admission to those rights aura privileges which were conceded by the constitution to other members of the same nation; no such allegations had been made, but it had been urged th a t th e legislature ought to be wholly Christian. lie denied this ne cessity, and maintained that such a doctrine had never vet been laid duress by any constitutional authority or w r it er . If such, then, was not the case, where, he would ask, could be the evil of the present bill? True, it had been said that it would open the doors of Parliament to Mahometans and the followers of Zo roaster, but he, for one, would erase from the statute hook all disqualifications with regard to oaths, except cases of individu als holding offices in another country, and would leave it to the discrimination of the electors of this country, whose interests were at stake, to select those for their representatives whom they might consider most competent to protect and defend their rights and interests. It was impossible to narrow and limit the market for talent, for no country was so superabundant of ta lent and industry as to be able to narrow its market for either by a system of exclusion; that exclusion was iniquitous, be cause it would neither benefit the country nor gratify that ho nourable ambition which was more or less the characteristic of every man.—( Hear.) He must again deny that the passing of this bill would place the christian religion in danger, and he would entreat the house to complete the great work commenced by the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, and by the emancipation of the Roman Catholics, by removing the Jewish disabilities ; and that they would not be led aside by those who had before denominated one sect idolaters, and now proclaimed another sect blasphemers.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He trusted the house would no longer allow the degradation to which the existing iniquitous laws had reduced the Jewish subjects of his Majesty; and if so, he was satisfied (if there was truth in human nature) that body would justify the concession. Mr. R. GRANT replied. The house then divided, and the numbers were, For the motion 159 Against it 52 Majority lO7 The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted on Friday week. On the motion of the SOLICITOR-GEENERAL, the house then resolved itself into a committee on the privy council bill. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL proposed a clause empowering his Majesty to grant £4(10 a-year each to four retired judges, in ad dition to their retired allowances, as compensation for services to be rendered by theta in the hearing of appeals before the privy council. Mr. JERVIS objected to the honourable and learned gentle man's proposition, on the ground that the retired allowance of English judges was already sufficiently large; and because the clause woulsl give to the government the power of getting rid of a judge whom they might wish to see out of the way, by pro mising him £4OO a-year in addition to his pension, to induce him to retire. There was a puisne judge on the bench who had served fifteen years, and was entitled to a retired allowance, but who refused to resign his situation unless some addition was made to that allowance. There was also a learned gentleman in that house, attached to the government, who was understood to be desirous of being elevated to the bench. What connexion these circumstances had with the introduction of the present bill, he did not pretend to say. He should not oppose the pro position if it were limited to retired colonial judges, whose re tired allowance was very small compared with that received by English judges. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL defended the proposition, on the ground that it would enable his Majesty to secur e th e assist ance of learned and able judges in the hearing of appeals before the Privy Council. If, however, it was the f ee li ng o f th e committee that the proposition should be limited to colonial judges, he had no objection so to limit it. Mr. G. YOUNG ,recommepcled the hon. an d l earne d gentle man to withdraw his proposition altogether for the present. Mr. RUTHVEN objected to the /public money being voted away at that time in the morning. (It was pasttwo o'clock.) After some further conversation on the subject, Mr. Fl. HunnEs rose and moved that the committee be counted. The committee was accordingly counted, and there being only 29 members present, the house adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, THURSDAY, MAY 23. Lord Willoughby and Lord Dynevor took the oaths and their seats. The Duke of GORDON presented a petition from the medical students of the University of Aberdeen, praying for an altera tion of the Apothecaries' Act. Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition from certain Baptists, praying for an alteration in the law relative to births and bap tisms another from Penzance, praying for the removal of the disabilities affecting the Jews; and a third from au individual, praying for the abolition of tithes. Petitions, praying for the adoption of measures for the better observance of the Sabbath, were presented by the Earl of Car bery, Lord Lyttleton, and the Earl of Roden. SLAVERY. Earl Sr. VINCENT gave notice, that on the se con d d a y a ft er the rece ss h e wou ld prese nt a petition from merchants, ship owners, mortgagees, and other persons interested in the colo nies, praying the house to protect their rights. He moved that their lordships be summoned for that day.—Ordered. The Bishop of Bairroi. presented a petiti on f rom t h e inhabi tants of Cambridge, praying the house to adopt measures for the prevention of unnecessary cruelty to animals. The LORD CHANCELLOR gave notice, as we understood, that a commission was about to be issued to inquire into the law of Scotland, similar to the common law commission in England. The last report of the latter commission was now upon the ta ble, and would be ready for delivery to their lordships in a day or two. The Sewers Bill was read a second time, and referred to a select committee. Adjourned to Thursday next. HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY, MAY 23. The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter past twelve. Captain ELLIOT presented a petition from the female inha bitants of Hythe, against negro slavery. Mr. R. TODD presented a petition from Honiton, for a repeal of the house and window tax. Sir J. SEBRIGIIT presented a petition from an individual named Hibbert, s tating that he was a prop r i etor o f s l aves to a very great extent, that he objected to the ministerial plan for the emancipation of the negroes, and that rather than subject the country to the infliction of a lo for ompensation to the slave-owners, he would be willing to an have c his slaves uncondi tionally emancipated. Mr. F. O'CoNNOß.gave notice, that on the 24th of June he should move resolutions to the effect that the union between England and Ireland had been proved to be a measure of bad policy, and that the conditions under which it had been com pleted had been violated. Mr. Roue presented a petition against the substitution of 10-gun brigs for packets sailing to and from the port of Fal mouth. Captain ELLIOT defended the conduct of the Admiralty in the alteration that had been effected, and pointed out many ad vantages which had resulted therefrom. He understood from many persons at Falmouth that the petition did by no means was g lad to h ear th e su bj ect was under the at represent the general feeling of that port. Sir G. GREY tentive consideration of his Majesty's government. Mr. ROLFE presented another petition from the mayor and aldermen of Falmouth respecting the limits of that borough. Herbert, addressed to him as chairman of Sir T. WINNINGTosr stated that a lett er h ad been received from Mr. Sidney the Montgomery election committee, stating his inability to at tend the committee in consequence of indisposition. A medical gentleman was examined at the bar of the house, and swore that the hon. member would be unable to attend his parliamentary duties until next week. On the motion of Sir T. WINNINGTON, Mr. Herbert was ex cused from further attendance on the committee. Lord Li sicoLN presented a petition'fror n a parish in Notting ham, and also a petition from the delegat es of Scotland, in favour of the Ten Hours Factory Bill, and praying an address to his Majesty to be pleased to recall the commission. Mr. CLAY presented petitions from several parishes in Lon don in favour of the present system of beer -shops; a petition ag a from the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, river Th ames , against the county com plaining of distress, and praying and police rates; and a .petition from the ship-sawyers of the consoli dation of the various acts in existence on the subject of ship ping and commerce. Mr. Osw ALI) presented petitions for the immediate abolition of slavery, from places in Scotland. Sir R. DON KIN presented a petition from th e s hi powners o f laws, i c a k n - d u p p o r n a - y l: Nnvge ette house complaining to of so me of the navigation enact certain laws for their protection. Mr. H Awes presented a petition from the inhabitants of the Kent-road, against negro slavery. Mr. An LIOND Y presented several petitions from Clerkenwell, Newington, and other places, in favour of th e B eer Bill. Referred to the beer committee. Sir R. INGLis presented a petition from the electors of Bed ford, respecting the registration of voters at the late election. Mr. FerzsistoN presented a petition from Clare, against the punishment of death except in cases of wilful murder, and several petitions against negro slavery. Lord MoRPETH presented several petitions from the West Ridint , of the county of York, of a similar kind. Mr. AlonGes presented a petition from a body o f Dissenters, complaining of certai n disabilities respecting marriage registra tions. Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from East Kilb r i g h t, against church patronage; also a petition from th e attornies of Paisley, respecting licences. Mr. HUME presented a petition from Newborn, in the county of Fife, respecting the qualification of voters in Scotland. Sir R. VYVYAN presented a petition from the clergy of the eastern division of Cornwall, ag ainst the Irish Ch urch tempo ralities bill, and a petition from Bristol against the ministenal plau for the emancipation of the negroes; also similar petitions from Edinburgh and Dumfries, and a petition from St. Stepen's, Bristol, against the assessed taxes. Mr. EGERTON presented several petitions for the better ob servance of the Sabbath from the county of Chester. Lord EBRINGTON presented several petitions from the county of Devon, for the abolition of negro slavery; also a number of petitions against the tithe system. The noble lard also present ed a petition for a repeal of the 16th section of the 10th George IV., relating to weights and measures; and gave notice that on the 17th of June he should move for leave to bring in a bill to make it compulsory to use the imperial measure in all cases. Sir J. Owen presented several petitions from Wales for the abolition of slavery. Mr. SANFORD presented a petition from Wellington in favour of a bill for the better observance of the Sabbath; and petitions against slavery and the beer bill. Mr. MoewroN presented several petitions for the abolition of slavery from Limerick, Margate, Dublin, and also flora bewu -lev in favour of the beer bill. The SPEAKER then vacated the chair. The SPEAKER resumed the chair at five o'clock, at which time there were scarcely more than 20 members present. On the motion of Mr. HUME, several returns relating to the national debt and the per cent. duties were ordered to be printed. Captain GaoNow took notice that 40 members were not pre sent, and moved that the house be counted. The SPEAKER intimated to the hon. member that as it was not a quarter past five o'clock the house could scarcely be said to have had time to form itself. Mr. SH A W then presented petitions for the bett er o b servance of the Sabbath-dav, and against the Church reform bill. It being now a quarter past five o'clock, Captain GRONOW again moved that the house be counted, and only 29 members being found to be present, the house ne cessarily adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRIDAY, MAY 24, The Speaker the chair at a few minutes before twelve o'clock. Sir C. PAGET took the oaths and his seat for the borough of Carnarvon. Mr. &LIVER then gave notice of a motion respecting the poor laws, the purport of which we were unable to catch. Mr. PRYME presented a petition from the members of the corporation of Cambridge, complaining of abuses which existed in that corporation; and a petition from the same place against colonial slavery. Mr. Rica supported the corporation petition. Mr. T. ATYWooI, presented a petition from a village in Ox fordshire, complaining of distress, and stating that they could only obtain from Is. 21. to Is. 6(1. per (lay for their labour. At the - workhouse at Birmingham he believed they were very ill paid, but they gave the paupers 3s. Gd. per week. The hon. member also presented a petition from Nuneaton, complaining of distress, and praying the house to repeal the corn laws, the duties on malt, hops, soap, and all the necessari es o f lif e , as th e only means of relief; also a petition from the Birmingham Polish Association, praying the house to present a humble ad dress to his Majesty, to form a league with the King of the French, -on behalf of the distressed Poles. He belie - Ved that the holding up of the Enger of England, two ye a r s ago , m i g ht have. saved Polandas well as Constantinople, but now it would millions or hundreds of millions to save the latter, and save her we must, unless England were prepared to surrender the Thames to the Czar ot Russia. He next presented a petition from a person named Solly, who attributed all the commercial distress to the present system of the currency. Iu the prayer of this petition he heartily concurred. He also presented pe titions from Dariaston, for an alteration in the laws that regu lated the new beer shops, to make them more independent of the police; from the political union of Birmingham, in favour of the ten hours' factory bill; and several petitions for the abo lition of black slavery. The honourable member, after refer- ring to a great variety of subjects, concluded by-observing that there were three parties in this country—the ultra-radicals, the ultra-tories, and the ultra-whips; and it was a remarkable thing that though they were divided on all other subjects, there was one in which they all cordially agreed—Ahay all united in making war upon the currency, and would one day pull down the whole fabric of society on their heads. Mr. DIVETT gave the hon. member credit for the honesty of his intentions, but protested against his doctrines. He believed doctrines of a more destructive character were never promul gated by any man—(Hear, hear). He had been pleased to read the house a lecture on foreign policy, and to talk a great deal about white slavery but he (Mr. Divett) differed with the hon. member on the subject of white slavery, and believed that if it existed the hon. gentleman didnot proceed in the right way to put an end to it, by setting the people against their rulers —(Hear). The hon. member had said that there were three great parties in England ; he would add a fourth, to which, he believed, that hon. gentleman belonged,—namely, the Ultra union party (hear, hear), which was more dangerous than all the other three—(Cheers). He thought that the observations in which he (Mr. Attwood) was accustomed to indulge against savings' banks came with very bad grace from him (hear), and he (Mr. Divett) considered them one of the best inventions of this country for the benefit and happiness of the lower classes. ASSESSED TAXES. Mr. WALTER gave notice, that upon the house resolving it self into committee upon the assessed taxes, he should move that the relief coutemplated by the bill should be extended to the premises occupied by licensed victuallers and schoolmasters. Mr. MARSLAND presented a petition from Stockport in favour of the introduction of poor laws into Ireland. The Speaker left the chair at a quarter to three o'clock. The house resumed at five o'clock. Sir T. WINNINGTON brought up the report of the committee on the Montgomeryshire election petition, declaring J. Edwards, Esq. to have been duly elected, and that the petition was neither frivolous uor vexatious. _ Sir W. GUISE brought up the report of the committee on the Clonmel election petition, declaring D. Ronayne, Esq. to have been duly qualified and elected. Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from the town of Cam bridge, against the Irish Church Reform Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL stated, in answer to some remarks made across the table by Lord Duncannon, that he would postpone his motion relating to the information against the Lord Primate, which stood for Thursday : day not fixed. We understood the ground of postponement to be the fact of a uew trial having been instituted against the right rev. prelate. HERTFORD ELECTION. Mr. BERNAL rose to propose a resolution founded on the evi dence taken before the committee on the election for the borough of Hertford, on which he conceived it highly important that the house should express an explicit and decided opinion. The hon. member (the report of the committee made on the 2d of April having been read) thought it necessary beforehand to re , mind the house that in 1831 the borough of Hertford was con ' tested, and that Lord Ingestrie was the unsuccessful, and Mr. Duncombe the successful, candidate. In consequence of this result the party which supported Lord Ingestrie formed a club, called the Union Club, which met at the Wheatsheaf, and which was duly organized, for the purpose of returning one advocat ing their own particular opinions to Parliament. A practice had prevailed at Hertford, since the month of August, 1832, of distributing dinner or refreshment tickets. These tickets, which were blue and red, and of the value of 2s. 6d. or 55., were given away by a person named Dack, who was fostered and ushered into notice under the auspices of Mr. George Nichol son; and it was acknowledged by Mr. Nicholson and Mr. Longinore that a sum of £lOO appeared to be entered in their banking account in the month of August, 1832, as money paid to Dack for the issue of refreshment tickets. He was not pre pared to go the length of saying that candidates should be de barred from giving the electors some little refreshment, but he thought the house ought to discountenance a gross and corrupt system of treating, the only object of which was to influence the votes of the electors. (Cheers.) He was prepared to wove from the evidence that these tickets were applied not solely to the purpose of obtaining refreshment, but that they currently passed in the borough of Hertford as paper money (hear, hear,) and that they were taken in payment at the different grocers', drapers', and other shops. Ile, therefore, was justified. in say ing that these tickets were not issued for the purpose of re freshment, but that they were a mere election manoeuvre, to establish for corrupt objects a paper currency. (Hear, hear.) Mr. G. Nicholson, one of the agents of Lords Mahon and Ingestrie, admitted in his evidence that he had provided the means of discharging these tickets, and he said that their issue was not confined to the early part of August, but that there were two issues of tickets subsequent to the entry of the noble lords into the borough, as late as the end of November, within a few days of the test of the writ. It appeared from the evi dence of Mr. Pollard, a draper, that these tickets came to his shop during the period of canvassing and of the election, and that they were taken in payment for goods by one of his ap prentices, who was told by Dack that they would be all duly honoured and paid. In consequence of this assurance tickets to the value of £l2 12s. 6d. were taken by Mr. Pollard, for part of which he received £9 7s. 6d. in payment from Deck, having given the rest of the tickets to Robert' Harris, a butcher, for meat. He, therefore, thought he was not using an exag gerated term when he said that the distribution of these tickets was only a device, and a shallow device, to evade the laws re lating to elections. (Hear, hear.) Not less than £3OO were paid by Mr. George Nicholson to discharge these tickets—a sum much too large to be expended for the mere purpose of refreshment in a borough the whole constituency of which amounted to no more than 690 persons. (Hear, hear.) The value of these tickets was not restricted to 2s. Gd. and 55., but in many instances extended, as appeared from the evidence, to 10s. He hoped that after this statement he should have no occasion to enter into any argument to prove that bribery and corruption brought in their train a mass of crimes which no man could view without horror. It was a disgrace to the British nation that those things should occur every day and almost with impunity. Whose fault was that ? The fault of the legislature ? (Hear, hear.) The statute book was crowded with laws for the preven tion of bribery, but it was quite clear that those laws were in efficient. He therefore trusted that his noble friend below him, who had acquired such lasting glory by destroying the corruption of that house, would endeavour to acqnire a still more brilliant reputation by destroying the corruption of those who had the power of electing that house. In the mean while he (Mr. Ber nal) should submit two resolutions to the house. The first went to state that the bribery and corruption which prevailed in Hert ford both before and after the late election for that borough re quired the most serious consideration of the house. His next re solution, supposing the resolution which he had just read to be car ried, would be to move that aselect committee be appointed to con sider the best means of preventing bribery and corruption in the borough of Hertford. There was a new practice, buthe hoped that it was not a bad one. He mentioned that there was one case ana logous to it, but we are sorry that the particulars of it did not reach the gallery. But supposing that it were entirely without precedent, has not the house sufficient confidence in its own wisdom to make a precedent for the occasion? As the neighbourhood of Hereford was populous, and as several towns and hamlets were within a radius of a few miles of it, it puzzled him much where to place the limit in case the house should be of opinion that the extent of the borough should be increased. Some gentlemen called for the disfranchisement of a certain class of voters. He did not know how far that might or might not be desirable, but in his opinion a sufficient case had not been made out for the total disfrachise ment of the borough. He thought that a committee might trace out new limits for the borough, by which fresh blood might be introduced for the purification of that which had become cor rupt. He believed that they might amalgamate a new consti tuency with the old constituency to such a degree, that if the old corrupt practices could not be exterminated altogether, they might at least be rendered innoxious and harmless. The hon. mem ber, after a brief apology for the length at which he had tres passed upon the house, concluded by moving the two resolu tions which we have inserted in his speech. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET would state the grounds upon which he differed from the hon. member for Rochester. The hon. member for Rochester stated that all cases of bribery in elections ought to be treated with great severity. He agreed with the hon. member, but he also d es i re d no t to mix up the innocent with the guilty. and to subject both to the same pu nishment. The hon. member for Rochester had been particu larly successful in keeping the house in doubt as to the purport of the proposition which would follow upon his present motion. He had kept his intentions so sedulously to himself, both in his private intercourse and in his public, as to render them a matter of complete uncertainty. The hon. member's attention had, however, been more directed towards the justification of the Hertford committtee in turning out the sitting members than towards any endeavour to inculpate the electors, or to show cause for the house to adopt ulterior proceedings against the borough. The expenditure in treating before the testing of the writ was not such a crime as to justify the house in awarding such a punishment on Hertford as the hon. member for Roches ter evidently wished them to do. Why, if the evidence before the committee, as to the treating and distribution of tickets for months before the election took place, was to be suffered to form a ground for proceeding, the house might as well put a step to. everything like charity, or the bounty of families in the coun ties, and all over the kingdom; for the distribution of food, clothing, or necessaries, might thus become subject to the im putation of being bribes for votes at the ensuing election.- 1 he borough of Hertford had not been fairly defended; in fact, the hon. member for Rochester wished to punish it without even a conviction; for all the counsel had to do was to defend the sitting members, and not the borough; and if; therefore, the house was called upon to punish the electors, let them first be convicted of an offence worthy of punishment. lie had no dis position, he assured the house, to contest its right to interfere with a question as to the purity of electiOn, but he trusted that in following that object they would not interfere with the purity of justice as between the parties interested. lie must say, to o , that the most improper view had.been taken by interested indi viduals of the occasional distribution of blankets to the poor electors by the Marchioness of Salisbury. From the lung con tinuance of that practice by her—for now above three years— it was but fair to attribute it to feelings of a very honourable nature to her. Were they, by the proposed inquiry, to put bounds to private charity, or dry up the sources of benevolence? (Hear.) Did they propose by this motion to institute an in quiry into the whole conduct of all the voters, both rich and poor, throughout the district attached to this borough, which comprised an extent of nearly 10 miles ? Surely such an in ckuiry would not be required after the very protracted examina tion of evidence that had taken place on that subject; and from all that had transpired during that inquiry, he must, in taking leave of the subject, confess he did not see that a sufficient case had been made out to show the criminal privity of these parties —now unseated—to those alleged acts of treating and bribery, and to induce the house to adopt the mode of proceeding recom mended by the motion of the hon. member. Mr. CLAY observed that the greater part of the noble lord's speech had been addressed to the question whether the decision of the committee had or had not been a correct decision. It would, in his mind, be difficult to arraign that decision in the eyes of the public. For himself he must say, he thought it was a decision which reflected great credit on themselves, and which must ultimately do good throughout the borough representation. Would the noble lord contend that noTrinto jade case had been made out to show that the electors of Hertford were not worthy of being entrusted with the elective franchise, after all the evi dence to prove the extent to which bribery was carried on in that borough? or would he contend that there was not, at all events, a case for inquiry ? (Hear, hear.) The reformed Parlia ment would best ensure the confidence of the country by enforc ing a strict and firm inquiry into every case of this description which might be brought under its notice. (Hear, hear.) Mr. C. W. WyNN said that the question before the house was not as to the conduct of the late members of the borough, but as to whether the electors had abused their - franchise to such an extent as to call for so severe a punishment? In the case of Hertford he believed there were only eleven or twelve cases of bribery proved—certainly the number was under twenty—and this oat of no less than 6% electors. Surely such a limited THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. number of instances of bribery could nut justify the disfranchise ment of the borough—a number small indeed, as compared with the number of cases proved in all other instances where the house had interfered to such an extent. If the principle of punishing treating to such an extent were to be established in this instance, any person whatever might set aside any election in the kingdom, and also stop the issuing of a new writ. He contended that there was nothing illegal in a member's going down in January to the place for which he had been elected, and distributing money among his constituents, provided it was not done under a previous promise to do so. It might be a very good reason to bring in a bill to alter the law upon the-subject, but until the law should be altered such a proceeding would not be illegal. The ATTORNEY. GENERAL said that in taking into considera tion the circumstances of this election, he felt it necessary to consider that the object the house had in view when it passed the reform bill was to prevent all bribery; and, taking this into consideration, he should feel that he was acting derogatory to the support he had himself given to that bill were he not to vote for the present resolution. The object of the reform bill was to secure the pure exercise of the elective franchise. He voted for that bill in order to secure that result, and he regretted that in the case of the borough of Hertford it had been defeated. If bribery and corruption were proved before the committee to have prevailed at Hertford, the house would disgrace itself by disavowing the resolutions of the committee to that effect. He contended that if the question were to be at all taken up by the house, the course now proposed was the only one that could be adopted; but at the same time he must say, that, as far as re garded his own opinion, he did not think this resolution strong enough to meet the circumstances of the case. (Cheers from the ministerial benches.) He would put it to the house whether they were prepared to say that bribery and-treating at an elec tion did not deserve the serious consideration of Parliament? He maintained that the house must entertain the resolution, unless it was prepared to disgrace itself with the public, and lose the public confidence. Mr. P. PoLLocx insisted that the resolutions were both pre mature and unjust. There was nothing in the report to impli cate the late sitting members. All that the committee said was, that it appeared that bribery and treating did prevail. They did not affirm the fact. (Loud cheers of dissent from the mi nisterial side.) If, upon this resolution, it was intended to found a general measure for the purpose of preventing the re currence of such acts of corruption in other places, he should be ready to give it his cordial support; but he could not agree to the principle of making a special example of Hertford. Mr. GOULB URN would state the grounds which led him to concur in this motion. His hon. friend opposite was too candid and too honourable not to state openly to the house the nature and objects of his motion. He distinctly understood his hon. friend to state that, in the event of his present motion being carried, the next step would be to appoint a committee to inquire, not into the guilt of the accused, but how they were to be punished. So that they had the indictment, and a call for punishment, without that necessarilly intermediate step, the trial of the parties accused. (Loud cries of hear, hear.) The report of the Hertford Election committee simply was, That it appears to this committee that bribery and treating prevailed previously to and during the last election for the said borough of Hertford." If it had been shown that bribery and corrup tion prevailed to any extent, then it would have been the duty of the committee to recommend, as the NeWry Election coin ' mittee did, that the house should desire that the Attorney- General should proceed to prosecute the guilty !fatties. The cases were analogous, and why should they depart from their former usage ? It they did so in this case, they would be con demning the parties without a hearing. (Hear, and No, no.) If he (Mr. G.) thought that bribery had extensively prevailed at Hertford, he would willingly consent to place the accused in a situation which would give them an opportunity of defend ing themselves, or of being punished, if guilty. But with the evidence before him he could not consent to be a party to a resolution, which was to be followed up by another which was to disfranchise the borough, or swamp the franchise of its free holders by extending the right of voting over the adjoining hundreds. (Cries of Question, question.) In conclusion he would state, that he was determined to oppose the resolution of his hon. and leered friend, on the grounds he had already stated. Mr. BERNAL shortly replied; on a division, the numbers were, . . For the select committee Against it Majority CARRICKFERGUS ELECTION. __. Mr. O'CONNELL said it was his intention to move for leave to bring in a bill for the total disfranchisement of this borough. It was in Antrim, whit') had six representatives—one-twentieth of the representation of Ireland, and the total amount of the in habitants was 8,698. The influence on the electors hatl been distributed between the familes of Donegal and Downshire ; and, at the last election, he maintained that bribery was uni versal. It might be said that he ought to suggest how the fran chise should be disposed of if it were taken from Carrickfergus ; but he would leave that part to the decision of the house. As the constituency were of a different persuasion from his, he did not wish to incur the imputation of party motives. He moved that the house should agree with the committee in the resolu tion that the most gross and scandalous bribery had taken place on both sides, at the late election for the town of Carrick fergus. Mr. SHAW said he had presented a petition from a number of the inhabitants of Carrickfergus, disclaiming bribery on their parts. He admitted, however, that the honourable and learned gentleman had made out a stroug prima facie case, and, as the course which he took was a fair and candid one, he (Mr. Shaw) should offer no opposition to it. Sir R. BATESON said a petition bad been intrusted to him from a part of the constituency of the town, who declared in the most solemn manner that they had not been bribed at the last election ; but that, because they had refused bribes, a conspi racy was now formed to deprive them of their hereditary rights. Bribery would sooner be put a stop to if the punishment were visited upon the bribers, and not the bribed. It was clear that the town of Carrickfergus could not be so depraved as this ge neral imputation of bribery would argue, since the Judges had for the last three years successively returned thanks for maiden assizes. Mr. E. TENNANT said he should not have opposed the dis franchisement of the freemen who had been bribed, but he saw no sufficient grounds for the entire disfranchisement of the borough. Mr. Legg, in his evidence, said he knew of no house holder having been bribed; and the agent of Sir A. Chichester knew of only one. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that after the state ment of the honourable and learned member, it could not be doubted that the bill ought to be introduced. He th oug ht f r o m that statement that the bribery was so general that it would be extremely difficult to leave any . part of the constituency that would be pure. At the same time, while he gave his hearty concurrence to the introduction of the Bill, he should reserve to himself the right of considering, in common with the House, whether justice might not be effected by a partial disfran chisement, if it should turn out that there was any class of voters sufficient to form a constituency who had not been bribed. Mr. C. W. WYNN considered that there could be no doubt as to the propriety of bringing in the Bill; but of course justice required that the parties should have au opportunity of being heard. The resolution having been agreed to, Mr. O'CONNELL moved to suspend the writ for the Burgesses for the town of Carrickfergus until the lst of July next. The hon. and learned Member then obtained leave to bring in a bill to disfranchise the borough of Carrickfergus. Mr. O'CoNNELL said that there was another branch of this report, with respect to the delay which had taken place in pro ducing certain papers, to which he sh ou ld f ee l it his duty to call the attention of the house on Tuesday week. The second reading of the Dramatic Performances Bill was fixed for Thursday next. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at a quarter before two o'clock to Thursday next. LONDON GAZETTE.-FRIDAY, MAY 24. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED . William Bennett, of Lostoek, Lancashire, cotton-spinner. Thomas llodgson, Manchester, tanner. BANK IttiPTS. - - - - John Bagger (and not John Ilaggar, as before advertised,) late of Brighton-place, Brixton-road, oilman. James George Charles Chamberlain, Marlborough-road, Chelsea, grocer. Jarvis Palmer, Hampton-street,Walworth, fish•sauce manufacturer. George Ross, St. Mary-axe, grocer. Charles Thoroughgood, New Church-street, Lisson-grove,victualler. James Eyre Watson ' Bucklersbury, merchant. James IloLnan, Holton Old Town, calenderer. Stephen Hale Alonzo Marsh, Bristol, music-seller. Joseph Winter, Stoke-under-llamdon, Somersetshire, glove-manu facturer. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. J. Jones and G. Broune, Liverpool, morocco-dressers.—R. M. D., and A. Manny, Liverpool, surgeons.—S. Sherlock and W. L. Thompson, Liverpool, wine-merchants.—C. Butler and T. M ax fi e ld , Sheffield, haft and scale-pressers.—J. Saunders and F. Burghart, jun., Warwick -street, Golden-square, saddlers.—ll. M. Wrench and J. Dodsworth, Regent-street, linen-drapers.—J. Yearsley and C. E. Thomson, Ross, Herefordshire, surgeons.—J. Parker and J. Parker, Harpurhey and Manchester, cotton-spinners.—J. Jackson, jun., and J. Mountford, Tiverton, Cheshire, brick-makers.—E. Knapp, W. 11. Earle, and W. W. Bulp e tt, Wi nc h es t er, coal-merchants.--T. Jeffery and J. Burrow, Allerton Bywater, Yorkshire, stone-bottle-manufac turers.—J. Angell and T. G. Angell, Norwich, curriers.—B. Hart and L. Hart, Holywell-street, Strand, clothes-salesmen.—J. IVeaver and B. P. Hander, Wolverhampton, chemists.—ll. Wilson and G. H. Cut ler, Dunster-court, Mincing-lane, wine-merchants, DIVIDENDS. June 18, J. Morley, Liverpool, merchant. —June 15, J. Bagley, Liverpool, haberdasher.—June 3, W. Lushington, jun., Mark-lane, merchant. —June 11, .1. Finney, Charlotte-street, Portland-place, merchant. —June 14, C. Bray, Thcobald's-road, coach-maker.—June 17, T. Freethv, Acton, Middlesex, larpenter.—June 20, J. Cox and ' liclsch, 1.1,iw-court, Crotched-friars, m erc h an t s .—J une 20 , W . Dickinson, Milk-street, warehouseman.—June 6, W. Wilmington jun. Milbourn-port, Sumersethire, glove-manufacturer.—J une 14 , C. ff. Wearing and W. Greenwood, St. Paul's Ch urc h-y ar d , mer chants.—June 6, W. Sangster, Holland-place, Lambeth, builder.— June 15, R. Smith, Old City Chambers, merchant —June 17, J. Ilberv, Doughty-street, merchant.—June 14, A. M. Pereira and H. Castellain, Old Bethlem, merchants.—W. F. Fussell, Boltonsborough, Sornersetshire, tanner.—June 15, J. St a dd ers, Burnley, Lancashire, draper—June 17, E. Andrews, Worcester, bookseller—June 17, J. Wilde, J. Bowden, T. Gartside, and Z. Mavall, Oldham, Lancashire, cotton-spinners—June 19, W. Haywood, Birmingham, bookseller— June 18, T. Cooper, Thatcham, Berkshire, coach-proprietor—June 18, W. Emery, Bristol, corn-factor. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the con- trarv, on or before June 14. R. Dodgson, Preston, Lancashire, innkeeper—J. Leighton, N o rth Shields, victualler—T. Gilbert, Birmingham, coal-dealer—C. Bollin, Barossa-place, Chelsea, plumber—J. Ilberv, Doughty-street, mer chant—G. A. Whale, Bocking, Essex, innkeeperLG. Rich, Curzon street May-fair, tailor— H. Joyce, Milford-lane, Strand, oilman. NEGRO SLAVER y.—ln remarking on the ministerial plan for the extinction of slavery, the Christian Advocate says :—" The people of Great Britain are again swindled out of their most just expectations by the trickery of our liberal administration ! The state of things contemplated by the plan is not emancipa tion, but continued slavery ; if possible, in an aggravated form. By the very principle of the scheme self-redemption is made impossible; and yet, self-redemption is the only means pro posed for freedom. One-fourth only of the slave's time is, ex hypothesi, the standard of his value—the whole of this is con fessedly necessary to redeem his price; so that it must require the penurious saving of every sixpence, thus obtained, to pay for his redemption, when the twelve years are expired; yet he is expected to pay a half-yearly instalment to government as his contribution to the liquidation of the colonial loan. It is perfectly clear that Lord Althorp, and the able Mr. Stanley, are both ignorant that two and two make four. Let these gen tlemen but touch; however lightly, on financial operations, and they expose_ an ignorance that wo u ld shame a cha r ity school boy. flow is it possible, at one and the same moment, to ap propriate the entire wages to the purpose of self-redemption, at a distant day, and, meanwhile, to devote a portion of them an nually to the payment of the colonial debt ? Thes4liberalgen tlemen are absolutely stultified. Thus, then, it is clear,'that emancipation is rendered impracticable by the very principle of the arrangement." The publication in question adds,—" We have the satisfaction of assuring our friends, that the house will most certainly be divided upon the broad and simple issue of slavery or freedom. There will be no loophole to escape ; not a crevice through which a mouse can creep. A distinguished member has undertaken to do this, should even Mr. Iluxiun fail ; and we are assured—we know, that this is his determined purpose." CO..VTEMPORARY PRESS. The contest in Portugal between Don Miguel on the one side and Don Pedro, Lord Palmerston, and Louis Philippe on the other, may be said to be drawing near to a termination. According to accounts which carry with them an air of great probability there is absolute starva tion raging in Oporto, acd the foreign soldiers of the Ex Emperor seem likely to be obliged shortly to be forced to serve out the attenuated and lifeless bodies of the inhabitants as necessary food to each other. In this dilemma, however, there is still one hope left, however forlorn it may seem. Captain Napier, R.N. a gallant Commander in his Majesty's service, has un dertaken with the aid of seven steamers to land 3,000 men in Black Horse square, or the Terrero de Passos, from whence the conquest of Lisbon could be easily effected. No plan is given of these brilliant movements and inten tions, but the fact seems to be taken for granted that they will assuredly be carried into effect and without op position. Captain Napier is a veteran in the art of scheming, and we are inclined to think that this among others will be little more productive of honour and profit than his steam navigation on the Seine, which we believe did so far suc ceed as to plant a steamer between Rouen and Paris, where for a short time it exhibited with as much success as from little custom and shortness of means could be ex pected. It is said that Captain Napier has actually sailed on his romantic expedition accompanied by the Marquis of Pal mella. The Noble Diplomatist, however, whose trade is not fighting, is to be dropt at Oporto, before the gallant Commander commences operations. Such are some of the stories of the day.—Guardian and Public Ledger. The following appears as an advertisement in the Leeds Times of Thursday : " PUBLIC NOTICE. "A paragraph headed Caution Co Manufacturers' having appeared in the Leeds Mercury of the 18th instant, imputing to a gentleman (Mr. S), late candidate for the representation of this borough, that he had threatened a manufacturer in the following words, viz. ;—`Sir, if I met you on a dark night, with a pistol in my hand, I would shoot you and having received from that gentleman an assurance that we gave an entirely false representation of the cohversation, we have made such inquiries as have satisfied us that the imputation conveyed by the paragraph is wholly false ; and we thetefore beg to apolo gize to him for the insertion of the paragraph, and to express our regret that we have been led by the information we had received to publish it. " We were prepared to have given a further public expres sion of our regret, for the injury. vhich such a paragraph was calculated to inflict on his character, but have to acknowledge his forbearance in waving it. " EDWARD BANES AND SON, " Proprietors and Publishers of the Leeds Mercury. "Leeds, 22d May, 1833." The Messrs. Baines, who thus confess themselves guilty of a falsehood no less serious than the charging Mr. Sadler with a threat to commit a foul assassination, are the head of the Socinian, which is the Whig party in Leeds. We do not wish to aggravate the sufferings of those who have been compelled to make this miserable confession of falsehood, and the wretched apology annexed. But what is to be thought of the party who follow such leaders— that has recourse to such arts—and so promptly crouches under manly opposition ? What is to be thought of that party ? Why, that it is fitly represented.—Standard. " MARSHALL AND MACAULAY FOR EVER."—This once popular cry is now fairly shelved. We have recently al luded,, more than once, to the great dissatisfaction ex pressed by many of the stanchest friends of the liberal members for this borough at their parliamentary conduct; and we have now to apprise our readers, that at the weekly meeting of the council of the Leeds Political Union, held on Tuesday last, the whole of the proceed ings of the representatives of this borough were brouht under review by a leading member of the council. '1 he " superhuman" Mr. Macaulay and his excellent coadju tor, Mr. Marshall, were tried in the balance and pro nounced to be wanting. Of Mr. Macaulay nothing else could reasonably be expected, considering the situation which he fills; but after the flattering promises made by the other worthy young member, it surely was not pre sumptuous to hope better things of him. The principal topics which had occupied the attention of Parliament since the opening of the session were brought under no tice, and on each point the question was put, " Have the members of the borough of Leeds done their duty to their constituents on this subject, or have they not ?" Seven important subjects were considered, and on five of them the decision was against our representatives, either for having absented themselves from the debate and division, or for having taken the wrong side.. The discussion was adjourned to Tuesday next, when the remaining votes of those gentlemen will be canvassed, and we understand that if the final decision is against them, a public meeting will be called to take into consideration the propriety of requesting them to resign their seats. This is in accord ance with the professions of the members, when they de clared that the moment a majority of their constituents called upon them to resign, they would do so. We hear that the leaders of the union are certain they can obtain a great majority of voters who will join them in the re quest, and put the members at once to the test of veracity. We trust that some decision will be come to speedily, be cause it would not be very agreeable to Mr. Macaulay to be unceremoniously called upon to give up his member ship after having resigned, or at least made a feint of re signing, his seat at the India Board, in order to curry fa vour with his constituents.—Leeds Intelligeneer. The bill proposed by Sir A. Agnew for the better ob servance of the Sabbath has been most uncourteously rejected by the House of Commons—nay, not rejected merely, but actually scouted. The reformed house had just listened, not only with the utmost patience, but with high delight, to the profitless altercation between Mr. Cobbott and Sir R. Peel, and in numbers nearly three hundred : no sooner, however, was a question to be in troduced that related to the all important subject of that Christianity which is part and parcel of the law of Britain, and which our legislators, above all, ought ever to reve rence, than half the members rush out of the house, and half the remnant assail the proposal with a ribald shout, and ultimately kick out the bill with " loud cheers !" Seldom has there been exhibited a more disgraceful scene within the walls of St. Stepen's than that exhibited on this occasion. The Popish and revolutionary members, we are told, were prominent actors therein above all the rest—insomuch, indeed, that Mr. A. Johnston, (M.P. for Cupar,) had formally to complain of it to the Speaker; but as well as they, even ministers themselves opposed that Christian measure, and employed against it the whole influence of government. The result affords another striking instance of the utter disregard with which the Whigs and Liberals treat the petitions of the people, when the object is one opposed to their views, or uncongenial with their feelings. The pe titions lately presented in favour of the principle of Sir Andrew Agnew's bill are computed to have borne the signatures of almost half a million of people —aye, and of the very best portion of the people too—not from their rank or their wealth, but, what is far better, their moral and religious worth—their possession of all those quali ties which make men the best subjects, and the best citi zens. Yet in the first reformed Parliament, a class of peti tioners, at once so numerous and respectable, are driven away in a manner scarcely merited by the most worthless, the most despicable! The bill might, perhaps, be somewhat objectionable in a few of its details—though, if the habits of society are to be made conformable to the Divine law, rather than that law—one jot or tittle of which is not to fall to the ground—should be altered to suit the habits of society—much less so than has been generally asserted ; yet tile principle of it was sound and good; and in a com mittee of the house it might easily have been modified. Yet instead of this, the High Court of Parliament—lately reformed upon the most improved Whig principles—scoffs and sneers at the subject, and finally rejects the measure, principle and all, with great acclamation !—Carlisle Patriot. The London papers for the last two or three days have been occupied to a very considerable extent, with the evidence furnished to the coroner and jury, impannelled to investigate the circumstances attending the death of the policeman who was stabbed by one of the mob du ring the late affray in Cold Bath Fields, London; and with remarks on the most extraordinary verdict returned, viz. that the policeman met his death by an act of fuei. fiable homicide! The case appears to us to have' been as clear a case of murder as ever was made out. The jury, however, in their dislike to the arbitrary proceed ing of the Whig government, and their indignation at the violent conduct of the police, thought fit to pronounce the act of an assassin as one not merely capable of exte nuation, but even justifiable ! The populace improve upon the hint, and by their outrageous conduct at the funeral of the unfortunate deceased, show that they think the murder not merely a justifiable but a laudable act. This is a new feature of the times, attributable to the insane conduct of the Whigs in fomenting agitation to keep themselves in place. So, if men are beaten with constables' staves on one side the street, a ruffian is not guilty of murder who kills an unoffending policeman with a dagger on the other I for there is not a tittle of evidence to prove either that the man killed had. misbe haved himself, or that his slayer bad received D. tingle blow ! We say nothing of the fact of- men attending political meetings with concealed daggers, an un-Et:glish. mode of proceeding reserved for the present age of isbcr-: alism. We wish the Whigs joy of the new doctrines de., veloped by these proceedings, and trust ther will not long be permitted to govern a country is which, under their fostering care, they have been permitted.tc ttike root.—Hull Packet. Various rumours are afloat as to dissensions in the cabinet relative to the slavery question. That there ere dissensions is evident, and they are not confined to the cabinet. We see Lord Howick opposing his father's governm en t. M r . Ch ar le s Grant, it is understood, - has sent in a conditional resignation. Mr. Macaulay has done the same. The learned gentleman ob jects to the principle of the ministerial proposition, and to mak ing the negroes pay for their freedom and work out the fifteen millions.—Leeds brlvlliyencer. MAY 28, 11335. THEATRE ROYAL, LIVERPOOL. The new Play of THE WIFE, continuing to be receive d 0° . 11 10 each representation with the most rapturous applause, WI repeated To-morrow Evening and on Friday . . IIIIHIS present TUESDAY, May 28, will be performe d ° popular Play, written by , James Sheridan Knowles , Bok called THE HUNCHBACK. Lord Tinsel Mr. Browne. Master Walter (the Hunchback) Mr. Vandenhuit Julia Miss Jarman. To conclude time,with s , E fo c r o t N hetbird thenew F ar ce, call SECONDTHOUGHTS. ea - Which was received here on its first and second reprefen tad°2l with reiterated plaudits. / Mr. Jabber Nl r . Browne.' Mr. Sudden.. Mr. Baker—Mrs Trapper.. Mrs. To-morrow fur the sixth ti me , t h e f av yite new Plitt' THE WIFE. Julian St. Pie rre lr. Va n denboff. Mariana.... Miss aiman. After which, the popular ew Drama of NELL GWYNNE. King Charles the Second.... Mr. Vandenboff. Joe Haynes.. Mr. Browne.. Nell Gwynne.. Miss Jaratel.lfee, On Thursday, the HUNCHBACIC, and a favourite a ft er p ie On Friday, the WIFE. After which a new Drama, never ' acted here, called ELLEN WAREH A M , b e ing Tor, b el Benefit of Miss JARMAN, and th e l ast n i g h t b ut o ne 0' engagement. The new Farce of "Mr. and Mrs. Pringle," is in prel'a and will shortly be produced. Places in the Boxes may be taken of Mr. Parker, a the Box. office, from Ten till Three. Lower Boxes 45.; Upper Boxes 3s. 6d.; Pit 2s. 6d.; lierll to Doors to be opened at Half-past Six, the Fedora:ton"- commence at Seven precisely. TO CORRESPONDENTS. We have been compelled, by a redundancy of matter, but D3 a , u u- b against our incli na ti on , to l ay as i de many excellent 0 ;4)a nications which we int en d e d to i nsert b oth in the l as t as the present number. ioo The advertisement sent to us fr om M anc h ester f or s i x 10 r t filo cannot be admitted into the columns of the STANEtitv• money will be returned on application at the Office. d G. R. G.'s verses should b e sent to t h e Mercury. They h •a i s ior the vulgarity of Sanch o P anza ' s apot h egms, without theladerl, plicity or their intelligibility, but that nevertheless re ig) them more suitable to the calibre of our contezne readers. 0. is informed that notes taken at the trial at Jo/master ares:l our possession. They were furnished to us by'a barriste r ' he is welcome to a sight of them. but. The verses of M. L. H. are goo d enough in their way, exceptionable on other grounds. TO OUR READERS. , r wi de % THE LIVERPOOL S TANDARD i s presented to its - at . and the public i n a new f orm, under iMprov ea rangements, and with an increased size. Whg th has been done will be easily explained in a fat' 1 0. The support which we have received in so short a P eg . as six months h as b een , we are proud to say, qu ite 00 precedented in the history of any provincial j'a rri . 7 ,, The circulation of the STANDARD has steadilY l a , creased, far beyond our expectatiOns, ever since i t it established; a n d our a d vert i sements, althoug h of ip 0; very highest orde r , an d unta i nte d b y the ealP irl • drugs and impo s iti ons of the day, are als o increas y ; in a similar r a ti o . E ncourage d b y this success,/ ts, which we beg to ex p ress our grateful acknowle d g o we have resolved to render our paper still more g el !, rally useful, and a mo r e conven i ent me di um o f eonl , r ing our politic a l o pi n i ons to t h ose who entertain ,1 sentiments, or a re lib era l enoug h to countenanc e passionate discussion on the part of a political ci r rt ponent. The for m w hi c h we h ave a d opted we P I it ourselves offers many facilities for tkise objects. contains considerably more matt e r thdn formerly, be lt., arranged, more easily referred to, and m uch- m ore O ., c i veniently and expeditiously printed. We have nic er , moreover, a valuable additi on to our commercial, tilted canti le, and agricult ura l ta bl es , and we have establish so many agencies i n a ll th e large towns throughout 1m , three kingdoms, as well as in the coloni es , an d in f o reign countries, as will enable us to supply a la r i f jr oi quantity of early and correct information than other paper. The peculiar advantages derived front the centrali .. Lion of Liverpool, with reference to all other rat s England, Scotland, and Ireland, and our waxer' agencies, have induced us to publish a SECOND E Dl'l l °; every Tuesday an d F r id ay afternoon, containing 1 most important intelligence, political, commercial, a 7 1 .„ agricult ura l, rece i ve d b y the mails of those days fru'l, every division of- tliemp ire,.and by the nuniel th z ` arrivals at this port from tilt q - uarteri of the st (ff oni , together with th e s t ate o f t h e General Pro d uce, ton, and Corn Markets, brought down to a late which intelligence will be conveyed to all parts of I three kingdoms by the mails of the same evenings al : to the whole of th e B r i t i s h colon i es, the United gal": of America, and other foreign countries, by the _ .,o l ` ii ; merous packet-ship s , an d ot h er vessels whose jeer - to and systematic departu r e on fixed days. is peculiar the port of Liverpool. Each publication of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD, the fore, will be equal to one morning and one eottl ia , paper; and, in consequence of the universal cite° ill lion which it enjoys, it presents advantages, both tip promptness of information and f or a d vert i s eose l unequalled by any other newspaper. Ebt Eiberpool 'tanbarb. TUESDAY MORNING, MAY 28, 1833. It has been said by some one that " he would be a b °P man who should attempt to tamper with the funded Ifi l ; perty of this country." And questionless he would be bold man ; but we, nevertheless, are of opinion that t men who are tampering with property in the W es Indies are bold enough, or ignorant enough, to do Oi thing, even to applyi ng th e ann ihil at i ng sponge ,to th e 4 national debt. We are , b es id es, o f op i nion,—an which we do not express without due and calm consid e ; tion—that the measure of his Majesty's ministers- --bl ie - s promulgated by M r . S TANLEY —i s calculated to inflict ii much misery upon f am ili es as wou ld, be inflicted by t o f besom of destruction if appli e d t o t h e f un d s. J ust ice' course, has nothing to do with either measure. To r ° o the fundholder would b e a fl agrant cr i me—to rob the planter is a crime o f an equa ll y d eep an d i mpe risbaoo_L dye. To rob the fundholder would be a crime, perbor of unattended with any sanguinary consequences, exceP. t o , a private nature, such a s d es p a i r super i n d uc i ng suicid te But to emancipate the slaves without giving ado:l° 2l of compensation to the slave-owner must lead to events too fearful and heart-rending a nat ure t o b e r ashly ° r prematurely announced. otr We have been particularly imp e ll e d t o ma k e these 0 servatious by the contents of a l e tt er o f recent d a te fr° Jamaica, written by a magistrate of that island, and Pla c ed in our hands by a gentl eman on w h ose cre dibility t he most unbounded confidence may be reposed. It ° i a later date, by two days, than any letter we have Yet see and therefore we atta c h m ore i m p or t ance to it. T he following is an extract : " Kingston, April 20tb' "The election of members to the House of Assembly f ° this city took plaee on the 18th instant. Mr. Watkis and S r i Campbell, both men of colour, were returned on the p ro fess° principles of the radical party, in opposition to Mr. Medal and Mr. Bravo, who stood on the Conservative interest, are both meu of the highest respectability, and of large P r A V party. Mr. Mitchell, the mayor of Kingston, was the tb" member, and he is elected on the Conservative interest. The successful candidates, Watkis and Campbell, are men 1100" no stake in the Island; this is the result of enlarging the cod stituent body by a Jamaica Reform Bill, which has extee" , the elective fr anc hi se t o a ll ten - poun d h olders of pre Pertr without distinction of colour. These two men were retureodi not on account of th e i r t a l en t s or p ro perty , but on accotg lt 6 their colour—by electors of colour." e t, * There are some parts of the letter of so co mbust.- :hi nature, and evidently written under g rea t exciter() e o vo that, in the discharge of a responsibl e d u ty, We t t e thought it expedient to suppress: The return of 1 13 ; • oolouredgentleruen ie one of the res u lt s o f th e Peru ic : o o , aystetu pursued by Lord Mulgrave. Here we ha" of no property whatever, like some of the h on ourablo l solvents of our own-Parliament, elected by brother P ati o t* pars, to legislate upon matters relative to the proper t i e d, ethers- Thus the servile war has already cornmen c oo An attack is made by the desperate and the needy tiP ihe the wealthy and the industrious. The agitator and woo ac e leveller are let loose, und er p ar liamentary authority , ° b r the peaceful and the Conservative. Those who s op something to lose are to be governed by person s ig it have neither property nor character to peril. 11 °` v . v ihi possible that society can hold together under such and insane measure of reform ? for Bay