The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-03-27 00:00:00

amount of the deposits made in them, and to encourage
honest, hard working, and industrious people to
deposit their money in benefit building societies
rather than in savings' banks. One of the pri-
vilegee held out to them was the right of transferring their
property one to another without incurring the stamp duty.
Now, he maintained that if the government desired to
take away that right, they should, at least, have commu-
nicated with some of the benefit building societies, or they
should have introduced a bill having special reference to
building societies. (Hear, hear.) This, at least, the
government should have done, so that those wbo were
interested in building societies, and the members of the
House of Commons who represented the people, should
know the course they intended to pursue. (Hear, hear.)
But what did they do ? Now for a specimen of political
honesty. Mr. Wilson, the Secretary of the Treasury,
introduced a clause into a bill not having any relation to
building societies, and called a Friendly Societies
a clause to deprive the building societies of
the right of transfer without the expense of a
stamp. That bill passed through a second reading
in the House of Commons before members were at all
aware that it contained anything relating to building
societies, and without those who were deeply interested in
the question, both in Liverpool and elsewhere, knowing
of the existence of such a clause affecting their interests.
S one gentlemen in Liverpool interested in the question
very soon found their way up to town. They called upon
him, and asked him what they were to do, as the bill was
then in the House of Lords. He said, "Come with me—we
will go to an old and tried friend of yours, formerly Mr.
Liddell, now Lord Ravensworth." (Cries of hear, hear,
and'loud cheers) They went to L srd Ravensworth—
ev hat did he do ? He said—" I cannot forget Liverpool ;
let me know the facts of the case." The case was stated
to him; he took the question up in the House of Lords;
he defeated the government, and rejected the clause
(Cheers.) But not satisfied with that ignominions defeat,
Mr. Wilson introduced the same clause into another
bill having no relation to building societies, but headed the
`• Stage Carriage Act." (Great laughter.) Bet, having
found out the trick before, members were rather alive to
the matter, and watched all the bills; and when they came
to that particular clause, it was his (Mr. Horsfall's)
privilege and his duty to move that that clause be
rejected. (Hear, hear.) Although the Government
whippers-in used every exertion, they could not
muster enough of members to carry that
politically dishonest act, and the government accordingly
withdrew it. (Cheers.) Mr. Horsfall then alluded to the
Civil Service Superannuation Are. He rejoiced to see an
article upon that subject in the daily papers. (Cheering and
groans ) He gave everybody credit who did right, and he
was quite certain that, in advocating the cause of the civil
servants of the crown, that paper was advocating a right
cause. (Hear, hear.) The appeal made in their behalf
stated that they were about 10,000 men, and they complained
that in order to hold office under the crown, they were all
disfranchised. He (Mr. Horsfall) might say, however,
that he was not so sure, although they thought they
ought to have the franchise, that it would work well,
because it might lead to what the public disliked very
much - government influence at elections. (Loud cheers )
But what these officers complained of especially was
that they were doubly taxed. They were taxed to the
amount of £60,000 per annum, while the pensions
they received amounted to only the sum of
£ll,OOO per annum. The total amount contributed by
the se officers, since the institution of the tax was about.
£900,000, while the amount returned in superannuation
allowances was but £BO,OOO, leaving a net surplus of about
£820,000. Now, he contended that was politically
dishonest towards a large and highly respectable holly •
men ; and it was such corruption as that which he hoped
their future members, whoever they might be. would assist
in exposing. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) The hon. gentleman
then proceeded to reply to questions put to him in several
letters, strongly condemning, in reply to one querist,
the system by which very small boroughs had as full a
representation as Liverpool, and the metropolitan
borough returned sixteen members while Liverpool
Only returned two. Remarking that ha did not think
he had much reason to complain of abuse even from the
Radicals of Liverpool, aud that, upon the whole, lie had
been very courteously treated, lie proceeded to reply to a
letter published in the Mercury, signed "
William
Scott," and dated from the Temple, London. The writer
of that letter complained that having been until lately a
resident in Liverpool, he bad applied to Mr. Horsfall for at
order to admit him to the House of Commons, and received
no reply from Mr. Horsfall, whereas, on several occasions
when he applied to Mr. Ewart, he received a prompt and
courteous reply. In reference to this statement Mr.
Horsfall replied that he had never received such a letter,
that had he received it, he should have been very
happy to comply with the request, that he could only
regret the circumstance ; and he appealed to his friends
and opponents alike, to say whether he was ever guilty
of any act of discourtesy. (Cheers.) Mr. Horsfall
_further stated that he had received a letter that morning
from the Rev. Mr. Holmes, of the Kirkdale Industrial
Schools, informing him who Mr. William Scott
was. The letter, which Mr. Horsfall read
aloud to the meeting, stated that some years ago the
writer, named William Scott, was a boy in the Corporation
North Schools, and when Mr. Horsfall was chairman of
the committee of those schools, Mr. Holmes had on several
occasions received money from him to buy bread for
William Scott, and to pay the fees. &c., for his going to
school ; he was now clerk to Mr. Simon, the barrister.
Having read this letter, Mr. Horsfall said he thought
Mr. Scott need not, under such circumstances, have
accused him of intentional discourtesy. (Hear, hear,
and loud cheers.) With an eloquent appeal to the support
of Liverpool in the ground of his political principles.
Mr. Horsfall concluded amid loud applause.
Mr. Turner, who was enthusiastically received, next
addressed the meeting. Ile denied that he was opposed
to pregrees, or bound to Lord Derby. He denied that he
came forward as a disturber of the peace, and asked why
did the Radical Councillor of that ward come forward, if
he so much feared disturbing the peace, to oppose his
venerable friend, Mr. Sohn Buck Lloyd. The Radicals
appeared to have originated a strange doctrine at this
election, that the minority should elect a candidate as well
as the majority; but, he asked, did they ever know a
Radical to propose dividing anything when he thought he
could get the whole (Hear, hear, and cheers.) He referred,
its a proof of this, to Manchester,
of steadynchester, Bprßßradford,parnedsorythigegr
places where Radicals returned their own members. Hp
declared himself in 4
cherch and state, but introducing such alterations, from
to time, as circumstances would require to make the institu-
tions of the country more efficient for those purposes for
which, like all human institutions, they were intended.—
the good of the community at large. (Cheers.) Ile spoke
of the income tax, which he declared a very useful engine
of finance, but one which ought to be reserved for times of
war and extraordinary occasions, and should not form part
of the ordinary financial arrangements of the country.
He expressed a hope that the finances would be so arranged
as to admit of the extinction of the income tax,
ae was promised, by 1860. Mr. Turner went over several
other Welts frequently referred to by him in
previous addresses, and having fully explained his poli-
tical principles, concluded amid loud applause.
Mr. Christopher Bushell, who was loudly cheered, said
he came forward for the purpose of performing an act of
justice. He referred to the charges recently made and
published in the Mercury against Mr. Charles Turner, in
reference to what was called the " bales and trusses "
question. He (Mr. Bushell) was chairman of the committee
appointed by the Town Council in 1843 to enquire into
the charges made against Messrs. Sancta, Turner and
Co, andle read the names of the committee *high have
been recently published. The charge•was brought against
Messrs, Sands, Turner, and Co., et a very inopportune time
for the parties who brought it—jest at the pried when Mr.
mu teas nominated to the dayoralty. The charge must
have existed against the hopse for a period of ten years
previously, and yet the matter was permitted to smoulder—
no charge wee brought egainst the hoese until 4 period some-
thing like the aresont, when an honor was about to be
conferred upon one of its members. (Hear, hear, and cheers )
The committee of the Town Council sat for many
days, and after a most patient investigation, during which
they had heard evidence on all sides, they came to a
decision Mr, Bushell then reed the cot clting passages
of the committee's report, in which it was declared, that
considering the want of some declared rules of distinction
between the articles, the omission ever since 1834 of auy
objection on the part of the receiver of the dues; the manner
in which the charge had 'been met by Messrs.
Sands and Co., with a prompt admission of the
facts, and the production of all the papers ; and,
moreover, the solemn assertion of the parties that they
were acting correctly, the committee ware of opinion that
although they proceeded erroneously, yet that they did so
without arty dishonest intention. Mr. Bushell then
reminded the meeting that since the charge was made, Mr.
Sands had been elected a borough magistrate, and sat over
and over again on the same bench with Mr. James Aikin.
If that gentleman believed Mr. Sands to be a dishonest man,
why did he not raise his voice against such a man casting a
slur upon the bench by his presence? (Hear, hear.) Would they
believe Mr. Aikin ? ("No, no.") Mr. Turner was elected a
county magistrate in 18.50, at the same time with Mr. 11,oLert,
son tadstonc—(hisses) —and other gentlemen. Seine years
after the charge was made, Mr. Robertson gladstone, of whose
refined sense of honour they were all aware—(hisses and
laughter)—consented to be nominated in the same year as
Mr. Terner, and never raised his voice against it. (Cheers.)
A Voice ; " Gladstone and Aikin protested against the
committee's report." (Cries of " order *ere")
Mr. Bushell asked what could they say of such consist-
ency ? Could they believe that the present charge was
was sincerely made. (Cries of " No, no.") Mr. Turner
was then elected chairman of the pock Qorrunittee—Mr.
Turner, upon whose name dishonour was now sought to
be thrown—presiding over gentlemen, every one of whose
names wag a guarantee for their honour, and not one of
whom would sit under a man whom they did not believe to be
the very soul of honour, Mr. Bushell read over the names

of the Dock Committee—the navies of Mr. Robertson
Gladstone, Mr. Eyre Evans, and Mr. William Rathbone,
being followed by hisses and groans from the meeting. He
asked them could Mr. Turner by any possibility have sat
as the president of a committee so composed, if the whole
or any of these gentlemen had believed that he was the
man they now sought for political purposes to paint him.
(Cries of no, no, and loud cheers.) Mr. Turner had been
selected over and over again to proceed to the House
of Commons, to defend the rights of Liverpool, by
the dock committee. Why did the dock committee do so
if they believed he was not an honourable man?
What did Mr. Ewart, a gentleman in every sense of the
word, say of Mr. Turner on all occasions? He always
said he was proud to call Mr. Turner his ,friend, his
honourable friend. (Cheers.) Could they have a stronger
proof of the fact that the present charese was merely a'
political clamour, got up for political purposes, to defeat
the object the electors had in view. (Hear, hear, and
loud cheers.) Mr. Bushell also referred the meeting to
the decision of the committee of merchants of the highest
standing formed to investigate the charge under the
presidency of Mr. William Brown, M.P., b 7 which Messrs.
Sands and Turner were declared guiltless of any wrong.
(Cheers.) In conclusion, Mr. Bushell declared his perfect
conviction of Mr. Turner's high honour, and his determina-
tion to support him with Mr. Horsfall at the election.
Mr. Henry Danson proposed the next resolution, which
declared Messrs. Horsfall and Turner fit and proper persons
to represent the borough, and pledged the meeting to
their support. Mr. Danson went into a lengthened
history of the proceedings which led to the recent meeting
of the licensed victuallers, and reiterated his charge against
Mr. Ewart of declining to recei,e a deputation and evading
a distinct answer. He denied that Mr. Turner had made
any incorrect sta'em-nt to any licensed victualler, as
a leged at a liberal meeting by Mr. Councillor Hodson.
Any qatement made on that occasion was made by him.
(Mr. Danson) and he declared Mr. Hodson's alleaation
diametrically opposite to the truth. He said Mr. Hodson
had stated what he knew to he contrary to facts, to be
untrue, for an unworthy electioneering purpose ;—to
endeavour to blacken the fair fame and reputation of Mr.
Turner, he had stated what he kcew at the time to be a
falsehood. (Lund cheers )
Mr. Harmood Banner seconded the resolution, which
was carried by enthusiastic acclamation.
Mr. John B. Lloyd proposed, and Mr. Bold seconded
a vote of. thanks to the Chairman, which was carried
unanimously.
The meeting then separated.

COVENTRY,—The Right Hon. E. Ellice, Sir Jos. Paxton,
Mr. Treherne, Mr. Mellor, and Mr. Phillimore, were
yesterday morning duly proposed and seconded, A poll
was demanded, and fixed for to-day.
WINDSOR.—Messrs. Grenfell, Ricardo, and Vanstittart,
were nominated;yesterday, and the poll fixed to take place
to-day

CARLISLE.-Sir James Graham, Mr. Ferguson, and Mr.
Hodgson, were put in nomination yesterday, and a poll
demanded.

HEaTromp.—The polling here will take place to day.
Yesterday. the Right Hon. E. Cowper, Mr. R. Chambers
and Mr.:Far quhar were put in nomination.

The Post says—Having gone over the list of candidates
carefully, and the probabilities of failure and success, we
have come to the conclusion, always rather underrating
the forces of the Government, from a feeling of careful
precaution, that the Minister will have at least a working
majority of from 75 to 80 in the coming session.
The Advertiser complains, as a breach of the under—
a.auding implied in accepting the candidature of Baron
Rothschild for the City, that the Jews belonging to (he
Reform Club have resolved almost to a man to vote for
Lord J. Russell, and they make no secret of the fact that
such is the intention of the Hebrews as a body.
The meeting of Cripplegate Ward held on Wednesday
evening, at which a resolution was carried by a large
majority in favour of Lord John Russell, was attended by
the four commercial candidates. Lord C. Russell appeared
on behalf of his brother. '

LORD PALMERSTON AND TRE EARL OP

MALMESBURY:

The following letter has just been published :
London, March 25, 1857.
Lord,---I am one of those who thought it their duty
to vote against your government on the Chinese question,
and who have in consequence been exposed to your public
invectives and misrepresentations on the subject. You
have uttered and written these at a moment when we are
unable to reply to them in parliament, and I therefore adopt
the less usual course of answering you through the press.
The invective is of comparatively little consequence, but
it is important that the public, who are now occupied with
the primary causes and proceedings of the Chinese war,
acd who have never read the Blue-book. except in extracts,
should know exactly what they were. That Blue book was
Sir John Bowring's justification of his acts. It became
our indictment against him, and the House of Commons,
upon this evidence, gave a verdict against the defendant.
Now that verdict was founded simply on what appeared
in the Blue Book, as having occurred up to the time it was
produced, and when the events were re!aeed according to
their respective dates. ' But this undoubted evidence
stands in direct contradiction to the statements which you
make to your constituents at Tiverton To them you
write :—" An insolent barbarian, wielding authority at
Canton, had violated the British ft ig, broken the engage.
ments of treaties, offered rewards for the heads of British
subjects in that part of China, and planned their destruc-
tion by murder, assassinations, and poisons. The British
officers, civil and naval, on the station, had taken those
measures which appeared to them to be proper and
necessary to obtain redress." Now, my lord, the
inference which must be drawn from these lines Is,
that ill those outrages preceded our seieure of ships,
shelling ports, and bombarding Canton itself, and
were the provocations to our aggression. This inference
is not true, for with the exception of the first one, namely,
the supposed violation of the British flag on board the
Arrow, all the others were subsequent to, and in retalia-
tion for, our operations conducted withent any declara-
tion of war. You would make your constituents believe
that the issue upon which the minority in the Lords and
the majority in the Commons decided was that all the
outrages which you enumerated could not and did not
justify our hostilities, whereas they only declared that the
original dispute of the Arrow did not jestify the use of our
violent reeaeures; measures which have subsequently
induced barbarous reprisals, and engaged us in a sangui-
nary war. That was the real issee and verdict before
Parliament, but you have both in your address and in
your speech at the Mansion House attempted to mislead
the public as to this fact by mixing up the successive
events and confusing the impressions of your audience. If
the blue book were within their reach, they would find that
Sir John Bowring did obtain important compensation
for the first offence, and might t hen have stayed his hand
until he received orders from home ; but that the blood-
shed and crimes that have followed, are the consequence
of other dernagde which you yourself in your wiser hours
had officially propounced to be dangerous and unprofitable.
You proceed to toll the voters of Tiverton that we are
men " who have endeavoured to make the humiliation and
degradation of our country the stepping stone to power."
What opinion, my Lord, have you of the memory and
credulity of your countrymen, if you think they have
forgotten that Lord John Russell has but lately retired '
from your own Cabinet, and that Lord Derby having
resigned office on the first hostile division of the. House of
Commons in 1852, has supported yourself and your col-
leagues with all the, strength of the Conservative party
during every phase of the Russian war ? Such statements
may Perhaps be forgiven in an address as electioneering
claptrap, but was it decent to use the table at the Mansion
house as a hustings ? lot I find that, at On Lord
Mayor's dinner, on the 20th inst., you are reported by
the Times to have spoken thus :—" If those who voted
against qs had risen to power, what ought they to
have done as to the logical and inevitable consequence
of their vote ? They asserted that our proceedings
were unjustifiable. : , . . . • . . They
must have paid the rewards which had been given
for the heads of our merchants, and the cost of the arsenic
which had been used in poisoning our fellow subjects at
Hong Kong." And this is the language of the Prime
Minister of England at the banquet of the first magistrate
of her capital, surrounded by foreign ambassadors and
all the talent, rank, and wealth of his party. What they
thought of this extraordinary insult to some 400 members
of Parliament is more easily guessed than known ; but
what would the most ignorant of our countrymen have
said of your logic had you addressed them thus on an
analogous case of possible occurrence. Two men quarrel
and proceed from words to blows ; one is killed , the sur-
vivor is tried ; his counsel pleads justifiable homicide. The
jury give a verdict of manslaughter ; pending the trial the
relations of the deceased take up the feud and poison those
of the accused. The jury logically must pay for the poison.
Have I not then a right to call your lordship's speech in
the city an electioneering claptrap ? But was it the place
and the audience for such a tone? The impatience of
obscurity, or the irritation of misfortune, may sometimes
excuse invective, but you had on that occasion no such
palliation. You are the popular minister of the day. You
may justly refer your countrymen to very long, and, I
admit, very useful services to the State. They appear to
be anxious to do you honour, and give you their confidence,
and yet you choose this moment of pride andprosperity
wantonly to accuse those who have, like myself, often
supported you in maintaining the honour of England, and
defending her best institutions, with sacrificing these to
the basest personal motivee. If the charge had not rr•O-
ceeded from so high a quarter I should have dos'plsed it.
I declare it to be utterly unfoundedas
l'egards myself,
and 1 believe it to be equally so as regards the gentleman
with whom I found myself in universal acoordance upon
the China vote. By its very nature it was unconnected
with any party creeds as to religion, finance, or politics,
and this is the simple and true explanation of the medley
division that ensued. The country having been committed.
my humble vote will support a war which has now become
necessary to English interest and honour, but which at
first might have been avoided without a sacrifice to either.
I have the honour to remain,- your lordship's obedient
servant, Meemessuee.
The Right Hon. Viscount Palmerston, K.G.