Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-12 00:00:00

treatment of the Indian soldier which causes
him to feel discontent, in GOD'S name let it be
remedied ; but if, on the other hand, he has
been, as some of the Indian journals would lead
us to believe, " pampered into insolence, flattered
into unfounded pride, and bribed into doing his
duty by pecuniany largeeses," it is only a reason
for our fears that it is foreign influence, and
not social grievance, which has set in train the
series of mutinies which have taken place..

THE Guardians of the West Derby Union have
had another meeting, and another display of that
coarse and ungentlemanly demeanour for which
many of them are noted. Elevated t) a position
which places in their hands a little bit of
patronage, and the exercise of a small modicum
of power, they seem to forget what they were,
and who they are. Many of them exhibit a
sensativeness bordering upon the ridiculous, and
in the vindication of what they deem their honour
and rectitude, make themselves laughing stocks
before the world, and most clearly demonstrate
that they cannot interpret the legitimate meaning
of a simple sentence ; in a word, that they do not
understand common English. The random shots
of such feeble intellects as that of Mr. I. EDWARDS
should not have caused Mr. PITTS to exhibit so
much impatience, and give to the public food
for a hearty good laugh. The sallies of wit to
which persons of Mr. I. EDWARDS' mental calibre
give utterance, should be treated as they merit—
with silence. A yea or a nay should be given
to his questions : nothing more. This is the way
such characters are treated in more august
assemblies, and it very soon cures thein 'of
their contemptible satire.

Passing by this interlude of last 'Wednesday's
proceedings, we come to the more important
matter of Dr. NEVIN'S case; and here again,
we find at full work a spirit of extreme illiberality,
bordering, we would say; upon petty persecution.
This case was introduced by the clerk reading a
letter from Dr.NEvists, acknowledging a resolution
of the board passed at its meeting on Wednesday
se'nnight. This resolution, it will be recollected,
referred to the report of the Poor-Law Board on
the investigaton made by Mr. MA.NWARING,
as to the allegations contained in an article which
appeared in these:columns headed, for the purpose
of attracting attention, " Rattle his bones over
the stones," and which was written by Dr.
NEvINS, and called upon the Doctor to do one
of two things—apologise or resign. The reading
of the Doctor's reply, of course, caused the
deepest attention. Many of the Guardians had
already quailed before his ejaculatory effusions,
and, being unable to controvert his statements,
have become his bitter and determined opponents.
To use a homely phrase, every " ear was cocked,"
to learn whether apology or resignation was the
word of adoption. His friends looked for the
former, and his enemies prayed that it might be
the latter. But when the clerk came to that
manly declaration, " Apologise further, I shall
not —resign, I will not," consternation seized the
ranks of Messrs. Shaw and Company, and upon
the countenance of each might be observed the
gathering storm—a last effort to rid themselves
of a gentleman who despised to act the part of
a coward, and nobly told his masters—" If I
adopted either course"—apology or resignation
—" my conduct would be attributed to fear —a
sentiment with which I have yet to become
acquainted."

Now, as Dr. NEVINS has determined to refuse
any further apology, or to resign, let us see how
far he is correct in the course he has adopted,
and whether the resolution which Mr. SHAW
carried, by a majority of one vote, is warranted
under the circumstances. In doing this, we
have only to refer to two documents read at last
Wednesday's Board, viz., the Report of the Poor
Law Board, and Dr. NEVINS' letter. The first
is, as Mr. SHAW termed it, " the decision of the
judges who tried the case." What do the Poor
Law Commisioners say, after having " carefully
considered Mr. MANWARING'S report, and the
evidence by which it is accompanied ?" Why
that Dr. NEVINS "wholly failed to substantiate
the charges preferred by him against the Board."
This, however, be it observed, does not do away
with the fact that there were just and reasonable
grounds for the charge. The case to which we
alluded in yesterday's issue, respecting the
petition of Mr. SIIEDDON to the House of Lords,
on Monday, is a convincing proof that charges,
although not absolutely proved in law, may be
strictly correct. Men generally come to the
consideration of judicial matters with a mind
predisposed to support the ruling powers ; and
hence it is but natural to 'expect that Mr.
MANWARING would report in favour of the
Guardians, gentlemen with whom he is in some
degree obliged to associate, but cannot control.
Now, although Dr. NEVINS may not have proved
his case, it does not follow that the statements
which he made were entirely without foundation.
The next point in the Poor Law Commission-
ers' Report, is the statement that Dr. NEVINS, by
publishing the charges which he did, was guilty
of disrespect to the Board, and considers that
it is questionable whether he should be permitted
to retain his office. To this, however, they add
a saving clause, and intimate that quite enough
has been made of the case, and that as Dr.
NnvrNs has well and truly discharged the duties
of his office, the Guardians " should be satisfied
with the expression of their opinion'.' contained
in the report, trtoting that Dr. NEVINS would
"in future confine any complaint he has to
make, ks to defective medical arrangements, to
the proper channel." All this amounts

nothing more than that Dr. NEVINS, in his
anxiety to have the medical wants of the
paupers properly attended to, was over zealous,
and that those who now seek for his dismissal
are only getting up a " tempest in a tea-pot."

The Doctor's letter, which called forth the
debate on Wednesday, is next to be considered.
In that communization he notices the origin of
the quarrel between himself and a section of the
Board, and reiterates the charge that it "is
neglecting its duty to the sick who are under
its care in the workhouse," and in proof of the
statement, asserts that he is still left without the
necessary assistance which he requires, unless
he pays for it out of his own pocket. The other
part of the Doctor's letter is a frank and an
honourable expression of regret, that if anything
which he has written during the controversy has
wounded or hurt the feelings of any Guardian,
he is sorry, and desires to retract it. What, we
ask, could be more honest, open, and honourable.
He still complains, and justly too, that he is
not afforded the proper help which the medical
department of the workhonse requires. Recti-
tude, and a determination not to be bullied by
a section of the Board, induce him to decline
further apology. What he wrote served to
satisfy gentlemen of education, standing, and
position in society ; for we find when Mr. SaAw
moved his resolution of "expulsion," that the
Rev. Mr. TATTERSALL said that from what he
could learn of the case "he thought Dr. NEVINS
had made as much apology as he could in the
letter that had that day been read."

Mr. SHAW, our readers will observe, is the
fugleman of the party who is thus endeavouring
to hunt the Doctor down. Well, this gentleman
was the leader of the onslaught on the medical
officer on Wednesday. He made a speech
which contained :nothing but a tissue of vague
and illogical assertions, evidently showing that
before he aspires to be a debater, even in a
Workhouse Board-room, he should get lessons
in some elementary discussion class, where
he will learn the first principles of
disputation- Mr. SHAW upset his own argu-
ment—at least what he pretended to be an
argument—in supporting the resolution which
he proposed, by stating, " I will not say that
the Board was right in refusing him the assist-
ance, nor will I say that they were wrong." This
is Jesuitry of no mean order. Mr. SHAW voted
that the assistance Dr. NEVINS asked for should
be refused ; yet he is not in a position to say
whether that act was right or wrong. This
statement places Mr. SHAW on the horns of a
dilemma—he may chose which he will sit upon.
Either he is so ignorant of the question of right
or wrong, or he is a coward, and dare not vindi-
cate the course he pursued with reference to the
matter. If Mr. SHAW cannot—or will not—say
that the Board was justified in the course it
has adopted, his whole harangue against Dr.
NEVINS goes for nought.

The resolution moved by Mr. SHAW was
carried, as we have said, by a majority of one
vote. That resolution requested the Poor-law
Board to call upon Dr. NEVINS to resign. When
it reaches London, the Commissioners will
naturally enough look at the yeas and the nays,
and as men of the world will say, why Dr.
NEVINS is not the obnoxious animal that Mr.
SHAW represents him. Ten vote that his letter
is an ample apology ; eleven, including the
wicked " IIAMAN" of the Board, are all that
condemn his proceedings. We cannot—we will
not—order the resignation; for it may be, on
looking at the names of the minority, these ten
men are, on the whole, persons of much greater
intelligence and influence. To grant the prayer
of the " Eleven of all West Derby" would he an
insult to the minority. Such, we say, will be,
in all probability, the feelings and opinions of
the Poor-law Commissioners, when they read the
resolution passed in the Board-room of the West
Derby Workhouse, on Wednesday ; and as they
have already, in an indirect manner, read a
lecture to Dr. NEVINS, they will, no doubt, find
occasion, and justly too, to snub the majority of
eleven, of which the leaders are Messrs. SHAW
and EDWARDS.

The public are weary and sick of this unprofi-
table squabble—controversy it cannot be called;
and we trust that, seeing that Dr. NEVINS has
done all in his power to heal the wound that has
been opened, they will sustain a gentleman
whose professional attention and solicitude for
the well-being of his patients, the bitterest
enemy which he has upon the Board dare not
question, and confirm him in his position as the
medical officer, irrespective of the snarls and
yelps of certain self-sufficient but ill-natured
Guardians; and that they will discountenance
the reported project of employing a resident
medical officer, who will do their bidding
whether it tends to the benefit of the Union or
not.

CONSECRATION OF THE BISHOP OF NORWICH.---Yester-
day morning, the Hon. and Rev. John Thomas Pelham,
D.D., was consecrated to the bishopric of Norwich, at S .
Marylebone Church by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who
was assisted by the Bishops of London, Gloucester, and
Bristol, and Ripon. Prayers having been read, a sermon
was preached by the Rev. Henry Veun, D.D., Prebendary
of St. Paul's. The bishop elect was then presented to the
Archbishop, who went through the usual form of conseora-
tion, saying—" Receive the Holy Gh-Jst for the office and
work of a bishop in the church of God, 110 W committed
unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in the name a
the Father, and of the So;,, and of the Holy Ghost
Amen. And rememb;r that thou stir up the grace of
God which IS I.t thee by this imposition of our hands, for
God but of power
illoaTtsh:ndotsogbievrennesuss.
is a brother of
isfheaorp,
ce as an ecclesias-
tb.S Earl of Chichester, to whose influence,
his appointment.
"theThspetrniet new bishop
tieslcommissioner, he is said to come by