The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-04-06 00:00:00

clap-trap ; and who would be worth a dozen
flimsy orators, by the facts with which experience
has made him familiar.

The speech of Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE swept
away whole volumes of the sophistical rubbish that
Mr. CARDWELL and the PEEL-parrots are per-
petually uttering by rote. Mr. MooRE showed
that Mr. CARDWELL had falsified every one of his
professions—had kept his word of honour to the
Shipping Interest, by voting away the CHARTA
MA RITIMA—the Navigation Acts—had showed
his attachment to the Church, by voting against the
bill to restrain the Italico-Irish swarm of Popish
priests who are caricaturing a hierarchy all over
the land—and had evinced his. regard for British
Commerce by supporting a policy to give away our
people's rights of industry to America and France.
The speech is not only of powerful service at the
present crisis, but is permanently valuable for its
close argument and conclusive statistics ; and Mr.
BRAMLEY-MODRE very fully discharged the obli-
gation he felt himself under to explain that Mr.
CARDWELL had deceived him, and not that he
had abandoned Mr. CARDWELL.

Of Mr. SAMUEL HOLME'S telling and eloquent
address, it is difficult to speak with adequate appro-
bation. It was the speech of an effective debater,
and was acknowledged by often•repeated applause.

Let the electors remember that the coming
Parliament is the foundation of the resistance
to the threatened social-republic—the universal
peace of the pugnacious Mr. BRIGHT, and
the cheap and careless government advocated by
Mr. COBDEN. There is (and let no sneers drive
the fact from the minds of Conservatives) a great
deal more at issue than the question of prices in
this election. The public must decide been anarchy

and order—between the Constitution we have, and
the system which would have Mr. RICHARD COB-
DEN for a CARNOT, and Mr. Fox, the SoCinian
preacher, for an Abbe SIEYES. Lord DERBY has
declared that be desires to he tried " by GOD and
his country." All that is needed is, that the peo-
ple should "well and truly try, and true deliver-

ance make,
battle,

and, in the words of the old wager of

" GOD defend the right !"

MR. CARDWELL'S MANIFESTO.

IT is a saddening task which we have to perform

in commenting upon the proceedings of the Whig
Radical—we might justly add Papistical—meeting
of Saturday last. Mr. GEO. BALL LAURENCE
was chairman ;—" Heu! quanto mutatus !" The
once Tory and Protestant Member for West Dcrby
ward—the advocate of Scriptural Education in the
Corporation Schools—was chairman of a meeeting,
the leading feature of which was the prostration of
Protestant Conservatism, and of Whiggery as well,
at the foot of aggressive Papacy ! Mr. GEORGE
HALL LAURENCE, however, was never a man of
any fixed principle. The Burgesses of West Derby
ward repudiated him; and he has now taken re-
fuge under the wing of his atra-bilious relative Mr.
WILLIAM EARLE. He tells us, indeed, in excul-
pation of his lapse, that he is only walking in the
footsteps of CANNING and HusKrssoN. Ch, that
the venerated shades of these great men could rise
anl fright the pigmy, GEORGE, into his proper
dimensions ! GEORGE CANNING, and GORGE
HALL LAURENCE ! " Hyperion to a Satyr !"
It is with Mr. CARDWELL, however, that we
have principally to do. Mr. CARDS
celebrity; and having appeared amongst us to
justify his apostacy, and, in doing so, assumed a
little too much of the " Hercules vein," we feel
impelled to examine his pretensions and statements
rather closely. The world sets him down as a
" smart" man. He is reckoned "cunning of fence"
and most plausible. But if we fail in proving to
every unprejudiced mind that mere cleverness and
plausibility may coexist with want of truthfulness
and honesty in political matters, we are content to
have our judgment set at naught, and to acknow-
ledge that the estimation of Englishmen, as to the
character of the legislator, should, from henceforth,
be based upon the principle that " motley is your
only wear "

[L is a

We pass over the Free Trade generalities con-
tained in the opening of his speech, and proceed at
once to his attempted reply to the statements made
by Mr. J. BRAMLEY-MOORE, at the meeting of
Thursday last. We pass over, too, his attempt to
refute the charge of inconsistency, brought against
him for having referred to the increased con-
sumption of Tea, upon which no decrease of duty
had taken place, as the result of Free Trade policy;
merely recalling his attention to the fact that there
has been a decline in the consumption of Coffee,
the duty upon which has been reduced. Our first
object is to draw attention to his attempt to get
over Mr. BRAMLEY Moon E's charge of his having,
in arecent speech in the House of Commons, asserted,
and pretended to have at hand statistics to prove
the assertion, that the Cotton Manufacture in Ame-
rica had declined since the inauguration of free
trade, and especially since 1845. Mr. CARDWELL
distinctly stated that " In the return of the first
year to which we had access, the consumption of
raw cotton in the United States had been 300,000
bales, and it had risen rapidly to 550,000 bales
in ten years. In 1845 the duty on cotton
was removed, and in 1846 our tariff was finally re-
vised ; and a decline in the production of cotton goods
in America at once commenced, and for every year
since had been continuous." We repeat, with Mr.
BRAMLEY-MOORE, that there has been no such
decline. There has, on the contrary, been a con-
tinuous increase up to the last two years. The con-
sumption in 1844-45 was 389,006 bales; in 1845-6,
422,597 bales ; in 1846-7, 427,967 bales; in 1847-8,
531,722 bales; in 1848.9,518,039 bales; in 1849-50,
487,769 bales; and in 1850-51, 405,108 bales. We
take these figures from the statement which bears
the guarantee of having been "printed Sept. 1851

for Thcm as Court, Underwriters'-room, Liverpool,"
an authority which every merchant by whom Mr.
CARDWELL was attended on the platform of the
Amphitheatre on Saturday knew to he the most
worthy of confidence upon the subject. Mr.
CARDWELL'S object was clearly to show that the
consumption in America had risen under a protec-

tive system, and declined under the operation of
Free-trade. It so happens, however, that the
highest point it ever reached,—which, by the way,

he overstates,—was in 1848, three years after the
duty was taken off, and two years after our Tariff
was finally revised, instead of the consumption