The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-08-10 00:00:00

TO CORRESPONDENTS

If a " Sunday-school Teacher " lad written his communi-
cation upon one side of the paper, and forwarded it at an
early hour in the day, we might have been able to have
used it ; but it was received too late, and, for the cause
assigned, it was useless. It is left out for him, if he thinks
proper to re• write it.

ebe Lthtrpaol &tanbarb.

TUESDAY MORNING, AUGUST 10, 1841.

By the papers brought last week by the Crane, we
observed that the good people of the West Indies, who
had just heard of the defeat of ministers on the sugar
question, were wondering what would come next. We
are not surprised at their perplexity; but amidst the
diversified intelligence contained in these papers, it

gave us pleasure to observe that the prevailing tone of
feeling is far from despondent. A public meeting,
most numerously attended, had been held at Trinidad,
at which strong resolutions were passed " condemnatory
of the presumption that there was a necessity for the
mother country to resort to other than her own colonies
for a supply of sugar, especially to those cultivated by

slaves, and declaring that that island alone, from its

extent and fertility, was capable, with a sufficient la-
bouring population, of producing more sugar than the
inhabitants of Great Britain can consume, and at a
cheaper rate by free labour than it can be raised in any
country where slavery prevails, provided the restric-
tions which now impede the free current of immigra-
tion be removed, and that an adequate protecting duty
be continued to the British grower until he can obtain
a sufficient supply of free labour. These resolutions
were to be forwarded to the Colonial Secretary, and the
official support and recommendation of the Governor
requested."
Here then is a statement which is well worthy of
consideration, granting even that it should in some
measure exaggerate with regard to the capabilities of
this one island. It shows the strong confidence enter-
tained by the inhabitants in its resources—a confidence
which it is not to be supposed they would either feel,
or affect, if there were not some foundation for it.
They assert that Trinidad alone is capable of producing
more sugar than the inhabitants of Great Britain could
Consume. We have no need to put the assertion to
the proof ; but there is enough in it to make us pause
when anything so anti-national and monstrous is pro-
posed as that of abandoning our own colonies, and re-
sorting to slave-cultivated countries for an article which
these, our own colonies, are capable of supplying us
abundantly with.
It is a healthy sign that there is almost no other se-
rious complaint but the want of labourers in the
islands, and that great exertions are being made to
procure them. There is no despair of being able to
cultivate by means of free labour only. Recent efforts
to obtain free immigrants have met with encouraging
success. At Jamaica it was ascertained that only two
families, from London, had quitted the island, and that
the departure of these was looked upon rather as a
gain—contrary to a report that many late immigrants,
becoming dissatisfied, had left. A Mr. Hamilton had
given evidence before the committee of the Agricultural

Some of our brethren of the Conservative Press are

not disposed to acquiesce in the policy of that self-
denying ordinance of Sir Robert Peel, which will have
the effect of leaving in the hands of an individual

Whig the office of Speaker, with all its emoluments
and dignity, and certainly it is no trifling sacrifice :

such a one as we should never expect from a leader o:

e adverse party,

We have struggled, say the dissen

Lents, not only for a change of measures, but a change

of men ; we have fought hard, and we have won : wh)
then are we not to reap the fruits of a glorious vic.

;ory ? We have had enough of conciliation, and mus

have no more of it. Was it ever heard that the
Speaker of the House of Commons was the chosen of

le minority of the House ? Sir Robert Peel has, by
Lis false move, greatly damped the ardour of his

friends, and, if he continue to act on this tack, must
destroy either the cause confided to his conduct, or
himself as the leader of the Conservative party. Such
is the view taken of this step by some of our talented
and esteemed confreres of the constitutional press, and
we freely admit that, at the first blush, the case might

easily wear that aspect with which it seems to have

presented itself to them ; but a very slight annotation
of particulars must serve to show that they judge

We admit that we have been engaged in a long and
severe conflict ; but has it been for nothing more than
to put a few individuals of our own party into coin-

fortable berths ? Has it been no more than a scramble
for offices, and do we lose the fruits we looked for,
when a single place or pension which might have been
secured to a follower eludes our grasp ? Surely it will
not be said so. Conservatism, as we understand it,
has had in view a far nobler and more comprehensive
range of objects. Its steady, unvarying principie, we
take to be the greatest happiness of the greatest num-
ber by the agency of sound instruction and just mea-
sures, and we shall not permit ourselves to call anything
anti-Conservative that does not aim at obstructing, or
that is not practically a hindrance to, these great ob-
jects. The simple question then is, does our leader
make any sacrifice of our great cause, whatever he may
do as regards his immediate friends, by declining to
wrest the office of Speaker from the hands of its pre-
sent occupant ? We answer that question in the ne-
gative, and for two reasons—first, because the office is
not a party one, but judicial rather than political, and
because, when it is fairly and properly discharged, as
it is allowed to have been in this case, Conservatism
can sustain no injury from its being in the hands of a
merely nominal Whig; and, secondly, because Mr.
Shaw Lefevre would not be removed without the
country having to pay him a pension of £4,000 a-year.
This latter consideration would probably he but a ba-
gatelle in Whig estimation, but it is something in the
contemplation of a Conservative, and, as an evidence of
principle, it will be a great deal in the opinion of the
country. Whigs talk of economy; let it be seen by
the people that the Conservatives practise it. Sir Ro-
bert Peel is bound to act in conformity with his own
opinions, and ought not to suffer in our esteem for his
strictness in this respect, and it is known that he ar-
gued against the selection of Mr. Abercromby to fill
the office of Speaker chiefly on the ground that it was
not a political appointment, and that mere party consi-
derations ought to be laid aside in selecting the person
to occupy it. The Whigs, it is true, did not adopt this
doctrine, or at least took good care that the most
" senseless and fit man" should be of their own party
when they were strong enough to make a choice ; but
their example in this, as in most cases, is good only for
avoidance, not for imitation. Suppose our leader were
to follow it, we should be glad to know how our dis-
sentient friends would answer the objections that would
instantly be raised against him ? Could they reconcile
such conduct with his own preaching, the literascripta
of which may readily be found in Hansard's Parlia-
mentary Debates, or with his high character as a states-
man and economist ? Would they have him " give
up to party what was meant for mankind?" Such a
step we do not at all look upon in the light of unto-
ward conciliation, but as the dignified proceeding of a
man and of a party resolved to act steadily upon prin-
ciples most conducive to the interest of the country,
whatever loss it may occasion to themselves indivi-
dually. This is just what we desire our leaders would
make the polar star of their conduct—to adhere to
principle, and yield as little as possible to expediency,
whatever amount of temporary inconvenience such
strictness may involve. As to conciliating by conced-
ing against principle to the demands of our adver-
saries, or filling offices voluntarily from their ranks, we
utterly abominate the practice, and would go quite as
far as any of our contemporaries in condemning it.
We trust it is a rock which our leader will be careful
to avoid; but we acquit him of such an intention in
this instance; and add that if, during his administra-
tion, he shall give no other or further occasion for such
an imputation, he will do well.

The Americans begin to wax insolent. M‘Leod is
still their prisoner, and the remonstrances of our mi-
nister are treated with contempt. Their conduct is
disgusting beyond measure; but how far is forbear-
ance on our part to be extended ? By the intelligence
last received, it appears plainly that hitherto it has
only had the effect of augmenting the insufferable
vanity and presumption of the republicans, and war
with England is become as familiar to their tongues
as if they cared nothing about it. Truly, unless we
mean to give up our innocent countryman as a peace-
offering to the offended dignity of Yankee land, it is

almost time to rescue him out of their clutches. This
is another admired part of Lord Palmerston's foreign
policy, and one knows not which to laud most—his
war-system with the Chinese, or his peace-system with
the Americans. A war with America is most likely
another precious legacy about to be left by the Whigs