The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-07-03 00:00:00

,ors, proved, so far, a complete failure. The tables o,

imports from our colonies render this fact indisputable.
Colonial produce is becoming dearer every day. It is
obvious that this increase of prices cannot go on much
longer. However willing the nation may be, at pre-
sent, to deny itself of the luxuries of sugar and coffee,
this self-denial cannot endure for any protracted
period. What, then, can be done to remedy this state
of things ? Ewart, Hawes, Villiers, and Co. advise
us to admit foreign sugar, at reduced duties, for home
consumption. This would be equivalent to a bonus
upon slavery in its most aggravated form. It is per-
fectly idle to meet this assertion by saying that free labour
foreign sugar would alone find its way to the British
market. We cannot admit free-labour foreign sugar,
and, at the same time exclude slave-labour foreign
sugar, without violating treaties with the Brazils,
United States, and other countries. This settles the
point at once.
But is there no remedy ? The readers of the
STANDARD will surely anticipate the reply. The obvi-
ous remedy is, the encouragement of free labour in our
own colonies, or, in other words, the encouragement
of immigration, on a scale commensurate with the
wants and resources of our colonial possessions. For
this we have long and earnestly contended. The ne-
cessity of an increased supply of labourers in the West

Indies and British Guiana is now acknowledged on all
hands. The capabilities of those colonies to produce
an amount of coffee and sugar sufficient for the con-
sumption of the whole world is equally acknowledged
by all parties. We have, therefore, every reason for
calling upon the anti-slavery agitators and the political
economists to devote their energies to this grand object.
Instead of seeking to put an end to the slave trade by
the colonisation of Africa, and throwing away their
time and money on theoretical expedients, the imprac-
tibility of which has been fully demonstrated, let them
exert their eloquence and their influence, and employ
their time and their wealth in extinguishing slavery by
rendering slave labour unprofitable. Let them call upon
the government and the legislature to afford every
facilitylor the introduction of free immigrants from all
parts of the world, into our own colonies. This is all
that the planters want, and this they must speedily ob-
tain, or they will be plunged into irretrievable ruin.
But we must not stop here. We cannot close these
remarks without suggesting to the West India inte-
rest the policy of forming a WEST INDIA COLONI-
SATION SOCIETY. We have a Canadian, a New
Brunswick, a Newfoundland, a South Australian, a
New Zealand Colonisation Society, all of which, we
believe, have been found to work admirably, and all of
which have been eminently conducive to emigration on
a large scale. Why should the West Indies and Brit-
ish Guiana, with their vast undeveloped resources, and
their millions of acres of unreclaimed crown lands, be
without a similar advantage ? But of this we shall
have more to say in future numbers.

We can quite well afford to pity the shuffling attack
upon the STANDARD, conveyed in an ominous make-
weight in Tuesday's "overset" Mail. The increasing
advertisements and unpuffed circulation of the STAN-
DARD are their own vouchers, and the best reply to
the insinuations and fictitious charges of our rash and
sinking contemporary.
We believe that the paragraph, which invites evi-
dence against itself, was penned with a view not so
much to injure us, as to serve a Jerry Diddler's pur-
pose in appealing to it as a means for alms, and as a
bait for " gudgeons," at whose expense it is peculiarly
desirable for gentlemen in difficulties to raise the wind.
We quote, for our contemporary's satisfaction, a
paragraph from the Morning Post :
" Our contemporary," observes the Post, in reply to an
article in the Globe evening paper, "Our contemporary says
he has extracted this" (a. portion of an article of the Mail)
" from a provincial paper ;—an assertion which, as we have
not at hand the means either of verifying or contradicting it,
we are bound to regard as true. But why extend the circu-
lation of such disgusting trash ? To prove that the writer is
disloyal ? The evidence would have been more cogent had it
been adduced to prove that the writer was tipsy. No,—the
ambiguous extract has a higher aim. It is to prove forsooth
that the Conservative party is disloyal. The inference and
the production upon which it is founded must scarcely be the
product of one mind and spirit. We trace equal coarseness
of feeling and equal potency of gin in each.
" Of one thing at least we are sure, that the diffusion of such
a paragraph, and the elaborate attempt to impart to it a dis-
tinct and atrocious meaning in reference to her Majesty (the
writer being evidently incapable of any meaning whatever),
though conclusive enough that our contemporary is a faith-
ful and zealous servant of the O'Connell ministry, cannot be
taken as a proof of his respectful and affectionate loyalty to
the Queen."