The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-01-29 00:00:00

TO CORRESPONDENTS

ERRATUM—CAPTAIN PIDDING'S TEAS.—In last week's
advertisement it was stated that Captain:Pidding's tea was
reduced 9d—for which read is per catty package of Gun-
powder.
Mr. Sheldon's letter can only be inserted as an advertise-

men t.
We think " A Subscriber " is a little " too hard " upon the
managers of the Subscription Concerts.

Ebt Lthnpool tartbar73.

FRYDAY MORNING, JANUARY 29, 1841

We have repeatedly called the attention of the pub-
lic to the lamentable supineness evinced by our Town
Council when the interests of Liverpool are vitally af-
fected ; and amongst the questions hostile to the wel-
fare of the town which have latterly gained strength,
and upon which our local representatives appear to be-
stow the most extraordinary indifference, the claim of
Manchester, and the inland towns generally, to the
privilege of bonding goods, is one of the most promi-
nent; and, from the proceedings of a public meeting
held in Manchester during the past week, we learn
that that question is to be strongly agitated during the
present session, and, as its advocates would have us
believe, with the prospect of certain success. Are the
inhabitants of Liverpool, we ask, prepared to oppose
a concession so pregnant with certain danger to their
interests as a mercantile community ?
*We do fear that they are not. We fear that the
members of that body, which ought to be, and is the
publicly recognised organ of the opinions of the people
of Liverpool, are not only unprepared to oppose such
an aggression against the interests of the town, but
that, in pursuit of their own selfish purposes, they
woilld,readily submit to any and every aggression,
prejucliciitl and Itowever ruinous. . We address
ourselves, therefore, not to them—not to the Council—
not to the Dock Committee; but, in the few remarks
which we shall to-day offer upon the subject, in reply
to the views of the Manchester meeting, we address
ourselves to the common sense of our readers and, of
the legislature. We leave, for the present, out of ques-
tion altogether the comparative expense to the reve-
nue of the present system of bonding, and that of
bonding inland ; we will not attempt to form an esti-
mate of the number of additional custom-houses and
officers which will be required ; we will not advert to
the insecurity of conveying goods from seaports to the
different inland bonding depots, but confine ourselves
to an examination of the present grievances complained
of and the advantages to be derived by the inland
towns from the proposed new system.
And first we will examine the case of grievance as
respects our Manchester neighbours. The merchants
and manufacturers of that town complain that they
should be compelled to bond their imports—their cot-
ton and drysalteries—within a distance of an hour and
a half's transit of their own warehouses or factories !

A very serious grievance, truly ! They complain that,
owing to these imports being bonded in Liverpool,
they are compelled to employ Liverpool brokers in their
disposal ; that they are saddled with additional porter-
age and cartage; and that they are unable to inspect
their merchandize in bulk without incurring the trou-
ble and expense of a journey to Liverpool. By a state-
ment drawn up by Mr. T. 0. Lingard, agent to the
Old Quay Company—a very disinterested witness !—it

is calculated that, by the present system, the cotton
trade alone of Manchester has paid to Liverpool, for
cartage, brokerage, &c., in three years, the sum of
£315,807 18s., the greatest portion of which the con-
cession sought for will enable the cotton manufactu-
rers, brokers, warehousekeepers, &c., of Manchester,
to appropriate to themselves.
It is possible that about one-tenth part of the hard-
ship complained of may be real. Perhaps one-tenth
part of tha contemplated saving to the people of Man-
chester might be effected—at double the expense to the
revenue; but we are fully confident that the ultimate
result of conceding the privilege of bonding would be
productive of disappointment and heavy.losses to those
towns availing themselves of it. Whilst the novelty of
the scheme lasted, we have no doubt that warehouses
would be built sufficient to bond all the cotton con-
sumed in Manchester for a twelvemonth ; and we have
as little doubt that when that novelty had worn off the
same warehouses would be two-thirds empty. For a
time the cotton kpiunerfri_stf Rochdale,__Oldham„Ash-
tOn-under-Lyne, Stockport, &c., might keep stocks of
cotton bonded in Manchester warehouses instead of in
Liverpool ; but so long as canal conveyances exist
from Liverpool direct to those towns, we apprehend
that, so far as the cartage, &c., spoken of, is concerned,
those stocks may just as cheaply be kept in Liverpool.
In the course of another year or two, by the formation
of a junction line of railway through Manchester, we
shall possess a continuous railway conveyance to all
these districts, and the necessity of merchandise stopping
at all in Manchester will cease. We have already

railways and canals to Bolton, Preston, &c. ; and these
manufacturing towns would consequently never make
Manchester their bonding port. It is just possible,
too, that a conservative ministry may some of these
days take off altogether the cotton duty, and there will
then be no necessity for bonding that article at all !
With respect to a number of other articles of mer-
chandise, extensively consumed in the manufacturing
districts, and which the Manchester importers complain
of their inability to transport at once under bond from

the vessel in dock to their own warehouses, we will
simply inquire of these gentlemen what would be their
position in ease such cargoes, on inspection in Man-

chester, were discovered, which is no unusual case, to
be wholly or in part unsuited for that -market ? They
must be brought down again to Liverpool for re-expor-
tation, and an additional expense of cartage, carriage,
&c., incurred, which would entirely preclude the pos-
sibility of there being so re-exported with any hope of
a profitable return.

But let us briefly glance at the prospect of aggran-
dizement which the people of Manchester hold out to
themselves as the result of the measure being granted.
That town we are told will in future, to the total ex-
clusion of Liverpool, be the market of the manufac-

taring district around, for the raw material of their
manufactures and for every description of foreign pro-
duce. She will provide her own brokers, her own
warehouses, her own carters and porters ; in short,
Liverpool will be from henceforth a decayed and de-
serted town, situated at the mouth of the river Mersey,
and Manchester the modern Tyre which is to spring
up, out of her ruins. We are shortly
doomed to see " the flags " of our busy Exchange
grass-grown, and the " lads " thereof standing. " like
patience on a monument," waiting to pick up the few
crumbs which the men of .Manchester in their merciful
humanity may allow them to sustain life withal. No
need of new warehouses henceforth on our dock quays
or elsewherel Our merchant vessels, consigned to
Manchester brokers, will unload their precious cargoes
into flats in the river, in very mockery of Liverpool and
her docks, her warehouses, her merchants, and her
brokers !

We must confess that we are a little incredulous as
to this miraculous transformation. We cannot believe,
whatever may be the opinion of such eminent wiseacres
as Mr. Mark Philips, M.P., and Mr. John Brooks,
boroughreeve, that, as importers, our Manchester neigh-
bours possess such an overwhelming influence in the
affairs of the world. Liverpool has also her importers
of cotton, of drysalteries, of foreign and colonial pro-
duce of every description ; and we do therefore think
that a portion at least of the merchandise which enters
her noble river would still be marketed and ware.
housed in the good old town.
The inevitable result, then, of the inland bonding
measure, as regards the community, would be that the
buyer of the manufacturing districts, instead of being
able to find in one large market the entire stock of the
merchandise which he seeks, must visit three or four
markets ; that instead of making their entire purchases
through the medium of one confidential broker, in
Liverpool, or any principal seaport; he must, have three'
or four brokers employed in different bonding towns,
each of whom will be bidding for a monopoly of his
orders, and anxiously pressing upon him that particu-
lar quality of merchandise which happens to be stored
in his own market. As a measure of general advantage
to the community the whole scheme is a mere bubble ;
and we are confident that the merchabts and brokers
of Liverpool, apart from any consideration of their own
interests, will be of our own opinion. It is undoubtedly
of importance, however, that the legislature should be
enabled to see it in the same light, in order that the
positive injury to the interests of Liverpool with which
it is pregnant may not be wantonly inflicted for the
sake of so worthless an object; and therefore we urge
upon our fellow-townsmen the necessity of letting their
voice be heard in vindication of their own properties
and welfare within the walls of Parliament. We re-

peat again, the merchants and other parties interested
must look alone, with respect to this matter, to their
own exertions, for undoubtedly they will receive no
assistance whatever from that body which professes to
be their representatives.

The Queen's speech has now been read in every pare
of the United Kingdom, and we venture .to say that
there can be but one opinion of that extraordinary doc-
ument. It is universally acknowledged to be the most
meagre and unmeaning speech ever put into the mouth
of Queen Victoria. The Whigs have always been con-
spicuous for the terseness and brevity of the royal
speeches which they have annually manufactured, as
well as for the careful avoidance of all topics that
might lead to unpleasant parliamentary discussion ; but
this year they have fairly excelled themselves in the art
of mystification. They have studiously left out every
subject that would have led to anything like a division
in the House of Commons. The principal feature in

the speech is that which Talleyrand designated as the
very acme of royal speechmaking—the concealment o:
the thoughts and opinions of those from whom ii

ssued

The foreign policy of the government and the foreig]

relations of the empire constitute the subject of eight
out of the thirteen paragraphs of which the speech is
composed. There is no allusion whatever to any ques-
tions of a domestic character further than a hint at
some new job which is now in embryo, and which will
have for its object the engagement of a fresh swarm of
briefless barristers in the capacity. of commissioners.
The only passa'ge in thewhole" speech which merits any
attention is that in which the Queen is made to say that
she has directed the estimates for the year to be laid
before the House of Commons, and in which she
assures the house that " however sensible of the impor-
tance of adhering to the principle of economy, she feels
it to be her duty to recommend that adequate provision
be made for the exigencies of the public service." The
apologetic tone of this paragraph would lead us to infer
that large demands will shortly be made for the pur-
pose of defraying the expenses incurred in the carrying
out of Lord Palmerston's schemes of foreign policy.
A departure from the vaunted principle of economy is
evidently contemplated. The blessing of cheap go-
vernment is a dream never to be realised under Whig
domination. The promises of retrenchment which these
hypocritical politicians have held forth are to be thrown
to the winds. In addition to the increased taxation of
last year we may now expect that fresh burdens will be
imposed upon the people.
The " negative qualities " of the Queen's speech are
singularly illustrative of the cowardly policy of the

present administration. They have not dared to make
a single allusion to the Repeal agitation—a topic _which
under a Conservative ministry, would, we feel assured,
have occupied the most prominent position in the whole
speech. It is perfectly notorious that O'Connell has
repeatedly boasted that there are hundreds of thousands
of the Irish peasantry who have banded themselves
into a conspiracy for destroying integrity of the em-
pire. It is equally notorious that the Popish hierarchy
and priesthood of Ireland have long since made an
open parade of their adherence to the principles of this
traitorous confederacy. Why was there no mention
made in the speech from the throne of this conspiracy ?
Is the integrity of the empire of less moment in the
eyes of our Whig governors than the disputes of foreign
nations ? Or are they afraid of losing the suffrages of
" the tail " by adopting an honest and straightforward
line of policy ? Does not their marked evasion of this
topic afford another pregnant and unequivocal proof of
their truckling subserviency to O'Connell ? Has not
their allegiance to their royal mistress been once more
placed in abeyance to their love of place ? Have they
not shown to the whole world that they dread the frown
of the arch-agitator more than they do the loss of their
own reputation ?

The silence of the royal speech on the subject of re-
peal ought to lead to some immediate and substantive
motion on the part of the Conservatives, having for its
object the effectual suppression of that treasonable agi-
tation. We trust that some one of the leading mem-
Ors of the opposition wilt test the loyalty of the nii=
nistry on this question. Let them be called upon to
declare whether they are or are not prepared to vindi-
cate the prerogatives of the crown by putting down the
repeal agitation. Let them be asked to prove their
determination to uphold the integrity of the British
Empire before the House of Commons votes any sup-
plies for " the exigencies of the public service."
The speech does not contain a single syllable on the
subject of Canada, where, at the present moment, one
of the most important changes in the system of our co-
lonial policy is in progress—a change which may prove
fraught with the most momentous consequences to the
welfare and prosperity of the mother country.
Equally silent is the laconic speech from the throne
on the subject of the Disputed Boundary question—
a question which may eventually lead to a rupture be-
tween this country and America. Was it impossible
to introduce any compliment to Lord Palmerston on
" the satisfactory progress of the negotiations" with
the government of the United States in reference to
this vexata questio ? What a contrast does the conduct
of our dastardly administration afford to the straight-
forward language of the President of the American
States !

India, again, is not mentioned in the speech, al-
though expensive armaments have been going on in
that part of the British dominions during the past
year, and although several engagements have taken
place there within the same period, one of which, at
least, has proved eminently disastrous to the British
forces employed. Why this mysterious silence on the
subject of our Indian affairs ?

At a time when such a vast expenditure is being
incurred by this country, in its naval armaments, one
might have expected that some reference would have
been made in the Queen's speech to our financial con.

, . .
[ition and prospects. But, no ! Not a word is Whig-
lered as to the prospective increase of our national
lurdens. Were the ministers afraid of having their

roasts of " retrenchment and economy

weir faces ?

thrown in

Even the congratulatory portions of the speech
must strike the reader as somewhat novel in their
construction. The very first paragraph contains the
ominous announcement that the Queen " receives
from foreign powers assurances of their friendly dis-

The omission of the significant term " all "
n this sentence cannot but give rise to unpleasant in-
.:erences. What foreign powers are there from whom
we have ceased to receive assurances of their earnest

position."

lesire to maintain peace ? Is France among the num-
ber ? Why is France passed over as if that country
no longer formed any portion of the great European

commonwealth ?

It must be evident to the most cursory observer that
the whole of the Queen's speech was specially con-
cocted with a view to shun discussion, and to avoid
the still more unpleasant alternative of a division in
the House of Commons. However, a trial of strength
will take place in that arena before another fortnight
has elapsed, and we shall then see whether Lord Mel-
bourne has not acted prudently in securing for himself
the patent for a marquisate.