The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-07-05 00:00:00

the resolu
more Ve.,.1-

his life had after,

aotico made by his es-
teemed friend Mr. Eyre Evans. (Loud cheers.) That
very night last year they were met in the same building
to advocate the same noble principle of Free-trade; they were
opposed then, as now, by men of faction—men who had not
the boldness to come forward and say what they meant. (Hear,
hear.) The two last members had been unseated to give way,
he hoped, to better members. How did Messrs. Forbes
Mackenzie and Turner act upon their principles—the first as
an avowed supporter of Protection, and the latter advocating
reciprocity. When they had the opportunity of bringing for-
ward a policy, did they do so? ("No ! no I") Those of the
constituency here who sent those gentlemen were clearly de-
ceived; for. sent to obstruct Free-trade, they ultimately as-
sented to it. (Hear, hear, and loud applause.) When he
had last addressed an audience like this, he ventured
to mention the benefits which had arisen from free trade ; and
he was told by several voices that the prosperity was only tem-
porary; but twelve months had now !elapsed, and what did
they see? Why, that the increased state of prosperity was
still more fully developed than ever. The dock space was
doubled under free trade. The number of ships in the graving
docks for the year 1352 were 1119; in 1853, there were 1315—an
increase which must be beneficial to the ship carpenters, seeing
that there were four ships a week more in the docks. (Cheers.)
The wages of the workmen had been advanced to 6s per day.
Was it free trade or protection which bad done that? (Cries
of "Free trade Did they wish to perpetuate that state of
things or not : Ift hey wished to continue that state of things
he asked them to examine the claims of the candidates now
before them. He then proceeded to recapitulate what he con-
sidered the qualifications of the candidates. And first he
would speak of Mr. Liddell, who, in his (Mr. Jeffery's) opinion
ought to be called Mr. Diddle; for he decidedly meant to
diddle the electors of Liverpool. (Laughter and cheers.) Mr.
Liddell believed free trade to be a fact accomplished ; he (Mr.
Jeffery) did not think it was. It behoved them therefore
to see who they sent to consummate that system of free trade,
which had conferred such blessings upon the country. Would
they once more send men to Parliament who had opposed
every measure that was for the benefit of the artisan and the
great body of the people? (" No.") He, as a citizen of Liver-
pool, felt humiliated that such men should be sent. He
alluded to Mr. Liddell having long since gained for himself,
even among his own friends, the name of "Young Duplicity ;"
and concluded his delineation of the hon. gentleman's character
by quoting Lord Durham's opinion of Mr. Liddell, which gave
him credit for being an accomplished drawing-room man, but
one very ill-qualified to be a member of Parliament. He then
proceeded to criticise the character of Mr. T. B. Horsfall,
whom lie stigmatised as having disgraced his mayoralty by a
speech which he was alleged to have delivered at the table of
the mayor of Manchester. With regard to the conduct of Mr.
Horsfall during the short period he had been in Parliament, he
showed that he had voted for the imposition of the window tax,
in favour of Mr. Disraeli's budget. and also in favour of the
house tax. (Hear, bear.) The third candidate was Mr. John
Bramley-Moore ; hut, from his address, be appeared to be
neither fish, flesh, nor red-herring. So he would pass on to
their respected candidate, Sir Erskine Perry; who had claims
upon them—embodied in his judicial career; in his labours to
promote education ; and in the fact that he was thoroughly
conversant with Indian affairs, and was therefore well fitted to
aid in providing a remedy for the misgovernment of that coun-
try. Liverpool was deeply interested in India; and would they
not do well to send to Parliament such a man as the present
candidate? Let them " plump " for Perry at the coming elec-
tion. Let them place him at the head of the poll: not by
intoxication, and other immoral means, but let them go up
fearlessly and purely to the poll to record their names,
and prove that Liverpool was not so degenerate as recent
proceedings would lead the world to believe. (Cheers.)
On the resolution being put to the meeting, only four hands
were held up against its adoption.
Mr. WHALLEY; M.P. for Peterborough, as a neighbour re-
siding within half-an-hour's ride of Liverpool—as one inte-
rested in shipping—and desirous of seeing Liverpool re-
trieve its character, came forward and made an appeal in
behalf of Sir Erskine Perry, whom he did not know per-
sonally, but who, he was well assured, would be a worthy
representative of this great town. (Cdeers.) He mentioned
that, at a recent dinner of law reformers, at which he had been
present, one of the most honoured guests was Sir Erskine
Perry, whom Lord Brougham singled out as the first object of
his warm eulogium, stating that Sir Erskine bad, in the reform
of the law in India, set an example which they might do well to
imitate in England. (Cheers.)
Mr. BOULT then moved a vote of thanks to the chairman,
which was unanimously carried ; and, the honour having been
duly acknowledged, three cheers were given for Sir Erskine
Perry, for the Chairman, and for the Queen, and the proceed-
ings terminated at about half-past 10 o'clock.

SERIOUS OUTRAGE IN REDCROSS-ST.-
MURDEROUS ATTACK ON THE POLICE.

Yesterday four men. named Richard Thomas, William
Beresford, William Reed, and John Leatherby, were
brought before the magistrates at the Police-court,charged
with an aggravated assault upon the police, whereby the
lives of two members of the force have been placed in
jeopardy.

Sir. SNOWBALL, solicitor, defended the prisoners. It
appeared from the statement of police-officer 43, that
shortly after twelve o'clock on Saturday evening, he
was on his beat, and met two of the prisoners, Thomas
and Reed, in Redcross-street, in company with another
man who was drunk. He was in company with officer
553. On telling the prisoners to go home, they knocked
553 down and kicked him ; and whilst 553 was on the
ground they made their escape. About an hour after-
wards witness got the assistance of two other officers; 522
and 609, and having learned that the prisoners resided in
a cellar in Murphy's.court, Redcross-street, they pro-
ceeded thither, where they found Thomas and Reed in
company with the two other prisoners Beresford and
Leatherby. On entering the house the prisoner Beresford
came to the door with a poker in his hand, and struck
officer 553 a violent blow on the head with the poker,
which knocked him down and rendered him insensible ;
and he was now lying in a dangerous state and unable to
appear in court. A struggle took place, and officer 522
was also dangerously hurt, and was also unable to appear.
In cross-examination by. Mr. SNOWBALL, Officer 43
stated that morethan an hour elapsed between the first row
in Redcross-street and the time when the officers went
to the prisoners' house in the cellar, and that he (witness)
was aware that in the meantime the two prisoners,Thomas
and Reed, had reported witness and officer 553, _ _

Officers 609 and the inspector on the beat corroborated
the previous witness's statement.

IVir. SNOWBALL addressed the bench at considerable
length on the part of the prisoners, contending that they
were not responsible for what had happened to the police.
officers. They had no right in law to enter the prisoners'
house as they did. The only legal process was by warrant,
and the prisoners were justified in forcibly resisting their
entry even to the death.

After some conversation amongst the magistrates, during
which Mr. Wybergh gave it as his opinion that the police
had certainly no right to enter the house, except aimed
with a warrant, the prisoners were remanded for a week.