The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-02-20 00:00:00

TNT LIVE!ZP(I,OL STANDARD

TUESDAY. MORNING, FEBRUARY 20, 1838,

{lam' The Publication of the STANDARD commenced this morn-

ing at 5 o'clock

LATEST NEWS FROM CANADA.—By the Hibernia,
Captain Cobb, which arrived • here yesterday, xe have
received New York papers up to the 28th ultimo, inclu-
sive. We proceed to extract from these papers such
extracts•as hear upon the affairs of Canada.

It appears from the following, which we quote from
the New York Courier and Enquirer of the 26th ult.,
that the scene of operations was transferred from Navy
island to the upper part of Lake Erie :

(From the Albany Argus of yesterday.)
FROM THiE FRONTIER.

'The scene of operations seems now to be transferred from
-Navy Island to the upper part of Lake Erie—to Detroit, Mal
&c. Our latest advices from that quarter are via Toronto.
.The Patriot of the 16th 'contains Detroit dates of the 12th, four
•das later than received from Detroit direct. .

The Detroit Past.contains the official despatches addressed by
Th. J. Sutherland, brigadier general of the patriot army,
U. C.," Gen. Yea Rensselaer, commander-in-chief, &c., &c.,
giving an account of the movements in that quarter. They are
slated at Boiaßlanc,.Ut C. nn the 10th and 11th instant. The
'first despatch states that Sutherland found himself on the 7th
4' at the head of a very respectable -and gallant force," with
which, on theith, he landed on Bois Blanc Island, under cover'
of the guns mounted on a small schr., captured the island,
pulled down the enemy's flag, and hoisted the patriot tri-color.
The British force, consisting of about two hundred, principally
.negroes and Indians, fled on the first tire, leaving moat of their
camp equipage, a large quantity of ammunition, &c.
The second despatch details the loss of.the schooner, with its
'three pieces of artillery, two sixes and one nine pounder, a
small quantity of ammunition, and thirteen persons; including
Gen. Theller, Col. Dodge, and Captain Davis of the infantry,
:and CoL Brophey, of the engineers." It seems that in the at-
tempt to moor the schooner so as to bring her guns to hear
• upon a scow-built sloop that was preparing, as was supposed, to
attack Bois Island, she ran aground, parted her cable, and
Vitally drifted over to the British side, and within gun shot of
title force there, and was tired into and until after she had sur-
madered,
'The ".despatches" include also three proclamations by
Butherland, addressed to the " Patriot Army 'of Upper Ca-
;nada," and " To the deluded supporters of British tyranny in
.4Jpper Canada."

(From the Detroit Free Press of Jan. 11.)

The steamboat Erie was forcibly, taken from. this Port on
`Tuesday night, by a body of men belonging, it is supposed, to
The pattiot force on Whitewood Island. The alarm bells were
-rung and our citizens generally rallied as soon as possible to the
wharf, but before any considerable number had collected the
,boat and her men were out of the reach of our authorities. We
tunderstand that the proper officers -proceeded yesterday to the
seat of war, 'to recov=er the boat and arrest the offenders.

(From the Evening Star of January 27.)
FROM THE FRONTIER.

The Bois Blum (or Whitewood) Island expedition of •Judge
€uthetland on Like Erie, appears to have had as inauspicious
termination as that of Van Rensellaer at Navy Island, Gov.
Ma:son; it is now stated, went down the river from Detroit,
dispersed the .patriOt forces, and arrested several of the ring-
leaders. The Detroit Advertiser of the 13th gives the names. •
T. Du.fert and D. D. I%4'Kit-they, was yesterday held to bail
,by the Judges of the U. S. District Court of Chambers.
John B. Norton, jun., and J. B. Vallee, were received as bail
for the former, and T. C. Shuldon, and John Largy as bail for
the latter.
The'derendants are recognized to appear at the Circuit Court
of the United States,ib June next, the principal in 3000 dol-
lars, and-in each security in l 501) dollars.
Gen: Sutherland was arrested yesterday afternoon, and taken
before the'Distiict, Judge
After the loss of the schooner the patriots retreated to Gib-
raltar on the American shore, 20 miles below Detroit, where
they, in. violation of every principle of neutrality. openly en-
cored, and remained until broken up by the active' young
Governor of Michigan who is, as we recollect, thow,h young,
an old soldier, having served in the Great Tried° Border War
with credit.

The Governor recovered and brought back the arms. Gen
Sutherland had Frevioti,dy gone op to Detroit vhere he was
arrested, Ue was rid the next day before Judge Wilkins of

the U. S. District Court, then sitting, and acqUitted. The
General pleaded his own case, and when the decision was made
known he was enthusiastically cheered. The Detroit Paper
very cooly adds as the conclusion to this business, which really
places us in a very unpleasant, nit to -say disreputable light
in the eyes of other nations, " the General is still in the com-
mand, and it is expected that another expedition will be under-
taken without delay."

A bill passed the popular branch of the legislature of Michi-
gan, making provision for 2000 men to protect the frontier.
It would seem, therefore, that though the patriot force may
be dispersed, the materials remain there ready to congregate
whenever occasion presents, as the inhabitants seem to gene-
rally approve of their illegal movements.
LATER INTELLIGENCE.—By the Cleveland papers to the2Oth,
we learn that a large number of Indians had come down in one
of the steam boats, from the upper lakes, destined for the royalist
force at Malden. One of the persons killed of the patriots in the
schooner [the Ann] captured off Malden, was from Cleveland.
Dr. Theller, the leader, was wounded under the eye. There is
said to be no doubt, that he and all the other patriots taken
alive were massacred.

RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION.—Under this title the Mer-
cury of Friday last follows up its remarks of the week
before upon the pamphlet recently published by the Rev.
H. M‘Neile. Now, we object, in limine, to the applica-
tion of. such a term as " religious persecution" to the
language or the acts of the rev. gentleman, or of any
other clergyman who deems it to be his duty to declaim
against Popery. With exactly the same propriety might
the charge of " religious persecution" be brought
against Mohammedanism or Heathenism. With equal
justice might such an accusation be brought against our
Saviour and his apostles for denouncing the false doc-
trines, hypocrisy, and tyranny of the Scribes and Phari-

The editor of the Mercury knows, or ought to know,
that it is the bounden duty of every minister of the
Church of England to endeavour to root out all " heresy"
from the land. This obligation xlerives additional force
from the circumstance that such '" heresy" may be
fraught with danger to our national institutions and sub-
versive of our civil and religious liberty. This is pre-
cisely the character of Popery. It is not only opposed
to scripture, but is likewise an enemy to every species
of rational freedom. The clergy are therefore bound to
oppose it, not only as preachers of the gospel, but.also
as citizens of a Protestant community. •

The Mercury insinuates that the Rev. H. M`Neile
,wishes to persecute the Papists for the purpose of con-
verting them to the Protestant faith. The editor of the
Mercury knows or ought to know, that the rev. gentle-
man disavows any such intention. The whole tenor of
' his ministration proves that, while he detests Popery, he
entertains the most charitable sentiments towards its de-
luded victims. In fact his detestation of Popery must
spring from his anxiety to save those who have imbibed
its poison from their misery. Let the editor of the Mer
curt' peruse the following description of the enslaving
influence of Popery, and say whether it be a blessing or
a curse to mankind. if he acknowledges that it has
proved a curse to the Iriman race, then let him show his
own consistency in abusing those who seek ,to remove
this curse from the face of the earth. We quote the fol•
lowing from the eloquent speech of the Rev. R. J.
M‘Ghee at a recent meeting of the Glasgow Protestant
Association :

The Rev. Gentleman spoke as follows:—" Mr. Chairman, I
never stood up to address a public meeting with a feeling of
more solemn satisfaction than that with which I stand here this
evening, to advocate that sacred principle which we are con•
vened to vindicate and discuss. The great principle that we
come to advocate this night, is the principle of spiritual free-
dom for our fellow-men—the right, the inalienable right of man,
uncontrolled by his fellow-worm, to read for himself the word of
the eternal God—that word which teaches him his guilt—that
word which proclaims ,his pardon—that word, according to
which he shall be judged—that word which reveals the Re-
deemer , by whom alone he can be saved—that word which con-
tains the will of his God, which it is his duty to know; the will
of his God, which it is his duty to do. If it is granted that it is
the duty of man to do the will of his Creator, it must be con-
ceded that it is also his duty to know it ; and if it is his duty to
know it, it must be granted that it is his right to know it. Duty
is More than right. Right implies but a privilege; duty im-
plies an obligation. The marl who dares to interfere with the
right of his fellow-man to read the Word of his Creator, inter-
feres not only with his right, but with his duty to his Creator;
and he arraigns the power that gives him the right, for he ar-
raigns the power that alone imposes the obligation of duty'
Therefore he who invades the right and obstructs the duties of
his fellow-man, arraigns the power, and flies in the face of his
Creator. The Church of Rome does this. She stands between
the sinner and his God. She sets herself up as the authorised
interpreter of God's will to man. She denies his right to apply
to the Wor I of his Creator; for she insists upon his duty of
submitting to her authority. She usurps the prerogative of the
Deity, and imposes upon the souls of men the basest subjection.
It is to show the falsehood of this—to bring the principle to the
'test—to bring it to such a test that the poorest man can under-
stand it—to prove the guilt of that tyranny and superstition,
and vindicate the right of man's immortal soul, that we are con-
vened here to-night; and I hOpe that God, in whose house we
are assembled, will hear that prayer just offered at his footstool,
and that we will be enabled to assemble in the spirit of the
eternal God, to be edified and built up in his eternal truth;
and in the spirit of devoted philanthropy, and true benevolence,
and love to the souls of our fellow-men.
* *

"Now this is that lash of spiritual tyranny which the church
of Rome holds over the souls of men, to depriye them of their
right of reading and considering and appealing to the Word of
God for themselves ; for though they say we let them read the
Scriptures, how does the Roman Catholic take these Scriptures.
up ? Why, he takes them up under this feeling, that hedare not
exercise upon them his private judgment; that he dare not in-
terpret one point contrary to the dogmas of the church, because
the church is the only interpreter. Therefore, though he takes
the Bible in his hand, he takes it with his heart so bound under
the tyranny of the church of Rome, that he dares not let out
upon it that intellect and those talents and capacities which God
has given him—he dare not consider the question, What does
God say here for my eternal salvation ?' (Hear, hear.) Now
we say this is a false principle, and we wish to show the people
that it is fundamentally false—that it is a mere spiritual lash of
tyranny held over them (like some object of affright presented
to the mind of a child in the dark) to frighten them from exer-
cising their faculties as rational and immortal beings. You
know that the people are taught to receive this creed from their
infancy—it is instilled into their minds—and therefbre they are
accustomed to think that there is a sense of interpretation, put
upon the Bible by the church, and that which the priest tells
them are the dogmas of the church which he has learned; and
that, therefore, when they hear him they hear the church.
Now we say if there is any sense of interpretation, and if we
are to receive tha Scriptures in the sense the church has laid
down, what is that sense ? We call on the priests to give that
sense to the people, if' it has only existence but in the tyranny
of the church of.itorne. * *
" Now, 1 care not of being accused of being an enemy to
what is called peace here, when I remember who they were of
whom it was said, these fellows that have turned the world
upside down are come hither also.' (Hear.) , But this is my
answer to Bishop Murdoch and his professions and letters on
peace. If the Church of Rome desires to make peace with
Protestants, let them honestly come out and renounce the
horrid weapons of war and tyranny in which they bind all who
attempt to assert and vindicate the rights of conscience; but I
sav that when it is written in the Word of God that there is no
peace to the wicked'—when it is written that the way of peace
they have not known'—when it is written that 'the chastise-
meat of our peace was laid on Christ, and that by his stripes
we are healed' —when it is written that he is our peace,' that
he has made peace by the blood of his cross,' and that the
blessed message of his gospel is good tidings of great joy, and
on earth peace and o.ood will to men'—l know no peace, and
will teep no peace With a system that shuts out the lightof my
IRedeemer's face, and the blessings of his word, the blessings of
his peace, and the blessings of his salvation from the souls of
my fellow men. The servant that makes peace with the man
who robs his master is a knave; the soldier that snakes peace
with the rebel against his monarch is a traitor; and I will snake
no peace with a system that robs my God," my master, of his
glory, and my fellow-men of the right and liberty of rational
and immortal beings—the right to read the word of their Cre-
ator. (Cheers.) My soul should be delighted to hold out the
right hand of peace and love to all my Roman Catholic friends
and neighbours, but it must be a peace that is ratified by the
God of peace, it must he a peace which will not leave an.aCcusa-
lion upon my conscience for a guilty neglect of nay fidelity to
my fellow-men." (Cheers.)

This is the spirit in which the Rev. H. M'Neile would
address Roman Catholics—not f6r the purpose of inti-
midating them into a belief of the Protestant faith, as
the Mercury would insinuate—but for the purpose of
seeking•to liberate them from the spiritual thraldom in
which they are held by their priests. The Mercury, af-
ter quoting the Rev. H. WNeile's parallel between sla-
vers' and Popery, endeavours to prove that it is " ima-
' The following is, we suppose, intended as his

to escape from his' bondage, may he shot, hanged, or flogged.
The Catholic, notwithstanding what the Rev. H. ONeile asserts
to the contrary, is a free agent, inasmuch as he can at any time„
and without incurring any penalty, quit the Catholic fold, and.
become'a member of the orthodoi church of St. Jude's if his

inclination should lead him in that diection. We know seve-
ral persons whohave become Protestants after having been edu-
cated at Catholic seminaries, and having long continued mem-
bers of the Romish church, but we never beard any of them
complain of having been subjected to the slightest inconvenience
in consequence of the change ; and as we can place more reli-
ance upon what we have witnessed than we can upon the mere
assertion of the man who repeatedly declared that the bible was
excluded from the Liverpool Corporation schools, we shall not
waste any more words upon the ReV. Hugh M‘Neile's parallel,
which is as defective as the inferences he has laboured to deduce
from such false premises."

This passage certainly proves one thing—that the
editor of the Mercury is neither a man of candour nor a
man of sense. He shows his want of candour by stating

that the Roman Catholic is subjezt to no persecution for
assuming the profession of protestantism : he shows his

want of sense in hazarding an assertion the stupidity of
which is as glaring as its falsehood, and which must
make him the laughing-stock of the veriest school-boy.
Did the editor of the Mercury never hear of a horrible
dungeon called the Inquisition, in which persons only
suspected of Protestantism were immured for life and
subjected to the most excruciating torments? Has he
never read of the myriads of martyrs who have, from
age to age, suffered the vengeance of the Church of
Rome for their renunciation of her -faith ? In short, is
the editor of the Mercury entirely ignorant of the history
"of his own country ? Does he want a modern instance
of the tyranny and persecution of the Romish Church?
Let him take the following :
In the diocese of Waterford resides a popish gentle-
man, a Mr. Galwey. This gentleman had some political
difference, the nature-of which he does not explain, with
Dr. Abraham, his bishop. In this temporal matter he
refused to. yield to the bishop's authority. His wife, in.
the meantime, was visited with a severe illness, and
could not leave the house. The festival of the incarna-

tion was approaching. Mrs. Galwey was desirous of
receiving the sacrament at home, and Mr. Galwey ap-
plied to the priest of the parish to administer it. The
priest refused, assigning as his reason that the bishop had
put Mr. Galwey's house under an interdict of the ordi-
nances of the church. Mr. Galwey wrbte to the bishop,
to remonstrate. He received no answer. He became
indignant at such treatment, wrote the bishop a second
letter, and published both his letters in the newspapers.
The following are the letters:—

TO THE RIGHT REV. DOCTOR ABRAHAM, R.C. BISHOP OF

W ATERPORD.

Duckspool, January, 8, 1836•

My Lord,—On the 29th of last month I had delivered to your
lordship a letter on the subject of the unpleasant situation in
which my family have been placed, in consequence of your pro-
hibition to allow Mass being celebrated in my house; not having
since received any answer to my letter, I am now driven to the
painful necessity of sending (through the press) a copy of my
letter to your lordship, with a hope of getting some redress from
the archbishop, and in default of his attention to the prayer
of my communication, to appeal to his holiness the Pope.
Before I conclude, 1 beg respectfully to ask whether any act
of my life, as a Catholic, merited such conduct either towards
myself or any of my family, or whether it is not solely on account
of political dPrences this system of tyranny is attempted to be
practised towards me !
I remain, my lord Bishop, your humble servant,
JOHN MATTHEW GALWET.

COPY OF MY LETTER OF THE 29TH DECEMBER.
Duckspool, 29th Dec., 1835

My` Lord,—l beg to ask your lordship, whether it is your
intention to persevere in prohibiting the priest of my parish
celebrating mass in my house, and to know on what grounds
(except political differences) you have issued such a preremptory
order as.the Rev. Mr. Shanahan says he has received from you
to this effect.

I should not address your lordship on the subject but for the
illness of Mrs. Galwey, and the state of mind in which I had
seen her on Christmas-day, deprived of the opportunity of re-
ceiving the sacrament, and having prayers in my house in the
same way we have had them celebrated for, over twenty years,
before those political differences occurred.
Your lordship cannot, (I regret to say) have been' ignOrant
of Mrs. Galwey's illness ; for a week previous to Christmas-day
the priest of my parish mentioned the circumstance to you at a
month's mind held at Stradbally, and be has said remonstrated
with you on the hardship of a female, (unable eve❑ to come
down stairs) being deprived on such a holiday, of those reli-
gious consolations, which, to her, would be such a source of
comfort.

I beg you to excuse my saying, whatever differences your
lordship, some of your priesthood and myself, may have on the
subject of politics, it is an act of cruelty that a religious female,
in a had state of health, and unable on Christmas-day to leave
her bedroom, should be the sufferer.

I can scarcely bring myself to believe that revenge is your
object; but if it is, I freely acknowledge you have had ample
satisfaction, for there is no man of family who must not feel at
having seen a good wife and a good mother surrounded on her
sick bed by her children, deprived (on his account) of the rites
of her church..

Requesting your lordship may re-consider this subject, and
waiting your answer, I am, my lord Bishop, your obedient hum-
ble servant,

JOHN MATTHEW GALWEY.

The Right Rev. Doctor Abraham,
R.C.. Bishop, Waterford.
P.S.—I beg to add, this line of conduct is a bad return for the
many thousands given by Mr. Galwey's family towards erecting
chapels, convents, monk-houses, schools, &c.
We'have much more to say in reply to the Mercury,
but must reserve our concluding remarks until Friday.

THE BALLOT.—We are glad to find, that Mr. Grote's
annual motion on this nostrum has been once more ne-
gatived by a very decisive majority. The radicals affect
to believe that this question is gaining ground in the
country. .As far as Liverpool is concerned, we believe
the reverse to be the case. The last petition in favour of

the ballot from this town, after lying for signature for
nearly a month, 'could only boast of 5000 signatures ; the
previous one had upwards of 8000. It has, therefore,
lost ground here most materially.
Nor is the division in the House of Commons indica-
tive of any reaction in favour of the ballot, as will be
evident to any one who will take the trouble to consult
the calculations which we have given, in our last page,
from the London Standard. The progress of the ballot
question, since 1833, as shown by the different divisions,
is as follows :
1830—For the ballot
Against it
18.35—F0r the ballot
Against it
1836—Fur the ballot
Against it
1837—For the ballot
Against it
1838—For the ballot
Against it
_ -

As usual, the rejection of Mr. Grote's motion was
effected through the instrumentality of the conservative
opposition. The Spectator acknowledges that of the
317 who composed the majority no fewer than 252 were
conservatives. What effect the opposition of ministers
to the motion may have upon the state of parties we can-
not conjecture. The radicals have ascertained their own
strength by the division. They may perhaps use this
knowledge in embarrassing the government, or in com-
pelling the " squeezeable materials" to adopt a more
liberal line of policy.

ELECTION PETITIONS.—Nothing of a decisive cha-
racter has taken place since our last in reference to the
petitions‘ now under the consideration of the several
committees in the House of Commons. On the Belfast
election committee there are ten conservatives and 1
liberal. On the Sligo petition there are 3 conservatives
and 8 liberals. On the Bristol committee there are 3
conservatives and 8 liberals. The chances, so far, are
against us; but the most important ballots are to come.

CATHOLIC CHARITY BALL.—In the Chronicle of last
Saturday, the editor took occasion to congratulate us on
our advocacy of this benevolent Institution. We can as-
sure our contemporary that although he may have been
in ignorance of this trait in our character, it is by no
means a novelty. The party which we represent have
ever been foremost in works of charity, without'any re-
gard to political or religious distinctions ; and had the
sapient editor been as alive to public events as he should
have been, be might have noticed in our own town an
association of gentlemen throwing aside all difference of
opinion and cheerfully uniting in relietifig the distresses

of their fellow-creatures - And we hope that whilst there
exists a necessity for the exercise of the virtue, there will
always be found men who know how to cast aside their
peculiar prejudices and predilections, and combine for the
purpose of doing good to their fellow-men. But if our
contemporary means to iltSinuate that in recommending
the charity to the patronage of the public we have com-
promised our principles, We can assure him he is egre-
giously mistaken. To Popery we must always be opposed
so long as its acknowledged principles are at variance
With civil anti religious Melly, and so long as its policy
is opposed to the spirit and temper of the British consti-
tution. We believe it to be a system dishonourable to
God and degrading to man, inasmuch as it strips Deity
of its rightful attributes and denies to'man the free exer-
cise of his reason—the noblest quality with which lie is
endowed. But we would not on this account pollute the
sources of charity or dry up those springs of true benevo-
letice which cheer and gladden the hearts of thousands.
It is sufficient for us that misery exists toclaim our warmest
sympathy and support.