The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-12-13 00:00:00

THE LIVERPpOL STANDARD.

LIVER THEATRE.

ORANI) JUVENILE WEEK.
NEW FEATS, AND BRILLIANT EXPERIMENTS,

COLLECTED FROM
MR. SUTTON'S MAGNIFICENT APPARATUS,
Of such an order as to give
PLEASURE AND DELIGHT TO NUMEROUS JUVENILE PARTIES
THAT NIGHTLY CROWD THE BOXES.
FOUR SPLENDID REPRESENTATIONS
THIS WEEK!
11111 IS EVENING. (Tuesday,) the 13th, To-morrow, (Wed-
nesday,) 14th, Thursday, the Nith, and Friday, the 16th
instant.
MR. SUTTON, ever mindful of the gratitude that is due
to a liberal and discerning Public. for its generous and power-
ful support, most respectfully offers his sincere acknowledg-
ments, for the same. Public encouragement is a sure stimulus
to genuine exertion, and imperiously calls forth every species of
talent which nature, in her wonted gifts, so powerfully and
eventually displays.
The combination of attraction which Mr. S. now offers to the
Public will, he hopes, prove a just reward for the unprecedented
patronage bestowed on his exertions. Each representation
will be diversified by a great many Novelties.
Doors open at Seven, Curtain rises at Half-past Seven:
Boxes 25., Pit Is., Gallery 6d. Children Halt-price to the
Boxes.
Tickets and places to be had of Mr. T. FooG, at the Theatre,
from Eleven to Half-past Two.

THEATRE-ROYAL, LIVERPOOL.
Second appearance of those extraordinary Artistes, the Troupe
Alastique of
REAL BEDOUIN ARABS,
Sidi All, Abdallah, Amhed, Hossein, Mohammed, Hassan, &c.,
from the Porte St. Martin Theatre, Paris;
The Colosseum, and Royal Surrey Thiatre, London, whose
inimitable perfortnanees have been the theme of such universal
wonder and admiration, and who have been engaged for FIVE
NIGHTS. Of tb¢ rare and astonishing nature of their repre-
sentations, it istitnpossible to furnish the least idea; they must
be seen to be credited.
ruHIS present TUESDAY Evening, the 13th instant, will
JL be performed Shakspeare's Tragedy of
M ACBET H.
Macbeth, Mr. Stuart.—Alacduff, Mr. W. Howard.
Lady Macbeth, Mrs. Stanley.
After which, the performance of the
BEDOUIN ARABS.
The Entertainment in which they will appear is divided into
Two Parts, from the exertion required in its progress.
The Stage represents the Great Desert of Shaara! with Tab-
leaux vivant, of the Evolutions, Dances, and Exercises peculiar
to the Bedevi, or Sons of the Desert, which will be given in the
Representation of an Arabian Festival by the Native Bedouins.
The accounts given by Pacho, Burckhardt, Major Denham,
and other African Travellers, of the wonderful feats of Force
and Dexterity displayed by the Bedouins in their various Sports
and Exercises, were of so marvellous a nature, that they have
been hitherto deemed to be impossible, and were regarded
merely as 'Travellers' Tales; occular demonstration has, how-
ever, at length attested the veracity of these writers.
To conclude with the Nautical Drama of
BLACK-EYED SUSAN; or, ALL IN THE DOWNS.
To-moattow, (Wednesday,) the Tragedy of WILLIAM
TELL. William Tell, Mr. Stuart; Albert, Miss Chaplin;
Michael, Mr. W. Howard; Braun, Mr. Baker; Jagheli, Mr.
G. Horneastle; Emma, Mrs. Stanley; Agnes, Miss Faucit ;
Anneli, Miss Stanley. After which, te Performances of the
BEDOUIN ARABS. To conclude with the Farce of QUAD-
RUPEDS.
On THL RSDAY, the BEDOUIN ARABS' Performances,
and other Entertainments.
On FaiDay, the BEDOUIN ARABS' BENEFIT, and
their last appearance.
Arrangements have been made with a Company of FRENCH
PERFORMERS, who will commence an engagement of
FIVE NIGHTS at this Theatre on MONDAY next, in Two
favourite French Dramas.
Mr. EDWIN FORREST,
the popular Tragedian of the American Theatres, whose success
at the Theatre-Royal, Drury-lane, in the various characters in
which he has appeared there, has been most decided, is engaged
FOR FIVE NIGHTS,
and will make his first appearance at this Theatre on MONDAY,
December 26th.

Zia Eiberpool *tanbarb.

TUESDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 13, 1836,

MEETING OF VIE LIVERPOOL TRADESMEN'S CONSER-
VATIVE ASSOCIATION.—We beg to draw the attention of
our readers to the important meeting held last evening
at the large room of the King's Arms. We have no
space for any comments on the proceedings in this day's
publication; but we shall revert to the topic on Friday.

We are somewhat prematurEly called to the consider-
ation of that important constitutional question, which,
during the last session of Parliament, was so keenly ad-
vocated among destructives, in their " secret chambers,"
and which was covertly fostered by the present unstable
administration—we mean a reform of the House of Lords.
The speech of Lord Ebrington has drawn us from our
purpose of suffering to rest in quiet, till a more oppor-
tune season, the revival of a discussion which, we think,
should be the immediate attendant upon the meeting of
Parliament. But when a public man boldly puts forth
declarations as establishing, beyond contradiction,
mo-
mentous truths, involving important issues, to which they
do not give more than a shadow of support, and triumphs,
in an imaginary victory, when there is no one in the
field beside himself, we think it incumbent on us to strip
off a few of his hastily snatched laurels, or to breathe
upon them the air of truth, before which such transitory
honours always fade. After floundering amidst the gross.
est inconsistencies, in which, if we have space, we intend
to fasten him—at the very climax of ecstacy, his lordship
pressed from his " hard-bound brains," like another Ju-
piter, the very Minerva of reform. He told us to " mark
him, and write his speeches in our books," for what he
was about to utter (we quote his lordship's own words)
" differed from all those views that HAVE BEEN HEARD
Ott READ upon the subject"—meaning reform of the
House of Lords. Open your ears, ye radicals, and drink
to intoxication of this " new wine" of reform, whilst it
drops, in all its cloudiness, from the wine press of my
Lord Ebrington's brains ; for his lordship denies that the
" old is better." He prefers this new fermenting spirit to
that afforded during a vintage, when pure patriotism and
uncorrupted manners gave England her constitution—to
that which is mellowed by a millenary of years, and from
which all the dregs of passion have subsided—to the ge-
nerous wine of conservatism, which began to be stored
quo rege, aut, quo console, we know not. But my Lord
Ebrington is " Sir Oracle, and when he speaks let no
dog bark." Truly when we came to this awakening pas-
sage of his lordship's address, we raised ourselves on tip-
toe, to catch the wonder-working words that had "never
been heard or read," lest they should be soiled by passing
through other lungs before they reached us. We scarcely
knew whether imagination had hurried us to the " an-
trum immane" of heathen prophecy, and his lordship, a
very sybil, was about to pronounce some dreadful " fu-
ture," or whether Friar Bacon's brazen head was about
to speak. But, as time always brings to patience what
she waits for, so, in due season, we were blessed to see
that his lordship "found a tongue,"—aye, and even
words—plain, common, English words (no Irvingism) in
which to clothe " views that differed from all that have
been heard or read upon the subject" of reform. And
what were they ? you anxiously ask. Be patient, and
you shall hear them. A Newton and an Ebrington, tike
certain flowers, are only seen once in a hundred years.
Let his lordship' speak for himself—his expressions be-
teoinntuteitriooeflnythofofrsotenha those who maintain that the ex..
be-
come no other " mouth so well." " I differ," said his
ti
silordship,etiuniaglsc,9ni4;
feu Hn
doaums ee
notfa
ILbotrilta
ri s allof itise
epoanr
stitution unchanged, and immutable, which will admit of
no public modification, without the absolute destruction
of our political constitution. I am astonished, that men
of sense, professing to be well read in the history of their
country, can maintain such a doctrine. I pass by the
practical change (attend, readers, for these are the oracu-
lar words of my Lord Ebrington, which he declares 4 have
before never been heard or read') in the composition of
the House of Lords, by the immense increase of its num-
bers since the accession of Geore 111. 'Will any gentle-
man maintain, that, on the union with Scotland, the ad-
mission of sixteen representative peers, elected for that
country for the Pie liament only, was no change or inno-
vation in the constitution of the House of Lords ? Can
any one maintain, that the election of twenty-eight re-
presentative peers for Ireland, for the life of each peer,
was not an innovation in the constitution of the House
of Lords ? And can any one pretend to say, that, after
this innovation, any further extension of the elective
principle would be a new or unheard of violation of the
right of hereditary succession, inherent in the House of
Lords ?" This is the end of the oracle. It is quite evi-
dent, that his lordship had gone his 44 full time" in the
gestation of this " unread and unheard of" conception.
But had not the "gathering together of the electors"—
for so the public meeting at South Molton is introduced
in the Morning Chronicle—performed the office of a
Juno-Lucina to poor Lord Ebrington, he never could have
been delivered of this political burden—an asylum, and
a Cesarian operation upon his gravid brain, were his only
hopes. 'To drop pleasantry—though, like the servant of
Midas, tie must either " laugh or burst," at the ridicu-

lolls character in which my Lord Ebrington exhibited
himself—we are now prepared, with sober argument, to
grapple with the pigmy triad of his lordship. And first
with respect to " the practical change in the composition
of the House of Lords, by the immense increase of its
numbers since the accession of George III." Lord El,_
rington puts this numerous force, on his field day, in the
foremost rank, as imposing enough where he fears no
danger; but when he expects the attack of an enemy, he
can place no reliance upon it, and therefore marches it off
into the back ground, and " passes by" it as the Helots
of his political camp. But in this manoeuvring there is
displayed some little dexterity. His lordship knew, that
many of his radical compeers—his equals in political
arms—those who then surrounded him, would catch at,
and hold fast, this " practical change in the composition
of the House of Lords"—who would never trouble them-
selves to consider, whether it was either true, as "a prac..
tical change," or, if true, whether it justly and truly
served, as a precedent for a constitutional change—for a
"practical change," and a constitutional change, are not
convertible terms. As perhaps my" Lord Ebrington, any
more than his lazy hearers, may not understand the dis-
tinction been these two essentially dissimilar proposi-
tions—(for had he understood it, he would never have
corrupted it into an argument fur a reform of the House
of Lords : it might, very justly, have been deposited
among the things, of which man had never "read or
heard," the ligitimate offspring of his lordship's mind)—
let us consider the difference, the fundamental difference,
between them—between a " practical change" and a
change resulting from an alteration of principles. So
obvious is the distinction, and so strikingly is it illustra-
ted by daily examples, in every rank of life, that we
should feel ashamed to offer an explanation to any one of
a lower political grade than my Lord Ebrington and his
radical colleagues. Wherever there is any function, of-
fice, business, or transaction, dependent upon men, or the
council of men, for its successful performance, there, with
every mutation of the minutest circumstance of such men,
physical or intellectual, the function, office, business, or
transaction, will suffer a "practical change." Blane, in
his medical logic, says,. the temperature at which the
powers of the mind and body are most energetic is 62°.
A committee, therefore—a parliament—the House of
Lords itself, if it should assemble, and deliberate, at a
temperature one degree higher or lower than 62° would
suffer a "practical change" in its political wisdom ; and
if medical logic be mental logic, there would be seen in
the debates and the division of the House a correspond-
ent variation. The vernal equinox produced a "practi-
cal change" in the powers of imagination of the immor-
tal Milton. We fear the thermometer was much higher
than 62° at South Molton, when my Lord Ebrington dis-
tilled his political " mountain dew" into the ears of his.
infatuated auditory ; and at our Liverpool municipal
meetings it is as high as where "spirits boil." But, as
logic may not he matter to his lordship's taste, we beg
to call his attention to a late summary dismissal of Lords
Melbourne and Russell from being ministers, by the pre-
sent King ; an incident which will stick to their memo-
ries when the recollection of their misgovernment will
have no other record. Was that not "a practical change"
in the government Was not the recall of the Duke of
I,Wellington and Sir Robert Peel to office a " practical
change" in the policy of this country —was it not to
rescue her, sinking into contempt and misery, and to
Place her, thought for but a short interval, upon the rock
of her wonted integrity ? But, we ask, was there in all
this a constitutional change ? Were not the principles
of legislation preserved entire ? And in order that my
Lord Ebrington and his host may see that we are disposed
to deal fairly with him, we will take his own case, that of
the House of Lords. We maintain, that there was no
infraction of any one constitutional principle in the ele-
vation to the peerage of the " immense numbers" which
his lordship says has taken place since the accession of
George HI. It is the recognised privilege of the British
Crown to ennoble its subjects, and that privilege has no
prescribed limits. Policy may sometimes prompt a king
to grant, and sometimes to withhold, a patent of nobi-
lity, which public judgment may censure; but then we
are driven to the old political question, "pis custodiet
ipsos custodes"—discretion must be vested somewhere.
This is the declaration of a great lawyer, who says, " we
have no set numbers, for our nobles may be more or less,
as the King pleaseth." But Lord Ebrington will turn
upon us, and say, that all he contended for was a " prac-
tical change. True ; but of what is it intended—of
what is it declared to furnish a precedent ? Why a
-ellange essentially different—a constitutional change.
Is this not false and, we must add, most disingenuous
reasoning ? Does the surgeon, when he sees a little ex-
travasated blood, or a slightly increased circulation or
irregular action in a limb, proceed instantly to cut it off?
No; if there be constitutional health he knows that what
was effused will be absorbed—what was irregular will
subside, and original tone and energy be soon restored.
But the radical surgeons know nothing of moral thera-
peutics; with them the cry is—amputation ! amputa-
tion !

It may also be observed here, for the consolation of the
country, that the power vested in the King of England
to create peers is fenced round with a two-fold security.
First, the augmentation of the aristocracy has alWays
been regarded with a jealous eye at court, as lessening
the supremacy of the monarchy ; and, secondly, no one
is ever created a peer who has not a deep personal inte-
rest in the welfare of the country. Thus vanishes the
I first airy bubble of my Lord Ebrington, which, had it
never been blown by his lordship, might still, without
any loss to the community, have remained among those
many other things, the incognita curiosa of his lordship's
mental cabinet, which we " have never heard or read."
We shall now proceed to consider the two remaining
examples recorded in history, of " innovation in the con-
stitution of the House of Lords," with which Lord Eb-
rington is " astonished that any man of sense, professing
to be well read," should be unacquainted. They are,
" the admission of sixteen representative peers, on the
union with Scotland, elected for that country ;" and, of
"twenty-eight representative peers for Ireland for the
life of each peer." And with these " unread and. un-
heard of" marvels before him, my Lord Ebrington asked
triumphantly, as if conscious that but one answer could
be given to his interrogatory—" Can any one pretend to
say, that, after this innovation, any further extension of
the elective principles would be a new or unheard of vio-
lation of the right of hereditary succession inherent in
the House of Lords ?" " Nature bath made strange fel-
lows in her time," and in no respect has she been more
capricious than in the organization of the mind—that of
my Lord Ebrington is most anti-dialectic. To prove,
even to demonstration, that these cases afford no prece-
dent for " extending the elective principle" to British
peers, we ask, first, whether if Ireland and Scotland had,
originally, formed parts of one empire, would not Ireland
and Scotland have participated equally with England in
the constitution of its legislative assemblies ? Would
Ireland have had fewer than twenty-eight, or Scotland
less than sixteen peers in the House of Lords ? Will
Ebrington himself, or any one of his train dare to
say so ? And if Ireland and Scotland would have been
thus represented, if they had originally formed fractions
of one empire with England, so, whenever they should
stand in that relation, they would, evidently, become le-
gitimately entitled to such a privilege. It was no " ex-
tension of the elective principle" applied to the peerage
—it was simply supplying to additional responsibility
additional jurisdiction—it was giving to the Irish popula-
tion an Irish peerage—to the Scotch population a Scotch
peerage—it took nothing away, altered not one privilege,
' varied not one form of the English House of Lords.
If this be the only plea which radicalism can urge for
reform of the House of Lords, it is the very sorriest
imaginable—it will never shake the stability of that firmly
established and truly national wing of the British con-
stitution. But we see the verbal anodyne which cast my
'Lord Ebrington into his political slumber, and, after-
wards, created his fantastic dream, which, when he awoke,
though still rapt in ecstacy with the vision, he told as a
truth " never before heard or read Of." It is the "elec-
tion" of sixteen peers for Scotland, and of twenty-eight
1 for Ireland that gave all the obliquity to his mind. If
twenty-eight. peers are elected for Ireland, why not all
the peers of England ? his lordship forgot—dreaming

men do forget—that these twenty-eight Irish peers, and
these sixteen Scotch peers were elected out of the Irish
and Scotch peerage, by a majority of their own body, to
represent themselves. We have said, already, that these
peers represent the population of Ireland and Scotland,
and we reaffirm the fact. But, in spite of Sir J. Camp-
bell's authority, Attorney- General as he is, who said at
Glasgow, that the peers were originally "created for the
people," we tell him, that such a dictum is contrary to the
law of the land which says, the " peers are present for
themselves." But Sir John Campbell was led into .his
legal mistake by the fact, that the peers do sit for the
people—do watch, most indefatigably over the people's
welfare—through "good report and evil report," when
slandered for their zeal, and reviled for their integrity.
But there is a further qualification of this mode of
raising Irish and Scotch noblemen to the British Parlia-
ment, which it may be well to mention. Each of these
countries possessed a noblesse, which, if admitted to the
privileges of English peers, not "aught minished," would
have introduced a disproportioned number into the House
of Lords, and, therefore, in a question of such extreme
delicacy what course could be pursued so unexception-
able, at once so compatible with justice to England, and
so agreeable to the feelings of our sister countries ? The
invidiousness of royal selection was obviated, and the in-
terests of the respective peerages satisfactorily preserved.
In the foregoing arguments we have had recourse to
no hypothetical reasoning; we have not even entered
upon the question—How far the aristocracy of England
is essential to the integrity of our complex constitution ?
We have not recited the rights we owe to, and the bles-
sings we enjoy under the political guardianship of the
House of Lords. We Dave made no mention of Run-
nymede and Magna Charta, secured to us by our here-
ditary representatives, the barons. We have not ad•
verted to, nor offered one indirect breathing in vindica-
tion of their constitutional, and firm defence of our char-
tered rights, during the last session of, Parliament, in op-
position to unprincipled demagogues, both in and out of
the senate. All these we reserve for future triumphs.
Our present aim has been to overthrow the flimsy fabric
which my Lord Ebrington, in the illusion of a disturbed
imagination, had raised into an invaluable fortress. And
even this we should not have thought it worth our while
to undertake, had we not known that plausible assertions,
boldly made, always find weak minds ready to embrace
them. And when his lordship ushered them into the
world as truths, of which no one before himielf "had ever
heard or read," there was an imposing air of solemnity
accompanying them which would not only serve to make
the rustics stare, but might also become the parent of
more extended mischief.
We cannot better conclude our reflections upon this
most interesting subject, than in the just and pertinent
words of Sir William Blackstone, which we earnestly
press upon the attention of all our readers ; and, should
Lord Ebrington be one of them, we commend them es.
pecially to hitn:—"The legislation of the kingdom is en-
trusted to three distinct powers, entirely independent of
each other ; first, the King ; secondly, the lords spiritual
and temporal, which is an aristocratical assembly of per-
sons selected for their piety, their birth, their wisdom,
their valour, or their property ; and, thirdly, the House
of Commons, freely chosen by the people from among
themselves, which makes it a kind of democracy. As
this aggregate body, actuated by different springs, and
attentive to different interests, composes the British Par-
liament, and has the supreme disposal of everything,
there can no inconvenience be attempted by either of the
three branches, but will be withstood by one o f the other
two ; each branch being armed with a negative power
sufficient to repel any INNOVATION, which it shall think
INEXPEDIENT OR DANGEROUS. Here there is lodged the
sovereignty of the British constitution ; and lodged as
beneficially as is possible for society. For in no other
shape could we be so certain of finding the three great
qualities of government so well and so happily united.
If the supreme power were lodged in any one of the three
branches, separately, we must be exposed to the incon-
venience of either absolute monarchy, aristocracy, or de-
mocracy; and so want two of the principal ingredients
of good polity, either virtue, wisdom, or power. If it
were lodged in any two of the branches, for instance, in
the King and House of Lords, our laws might be provi-
dentially made, and well executed, but they might not
always have the good of the people in view : if lodged
in the King and Commons, we should want that CIRCUM-
SPECTION and MEDIATORY CAUTION, which the WIsDOM
OF THE PEERS IS TO AFFORD : if the supreme rights of
the legislature were lodged in the two houses only, and
the King had no negative upon their proceedings, they
might be tempted to encroach upon the royal preroga-
tiVe, or, perhaps, to abolish the kingly office ; and there-
by weaken, if not totally destroy, the strength of the
executive power. But the constitutional government of
the island is so admirably tempered, and compounded,
that nothing can endanger or hurt it, BUT DESTROYING
THE EQUILIBRIUM OF POWER BETWEEN ONE BRANCH OF
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE REST. For, if ever it should
happen, that the independence of ANY ONE of the three
should be lost, or that it should become SUBSERVIENT TO
THE VIEWS OF THE OTHER TWO, THERE WOULD SOON BE
AN END OF OUR CONSTITUTION.,' Again we say to OUr
readers, Conservatives and Radicals, meditate upon these
truths.

Of some things we soon feel satiety, but of philosophi.
cal, and, especially, of chemical truth, it is, " as if increase
of appetite had grown by what it fed on." We never ex-
perienced this more fully than on the present occasion,
when we have Mr. Hemming for our host, and our opera-
tive friends for our companions. If we speak with free-
dom of some of the dishes served up, we are always pre-
pared to. acknowledge that the entertainment is ample,
various, and judicious, and whenever we offer an objec-
tion it is never in the spirit of complaint.

Speaking of the use of "wicks," Mr. Hemming says
they consist of a " fibrous material, and contain a great
number of pores, up which, by virtue of capillary action,
the oil, &c., would rise above the ordinary surface of the
fluid in the vessel, to feed the wick." That the ascension
of the oil does not depend upon " pores," existing in the
"fibrous materials," of which wicks are composed, is evi-
dent from. the fact of wicks being made of the amianthus,
or asbestos, as Mr. Hemming observes, in which no such
pores exist; and, if this be disputable, we have the un-
exceptionable wick of Gordon's lamp, which is made of
copper wire ; indeed, pores in the capilli, or fibres of a
wick, would rather prevent than assist the ascension of
the oil. The fact is, that when fibres are either laid lon-
gitudinally, close together, or twisted, the small space
between them acts as a capillary tube, just as we know to
happen when two pieces of glass are brought, in a very
acute angle, to touch on one edge of each, and are then
immersed in a fluid—the fluid will rise between the pieces
of glass, and its upper surface assume the form of a hy-
perbolic curve. .

We are by no means satisfied with the position of Mr.
Hemming, that the intensity of light varies with the
quantity of carbon consumed. The very case he men-
tions himself is wholljoigOerse to it, viz., the combustion
of oxygen and Irydrogefi'when thrown, in a jet, upon a
piece of lime. In this instance there is no carbon, and
yet the, light exceeds, in intensity, every, other. Neither
do we subscribe to the assertion, that " the quantity of
light is in proportion to the carbonic acid formed." Time
is a necessary consideration in extending the " quantity
of light." A piece of charcoal, at just the temperature
of ignition, will furnish as much "carbonic acid" as if
exposed to a violent blast of air, or even oxygen gas it-
self, but the quantity of light, in the one case, will bear
no proportion to that in the other. And the only differ-
ence in the proces'ses is—rapid combustion in one case,
and slow combustion in the other.
On the subject of evolved carbon, during the combus-
tion of inflammable substances, we have never seen any-
thing satisfactdry. It cannot be sublimed, because car-
bon is not vaporisible, at any temperature. The only
way we can understand it is, that an atom of bicarburetted
hydrogen, which would require, for complete combustion,
five atoms oloxygen (for it is always carbonic acid, and
not carbonic oxide that is formed,) meets with but three
atoms of oxygen and thence one atom of carbon is cet
•
free.
With regard to the "patent candltstick,— which Mr.