The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-06-25 00:00:00

RUSSELL AND NO CORN-LAWS.

Only last year did the minister announce in parliament, in
terms rather needlessly strong for a man of principle, that
any alteration of the corn laws would be " madness." A
few months afterwards his government, being defeated on the
Irish bill, the " madness" began to exhibit undoubted symp-
toms. As disaster followed disaster, the ministerial mi❑d
became decidedly unequal to its adversity, and according to
the diagnosis of Dr. Melbourne it gave way—it showed
itself non compos. Within twenty-four hours of a con-
t:mptuous defeat, our corn-law ministry grew fervently
anti-present corn-law, but still clutched at a phantom of
" protection" to British interests in the shape of Bs. per
quarter—but, alas ! as the moon waxed the little remaining
degree of " sanity" wained, and before she had quite " filled
her horns," Sir Robert Peel expelled them from a house of
their own gathering. The " madness rose to its height, and
now Lord John, without even the lucid interval of Bs. per
quarter, calls publicly on the largest, town constituency in the
empire to have
RUSSELL AND NO CORN-LAWS.

For ministers in power, these shifis would be but sorry
exhibitions ; but emanating from the powerless, the fallen,
the sunk in political mire, from which not even their own
friends will raise them, such appeals create only pity or con-
tempt.

Whilst Lord John rests his claim to be returned to par-
liament, upon his advocacy of " No corn laws," his colleague,
Lord Palmerston, (who, by the way,) it is whispered,
is painfully anxious as to the result of the election, whe-
ther he is destined to be " unexpectedly called upon
to represent the great commercial interests, &c., which
the phrase " Free Trade," as more likely to win all
hearts in this commercial rival of the metropolis. But like
consideration might have made it occur to my. Lord Pal-
merston, that the merchants of Liverpool have wise heads as
well as good hearts, and are peculiarly likely to test the value
of his assumed principles of free trade. Is the foreign secre-
tary's name identified with those principles ? or are they an
election squib, or an election motto ? In the very last session,
previous to that just made, did the ministry advocate free
trade ? Did they not only scout such ideas, but practically
lay new restrictions and imports upon every article of trade,
and that as a feeble and ineffective means of cobbling up the
rent which their financial whiggery had made?
It is well that the electors should remember that the same
Lord John who, on the eve of an election, suddenly talks of
" no tar upon bread," " a removal of a farthing from every
three pounds of sugar," &c., when there was no danger of an
election, lately brought back the odious tax upon salt, which,
from its operating so harshly on the poor, had been long re-
pealed ; and that, in conjunction with Lord Palmerston, the
Free trade" gentleman, it was only last year that the fol-
lowing restrictions were placed upon trade .
An additional import duty on tea !
An additional import duty on coffee!
An additional import duty on sugar!
An additional import duty on flour !

An additional import duty on wheat !
An additional import duty on hides !
An additional import duty on, in fact, every one of the ar-
ticles most necessary to life and comfort, as well as im-
portant to trade.
This is not all, for striking a blow at our manufactures
and commerce together, the " free trade" gentlemen also,
last year, loaded every article of British manufacture (ex-
cepting cottons) exported from the kingdom with additional
duties.

The fable of the dying wolf, who told the peasant's boy,
that from his soul he ahborred eating human flesh, and
that if he would only bring the most trifling sustenance, he
would prove the sincerity of his conversion by not devouring
him, is not unlike the expiring ministry, too weak to con-
tinue doing harm to the country, and willing to avow or
promise any thing, if, perchance, they might obtain from
the credulous support sufficient to enable them to gasp on
a little longer.

SOUTH CHESHlRE,—Yesterday a few of the liberal elec-
tors of South Cheshire met Mr. George Wilbraham at the
Clarendon-rooms, and were addressed by him in support of
his claims upon the constituency at the forthcoming election.
His speech was that of an out-and-out ministerialist, full of
the fine promises which are held out to induce the people to
support their cause, but was totally destitute of all pretensions
to argument. Lord Grosvenor was the chairman, and as might
be expected by those who are acquainted with his lordship,
he appeared to as little advantage as his friend the candidate.
Mr. C. Towneley, the nominee of the Liverpool and Manches-
ter Unitarians and Papists, in opposition to the constitutional
representatives of the south division of Lancashire, was
present. and, of course, was easily prevailed upon to let off a
speech in favour of ministers. There is one consolation
which prevents the necessity of considering the pretensions
of Mr. Towneley, and that is, there is quite as much proba-
bility of his setting the Mersey on fire, as of his success in the
approaching contest.
SERIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE AT BITTERLEY CHURCH,
SALOP—At the conclusion of Divine Service on Sunday
morning last, just as the blessing was being concluded, a
large Newfoundland puppy, the property of the Rev. C. Wal-
cot, rushed into the aisle of the church, followed by a fox -
hound,
.which instantly seized and bit him. He then retired
out of the church, and went round the house at Bitterley-
court, meeting a large mastiff, which was never known to
run away from any dog, but in this instance he ran away,
was soon overtaken and bitten ; the dog then went on and
found some young greyhounds one or more of which he bit ;
he then went towerds Mr. Walcot's man servant, who was
coming out of church, whom he bit (it is hoped slightly)
through his clothes. He then overtook a boy of the name of
Gardener, arid ivithout any notice or provocation jumped
upon him, knocked him down, and bit him badly on the
shoulder thade, he then bit two more dogs-in the village. By
this time the village was alarmed and several suns brought
out and the dog was shot, without proceeding any further.—
Medical assistance was procured from Ludlow as speedily as
possible, and it is hoped by cutting away the injured parts
and cauterizing, that no bad effects will be produced.—
Salopian Journal.
ROBBERY AND APPREHENSION.—On the afternoon of
Friday last, a robbery of a daring and somewhat novel kind,
was perpetrated in Gorbals, Glasgow, of which the particu-
lars are as follow:—On the Wednesday preceding, two young
men, apparently belonging to a genteel station in life, named
John Gould and Christopher Jarvis, both strangers in Glas-
gow, took temporary lodgings in the house of Mrs. Butler,
Portland-street, and remained together till Friday. On that
day, Mr. Gould, who is a young commercial traveller, repre-
senting a London house, went over into the city to look after
his business ; and as it was unlikely he would be home till
the evening, Jarvis, in the afternoon, entered the lodgings,
sent the girl for a blacksmith, who, by his direction, picked
the lock of a closet door, the lock of a travelling bag, and the
lock of a portable desk, which latter, after being opened, he
took with him, in addition to a drab waistcoat. and a tartan
scarf, the property of Mr. Gould. This gentleman's desk
also contained a deposit receipt of the Marylebone Saving.'
Bank for £6O, a deposit receipt of the London Joint Stock
Bank for £5O, a deposit receipt of the London and Westmin-
ster Bank for £4O, a diamond ring, a cornelian seal, c.
Jarvis also took away two pairs of silver sugar tongs from a
trunk, the property of Mrs. Butler. Information was given
to the police, who apprehended Jarvis, ns h° was
proceed-
ingie-
vr
on board the Princess Royal, on her first trip to
Liver-
pool. He was attired in the stolen great coat, and in his
possession were found all the papers enumerated above, in
•
addition to a purse containing SS old coins. Gould first met
Monday, when
Jarvis in a tavern in Dublin, on the precedingagain the latter learned Gould's destination, and they
met on
board the Eagle, on her way to Glasgovv,wlienilywadsidasroa,nagnd
it arranged
they should remain in lodgings together. They
e
the robbery took place as detailed.
T
that robbery was the object of Jarvis all
to cash th
leor can be little doubt
along,andthe atwhen
apprehended, he was on his way to L
deposit
receipts.—Seottish Guardian.
place upon various public and private DIVISION S.—Tbe number of divisions
te
bills
in whichthe
Househavetaken
f
the Poor Law
Commons during the past session altogether amounts to
Amendment
e;
nodfmwehnitcßh
ilzo9loen th
leas
Coroners' Bill, 5 on thethe anl9 were
County upon
Punishment of Death Bill, and 6 on Lord Morpoth'a Irish
Registration Bill.

-

CORRESPONDENCE.

CORN LAWS.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL.-REV. HUGH WNEILE.

FAIR TRADE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

SlR,—Finding gross misrepresentations abroad, of what I
said last week in London, particularly with reference to Lord
John Russell's speech at the London Tavern, I herewith
send you an extract from a correct, so far as it goes, but
somewhat imperfect, report of what I really did say, and I
will feel obliged by your publication of it on Friday
" Upon this subject (the corn laws) I find an attempt at
simplification made yesterday in the City by the noble lord
the leader of this agitation, who has the happiness to com-
bine at this moment, in his own proper person, the offices
of minister to the crown and suppliant to the people. (Hear.)
He is reported to have said—l quote from the Morning
Chronicle of this day (16th June)—
" I will put the instance, as one might paint it to them-
selves, and it will be better, perhaps. if I take two indivi-
duals. Take a man in Germany, a small landholder, who is
ready to cultivate his land—to work all the year through—
to sow and to reap—and who says that he is willing to part
with the fruit of his industry, provided he can get clothes for
himself and family. (Cheers.) Take another man in Lan-
cashire, who, by his industry, and by working some ten
hours a day, in the hardest way and with insufficient food,
is willing to provide clothes fcr him, provided he can obtain
a better and more plentiful supply of food. (Cheers.) Here
are two men—the one wishing for clothes, and the other for
food ; and there is the third person, the merchant, who is
ready to negotiate between them, so that both parties may
be benefited. Is not that the course which seems, by the
natural order of things, to be pointed out—that which will
give a scope to industry, and give its reward to industry,
and make both men happy and contented ? '
" Upon this, with permission of your lordship and the
meeting, I will take the liberty of making a few observations.
(Loud cries of " Hear.") The residence of one of the noble
lord's illustratives is Germany. There is no special district
or province named. He is made to represent Germany.
Now, in all fairness, the second man in the illustration
should have had his residence assigned to him in England,
without specifying any particular locality. But this fairness
in the analogy would have exposed the special pleading in
the argument. (Loud cheers.) Therefore Lancashire is
named as the residence of the second man. Thus the atten-
tion of the noble lord's auditors was dexterously limited to
the English manufacturer, while his analogy had the appear-
ance of consulting for all England on one side, as for all
Germany on the other. This fallacy escaped the notice of
his auditors, and he was loudly cheered. (Cheers.) But,
my lord, let us suppose Lancashire properly selected as the
residence of one man in the illustration, and let us take the
noble lord's description of the point to be illustrated, namely,
that natural order of things which will give a scope to in-
dustry, and give its reward to industry' ; then, with due
deference I submit, that the residence which in fairness and
candour should have been selected for the man on the other
side of the illustration, is not Germany, but ESSEX. (Loud
and continued cheers.)
" The whole subject is not so simple as the noble lord's
illustration affected to make it, and I cannot but look upon
this part of the noble lord's speech as betraying a most un-
flattering estimate, in his lordship's mind, of the intelligence
and penetration of the electors of the City of London.
(Laughter and cheers.)

" I will take the liberty of attempting an improvement upon
the noble lord's illustration. (Hear, hear.) I will suppose
two men in Germany, a farmer and a manufacturer. After
their home arrangements have been made they have corn to
spare. And two men in England, a manufacturer and a
farmer. After their home arrangements are made, they have
goods to spare.
" Now look first at the case of Germany. In Germany,
upon the whole, there is a surplus of corn and a deficiency of
manufactures. Still they have some manufactures, which
they protect, which they are bound to protect, and to endea-
vour, moreover, to improve and extend. Ought they, or
will they, admit British manufactures to undersell their own,
thereby injuring what does exist, and rendering any increase
utterly impossible? Or ought they only to admit from Eng-
land, or elsewhere, the surplus of what they require, after
they have taken security for the protection and improvement
of their owu ? (Loud cheers.)
" Now look at the case of England in the parallel. (Hear.)
In England, upon the whole, there is a surplus of manufac-
tures, and a deficiency of agriculture. Still we have some
agriculture, which we protect, which we are bound to pro-
tect, and to endeavour, moreover, to improve and extend.
(Loud and continued cheers.) Ought we, then, to admit
German corn so as to undersell our own, thereby injuring
our apiculture which does exist, and rendering any improve.
ment or increase utterly impossible ? Or ought we only to
admit from Germany the surplus of what we require, after
we have taken security for the protection and improvement
of our own ? (Renewed and prolonged cheering.)
" \Vise legislation, like true charity, should begin at home;
although, like charity, when really true, it will not end there.
My lord, I cannot lose sight of the fact, that all the world is
not one nation, but many nations : and that nations are not
artificial distinctions made by the caprice of man, but real
permanent distinctions made by the hand of God himself;
who, by confounding their languages, has stamped his own
irresistible authority upon their separation. (Loud cheers.)
And I cannot lose sight of the primary duty which every
nation, like every family, owes to its own members. (En-
thusiastic cheers.) is it right to keep nations nationally in-
dependent? Is it right, according to the noble lord's argu-
ment in this same speech, to increase the British navy, at
considerable expense, and to plead as a reason for so doing,
that the French and Russian navies have been increased?
Doubtless it is. There the noble lord spoke like an English-
man ! (Rapturous and continued cheers.) But if so ;if na-
tions are to be kept nationally independent, if the contingency
of war is to be contemplated, and so practically contemplated
that armies and navies are to be maintained ; then I venture
to conclude, and to expect the agreement of every reasonable
man in the conclusion, that both agriculture and manufacture
should be encouraged in each nation in the firstinstance, and to
the greatest attainable extent ; and the question of intercourse
with other nations (so far as the necessaries of human life are
concerned) should affect only the surplus on either side, and
should never be allowed to go so far as to reach the bulk of
national supply ; thereby turning the whole of one nation
into a corn field, and the whole of another nation into a work-
shop. (Loud cheers.) In proportion as such a state of
things is approximated, the workshop nation becomes depen-
dent upon the caprice of its neighbour. For, suppose friendly
intercourse suddenly stopped; suppose the contemplated,
and at least possible, occasion for the army and navy to arise,
then the corn field nation can get no new clothes! Granted.
But they can wear the old ones till the workshop nation is
starved to death ! (Vehement and protracted cheering.)
Free trade ! yes, we shall hear and see on every side free
trade as a favourite electioneering hobby, and many will,
doubtless, be deceived, as though the legislature of England
possessed the power of making trade free. Trade involves
the regulations of other nations, and we cannot compel them
to make it free. (Hear, hear, hear.) My lord, we are ad-
vocates for FAIR trade, and we think that free trade cannot
be fair unless it is universal, neither can any nation, with
even the semblance of wisdom, adopt it, without a guarantee
from other nations for its simultaneous adoption ; and even
then, though universally adopted, and thus both fair and
free, nothing short of a millenial security against war could
make it safe. (Reiterated bursts of applause.)"
Permit me, sir, to commend this extract, especially the
latter part of it to the free dealers in free trade promises in
this town. I have had cards very politely left at my house,
headed " Palmerston and free trade," " Walmsley and free
trade;" and I beg to make this acknowledgement of the
favour. Permit me also to suggest to our friends the pro-
priety of raising the cry of FAIR TRADE, or SAFE
TRADE, as the proper and ready antagonists to the delusion
of free trade. This cry has on its side the equal advantage
of brevity, and the superior advantages of nationality versus
cosmopolitanism ; of sound philosophy versus empiricism ;
of reference to divine authority versus liberalism ; of regard
to social order versus radicalism ; and of enduring truth and
immutable principle versus the cameleon shiftings of deceiv-
ing convenientism.

Apropos, and in conclusion, if you can spare me a little
more space, I wish to call attention to a letter, addressed by
a free trader to one of his constituents, a Scottish farmer.
It is a letter of no ordinary pretensions, thus introduced
with a flourish by the Morning Chronicle, in some of its
most ostensible types.
" Mr. Elliot, M.P. fer Roxburghshire, has addressed to
his constituents ("fo the Teviotside Farmer') a letter, in
which the various bearings of the corn question are handled
in a masterly manner. That members who have to deal with
the prejudices of agricultural constituencies may have the
benefit of this sensible document, we have transferred it to
our columns. The constituents of Mr. Elliot rank, as far as
agricultural skill is concerned, among the first in the empire.
In discussions on this subject, it is too much the custom to
argue as if corn were the only object Nfhicli a farmer ought
to take into consideration. Mr. Elliot examines with much
fairness the circumstances in the proposed change which
would benefit the farmer, from his having other sources of
profit besides corn. We recommend the letter to the serious
consideration of our agricultural readers."
The first heading of this important letter begins with the
following paragraph :
" The average rate of protection that has been given by
the present corn-laws to wheat is under Gs. a quarter. It is
shown in a table contained in the appendix to a pamphlet
lately published by Mr. M'Culloch, under the title of State-
ments illustrative of the policy and probable consequences of
the proposed repeal of the existing corn-laws, &c,' that from
the passing of the act 9 Geo. IV., c. 60, on the 15th of July,
1828, to the sth January, 1840, 9,292,114 quarters of wheat
have been imported into England, and the duty received
thereon has amounted to £2,670,812, giving an average duty
of ss. 9d. a quarter. The average protection, then, during
this period, has been ss. 9d. a quarter, but the fixed duty now
proposed to be put on is 8,5. ; consequently wheat will have
more than a third additional average protection under the
proposal of government than it has had hitherto. This being
the case, I cannot understand why, in arguing this question,
you should treat it as if all protection Were_ to be withdrawn,' and as if no grain could therefore henceforth be cultivated in
England."
So then, after all, according to these competent authorities,
the government scheme is a wilful deception, and the cry of
free trade raised thereon is an electioneering hoax. Lord
John Russell calls the agriculturist who desires a continuance
of the present protection, a monopolist ; and to break down
the monopoly, proposes a fixed duty of Bs. Mr. Elliot
proves I that a fixed duty of Bs., instead of breaking down
the existing monopoly, would give the agriculturist me?"'

than a third additional average protection I And the
Morning Chronicle, says Mr. Elliot, has handled the various
bearings of the corn question in a masterly manner ! Who
is in the right ? If Lord John be right, Mr. Elliot is a de-
ceiver, and the Morning Chronicle is helping him. If Mr.
Elliot be right, Lord John is a deceiver, and the Morning
Chronicle is helping him. Non nostrum tante* eomponere
lites. But, in either case, it is clear that there is a ieceiver,
and that the Morning Chronicle is an abettor.

I have only to repeat to intelligent Englishmen, FAIR
Trade, and SAFE Trade.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
HUGH 'NEI LE.
24th June, 1841.