The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-06 00:00:00

INDIA

Governor-General—Sir James Graham (wits► a peerage).
Governor of Madras—Lord Elliott, or Mr. Charles Wood
(with a baronetcy).

FOREIGN.
:Minister to France—Lord Clarendon.
Minister to Constantinople—Sir S. Canning.
,_ All the other posts to remain as at present. Sir John Cam
liobliouse and Mr. Labouchere to receive peerages.
The incongruous materials thus brought together
would not adhere for a single hour. Such a ministry
Would be only known •to future historians as " TR,
13DBBLE ADMINISTRATION."

We find from the advertisement that the conservative
dinner at Newton is fixed to take place on Friday, the
23d instant, the day after the very interesting and
important ceremony of laying the foundation stone of
the Liverpool Collegiate Institution, in Shaw•street.
Among the noblemen and gentlemen.who are expected

to be present at the dinner are, Lord Sandon, Cresswell
Cresswell, Esq., Lord Francis Egerton, the Hon. R.
B. 'Wilbraham, Lord Wilton, Lord Stanley, Sir James
Graham, Sir George Murray, 'Sir George Sinclair,
and several other distinguished individuals. We
anticipate a rich treat in the eloquent addresses which
will be delivered on the occasion. We have no doubt
that the hall at Newton will be crowded with the rank
and respectability of this division of the county.

NUISANCE

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

SlR,—Allow me through the medium of your widely circu-
lated journal to point out one of the greatest nuisances in
Liverpool—viz.—at the south end of Paradise-street, and im-
mediately facing the Custom-house. It is a complete reposi-
tory for all sorts of filth and rubbish ; in fact, so much so,
that a person wearing decent clothes, cannot get to the Post-
office without running a great risk of spoiling them. This
ought to be attended to, in order to ascertain where the fault
lies. If this exposure should not have the effect of bringing
it into notice in the proper quarter, you shall shortly hear
from me again with full information of the parties whose duty
it is to see to it.—Yours, A TORY.

•

THE BOROUGH REGISTRATION,

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

Sll2,—As the period of the revising barristers holding their
revision court is now so near, it appears to me that it may be
useful to our conservative friends to recall their attention to
the objection to the lists, and upon which the Attorney-Ge-
neral has given, politically speaking, a most dishonest opinion,
in favour of their validity. I will dissect this notable docu-
ment and briefly compare it with the clauses of that perfection
of legislation—the Reform Act. Stand forth Sir John Camp-
bell, Knight, &c.
No. I.—" I am of opinion that in point of lime, the publi-
cation of the list in this case is not liable to any objection."
The question, as 1 understand it is simply this—whether
the lists ought not to have been affixed to the church and cha-
pel doors during the whole of the first two Sundays in August
last, and I find it admitted by the liberal party that such no-
tices were not so placed instil the evening of the first Sunday.
Now, what says the act itself? Sec. 44 enacts that the over-
seer shall cause a sufficient number of copies of the signed
lists to be affixed "on the two Sundays" there pointed out.
Now, I beg leave to state, that this enactment could only be
for the object of publicity during the usual hours of church
service, to enable parties whose names do not appear, to send
in the proper claims, and parties on the lists to give the ne-
cessary notices of objection, and in this view it is clear that
the whole of the Sunday is intended, for otherwise it might
as well be argued that publication one minute before twelve
o'clock at night would be a sufficient compliance with the act,
and I doubt if any sound lawyer would place himself in so
awkward a predicament. Such a publication would be a mere
mockery, and I maintain that the courts of law will and al-
ways do take notice of thefraction of a day, if it be necessary
for the purposes of justice, and yet coolly, says Sir John,
the time is not liable to any objection.
No. 2.—" I am of opinion that the act has not been strictly
complied with, as to churches and chapels, and that it would
be proper to return to thefornzer practice on this subject."
True, thou second Daniel: The act expressly says, that
such notices shall be affixed " on or near the door of all the
churches or chapels."
.Mark that little word all. Now it
is again admitted by the liberal party that such notices were
only placed on eleven out or all the churches ; and yet
saws Sir John, this is a sufficient compliance with the act.
1 boldly affirm it is not, and until I can be convinced that
the half is equal to the whole, I must continue to differ from
this most vaunted opinion.
No. 3.—" 1 am clearly of opinion that no condition prece-
dent has been violated, that the irregularity pointed oat is
merely a departure from a directory enactment, and that the
revising barrister is bound to revise the list."
Indeed, a mere departure from a directory enactment—
what honied words for the eager throats of the trembling liberal
party, and how delicate, how tender a rebuke to the unfor-
tunate overseers, who, by a mere departure from a 'compul-
sory clause, from " the absolute shall," of the statute, have
rendered themselves liable under the 76th sec., to an ac-
tion for £3OO penalty at the suit of every elector aggrieved.
The words of the act are peremptory, as much so as the act
making murder a felony punishable by death. There the
words arc, " whosoever shall' stab, cut, or wound any per-
son, &c., with intent to murder." Here " the overseers
shall cause ; and yet, in one statute, the word is to be con-
strued in its positive, and in the other in a negative sense,
" merely directory." Really, Sir John, this the argument
"ad absurdum" with a vengeance. The revising barrister
is bound to revise the list. Is he, indeed ? I say he is first
bound to see that the requisitions of the statute have been
fully complied with ; and for this purpose he is to examine
the overseers touching the accuracy and publication of the
lists ; and I at once assert, that unless the overseers can
show a full compliance on their parts with the act, the lists
are not those contemplated by the statute, but, in fact, a non-
entity, and the judicial power of the revising barrister entirely
at an end. lam fortified in my view of this subject by the
opinion of many eminent lawyers, and the decision of several
revising barristers, men who, unlike others, do not wor-
ship riches, and are too high-minded to bow the knee to
Baal.

No. 4.—" I entertain no doubt that a good election may take
place under the present list, when revised. Even should the
revising barrister be of a contrary opinion, I would most re-
spectfully, but most earnestly, advise him to revise the list,
leaving the question open for decision by a committee of the
House of Commons."

A good election indeed—" ex nihilo nihil fit." So that
an election under a bad, and I say illegal list, must ne-
cessarily be good. Common sense cannot swallow such
absurdity. Next peeps out the cloven foot ;—" leave
the question open for decision by a committee of the
House of Commons." Well done, Sir John. Carry the
election, you liberal party, if you can; lend the sinking
ministry, a vote on the address, or any other little measure
of straw, at which your drowning friends may catch in their
downward course to political perdition. Leave to the wicked
tories the expense and labour of an election petition, the con-
duct of which may be spun out by a little whig ingenuity
for half the session ; but pray let the house usurp the func-
tions of the revising barrister, it suits our party purpose, and
the end sanctifies the means. Truly, Sir John, you are wise
in your generation ;—watch this manoeuvre well conservatives,
and see that you prevent its being carried into effect, state it
fearlessly to the revising barristers, and urge them to pause
ere they decide, on the validity of the lists—much may hang
on their decision. If the conservative party would but shake
off their slumber, and rouse from their nerveless apathy to
the energy of prompt and decisive action, sure I am that
our enemies would quail before us, and the bright banner of
our glorious constitution, in church and state, again shine
forth triumphant and free.
No. 5.—" If he were to refuse to do so, the whole parish of
Liverpool must be disfranchised for the whole year."
Ave, " there's the rub," and fitting is it that the restless
clamourers " for the bill, the whole bill, and nothing but the
bill," should take the penalty of their bond, Shylock-like ;
let them have their pound of flesh, and nothing else. Well
will it read in history, that by the wisdom of the whigs, and
no fault of its own, the second city in the empire was for a
time disfranchised !"—" Most sapient senators."
No. 6.—" Claims could not be made in the manner pro-
posed "

" 'Tis true, 'tis pity, pity 'tis, 'tis true."
No. 7.—" Nothing more tan now be (lone to correct the ir-
regularities ; but I am of opinion, that with a view to revision
and al subsequent proceedings, it is quite immaterial."
J. CAMPBELL.

Temple, Aug. 18, 1840.
What a climax ! Oh, wise young man, how do I honour
thee. Quite immaterial—be it so; and you Sir John, now
you have earned your fee. But surely the strong good sense
of the true men of Liverpool cannot be gulled by such non-
sense as this—" immaterial." So that in sober earnest, the
statute has no peremptory definite meaning, but is to be
twisted in the due performance of its enactments, at the dis-
cretion of the overseers. If this be so it is indeed a thing of
shreds and patches; if it be not, how long ye gentle liberal
reformers, will ye strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. How
often will ye expend in a pitiful species of bribery, say £2000.,
in paying up the taxes of poor voters, and find as ye have
now done, a mare's nest ?
Liverpool, Oct. sth, 1840