The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-11-22 00:00:00

the masters to reduce their stocks; and the necessities if
many of the cut tersforcing theartooffer their labour at les
titan the listprices." In another place, the very next part-
graph, is added, " we regret to observe that there we
indications of extensive, and we fear protracted, tuns-
out, among portions of the work people in the manufmc-
turing districts." Still darker forebodings gather as we
advance. At Manchester " there is so much gloom ye-
vaiiing amongst the commercial classes altogether that it --
is impossible to predict what is to come. There canbe
no doubt we are on the eve of a great commercial crisis,
the end of which may be much more calamitous than bat
of 1823-6." At Middleton " plain sarcenet weavers, vho
have been without work a month have no probabilitt of
getting any at present. Those weavers who have mrk
are bound to be six weeks in weaving it, and they hen
have to wait some time before they get another Piece."
At Bury " many hands in the batting business are totally
without employment, and others have scarcely half work."
At Leeds " in the warehouses less business has been cone
than for some years past at the same period." All tiese
quotations, collected together in the Times, are taken
from local authorities, where there cannot be mistake,
and is no temptation to mislead. What (we ask) is
cloud of distress possible under the blessed sun of reform?
A remodelled House of Commons !—aye, and, to lnot,
the municipal corporation reform bill 1 Why "the be-
som of destruction." put into the hands of a reformed and
reforming parliament, we thought, was to have swept
away the Babylon of all political and social evil. To the
operative community we, therefore, say, " Lend us your
ears," and " season your admiration for a while," and
we will present to you truths, " strong as holy writ," to
prove the folly of those hopes you placed upon reform.
This shall be our demonstration. You were in distress
before the passing of the reform bill; you are equally in
distress now, three years after it has passed. If some
benighted child of reform, wandering in the darkness of
his own imagination, should say that this is the seed-
time only of reform, and that the harvest is yet to come,
when taxation will lose its cyphers, anti purity pervade
the state, we venture to tell him—we desire to throw
this ray of truth over him, that there was a time,

and that within our recollection, when we paid almost
20.000.000 a-year more in taxes than we now pay, and
we then heard nothing of distress—no clamor for reform,
or if any utterance were given to the wish, it was in the
soft breathings of theoretical desire only. Review, con-
sider, digest this fact. We paid almost 20.000.000 a•year
in taxes more than we now pay, and scarcely felt, and
certainly murmured little, under the burden. We care
not what may be ascribed to the transition from war to
peace, with all its concomitants. The fact remains indis-
putable, that taxation and national prosperity do not gra-
duate together; and a mistake of this has been the grand
error that led astray, and is still leading astray, vast
multitudes into the interminable road of reform, which
in its tortuous windings is ever raising hopes of some
new and pleasant prospect, but is ever disappointing them
with a path having " a wall on this side and a wall on
that side." If we had no other argument beyond this
fact, it ought to be sufficient to petrify the blood of the
warmest reformer. But our demonstration does not end

What, fellow-countrymen, far we deeply sympa-

thise with your sufferings, what do you ask, what do you
expect from reform, even when carried out to its utmost
limits ? Reduction of taxes still ? Why, what says the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to you—a man of your own
political complexion—one steeped in the very Styx of
radicalism, so as to become invulnerable to every assault
of reason. He tells you—he, your bead, says to you
the members—" the state cannot bear it—we have nar-
rowed the stream of revenue to its smallest channel--;-the
necessary machinery of government will be stopped if we
lessen by the smallest fraction the pecuniary movement
upon which its action depends." Give us, you say, a pore
tion of the tax upon malt. Mr. Spring Rice tells you, it
cannot be granted ; and prate as you may upon the topic
of a reduced revenue, all your words will " pass by him
as the idle wind which he regards not." Do we blame the
Chancellor for this ? We blame him not. We know that
what he says is true. Retrenchment and meonomy have
their maximum limit, and we have probably reached it.
Of what, then, do we complain ? Why, first, that the
present government and its partizans continue to deceive
the people with false hopes of meliorated circumstances
from political measures, which can in no way answer the
promise. The people " ask for bread," and ministers
" give them a stone." They seek relief from pecuniary
difficulties, and they receive crumbs of reform. They
complain of distress at home, and they are amused with
the promise of the spoliation of Church property in Ire-
land. But we stop not here. Our demonstration is full
even to superfluity of proof. What the financial circum-
stances of the country refuse—what the Chancellor of the
Exchequer pronounces to be impracticable, we will
cheerfully grant. We are ready with an argumen-
tative spunge to wipe out any tax which radical re-
form may require for the consummation of its wishes
—not a million or two only of the malt-tax, but we

will suppose the whole of it remitted—is this a mor-
sel not large enough and sweet enough to fill and

luxuriate in the mouth of reform? What would follow
such an abridgment of taxation ?—of taxation which is
thought to be peculiarly oppressive to the artisan ?—ad-
mit that 5,000,000 are to remain distributed over the
country which now run through the fiscal ducts of the
government into the treasury ? There are 20,000,000 of
persons contributing to the payment of these five mil-

lions of taxes, so that if an equal division of them were
made, there would remain to each individual just five
shillings a year, or a fraction more than ONE PENNY A
WEEK; but this is grounded upon the supposition, that if
that tax was abolished, the poor man, whose whole weekly
expenditure does not exceed from 124. to 20s. a week, and
and in many cases hardly half of such sums, would derive
as large a benefit as his rich neighbour who has an in-
come of £20,000 a-year. If we give every allowance in
the calculation to the side of the labouring mein, and con..
Filer his family to consist of five persons, the whole be-
nefit he could by possibility receive from taking off the ,
entire duty upon malt, would not be threepence a-week,
perhaps not half the sum ; and is it, we would ask, about
threepence a-week that all this outcry is raised—is it
whether an artisan receives threepence a-week, more or
less, that he is raised to comfort or is depressed in penury
—happy or miserable—and yet, to secure even this three-
pence a-week, we have been obliged to annul a tax of
5.000.000 a-year, and that at a time when the Chancellor
of the Exchequer tells you he cannot reduce any-part of

the revenue. Is this not demonstration, that reform is a
mere word more senseless than the jabber of " tongues"
in the mouth of crafty men, to abuse public credulity !
We call upon the operatives of the kingdom to open their
eves to these obvious incoutestible proofs—to stretch for-
ward their hands and handle these tangible arguments.
And be mot amused with the bugbear of municipal re-
form, whether as in operation in England, where it is a
hot-bed of contention, or as demanded for Ireland, where

it will serve to maturate rebellion. Your it have
nothing to do with these questions. But do not hence
conclude that we ask you to abandon the constitution, as

if it deserved not your veneration and protection. No.
Under that constitution, for generations, your forefathers
were happy. Many of you experienced comfort. But
we say, do not any longer deceive yourselves, nor suffer
others to deceive you, with hopes which can only disap-
point your expectation. Do you—we fearlessly ask the
question—do you find one single blessing secured to you
by all the government and municipal reforms which are
made such themes of exultation, that you did not before
possess ? Are you in the enjoyment of one right, civil
or political, that has added an iota of comfort to your-
selves or your families ? We know that you have not;
and if yon will still place your dependence upon that
" broken reed," Your folly will not only bring its con-
dign punishment, but almost place you below pity. We
have many more things to say to you upon this subject,
and in due course we shall return to it again; but, surely,
we have already said enough to excite distrust, and to
rouse inquiry. One word, by way of recapitulation, we
However feel compelled to add. Whenever the leaders
of radicalism are declaiming before you on the benefits
of reform, to stop their eloquence, ask them why the
" fust'an cutters of Manchester are now in as deplorable
" so much gloom still prevails
a condition as ever"—why

NOV. 2! LB3 (3.

there, and a great commercial crisis is expected, more
cdlatnitOUS tilau that of 1825 G"—why " illy hatters of
Bury are destitute of employment"—aye, and the "turn-
outs" are so general and so numerous, that we hear of
military movements, troops of horse and regiinents of
infantry kept in readiness to repress a spirit of insubor-
dination. Will any reform obviate these evils ?---'-the
expectation is fatuitous.

In anticipation of the discussion which is expected to
take place, in the Common Council, to-morrow,
on the
motion of Mr. Councillor Birch, that the Corporation
Schools be offered for sale, we make this appeal--perhaps
a final one—in favour of Scriptural Education, and ear
nestle invite the attention of our town councillors to
the arguments which we shall adduce in defence of our
views. We repudiate the charge, so frequently made,
that we are influenced by any malignant feeling towards
those who differ from us in opinion, and we shall only
give a passing notice to the gross calumnies which are
so liberally bestowed upon the advocates of Scriptural
Education. The assertion that we resort to the most un-
worthy artifices, to falsehood, and to scurrility, in the ad-
vocacy of our principles, is contradicted by the concur-
rent testimony of thousands who read and judge for
themselves. Modern liberals have made the wonderfni
discovery that zeal for the cause of God is the result of
a disordered mind; they regard the faithful and solemn
, warnings of Chtistian ministers, who are set for the de-
fence of the Gospel, as mere clap-traps to deceive the
ignorant, and advance the interests of the party they es-
pouse. In the prosecution of the duty we have under-
taken we are influenced by no other feeling than a dis-
position to advance the religious and moral improvement
of the community ; and this we believe cannot be
effected in any other way than by making religious
principle go hand in hand with moral and intellectual
improvement. Thus, whilst the intellect is cultivated,
and the mind stored with useful knowledge, those
vital principles are imbibed which improve the life,
The subject fur discussion to-morrow is one of the
highest importance, not only to the community of
Liverpool, but to the nation at large. It relates to the
first attempt made in England to introduce what is called
the "Irish system of education," ostensibly for the pur-
pose of reconciling conflicting creeds and allaying party
animosity. At the time when the Education Committee,
appointed by the Town Council, recommended the adop-
tion of this system, it was agreeably with the spirit and
design of the contrivers, namely, that the Bible, as a
school book, should be carefully excluded. In accord-
ance with the resolution agreed to, on the report being
received, the Bible was excluded from the Corporation
Schools, and it was not until public indignation had
aroused the fears of the Council, that they ever
thought proper to contradict the allegation preferred
against them. We speak advisedly, when we saY
the Bible was excluded, and might easily strengthen
our argument by a reference to the speeches delivered
in the Common Council when the subject was under dis-
cussion, proving, beyond controversy, that the intention
of the Council was to exclude the Bible, and introduce
the selections. The Reverend Hugh M'Neile has ad-
dressed a powerful letter to the Town Council upon this
subject, in which he clearly shows, upon the authority of
Lord Stanley, that if the Irish system be introduced, the
Bible is excluded, if the Bible is not excluded, then the
Irish system is not adopted. We look forward with some
interest, to the 'proceedings of the Council to-morrow•
and anticipate, with mingled feelings of shame and soratevv,
the sophistry and jesuitical craft which, we doubt not,
will be resorted to, in order to extricate themselves on
of this dilemma. We are prepared for bold assertions
and violent disclaimers ; but we prophecy that the argu-
ments in Mr. M'Neile's letter will not be answered; nor
the chairman of the Education Committee exculpated from
the charge of carrying his boasted liberality to the extent
ofpractical disregard of all truth; exhibited in his profession
of Unitarianism and his teaching of Trinitarianism. ,Our
contemporary of yesterday, appears exceedingly anxious
to convince the public that the Bible never was excluded
from the schools ; and charges his opponents with the
most reckless audacity, and unblushing effrontery, in
asserting what was utterly false. Now, in spite of these
weighty charges, we maintain our opinion, and leave it
to any man of common understanding to judge if we
cannot make good our assertion, by the line of defence
adopted by our contemporary. He tells us, and, we
believe, very truly, that he went to the schools, and saw
with " his own" eyes, and heard with " his own" earsp
and then formed " his own" judgment. He found the
Bible there; but where think you, gentle reader, that he
found it ? You shall have his
_own words. "We ap-
proached the end of the room occupied by the Prateitant
children ; they were reading—we listened-1T W Af-'1
THE BIBLE, IT WAS THE AUTHORISED VER-
SION," and lest there should be any mistake, he adds,
" we looked at it more closely," (mind, reader, witty" his
own" eyes,) "and found it to be an edition put. fortlt
by the centre of orthodoxy, the CHRISTIAN KNOW-
LEDGE SOCIETY." We would just ask our respect-
able contemporary, if he entertained the idea for a mo-
ment, that any 111851 of education would not detect. the
jesuitism, and low artifice here resorted to. Is it dins
that the majesty of truth must be sacrificed to promote
the ascendancy of party ? " Oh, shame where is. thy
blush ?" The Irish system provides that an hour shall
be set apart for religious instruction, during which the
ministers of all denominations may come and .
the children of their respective creeds, the Bible or
anything else they please. Every man who is acquainted
with the Irish system, knows that such is the fact.;, and
it is allowed ou all hands, that in this sense the Bible
was' not excluded. But in this, the system only gives
permission to ministers, it secures nothing to the children.
Our contemporarychose THIS HOUR to visit the schools,
and found the Protestant children reading the Bible And
from this circumstance he would attempt to persuade his
readers, that he had met the argument, and established
his own position. We intend also to visit the schools,
but it will be in what are called " school hours," and We
shall then very probably indulge our readers by letting
them know what we have seen with our own eyes, and
heard with our own ears.

We have now, we hope, satisfactorily disposed of the
question, whether the Bible is excluded or not, and would
appeal to each member of our Town Council, and ask,
whether the course they are pursuing, is becoming the
high character for honour, and integrity, which they
ought to sustain ? Do they approve this special plead-
ing, this jesuitical artifice, or, in other words, do they
encourage the fraud which is perpetrated upon the pub-
lic ? Mr. Councillor Rathbone has denied publicly, and
privately, that the Bible was excluded—" he has read it
himself—he has explained it himself'—and in the sense
in which the clergy/ of the establishment understand it."
Mr. Councillor Walmsley also says, that the Scriptures are
not excluded, but whilst they give to their words a par"
tial, and a restrictive meaning, they are deluding 06
public, and disgracing themselves. Let them meet die
question boldly, and tell the public at once whether
the Sacred Scriptures have as free, and unrestrained a
circulation amongst all the children attending the
,schoolg,
and at all hours of the day, as they had prior to the Irish
system being introduced ? This is the real point at
issue. It has been repeatedly affirmed, that the great-
est praise is due to the Town Council, inasmuch_
as they have given occasion for the exercise or.
Christian benevolence, and by this means increased
the facilities for edicating the infant population. But
whilst we gratefully acknowledge that good has resulted
out of the apparent evil, we are not disposed to cooceri
any share of the praise to our liberal and enlightene(
t
Town Council. Have they just cause for pride, that the
unprecedented liberality ofa Christian public has counter
;
acted their wicked intentions ? Have they cause for
joy, because Providence has overruled their evil desigui,
and made them subservient to the advancement of troth _
They sought to restrain the use of the Sacred Scriptures
—they attempted to shut out the light of Revelation .
But
drat
st
order to conciliate the popish party and secure their as-
sistance in the furtherance of party objects.
attempt has signally failed. We willingly allow t
many of the
ated be the purest motives; but it is impossible to 4
advocates of this system have beset! a c
rt t