The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-01-24 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL OPERATIVE PROTESTANT
ASSOCIATION.

Last evening a very crowded meeting of the members and
friends of the Liverpool Operative Protestant Associatipn
was held in the school-room belonging to St. Mark's Church,
I Cornwallis-street, for the purpose of promoting the general
objects of the institution. Mr. JOSEPH CRISP was unani-
mously called upon to accept the office of chairman, in the
absence of the Rev. Mr. Connor, whose attendance was
prevented by ill health.
The CHAIRMAN, after offering prayer, mentioned that the
principal subject for the consideration of the meeting was
the enormity of a Protestant government supporting a Po-
pish college. He would state an interesting fact, which he
hoped would excite their zeal and exertions for the future.
In the year 1837 the number of petitions against the annual
grant for the support of Maynooth was 52, and the number
of signatures 11,639 ; now, in the year 1838-9, the petitions
had increased to 199, and the signatures to 51,202. Before
the meeting closed he should have the pleasure of proposing
a plan for their adoption, which would have the effect ;of
increasing those petitions and signatures at least fourfold.
(Cheers.) He begged to introduce Mr. Scott.
Mr. SCOTT, in a very interesting speech, of which we re•
gret we can present our readers with no more than an out-
line, called attention to the singular fact that the Protestants
of England and Scotland, after an interval of 300 years,
should again be united in endeavouring to put down the
monster of Popery. He had himself travelled on various
parts of the Continent, and, since he had arrived in Liver-
pool, he had remarked an article in one of the Paris news-
papers upon the subject of the English " No Popery" agita-
tion. This "No Popery" agitation—although the French
were a people who seemed to care very little about any reli-
gion—was denounced first as the most fanatical, next as the
most foolish, and lastly as the most uncharitable thing
in the world. He should endeavour to prove that it was
neither one nor the other of these. Mr. Scott then went on
to demonstrate this position, and he succeeded in a manner
that frequently elicited the applause of the meeting. He
showed, from the character of Popery itself, the necessity of
a No Popery agitation ; and answered an objection in the
French paper, that the aristocracy had no share in it—that it
was too great to interfere in any cause of this nature. He
proved that many of the French aristocracy had left their
estates and their country for the sake of the Protestant faith ;
that some of them contributed materially to the victory of
William the Third in the Battle of the Boyne ; and that at
this moment some of their descendants formed part of that
aristocracy which this French writer so much misrepresented.
Their Popish opponents insisted that they had nothing but
the Bible on their side. Well, if they had, did they want
anything else ? Did it follow that the Bible was false, or
that Protestants invented the Bible ? (Cheers.) As well
might they say that those who believed in the truth of the
Newtonian philosophy had invented the sun, or that as
mariners in one place found it necessary to observe the rules
of navigation the same necessity did not exist over the whole
world. (Hear, hear.) • Reverting to France, he argued that
it was owing to the prevalence of Roman Catholic principles
that she was one of the moss difficult nations in the world to
govern, and, that, although Providence had poured into her
lap such abundant resources, she seemed destined never to
enjoy that greatest of all blessings—a contented mind. But
he was happy to say, that Popery was beginning to stink in
the nostrils fo the French people, and that few respectable
people brought up their sons to the priesthood. The greatest
number, he had been told, were collected out of the Found-
ling Hospitals, and brought up so strictly in the principles of
the church that they were never able to get rid of the system.
Popery affected to teach humility, but he would undertake
to prove, that, in the lowest member of the priesthood there
was more arrogance than a Protestant Archbishop would ever
pretend to. (Cheers.) On this subject what did Rome her-
self tell us? The poor gentleman who lived there washed
poor men's feet once a year;—(hear)—but bad the meet-
ing never heard of very different things being done to that
gentlemans' toes ? (Cheers.) This was the humanity of
Popery—making emperors, and kings, and princes kneel to
the Pope, and do the most menial offices for him. (Conti-
nued applause.) The great object of the meeting was to pe-
tition the legislature to withdraw the annual grant to the
Popish college at Maynooth. (Hear, hear.) What a fool-
ish appearance we necessarily made against the sound-think-
ing men of foreign nations by that grant ! We called our-
selves a Protestant country, we carried out our principles by
largely paying for teaching direct error, and to teach the
teachers of error! (Hear, hear.) By this what were we
doing for the miserable population of Ireland ? Why, we
were actually trying to support a system which was weak in
its morals and pernicious in its effects! (Hear, hear.) The
editor of the Gazette de France, in alluding to this subject,
ridiculed the parliament of this country for paying this its
annual sum to Maynooth, as paying for teaching the people
to laugh at the oaths made to that parliament itself ! Aye,
and whit sort of policy was that which paid to teach the
teachers of the people the necessity of violating or " swal-
lowing" their oaths ? This was not, however, the princi-
ple of Protestants. (Hear.) Mr. Scott concluded an
eloquent and impressive speech, by remarking, that whilst
the loyalty of the Roman Catholics was loyalty to the Pope
of Rome, the loyalty of Protestants was loyalty, first to their
God and then to the Queen under God; and by imploring
the meeting to sign the petition against the parliamentary
grant to Maynooth. (Cheers.)
Mr. WILLIAMS next addressed the meeting, and said,
though it might be superfluous, after the able speech of Mr.
Scott, to unfOld further the character of the Church of
Rome, he could not avoid reminding Protestants that her
object was not only religious but civil supremacy. (Hear.)
At all times, and upon all occasions, she exposed this object,
and now it has become our duty to cry, with Bishop Hall,
." No peace with Rome." (Hear.) We were told by the
sycophants of the Melbourne ministry, that by this no-
popery agitation we were speaking treason against the sove-
reign. Now, he contended that any man that spoke in any
way but reverently of our most gracious Queen was not a
true or a consistent Protestant. (Hear.) The Established
Church, he contended, was the great bulwark against the
aggressions of Popery, and that, alone, the dissenters would
not be able to resist them. He mentioned, in order to
thew the pro-popery character of the present administration,
the fact that Lord Melbourne had refused to present the
prospectus of the Institution of Civil Engineers to her Ma-
jesty, because it contained these words—" this institution is
based upon the principles of the Established Church." Now
it was fortunate, perhaps, that there was no law against ex-
posing the character of a pro-popery ministry. (Hear.)
Protestants repelled indignantly the charge of disloyalty.
. (Hear.) As Protestants their intention was to render her
Majesty one of the most glorious monarchs upon the•
face of the earth. He trusted we should yet see the day
when Protestant associations would multiply in our cities and
towns, in our hamlets and villages ; when the Protestant
spirit of England should rise and speak in a voice of thunder ;
when our senate house should be swept of the locusts that
now infest it; and when our sovereign, by the interposition
of divine providence, should see the dark designs of those
who now surround her, and call to her councils men who
would support Protestantism, and men determined to carry
Protestant ascendancy. (Cheers.) Protestantism and Con-
servatism, in this sense were synonymous. (Loud Cheers.)
Mr. LEATHEBARROW agreed with the sentiments of the
speakers who had preceded him ; and trusted that the opera-
tives of this important town would be up and doing. The
Papists and some of the dissenters had combined to under-
mine the established church, but they had been too rapid in
their approaches—they had succeeded only in rousing the
Protestant spirit of the population. Let the Protestants how-
ever, not be out-generalled. He concluded with a spirited
appeal to the meeting to this effect.
The CHAIRMAN begged to make one or two remarks with
regard to Maynooth. It might be asked why they were so
violent against the grant to that popish college. The an-
swer was that by allowing a Protestant government to con-
tinue it we were sanctioning the blasphemous and idolatrous
church of Rome. (Hear.) Now, government made grants,
in the colonies, towards the support of the dissenters, but
those dissenters, strange to say, did not come forward to
help the church on this question, although by the very prin-
ciple by which they dissented they were bound to oppose
popery. (Hear, hear.) They had petitioned strongly enough
against the Church of England ; for he found they had
sent 387 petitions with 152,142 signatures, against the
further endowment of the church of Scotland, 109 peti-
tions with 80,000 signatures for the abolition of tithes in
Ireland, and 391 petitions, with 25,305 signatures, in favour
of the appropriation clause—yet they went hand in hand with
the papacy, and would not help the church in protesting
against the idolatrous Church of Rome ! Our Protestant
government was now paying £50,000 a-year towards the edu-
cation of the Irish people, which education was conducted by
Romish priests. It was paying £9OOO per annum to May-
nooth ; 25,000 a-year for the establishment of Popery abroad ;
and £4667 annually to Popish priests in the colonies. (Hear.)
Why was this? Because it was " liberal." But he would
ask how long the Protestants of England would allow these
things to remain so ? (Hear.) Last year the Liverpool pe-
tition against Maynooth had only 4500 signatures, whilst that
from Manchester had 14,000. He hoped they would do bet-
ter this year. (Hear, hear.) He wondered what the. Church
of Rome paid towards the support of Protestantism. (Hear.)
Did France pay anything? No : and he thought we should
find our liberality all on one side. (Cheers.) The Chair-
man concluded by reading the petition.
Three cheers each were then given for the three watch-
words of Protestantism—Scriptural Education, Church Ex-
tension, and Protestant Ascendancy ;—and the doxology
having been sung, the meeting separated shortly before ten
o'clock.

MR. GEORGE LANE Fox. —lt is understood that
this gentleman retires from parliament on account of ill
health ; and that his brother, Sackville Lane Fox, Esq.,
offers Himself for the vacated seat at Beverley.--Leeds
Mercury.

HORRIBLE ATTEMPT OF A FATHER TO POISON HIS TWO
CHILDREN, AND HIS OWN SUICIDE.—A widower, named
Garn, aged 32, residing at Mitcham, by trade a tailor, gave
oxalic acid, on Tuesday last, to his two children (girls), aged
four and six years, and took also a large portion of the same
poison himself. Garn shortly afterwards died, but the chil-
dren, although very ill, are still alive, medical remedies hav-
ing been promptly applied. A coroner's inquest has since sat
on the body of the deceased, and a verdict was returned of
" temporary derangement."
ELGIN DISTRICT or BURGHS.—Sir A. Leith Hay ar-
rived here on Tuesday afternoon, and immediately com-
menced b's canvass. On Wednesday evening he held a pub-
lic meeting in the Trades' Hall, and addressed the electors
at considerable length. Mr. Grant of Carnoustie, the other
candidate in the liberal interest, arrived on Wednesday and
both gentlemen have since been actively engaged in calling
on the electors. They have resolved not to divide the libe-
ral constituency, and that the candidate who shall have the
smallest number of pledged supporters is to retire from the
contest. Sir Andrew left Elgin on Friday morning for
Banff.—Elgin Courant.
BRISTOL COTTON Wonx.s.—We hold out, Monmouth and
tion of the Manchester cotton, and of the
ne of the
Glamorgan iron lords (as well), the noble lc.
to .the imita-
tion
Cotton-Company, who have contributed £lOOO to the
proposal also to pro-
funds for erecting a new church.
vide church room for the increasinglplolpeeuatiou of St. Philip's
body of Protestant
will, we trust, be supported by a larg
set a noble Christians, besides those who have already
exam-
ple of munificence.—Bristol Jowl&
LISMORE LIGHTHOUsh.
immense number of rats
have crossed the narrow sound trom thteosouniethiisnloesttofpt
uosf.
the island of Lismore, in Argl.e,shire'
dale, on which the lighthouse ihsabvueileta,teannduarethdevpooutaritil all
that comes in the waY•
attacked their poultry, the potatoes
chicken
of
the lightkeepers, and
to one of their holes,Y. but being too
was dragged by the neck
large for the hole, they nibbled off the head, and so left it.—
Edinburgh Evening Post.
EXPEDITION TO uniNa.—The Master-General of the
Ordnance has transmitted orders to Woolwich for a party
of artillery and artificers, to be selected from volunteers of
civilians out of the royal arsenal, to be embarked in the ships
of war now fitting out for the coasts of China. Howitzers
and rockets are being prepared with the utmost celerity ; hi
fact, the workmen have been employed even on Sundays, in
addition to extra hours during the week. Officers of the royal
artillery have been directed to hold themselves in readiness
for instant embarkation, but from the particular nature of the
service in View at present, the absolute selection has not yet
taken place, and they are not to be taken according to the
" roster," or usual routine of duty. The non-commissioned
officers and gunners are all to be picked men from the sev-
ral battalions; although the commandant of the garrison is
desirous of selecting them from the seventh battalion.
Twelve arsenal artificers belonging to the laboratory depar
ment have volunteered to accompany the expedition on rep
ceiving double pay ; and it is stated to be the plan to pure
chase on the voyage (as near the Chinese seas as possible)
several ships which are to he filled with combustibles, and
converted into fire ships by these artificers, in conjunction
with the naval department, and then intended to be eon.
ployed among the ehinese war junks.

BIRMINGHAM ELECTION.

(From our own Correspondent.)

ti{~

r
41

THURSDAY EVENING, 5 o'CLoCK.
Th 9 nomination of candidates for this borough took place
at the Town-hall, Birmingham, this morning (Thursday.)
The attendance was not by any means so numerous as on
former occasions It had became known by a few parties in
the conservative interest on Wednesday evening, that they
intended to bring forward a gentleman well qualified to re-
present them, and Mr. Allen, who had previously announced
his intention to contest the election, when apprised of the
circumstance, offered to withdraw, in favour of a gentleman
whose claims on the conservatives were generally admitted.
The orchestra of the hall was appropriated for the candidates
and their supporters. Mr. Sturge, accompanied by several
of his committee, appeared first, and was received with cheers
and partial hissing. Soon afterwards Mr. Allen and some of
his supporters appeared amidst slight applause. In a short
time afterwards, James Taylor, Esq., J. W. Whateley, Esq.,
J. B. Hebbert, Esq., G. Amfield, Esq., and other leading
conservatives. On Mr. Muntz appearing, he was assailed
with hissing and yelling from those assembled. Among his
supporters, we noticed, Mr. Thomas Ryland, Mr. R. K.
Douglas, (editor of the Birmingham Journal,) Mr. J. E.
Lee, Mr. George Attwood, (brother of the late member,)
Mr. Salt, &c. Mr. Sturge sat on the right of the mayor,
and among his supporters were, Mr. Boultbee, the Rev. J.
M. M`Donnell, (a popish priest,) the Rev. Thomas Swann,
of the Baptist persuasion, Mr. Hudson, Mr. Shearman, (late
editor of the Birmingham Philanthrophist) a paper sup-
ported by Mr. Sturge and his party. Brown and Fussell,
the convicted chartists, also appeared on the platform.
At eleven o'clock the hall was about half full, and the usual
preliminaries having been gone through,
Mr. P. H. MUNTZ, mayor, and brother of one of the can-
didates, said, " The precept which I have received--" He
was not able to say anything more, in consequence of the
the most deafening noise and yelling with which he was
greeted. . .

Mr. Rice HARRIS, the high bailiff of Birmingham, then
said that he also had received a precept, in conjunction with
his colleague, the low bailiff, which he would read to them.
He then read the precept.
Mr. GEORGE EDMUNDS then said, I rise to move that
Joseph Sturge, Esq., is a fit and proper person to represent
this borough in parliament. (Cheers, and cries of " No, no.")
One complaint against Mr. Sturge is that he cannot make
long speeches. I think that to be in his favour,- for we have
had too much speechifying : we want "now to have a man of
business habits. He concluded by saying we won't have a
tory.

Mr. WILLIAM BOULTBEE seconded the nomination. He
supported Mr. Sturge, because he was generous, persever-
ing, philanthropic, and most exemplary ; in doing which he
was greeted on sitting down by several parties imitating the
crowing of a cock.
Mr. LEA said he appeared before them to nominate his
respected friend, George Frederic Muntz. Mr. Muntz was
able to defend himself. He did not know any man better
acquainted with the mercantile and local interests of the town
than Mr. Muntz.

Mr. SALT, (the founder of the Female Political Union,)
rose to second the, nomination, and was received with the
most discordant yellings, and it was not until the High Bai
liff interceded in his behalf, that he was able to utter a word
that could be heard.

The speeches of the above gentlemen were repeatedly in-
terrupted by the crowd, and scarcely a sentence was uttered
without eliciting a mixture of the loudest laughter, hissing,
&c. &c.

JAMES TAYLOR, Esa. (of Mere Hall) then rose, and after
a temporary interruption, said, the friends with whom he
acted had called• on him to propose a candidate. They
were all well acquainted with the difficulties of the govern-
ment—that the ministers were incapable of governing the
country. (Cheers.) The candidate he should propose would
be a gentleman who should be able to act when any change
took place. In referring to the corn-laws he said, the
American president congratulated the American people on
the benefits that had accrued to the American people by
agriculture. (Cheers.) The trading interests derived more
advantage from agriculture than was generally known„ (Hear,
hear.) It was under the present system of £he corn-laws
that this country had arrived at its present state of prospe-
rity. (Interruption.) The candidates who were named
were for a repeal of the corn-laws, but he should propose a
gentleman who would protect, not destroy, the agricultural
interest. (Cheers and hisses.) The candidate lam about
to propose is not the Attorney-General who prosecuted Mr.
Frost, but a gentleman who, when he was in office, during
the passing of the Roman Catholic Emancipation bill, threw
up his office rather than sacrifice his principle—he meant
Sir Charles Wetherell. (Great uproar.) The name was
received with great cheering.
N. C. ALSTON, Esq. seconded the nomination ; but the
clamour had risen to so great a height that it was not pos-
sible to catch a word that he uttered.

Mr. J. B. HEBBERT proposed Mr. R. W. Allen, and was
seconded by Mr. J. ALLDAY.
The MAYOR asked if any one else wished to nominate any
one, upon which BROWN, the chartist, stepped forward—and
the MAYOR said, Are you an elector?
BROWN—You produce the burgess roll.
The MAYOR—I can send for it.
Brown sat down, and
The Rev. Mr. M'DONNELL read the address of Mr.
Sturge, who was non est inventus. He stated that he had
not attended any of the committee meetings, but he should
and would also have been present if circumstances had not
prevented him. A great portion of the address was in refer-
ence to temperance. _ _ _

Mr. MUNTZ proceeded—He said that he dare say Mr.
M`Donnell would answer for his god-son. (Great clamour,
amidst which Mr. Muntz said—conscious of my own inte-
grity, I defy you all, men and women. He was the same
man as he was two years and a half before. He would speak
until midnight, if they did not hear him ; " and mark you,"
he said, " you'll never get universal suffrage, if you don't
know how to behave yourselves." He next abused his old
friends, the chartists, who, he said, had charged their
leaders with deserting them after they came into office.
(Cries of " They did.") He wodld ask what he had done
to deserve the reception he met that day ?
A VOICE—It is because that, on Monday night, you de-
clared, in the police-office, a menial servant was not entitled
to vote ; and because, after you brought forward the subject
of reform, you have dastardly shrunk from it.
Mr. MuNivt -No impudence, Sir, I can speak as harshly
SS you.
_ _

A. VOICE—It is because, when a petition was presented to
you yesterday, to save Frost, and the others, yea declined it.
Mr. MuNTz.—l did not. (Loud cries of " You did, you
did," " Shame, shame," " Off, off.")
Mr. MUNTZ (in a great passion).—You want hanging—
such a scoundrel as you are. All I have to say is, that Mr.
Acland is a dirty scoundrel. (Great confusion and clamour.)
-Mr. Muntz having stated that Frost had deluded a num-
ber of men into a dangerous enterprise, a ludicrous scene
ensued. A female (the chairwoman, it was said, of the
Female Political Union) in the large gallery opposite, shook
her fist, and, in a violent rage, exclaimed, " He never did=
it's you, and such like as you, as have humbugged the peo-
ple."the building resounded with shouts of laughter.
Mr. ACLAND .now stepped forward, amidst much confu-
sion, and denied the statement of Mr. Muntz ; but he was
not able to obtain a hearing.
Mr. MUNTZ resumed.—He would vote for the repeal of
the corn-laws, if accompanied by an alteration of the mone-
tary system. The time was at hand when that subject must
be taken into consideration. He was not surprised at Mr.
Attwood's failure : it was just like turning a lady's lapdog
into a tub of rats. (" Hear," and laughter.) He should be
independent of all parties. Sir Charles Wetherell was a
good lawyer, but there were too many of such men in the
house. (Cries of " The tones would not have you.") If
you try me, you may watch -me; and if you ask me at any
time to walk out of the house, I will. lam independent of
you all ; and you ought to be obliged, and not me. If you
do not elect me, I shall go home, and you will never see me
again. Mr. Muntz resumed his seat amidst partial cheering-.
Mr. GEORGE BARKER, ,on the part of Sir Charles We-
therell, he would say, that if they returned him, they would
return a gentleman distinguished for integrity, and an emi-
nent statesman. [The clamour here became-so great as to
render it impossible for Mr. Barker to proceed, and after
makin, a few observations, he sat down.]
Mr. ALLEN then came forward, and said he was aware of
being nominated when he came there. He wished to see the
people benefitted, but there had been too much of splitting of
opinions—too much of liberal promises and broken pledges
of late. He was for practical reform, but never would con-
sent to the separation of church and state. (Priest M`Don-
nell here interrupted Mr. A., and some clamour ensued.)
They had been told that the repeal of the corn-laws was the
grand panacea of all their suffering. Now he would tell
them what they had not been told. If the corn-laws were
repealed the agricultural population would be deprived of
employment.
Mr. ALLEN said, by repeal of the corn-laws, they would
enhance the price of laud abroad, while they reduced their
own. The whigs hay.ng have not brought forward one prac-
tical measure. (Cries of no, no.) He was not con-
nected with that gentleman who had brought forward Sir
Charles W., but had answered the call of a requisition, but
now that gentleman was announced in the person of Sir Chas.
Wetherell, than whom there could not exist a more indepen-
dent, a more excellent, and at the same time a more honour-
able man. (Cheers and hisses. Whatever the result of the
contest might be, he hoped it would be attended with some
beneficial legislative enactment.
The MAYOR said—Electors and non-electors, you have
before yOu three candidates. Joseph Sturge,Esq., has been
moved and seconded, and those in his favour please hold up
your hands. A large number of hands were held up.
He next put the name of Mr. Muntz, and subsequently Sir
Charles Wetherell, and decided against Sir Chas. Wetherell,
but said the show for Muntz and Sturge was so rqual that
he must put it again. (This was received with loud hissing.)
He then put it in favour of Sturge, and again for Muntz,
and decided in favour of his brother, George Frederick
Muntz, amidst loud hissing and yelling.
JAMES TAYLOR, Esq. tahnedn dtehienainitrlneedeeadipnoglsl in
terminated b ehalfof
Sir Charles Wetherell,
shortly before five o'clock in the evening.

THE HUDDERSFIELD.—' e are happy to inform our
subscription lists, in aid of the testimonial to
and the crew of the Huddersfield, are lying at
therea readers,
office
fea,,t
C Pt" this We
paper. trust that numbers are,ready
Lo contribute towards so praiseworthy an object. The intre-
idity of Captain Clegg and his crew richly deserve the re-
ward which is in store for them.
LAuNcn.—On Wednesday last a tine new vessel of about
450 tons burthen was launched from the building yard of Mr.
Steele, Baffin-street. She is called the " Livingstone," and
is of a very superior model, combining the advantages of a
fine entrance and a clear run, with ample bearings : she has
a bust head, decorated stern, and a roomy quarter-deck, with
ample accommodation for passengers. She is the property
of the builder, and we understand is intended for the East-
ern trade.

SIIIPPINGtIN LIVERPOOL—There is, perhaps, a greater
number of ships in this port now than was ever known at
any previous period. All the (locks appropriated for sailing
vessels, with one exception, are quite full; and should the
present westerly winds continue, the Clarence and Trafalgar
will have to be resorted to. Not one quarter of the vessels
in dock now can be accommodated with either quay or stage
berths. _ _ _

Colonel G. Deane Pitt, formerly of the SOth regiment, and
now inspecting field officer at Leeds, is to be removed to the
London recruiting district, in succession to the late Colonel
William Gordon M`Gregor. Lient Colonel Bissell Harvey,
K.H. on the half-pay of the Royals, and at present Fort
Major of Edinburgh Castle, will replace Colonel Pitt at Leeds.
—United Service Gazette.
Lusus NATuas.—There was slaughtered on Tuesday
last, in the parish of Solport, a cow, which, on being opened,
was found to contain a calf nearly full grown, having two
beads distinctly formed. The calf is now in the possession
of Mr. Stephen Beck, innkeeper, Botchergate, Carlisle.—
Carlisle Patriot. . .

Three of the ministers will, it is said, have a step in the
peerage, and a fourth he elevated to it. The four names
mentioned are those of the premier (by special command of
the Queen), Lord Palmerston, the Marquis o f Lansdowne,
and Sir J. Hobhouse.
THE GREAT CHARTIST TOAST.—" tiara winter—Spring
not green—Bloody Summer—and no Queen !" We are as-
sured that this atrocious sentiment is commonly given at the
meetings of the friends and confederates of Mr. Frost, who
Lord John Russell made a magistrate.
PRIVATE BILLS.—Hom eof Commons, Friday, Jan. 17.
It is ordered, that the house will not receive any petition for
private bills after Friday the 31st of January. That no pri_
vate bill be read the Ist time after Monday, the 9th of March.
That the house will not receive any report of such private
bill after Monday the Ist of June.

( ( ,
Sy
„i I -_=-,. D
• ;fi'•ft.t.-----
3Altjtils)C
7 :: • . ',.‘ , , ,fiNe ...ft./
' ' .;-,-',- r•,,. , -'',,A,__A
.•• '

':=y.
r~


Vottrpt

THE IMMOVEABLE KINGDOM

A NEW-YEAR'S EXERCITATION

BY THE REV. J. B. M'CREA

HEBREWS, Xii. 28.
Since first the voice Almighty spake
The planets to their spheres,
And burning suns began to make
Their count of days and years ;
What mighty myriads of mankind
Have moved this earth upon,
That, like the snow-flakes in the wind,
Are drifted, thaw-'d, and gone !
Not mind of mortal man can tell

The victims of the flood,
When Cain's descendants, fair and frail,

Had sinn'd with sons of God ;
What untold multitudes were slain,

By vengeance of the Lord,
When on the Cities of the Plain

The fervid torrent pour'd.
Who can recount the nations gone,
When Nimrod's kingdom rose,
The germ of that " great Babylon,"
The " queen of pride" and woes ?
Where are the tyrant Pharaohs now,
That Jacob's children tried ?
And Asshur, that, with haughty brow,
The King of kings defied?
Where is the Persians' gorgeous throne,
Their armies as the sand ?
Where mighty Philip's mightier son,
Not Persia could withstand ?
Where are the hosts of sanguin'd fame,
'Neath cross. and crescent led ;
Of Christendom, by sword and flame,
The.pride, disgrace, and dread?
Of martyr'd millions not to think,
That died by brand and blade ;
Their blood the mystic harlot's drink,
The church's triumph made.
With all the souls that into birth
Have burst from age to age,
Unspoken done their part on earth,
And glided off the stage.
Gone all, just as,a wither'd leaf,

Or insect on the stream :
Their being, glory, history brief
As half-forgotten dream.
One kingdom, 'mid the wrecks of time,

In gro-win7glori;iWnds ;
Cities and palaces sublime,
Unbuilt by human hands.
Deeper its firm fouiidations be,
Than ocean's caves descend ;
And further than remotest sea,
Its unknown bounds extend.
Its conquering subjects daily bring
Their trophies to its gates ;
And here an everlasting King
With grace unwearying waits.
When quench'd the sun's unwasted ray,
And stars have ceased to shine,
Shall flourish through eternal day,
This kingdom all divine.

LITERARY NOTICES.

The Foreign Quarterly Review. January, 1840. London
Black and Armstrong, 3, Wellington-street (North),
Strand.

It is some time since we have been favoured with a copy
of this very able review. The contents of the present num-
ber justify us in attributing to it a greatly improved charac-
ter. The 'first article, on " Euripides and the Greek Drama:
its Musical and Religions Importance," is very cleverly and
learnedly written ; but we cannot assent to many of the
opinions advanced by the writer. His views on the subject
of religion are very loose and theoretical. The review of
" Shubert's Travels in the East" possesses considerable
interest. The elaborate remarks on the " Indications of
Philosophic Progress in America" are evidently from the
pen of a Unitarian, or something more. We have been
highly delighted with the excellent article on " Architecture
at Home and Abroad." It furnishes much information of
great value, both to the professional as well as the general
reader. Much curious research is displayed in the paper on
the " Identity of English, Classical, and Oriental Literature
and Interests." We think many, if not all, of the grave
questions which the writer has strung together might be
answered on reference to the Scripture history of the confu-
sion of tongues at Babel. The etymological quibbles in the
review of Deschappelles' work on whist have afforded us
much amusement. The article on " The Apocryphal Books
of Isaiah and Enoch" abounds with much curious matter,
that will give great delight to the scholar and antiquarian.
The statesman may derive much benefit from the perusal of
" Turkey, Egypt, France, Russia, Asia, and the British
Ministry." We do not concur in all the views of the wri-
ter : but he has put on record some valuable truths, to which
it will be well for this country to pay a prompt attention.
We particularly recommend a perusal of the remarks on the
relations of this country with China. Under the head of
" Music at Home and Abroad," we are furnished with a
large fund of interesting information from all quarters of
the globe. The writer has displayed great diligence in the
collection of his materials, as well as tact and judgment in
their arrangement.

CoVessions of Harry Lorrequer. No 11. , Dublin : W

Curry, Jun. and Co.
The inimitable Harry, much to the regret of admiring
thousands, has brought his amusing adventures to an abrupt
conclusion. The regret is not, however, unmixed with a
feeling of satisfaction at the happy termination of his trials
and anxieties. The last chapter leaves him, after all his sin-
gular " ups and downs," and " moving accidents by flood
and field," a Benedict. The scenes at Munich, described in
this part, are exceedingly droll. The ruse by which he ob-
tains the hand of Lady Jane is capitally managed. We re-
joice to find that the pen that has afforded us so much amuse-
ment in Harry Lorrequer, is now engaged in preparing
Charles O'Malley, or, the Irish Dragoon, for the press.
We anticipate a very rich treat from the forthcoming work.
We must not omit to mention that " Phiz," in the illustra-
tions of the number before us, has outdone himself.

The Art-Union. No. 12. London :W. West, 1, Cathe

rine-street, Strand.

This excellent periodical is expressly devoted to the fine
arts, and contains a succession of ably-written essays, cri-
tiques, and reports, on matters connected with painting,
sculpture, engraving, and architecture. It furnishes a de-
tailed account of all the exhibitions, metropolitan and pro-
vincial; of the progress of foreign art; and of all new pub-
lications, at home and abroad, connected with the fine arts.
Many of the lighter articles in the Art-Union are from the
talented pen of Mrs. S. C. Hall, whose husband, we believe,
is the editor. The extended circulation of this spirited jour-
nal must have an unfailing tendency to improve and elevate
the national taste.

NORWICH UNION FIRE INSURANCE SOCIETY,

ESTABLISHED 1821.

'At the Annual Meeting of the Proprietors of this Society,
held at the Office in Surrey-street, Norwich, on Tuesday, the
15th day of January, pursuant to notice in the Gazette, and
also in the Norwich newspapers, called to receive the Report
of the Boaid of Directors, Edward Temple Booth, Esq. Pre-
sident of the Society, in the Chair—

The Secretary (Samuel Bignold, Esq.) read the cash ac-
counts for the eighteenth year, ending at Michaelmas last,
and also a statement as collated with the
the returns furnished
to the Stamp Office of the aggregate amount of the property
insured by this Society.
with a
The President then addressed the Members, and
nd stated
that he had the high gratification of meeting them
most favourable Report. That the Directors, after the most
careful consideration of the present state of ie affairs of the
Society, had resolved to appropriate the sum of X 30,000.
profits for the past year, of which £lB,OOO. would be devis-
able at the next triennial return amongst the Insurers, and
£12,000. became the exclusive property of the Proprietors,
£6OOO. thereof being put to their reserved fund, and £6OOO.
being applied for the annual dividend, which for the present
year would be £3. 15s. per share, or £l2i. per cent. on the
Paid-up capital. The President then adverted to the present
state of the Office, which he stated was in every respect most
prosperous, for the reserved fund, belonging exclusively to
the 'Proprietors, now amounted to £45,434. over and above
the original capital £66,000. and that this had accrued wholly
from the past profits of the Institution. That there was
£36,000. in the insurance fund, also consisting of realized.
profits, applicable to future returns to the policy holders, be-
sides,otnia surplus balance of £12,800. after providing for every
n gencYto the credit of the Society' on its accounts at
the commencement of the current year, which would end at
rht,
Michaelmas next. '
the fact, that the premiums s
President further called attention to
of insurance had in the last ten
years increased on an l averageu
x.stxx)of £2OOO. per annum, the last
years increase exceeding
Mr. Joseph Stannard inquired:an when the term of the So-
ciety's partnership expired, was answered that it termi-
nated on the Gth of August, lA which period all the
savings now forming the reserve fit' II also whatever ad-
ditions might in the mean time be made thereto, would be '
distributed pro rata amongst the holders of the £2,900.
shares. -
The Secretary (Mr. Bignold) entered at great length into
the concerns of the Society, which he described,
ot
pharatsicuto-
the extent of its business and in its results, to be
beyond all former precedent. Mr. Bignold
dweltprosperous
beyond
larly on the fact that the business now amounted to fill
seven millions, of which upwards of nine millions was fifty_
.
agricultural property alone, being one-fifth of the whole sum
insured by all the offices collectively (45 in number) on that
species of property. That the yearly premiums had risen to
£77,766. That the profits of the Office had in the two last
years enabled the Directors to apportion between the Insured
rind the Shareholders £60,000, three-fifths belonging to the
zi tiuler class, and two-fifths to the latter. That the Proprie-
tors' dividend had now for two years amounted to £321 per
tent. on the capital paid up, causing an annual distribution
of 1;82a, whilst the prospect on the year in which we were
now entered gave promise from the small amount of losses,
to equally favourable results. The Secretary added, "We
have had no litigation; all is smooth and tranquil over our
vast connexion. The particulars spoken to are facts on which
the Norwich Union Society may challenge comparison with
any other similar Society in the kin d " '
g om.
It was then moved bJohn Stra e E (one of the So-
ciety's Trustees), seconded by Williamc S
Rackham, Esq., and
unanimously resolved—

That it be referred to the' Directors' to take into consider-
ation the services of the Secretaries, with reference to the
great increase of the Society's'business, which is now nearly
fifty-seven millions, and has advanced twelve millions since
any addition has been. made to their remuneration.
E. T.' BOOTH, Chairman.
The President having left the.- chair, it was moved by Ed-
Ward Browne, Esq., of Hethersett, seconded by Wm. Martin
Sepriings, Esq., and unanimously resolved—
' That the thanks of this meeting be given to the Directors
and Officers of the Society, for their successful conduct of
its affairs, and particularly to the President (Mr., Booth), for
tie ability with which he has discharged the duties of Chair-
day.—Norwich Mercury.

THE CORN LAWS,

(From the Scottish Standard.)
TA THE PEOPLE OF GREAT BRITAIN! AND TQ THE PRESS,
THE MOST POWERFUL ORGAN OF DIHECTIOM OR PE*,

VERSION.
This may seem a most magniloquent address, but it is
exactly the address required by the subject, and no gnore ;
for the subject is one of VITAL interest to the STATE, and,
of course, to the WHOLE PEOPLE ; and it is through the
press alone that I can be heard—aud, if it be at all deserving
to be heard—it should be through the whole press.
The subject I am to speak of is the CORN-LAW ; that
question that has been argued so long, as to have become at
last inexplicable in the general apprehension ; but the reason
is, it has seldom been argued aright. The study of the sub-
ject for twenty-five years, and, during all that time, comparing
my reasonings with events, enables me to say, that upon
this subject THE PEOPLE ARE DECEIVED, by those who
would tempt them to relinquish the mainstay of this' state
and its reasonable protection,—l mean our NATIVE AGRI-
CULTURE.

The existence of an anti-corn law league in England has
long been known; it is now extended to Scotland. It is
seeking support by the most extraordinary exertions, and it
is receiving it. In the meantime, the farmers of the country
seem to consider themselves bound not to stir in the matter,
because they have been led to regard all questions of public
policy, and on which there may be differences of opinion as
PARTY POLITICS ; and the landowners seem not to stir in it,
either because the prejudices against them, having been
raised to phrenzy, they have no hope; or because they trust
to their influence in parliament. The events of a very few
months back should teach the landowners, that the distrust
that has long been inculcated as to PRINcEs, may now he
extended to PARLIAMENTS ; and as the farmers, if they
stand to their Shibboleth, they will find themselves like the
Jews in their last siege—who were massacred by thousands
on the Sabbath, because they believed it unlawful even to
" do good on the Sabbath."
I set out by admitting that there are many men of the most
respectable character as men, and men of business, intent on
aiding the anti-corn law league ; but their opinions are, as it
were, the opinions of the day; that a PRO-CORN-LAW advo-
cate, may seem almost a man standing alone and crying in
the wilderness ; and yet I profess myself such an one—and
say again, the people are deceived.
I do not build anything upon the fact, that the anti-corn-
law league has lately been defeated here in all quarters by
chartism, because that is merely a side-wind ; but the finding
themselves called " RASCALS," and this with every appear-
ance of the deepest sincerity, by the men they say they wish
to benefit, and whom, I believe, they wish to benefit, should
make them consider whether in some part of their arguments,
either as economists or statists, there is not a flaw which
these men can see. I think there are many which these men
see, and more which they do not see ; and I shall endeavour,
very briefly, to establish some of them.
At a late attempted meeting in Edinburgh, for the abolition
of the protection to agriculture, a pamphlet was left for dis-
tribution in the hall, of which I received a copy. It gives out
FOURTEEN PROPOSITIONS, every .One of which is liable to
objection on some ground :—that is, either as inapplicable
truisms, as unsound assumptions, as false conclusions from
premises perhaps correct, or as contradictions of forgone
positions. It is, of course, impossible here to enter into
them all; but some of them will obtrude themselves in the
sequel, and of them I may speak.
It is impossible, also, in the compass of a paper like this,
to establish an argument like this. It will be enough to
raise doubts of the arguments held to be established against it.
Ist. They say agriculture is the creature of manufactures.
This is of little consequence, but it is untrue. They may as
well say the father is the child of his son. It is true the son
may, chance, enrich the father; but that does not alter
their relation, nor is it the necessary or the usual course.
2d. They say next, that it is by excluding manufactures
from the market of the world, that the agriculture .of this
country flourishes as it does. But with equal reason, at
least, might the agriculturist say, that it is by excluding him-
self from the markets of the world, that the most important
and extensive manufactures of this country, ever came to
have an existence-

3d. They say, that were protecting duties upon corn re-
moved, we should have CHEAP CORN. I answer, more Scot-
tico, has the protection of the manufacture of cotton goods,
led to dearth in those goods? No. It has, on the contrary,
not only lowered them in this country, but over the world.
It has given us all of that manufacture that we possess ; and
that is considered so important, that now it arrogates to be
almost alone considered, in the arrangements of the state.
Has the protection afforded to the mannfacture of iron, given
us dearer iron ? No. It has cheapened iron universally.
Has it given us an inferior article ? No. On the contrary,
no artizan will now lay his hammer upon foreign iron, if he
can procure iron the manufacture of this country ; and that
manufacture is every day, that every hour of the day and
night, extending and improving, and directly onindirectly it
is supporting millions. So was our manufacture of cloth ori-
ginated ; so that of silk ; so that of almost every important
ingredient of wealth or of existence. And can protection and
encouragement, so useful as to every thing else, be baleful
only as to anus ? Quite the reverse, though it is one of the
insanities of the hour to hold so, as I shall by and by esta-
blish.
4th. They say, not only would the removal of protection
from agriculture give cheap bread, but cheap bread would
give cheap labour, and a new and inconceivable impulse to
manufactures commonly so called. All these arc given out
in the most dogmatical manner ; as irrefragable truths ; they
are the.staple of the arguments for removing the protection
from agriculture in this country : and they are all untrue. I
shall prove this as to the most important of these positions,
namely, that " cheap bread would give cheap labour," from
the very pamphlet left in the hall of the late meeting, as fol-
lows—" The price of labour (says that pamphlet) is not re-
gulated much, if at all, by the price Wood. It is regulated
almost entirely by the demand and supply of labour I"—and
this is perfectly true. Labour is cheap abroad, not because
food is cheap, but because there is nothing to pay for them.
sth. They say, that were the corn protection abolished
" there would be at once and permanently an additional de-
mand for our goods. By our consenting to buy corn from
abroad, for instance, fm eigncrs would be enabled to indulge
proportionally in the purchase of our cotton and other com-
modities—our commercial navy would also be encreased,"
&c. Now, is not this all mere theory ? Foreigners begin
not to like our goods, and they say there is cause ; they have
determined to manufacture for themselves as far as they can ;
and this is the natural and inevitable course. But supposing
this theory realized to the fullest extent, cui bono ? where
would be the profit ? I say there would not only be no
profit, but there would be AN IMMENSE and nurNot s Loss !
The reason is this. CORN is a MANUFACTURE just as much
as cloth. I said this many years ago, .both of corn and all
agricultural produce—and it is now adulitted. 2d. Corn is a
manufacture WHOLLY NATIVE. We have no deduction to
make from it, for staple or accessory. ALL that we save by
manufacturing CORN is GAIN. Are our " cottons and other
commodities" native? Suppose we pay for corn in cottons,
how much do we, as a nation, gain by that ? Have we not
to deduct the price of the raw cotton ? the expense of pur-
chasing and bringing it home ? duty ? transport to the seat of
manufacture ? tear and wear of machinery ? carriage for ex-
port ? expense for export ? sale ? insurance ? expense of
purchasing and transporting the corn, &c. &c. &c. ? In
short, we gain nothing as a nation, by the manufacture of
cotton, but the price obtained for labour ; a very inconsi-
derable proportion of the whole article. Suppose we pay
only 20s. a quarter for corn, in cotton goods, still, all is paid
in capital except the mere labour ; although part of that
capital may have been paid in America, part in this kingdom,
and part abroad, still it has been paid : and of the 20s. price,
15s. at least are capital, and only ss. gain ; perhaps not one
half. Now, by raising corn for ourselves, we have the whole
for our labour, the whole is gain. The gain from farming,
too, is not only all gain, but certain gain to the State. The
sale of manufactures may often, and in an infinity of cases
does, lead to actual loss to the State. There is loss to the state
the moment that the price obtained fails to equal the original
materials, and the charges of importing and exporting,
tear and wear of machinery, and interest of capital; an
this happens much oftener than is supposed. In short,
manufactures, except from native materials, give immense
room for juggling, and in many casses are a JUGGLE
MERELY, Though the mere manufacturer, after grinding
the bones of his pauper dependents into his painted trash,
which he never expects to see purchased by people in their
senses, may make an ample fortune, the merchant may rea-
lize not one sixpence ; and if the trash rots abroad, as much
of it does, the whole is a dead loss to the country. By agri-
cultUre she can never lose. Even if her agriculturist could
be turned into a manufacturer, therefore, and made depen-
dent upon the vicissitudes of trade, from change of taste, bad
patterns, bad prints, bad materials, bad texture, everything
that a reckless man can do to swell his own gains (and there.
are some such), regardless of the interest or character of the
country, is he not deserting a sure and gainful trade, in na-
tive materials, for a trade wholly uncertain in its gains, and
even in its existence, and based on foreign materials? He is.
But, 6th, say that it is gainful to prosecute manufactures
for export (as to the extent of what can be obtained for la-
bour, I admit it is), does the production of our native agri-
culture repress this ? It is said it does. I say no ; and 1,
will show immediately that I am correct.
I have, spoken Of the gainful nature of agriculture, and it.
may be shewn at once from this, that whatever isfraised be-
yond the seed sown, is all gain to the STATE. It is clear to
the dullest comprehension, that paying capital for agricui-
tural produce, creates a tremendous loss ; and I have shewn
that our payments in manufactures are only a little mitigat-
ed ; that is, by what we can contrive to obtain for labour. I
did not then state, however, what I now state, that by pay-
ments in manufactures, we may pay much more than in
money; because if 'we pay in a depreciated manufacture,
twice the money price may be embarked in materials, and
expenses
of manufacture and export, apart from the only
PaPing ingredient; that of labour. By raising corn for our-
selves, we evade all possibility of loss of capital to any extent;
and capital, as they say, produces capital.
As our opponents admit that price in everything depends
upon demand and supply, is the agriculture of Great Bri-
tain, indisputably the most efficient in the world, in spite of
all drawbacks, likely to raise price, or to lower it ? Can there
he any doubt that it lowers it, when we consider that eight
quarters an acre are often produced here ; while on the con-
tinent (according to William Chambers, himself a free trade
mail) the ground is often hardly scratched, by cows yoked
by the horns !

3d. Is bread the only ingredient entering into the food of
man, anet, consequently, into the price of labour ?—Must we
not add house-rent (not payable to the land-owners), fuel,
clothes, drinks, and all colonial products, including their
enormous taxes ?

4th. if cultivation does not cheapen bread, (which I say
it does), does it not cheapen butcher's meat, vegetables,
leather, tallow, and wool ; our opponents 'say no!! that by
cultivation " we diminish the extent o! pasture land ; and
limit the rearing of black cattle and sheep." Can these men
know, that by cultivation we raise tons of provisions both for
man and beast, from acres that but for cultivation would
hardly yield pounds ? That by the interstitial crops nece-
mssarily accompanying the raising of corn, more grsss, tur-
nips, potatoes, and vegetables, of every description, the food
of cattle as well as men, are raised, than could possibly be
ducts
compensated
ofcorn
or think of them, or they would never venture upon the rea-
b and
npdasst
turrae , exclusive of the great primary pro-
w ?
They cannot know these things,
innings they use. Pasture, as a general thing, is the very.
poorest mode of occupyino, a country. Resorted to in Scot-
land, it would reduce the country to beggary ; for acres that
at present yield produce worth five pounds, would not then
yield five shillings—that being the general
profit of pastur-
ing a sheep! • not
sth. But it is said free competition would repress
agriculture, but onl reduce the rents payable to landowners.
This spews that the principle of these rents is not understood.
Rent is the difference of profit between cultivating a good
acre and a bad one, after deducting the charges ; for the far-
mer must have al hisor he cannot live. The
ways profits, •
landlord's profit, of course inust'deend on the price of pro-
duce ; and as soon as farmingshould cease to pay him more
~, . .
than pasture, he would let 1 • agriculture,
iis land tor pasture ,
therefore, would clearly be r • • in grain upon
muted, by letting
the country, raised at a be raised
cheaper rate than if can
here.
But who would suffer by that? the landlord or the country?
rsay THE COUNTRY; almost exclusively !
Suppose the rent of the acre, of the poorest land that is
now' cultivated; to be ss, and
that the landlord would receive
pasture only 2s 6d—and he would lose u
for poi). 1000 such
acres £323 ; but the country at present derives a substance
from these acres wort .
h .... ............
it to .......... °0
d would, by abandoning
an
only a sus b tarice worth (including the landlords
ient).. . ......... • ... ' . ^ -

375

Loss to the country by pasturing
or exactly thirty-seven times the sum that would be lost by
the landowner ! As a general position, the landowner's inte-
rest is only one, and a trivial one comparatively, of wry

many interests. By tb.c aesesarnento to which ha is liable,
particularly in some parts of Scotland, for county and paro-
chial burdens, roads, and bridges, it c., his interest is often
reduced to a mere fraction. The fact that land seldom,
yields four per cent. on purchase money, shows that either
the interest is not considerablc, or it is overpaid for. Both
are perhaps true. The original character of landlord was
rather administrative than lucrative. It was a post of ho-
nour, and it is still regarded as such, and paid for accordingly.
It may be that in many of the efforts that have been made
for the encouragement of agriculture, the landowners have
had an eye to their own interest. lam not aware that there
is, or can be, any other general motive of action. But when
we see them, with equal vigour at least, applying themselves
to the promotion of every species of manufacture promising
to be useful to the country, and protecting them by every
rate of duty, from one to oue hundred per cent., or by abso-
lute exclusion if that see Med necessary; and paying those
duties themselves, either directly, for their families and es-
tablishments. or indirectly through every one paying them
rent, I cannot but think that they acted from national feel-
ings ; and it is clear they have produced the most splendid
national results ; for, by protecting and encouraging agri-
culture, they have covered the country with beauty and fer-
tility, and enabled it to raise up those manufactures that
have so greatly augmented its comfort, and perhaps its
wealth, though not to the extent they now arrogate, nor
authorising the engrossing preference they so insanely seek.
Does HOLLAND, a country naturally so much more comtner-
cial than BRITAIN, yet despise its soil? No. It cultivates
every patch. Why should not Britain? It could be so
much better employed, say our opponents. Show us that ?
I am decidedly of opinion that, even in Britain, AGRICULTURE
is the vine—manufacture (commonly so called) the branches.
The proprietor of a Highland estate, only to a small extent
arable, seeing the difficulty his tenant had, in conquering the
effects of the late unfavourable season, asked him why be
did not at once give up the idea of cultivating, depending
wholly on pasture ? The man's answer was, I think instruc-
tive—" By cultivating, I can maintain my family and esta-
blishment in comfort ; by pasture, I would not have the
means of maintaining mysql; for the acre that at present
yields me five or six bolls of victual, could not, in the space
of three years, pasture a sheep ; and what could I purchase
with that? It is true we must labour for it, but in every
event we must labour ; and perhaps at something not
so sure ?" This man's answer may stand fin- that of the
country. His case is ours. He cared nothing about protec-
tion—he only wished to be allowed to labour. But had rents
declined, his landlord must have enlarged his farms, till by
diminishing the number of families, and lessening the ex-
pense of looking after the flocks, he might have drawn the
former income, or as near it as possible, from one farm, as
from many. In this way the landlord would have lost no-
thing—perhaps lie might have gained ; but the country would
have lost strength in the loss of several industrious families ;
and wealth in the products that maintained them. It is true,
a manufacturer or two, for the foreign market, might have
replaced the twenty or thirty agriculturists lost; but I am to
learn that we ought in any sense, to have " doated on the
Exchange."
Your space will not allow me to go farther at present. I
shall show in a subsequent paper, that the rage at present ex-
hibited to destroy our agriculture, proceeds not only from
ignorance as to the value and necessity of agriculture to this
country, but also from being ignorant, that it is not the protec-
tion afforded to agriculture, that is raising the price of its
products, but an utter disregard to the operations of those
who are allowed to interpose themselves between the
grower and consumer, and that manufactures, so far as they
are repressed, are repressed to a great extent, by the fault of
manufacturers themselves and their dependents.

D. BAIN.

THE MANCHESTER ANTI-CORN-LAW DEMON-
STRATION.

(From the Kentish Gazette)
A " grand" meeting of the enemies of the farmer took place
at Manchester a few days ago. Twenty-seven members of
parliament attended, to give their name and weight against
the corn-laws, and, singular enough, not one of them holds
an acre of arable land in the country. These are certainly
the right sort of men to sit in judgment on the farmer. If
land realised only a shilling an acre, what would it signify to
them? They might, with the rest of the community, be in-
direct sufferers, but the demon of ruin would have spent itself
ere it reached their dwellings.
It is a goodly list, and headed by a political rebel worthy
his company :
Daniel O'Connell, M.P. The Beggar Man, No Corn Lands
Hon. C. P. Villiers, M.P. A place-hunting barrister,No Corn Lands
Mark Philips, M.P. A Cotton Lord, Nq Corn Lands
G. W. Wood, M.P. Partner of the above, No Corn Lands
T. Thomely, M.P. A Liverpool dealer, No Corn Lands
It. Walker, M.P. An lronfounder, No'Corn Lands
J. Phillpots, M P. A Whig barrister, No Corn Lands
E. Baines, sen., M.P. A bookseller, No Corn Lands
P. Ainsworth, M.P. A Cotton Lord, No Corn Lands
J. Scholefield, M.P. Brummagem merchant, No Corn Lands
H. Aglionby, M.P. A Whig barrister, No Corn Lands
H. Maraland, M.P. A Cotton Lord, No Corn Lands
J. Easthope, M.P. A Stock-jobber, No Corn Lands
James Stewart, M.P. A Whig barrister, . No Corn Lands
W. Ewart, M.P. _ A Whig bar. & merchant, No Corn Lands
J. Brotherton, M.P. A Cotton Lord, . No Corn Lands
N. A. Vigors, M.P. An Irish Tail Man, No Corn Lands
B. Holland,:lM.P. A ballooning barristet, No Corn Lands
J. Oswald, M.P. Glasgow manufacturer. No Corn Lands
T. Gisborne, M.P. A losing corn grower,No Corn Lands now
Sir De Lacy Evans, M.P. Count Iron, No Corn Lands
C. Hindley, M.P. A Cotton Lord, No Corn Lands
W. Ellis, M.P. • A haberdasher, No Corn Lands
A. Denistoun, M.P. Glasgow manufacturer, No Corn Lands
J. Fenton, M.P. A Rochdale banker, No Corn Lands
P. Chalmers, M.P. A Scotch merchant, No Corn Lands
T. S. Duncombe, M.P. A fishmonger, No Coru Lands

PRECEDENCE OF PRINCE ALBERT.

(Prom
.the Spectator)

In the bill now prepared, or in preparation, for naturaliz-
ing the Queen's future husband, it is proposed to give a power
for conferring precedence upon Prince Albert above her Ma-
jesty's uncles, the Dukes of the Blood Royal. This, we
believe, would be not only unprecedented, but Contrary to
all principle applicable to such matters. By the.comnion law
the Sovereign might confer on his subjects whatsoever, place
and precedency he thought proper ; but it has been held that
the statute 31st henry VIII. for " placing the lords," re-
strains the crown from granting to a peer a higher place than
the date of his patent would entitle him to claim ; and under
the Acts of Union with Scotland and Ireland, the crown can-
not, by its own authority, grant to persons not peers prece-
dency over peers, or assign to any peer a place higher than
belongs to the date of his creation. An act of parliament,
therefore, becomes necessary to enable her Majesty to bestow
upon Prince Albert the rank and precedence destined for
him in the royal inclination.
Should parliament pass the bill for the purpose mentioned,
it will become a party to the degradation of the Blood Royal.
Next to the King, the Royal Family are held in highest
consideration by the law. Although the wives of the King's
sons, grandsons, brothers, and nephews, are held to be part
of the Royal Family, the law does not invest with the same
character the husband of any female relation whatever, not
even of the sovereign's only child, heiress presumptive to
the crown. The constitution takes no cognizance of any
male relation of the Royal Family by marriage; limiting its
regards to those who may succeed to the throne, or from
whom the right of succession may be derived. For these
reasons, members of the Blood Royal have always occupied
a higher station in the country than any other persons what-
soever save the sovereign, and have never been postponed in
rank to any others. By the common law and by the statute
their rank has been fixed ; and to place any person between
them and the throne is a violation of an established right, if
not inconsistent with the principles on which the English
monarchy is founded.
No similar usurpation to that now in contemplation has
ever been attempted. The English history furnishes no in-
stance of any person not of the Blood Royal taking prece-
dence of the Blood Royal ; and we can only discover three
cases in'which individuals have been placed above the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury and the Great Officers of State. Prince
George of Denmark was invested by the statute Ist William
and Mary with that privilege ; but his son, the young Duke
of Gloucester, ranked before his own father, because he was
of the Blood Royal. After Queen Anne came to the throne,
Prince George, her husband, obtained no higher rank. The
Princess Sophia, her son, the Elector of Hanover, and the
Duke of Cambridge his son, were authorised to take place
before the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Great Officers of
State, the Dukes and other Peers, by an act passed in the
10th of Anne. Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg obtained a
similar precedence by act of parliament—the exception of
the Dukes of the Blood Royal being especially named in his
case.

Thus it appears that there is neither principle, law, nor
practice in favour of the measure by which it is proposed to
thrust aside the Dukes of the Blood Royal to make a place
for Prince Albert nearest to a throne which his birth forbids
that he should, ever inherit.

The thing may be done, nevertheless. The Whig minis-
ters are ready to gratify the Queen in this matter. Will they,
indeed, stick at any thing to retain the Royal favour? The
Duke of Sussex has been applied to for his consent ; his Royal
Highness has not refused, and it is thought that promise of
the additional income so shabbily denied to him last session
might, in a great degree, overcome his scruples. The Duke
of Cambridge has undertaken to waive his claims ; and it is
not unlikely that his complaisance may be rewarded by the
command of the army. His Majesty the King of Hanover,
heir presumptive to the Crown of these realms, may not be
so easily sopped ; he is the person most particularly'affronted
by the intrusion of a stranger into a place never before occu-
pied save by a prince or princess of the Royal Blood.
As to the House of Commons, their consent may be relied
upon ; a majority of five, or of two, will be sufficient. Our
curiosity is to see how the Lords will act. Will they agree
to degrade the Blood Royal of England ?—will they be won
over to sanction a violation of the principles of the monarchy?
* * • *

If the Royal Dukes consent to be degraded, and Lords and
Commons are ready to aid in the Prince's elevation above
the children of George the Third, so be it. But let there be
no complaint in future of popular want of veneration for "il-
lustrious" blood.