The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-07-02 00:00:00

ing the peace of Europe than all that noble secretary for
foreign affairs ever did. (Great cheering.) With respect to
the other candidate I say nothing; he is before you, and
whatever disposition I might have to retaliate on his proposer,
by commenting on his candidate, I shall forbear, although he
was pleased to make some observations in reference to me.
(Hear, hear.) lam content that the rival candidate—not
the phantom candidate—(great laughter and cheers)—who is
absent, but the present candidate, should speak for himself,
and that you should judge him by his words. By his votes
in parliament you cannot judge him, for in parliament he has
never yet been—(" he never will,")—but you will judge him
by what you hear him say. (Hear, hear.) In the common
council of your borough you have, no doubt, seen the manner
in which he dealt with questions of local interest ; those you
remember, and him I shall leave to speak for himself. (Hear,
and cheers.) We are taunted and told that we have come
here blinking the questions which are before the country, but
out of the mouth of the gentleman who made that remark I
shall convict him. (Renewed cheers.) He said---" You have
wandered from the subject ; we set before you three topics—
discuss
them and no others; church, education, vote by
ballot, and universal suffrage, you are avoiding the great
questions at issue ; address youselves to the subjects of cheap
corn, timber, and sugar ; discuss these, for we shall not allow
you to speak of anything else." Now, I say that the very
gentlemen who suggested that we had no right to introduce
other topics into our addresses—for my noble colleague,
Lord Sandon, was attacked for having done so, he himself
acted on the authority of Mr. Canning, who, when here,
told the electors to discuss every question as if it was a
question debated in the House of Commons on the state of
the nation. (Hear, and cheers.) I, therefore, have a right
to consider the whole of the ministerial policy ; but with re-
spect to the questions of corn, timber, and sugar, I have
addressed you over and over again, and really have not
strength to do the same on this occasion. There is a piece
of news, however, in town to-day, and it is a good omen.
We have heard of the result of two elections—one in
Southwark and the other in Horsham ; in the former two
ministerialists have been returned as was the case before,
but in the latter, one ministerial member has been dis-
placed by a conservative—(hear, hear, and cheers)—and
by the post to-morrow I trust we shall have an account of
three, or, in all probability, four conservatives returned for
the city of London. (Great cheers.) It would be wrong of
me to detain you any longer ; allow me, therefore, to thank
you for your attendance, and to express a hope that you will
be early at the poll to-morrow morning. (Tremendous
cheering.) Mr. Cresswell then turned to the gentlemen in
the interior of the booth, and said, " Mr. Mayor, out of re-
spect to you and the gentlemen I see around me, notwith-
standing the little glances at my political conduct, I shall not
retort, because I know that I am not called upon so to do.
Olt at.) I heard no observation addressed to me in the
speeci.s of any of the gentlemen on the other side, concern-
ing which I need take any trouble, with the exception of
those general terms of unfaithfulness, which we always come
upon the hustings with the expectation of hearing, and
which, to use the language of my profession, are like general
counts—(great laughter)—of no avail, and therefore I pass
them by. It was said that my noble colleague and myself
hunted in couples, and that we had signed our names to the
one address. Sir. lam proud to think that such is the case.
(Loud cheers.) When the Liverpool constituency did me
the honour to elect me as their member, I was new to that
line of business. They knew me only as engaged in another
capacity, and I believe they knew me to be a straightforWard
man, who would not say one thing and mean another. (Re-
newed cheers.) I was happy, therefore, in having the assist-
ance of such an able colleague as my Lord Sandon, in every
thing connected with public business ; and I hope I have not
been altogether without profiting by te information he has
been so kind as to communicate to me respecting the in-
terests of this borough, for in that respect I never found any
person to excel his lordship. I have been with him to to the
President of the Board of Trade, and to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, on subjects interesting to Liverpool, and I
never saw any man so entirely at home upon those subjects
as my noble colleague. So far, therefore, from thinking
it derogatory for us to hunt in couples, I feel proud of being
permitted to associate with his lordship, desirous as I am of
profiting by the information of which he is so thoroughly ,
possessed. (Cheers.) Allusion has been made to the poor-
laws, and upon that question I have no hesitation in, stating
here as elsewhere my opinions. (Hear.) My opinion is this :
that before the new poor-law had been introduced, the old
one was badly administered, particularly in the rural dis-
tricts, where a practice had crept in of eking a certain amount
of wages out of the money subscribed for the relief of the•
destitute. I was glad, therefore, that a bill, designed to
remedy such an evil, had been brought into the House of
Commons ; but there are parts of that bill which ought not
to have been introduced, and which I would be happy to see
altered ' • nevertheless. I would not be disposed to create any
turmoil upon the subject, unless I saw a clear prospect of
having the alteration effected. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
I confess that I feel jealous of delegating legislation to par-
ties at a distance from the respective localities; but in that
bill there is a power given to commissioners in London, and
to them was given an unlimited power to make laws which
were to be of the same force and effect as if embodied in the
act, and consequently passed by the legislature of the
country.
A VOICE.—Why didn't you look to that before you gave
your vote in favour of it ? (Great cheering from the radi-
cals.)
Mr. CRESSWELL.—Because I wasn't in parliament when

the bill was passed. (Tremendous cheering from the con-
servatives.)
A VOICE.—Why didn't Lord Sandon then ?
Mr. CRESSWELL.—PossibIy because, not being a lawyer,
he was unable to discover it ; for recollect it never was dis-
covered until it had been brought before the Queen's Bench.
(Cheers from the conservatives.) Others, therefore, are
responsible for its unjust provisions, and not Lord Sandon.
(Continued cheers.) On the subject of the applicability of
the bill to large towns I have serious doubts. These are my
opinions with respect to the measure. I would rather see
the law administered by persons in Liverpool, chosen for the
purpose, than by commissioners in London; for on subjects
of the kind there is little public excitement, and local parties
are better enabled to judge of what would be beneficial to
themselves than strangers could possibly be. (Cheers.)
There may be gentlemen present who recollect that Lord
Sandon and myself pursued a similar course when an attempt
was made to centralise the pilots. We thought then, as now,
that the merchants of the town were competent to conduct
local affairs ; we opposed the bill which had been brought
in, and through our opposition it was dropped. (Cheers.)
.__Avnulit tia vote by ballot
Mr. CRESSWELL.—No ; I wou -kt,neers.) VIIC
of the most remarkable speeches I remember to have heard
in parliament was that delivered by Lord John Russell soon
after I had the honour of a seat in the house. Mr. Wakley
proposed that he should advocate three measures—vote by
ballot, universal suffrage, and annual parliaments; and the
noble lord, in that contemptuous manner which all who have
suffered under it can so well understand, addressed Mr.
Wakley as a member of the medical profession, and com-
paring the three propositions made to him to three powders,
made a wry face, put on an apothecary's voice, said they
were somewhat nauseous, and declined taking any of them.
(Loud cheers and great laughter.) And then, undoubtedly,
when Mr. Grote brought forward his motion of vote by bal-
lot, it was opposed by the cabinet as a cabinet; but when
Mr. Macaulay joined the ministry, it was made an open
question. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I won't stop
here to discuss the merits of open questions ; they have no-
thing to do with this election ; it is sufficient for me to say
that th 6 ballot was made an open question ; that I remember
Mr. Macaulay speaking with all his eloquence in favour of
it, and Lord John Russell denouncing it as strongly as be-
fore. (Hear, and cheers.) Such a proceeding did not pro-
mise that steady mode of legislation which her Majesty ex-
presses her desire to have in the new parliament. (Cheers.)
I hope, however, that a change of things will shortly take
place ; and trust such a parliament will be formed as will
enable her Majesty's ministers to pass such measures as they
may think fit. (Renewed cheers.) I fully agree in opinion
with others, that the worst of all governments is that which
possesses not the power to carry its own wishes into effect.
I believe that a steady government is essential to our pre-
servation. I trust the new government will be so construct-
ed as to possess such power in the House of Commons
that it will be able to act on its own judgment, and not be
left in the lurch by one man leaving them after another.
(Cheers.) I have now to apologise for having kept you so
long, and to thank you for the patient hearing you have
given me. (Loud and long-continued cheers.)
Mr. JAMES AIKIN then stood forward, and wished to ad-
dress the electors on behalf of Lord Palmerston, but he was
immediately assailed by such a storm of disapprobation, that
it was impossible for him to proceed, though he exerted
himself to the utmost to make himself heard. Lord Sandon
appealed to the conservatives to hear Mr. Aikin, but his so-
licitation was of little avail—he was only answered by cheer-
ing, which, while it continued, of course deprived Mr. Aikin
of an opportunity of speaking, and when this had subsided,
and Mr. Aikin attempted to resume, his voice was again
drowned in the uproar. The mayor entreated the gentlemen
to listen to the representative of Lord Palmerston, but his
entreaties were alike unheeded, and when his worship re-
sorted to threats, stating that he would order any person
who interrupted the proceedings to be ejected from the
court, he was hissed and hooted at most vociferously. Mr.
Cresswell and Mr. Rushton also endeavoured to obtain some-
thing like silence; but their efforts were as ineffectual as
those of the mayor and Lord Sandon. The uproar was in-
describable. Mr. Aikin, in the occasional lulls of the storm,
contrived to make a few remarks vindicatory of the conduct
li ioi
ofnLisotrrdatls. Palmerston;
maintained in having been attached to several ad-
n that the several changes which
the noble lord was said to have undergone in his political
opinion, were not changes as to measures, but only as to
men. Mr. Aikin was frequently asked where his authority
was for representing Lord Palmerston, to which he replied
that he had been deputed, by the committee of Lord Pal-
merston, to address the electors on behalf of the noble lord.
This was not satisfactory to the conservatives, and they asked,
in quick succession. " Where is he ?" " Has the requisition
been presented to him ?" " Why does he not come himself?"
" Off, off ; we won't listen to you ; we'll hear Sir Joshua
\Valmsley," &c. When Mr. Aikin had contrived to finish
the remarks which he intended to make,
Sir JosnUA WA LMSLEY stepped upon the platform whence
the preceding speakers had addressed the meeting. He had
scarcely uttered ten words, when a great uproar commenced,
which at once drowned the speaker's voice. Sir Joshua
waited patiently a few moments, in expectation that the dis-
order and uproar would presently cease ; but, being disap-
pointed in that expectation, he left the centre booth, and
went over to a window on that side of the booth opposite to
which his friends were assembled. He thence addressed the
electors in a long speech, but owing to the distance at which
he stood from our reporter, and the almost continual dis-
turbance and uproar which prevailed, it was impossible to
catch even the sound of his voice. At a quarter past threc
o'clock, Sir Joshua re-entered the hustings, and addressed a
few words to the persons therein assembled. He thought
that it would have looked much better of gentlemen if they
had listened to what he had to say, and then objected to any-
thing of which they disapproved, rather than have acted in
the manner they had done. (Cheers, groaning, and hooting,
and cries of " Who paid the protectors ?") He did certainly
hope that a fair and impartial hearing would be granted to
him ; but he was sorry to be compelled to say that it had not
been afforded to him. (Uproar.) He would not trespass a
moment longer on their patience or attention ; but if any
person wished to put a question to him, he was willing to
answer.

Amidst a continuance of the horrible din and confusion
which had marked nearly the whole of the latter part of the
Proceedings a great number of questions were put to Sir
Joshua Waimsley, some of which he answered, and others
lie had no opportunity of answering.
A VOICE.—Will you vote for the ballot?
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Yes. (Tremendous uproar, and the
clang of a hundred tongues bellowing out different interro-
gations.)

- A VoicE.—Will you vote for universal suffrage ?
Sir JOSHUA WALMSLEY.—No. (This question was
repeated some half dozen times.)
A VOICE.—Would you vote to disfranchise the freemen?
Sir JOSHUA.—No.
A VOICE—Would you continue to the freemen their pre-
sent right of voting?
Sir J. WALMSLEY.--I think that every man who has
served his apprenticeship for seven years to a trade, and has
become a useful artisan or mechanic, thus benefiting his
fellow-men, has a great deal better right to possess the fran-
chise than those drones who now possess it. (Much uproar
and confusion.)
A VOICE.—Did you subscribe money to disfranchise the
freemen ?
Sir JOSHUA.—NO.
The question was repeated, in conjunction with others,
and Sir Joshua at last refrained from
about twenty times,
answering.
A number of persons then called out, " Did you sub-
scribe to the Protector Society ?';