The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-12-02 00:00:00

DEC. 2, 1836.

narrow to conceal diens—contrition and amendment are
neither felt nor purposed—.such men would be a nuisance
in private life, which the laws and discipline of society
would soon abate ; but, to the infamy of our pubiic coun-
cils, and especially under our present administration, it
may be told, that the men who can act best the Proteus
of the day, practice duplicity with the hest semblance of
virtue, is the man highest in esteem, most in requisition,
and who best promotes his temporal interest.
After such a portraiture of a detested vice, it might be
supposed that we.should single out the wretch to whom it
is faithful in every lineament, and hang him up as an ob-
ject of universal detestation. We, one day, may perform
that painful duty, and when we take the pencil for the
purpose, we shall not lay it down till we have finished a
group of the same feather. At present our design is to
expose the gross, tangible, inconsistency of those who
profess, and call themselves, and are, by a deluded peo-
ple, believed to be, the friends and advocates of unhappY
Ireland. Such an exposure may serve, in the approach-
ing session of Parliament, to moderate the course of un-
principled policy intended to be pursued towards that
unfortunate country.
When the Irish municipal reform bill was under
,dis-
cussion in the House of Commons, it was contended by
Mr. O'Connell, and the ministerial carcass of which
is, virtually, both the head and tail, that precisely the
same plan ought to be granted to Ireland that has been
adopted in England-that there was an exact parity Of
circumstances between the two countries demanding it,
and an exactly similar constitutional right which claimed
it—that Ireland asked, and could not justly be refused,
a uniforinity of legislation for the whole kingdom—to
make one provision for England, and another provision
for Ireland, was, they said, to create invidious compari-
sons, and to be guilty of partial distinctions—it was to
treat her as a vassal, not as a subject. We had granted
her but half emancipation, whilst she stood not on• the
same level with us who made her free ; and' was not, in
every respect, regarded in the British senate as a British
subject. This was the language heard from the "centum
ora," the hundred months of the hydra-headed monster
of Irish reform—a brainless head head like that dis-
sected by Addison, where the vessels that produce blush•
ing could not be found—a head that has no communica-
tion with a sound heart—between which and the con-
science all the channels are obstructed—a little month,
and the waters of oblivion had washed away, at least for
a convenient moment, all remembrance of this flowery
Oratory. Ireland, that had raised herself on tip-toe, in
order that she might shoulder England as her equal po-
litical and civil sister, and caught the cry of corruption,
and asked the blessings of reform, now bends the knee--
piteously whines out her inferiority—renounces through
her ministerial organs all thought of equality—declares
that she is centuries behind us in civilization and the arts
of life—in wealth, and as an object of legislation ;—yes,
Ireland, in which Mr. O'Connell asks for " justice,"
and by " justice" tells us he means equality of legisla-
tion. This high-priest of duplicity, in the golden clouds
of incense that rise from the altar of his sacrificed coun-
try, loses sight of equality of legislation, and tells us►
what almost enrages patience to hear, that the poor, the
starving, naked poor, the victims of his political selfish-
ness, cannot be provided for, by laws similar to those that
provide for the poor in England. Away, then, with the
principle of uniform legislation—tire frothy argument
evaporates that proclaims the policy and right of Ireland
to be identical with that of England, and that the same
provisions which advance the interests of one will equally
advance that of the other. We do not now discuss either
the question of the Irish municipal reform, or the expe-
diency of introducing our poor laws into that country--
with those questions we now have nothing to do—vie
have accomplished what we designed, when we prove►
out of the mouth of our adversaries, that there is no jus-
tice in the position, that in all cases for Ireland and
England the same system of legislation is eligible►
though we may hope, that this exhibition of political tur-
pitude may also not be without its use.
Henceforward, then, never let us hear, when an Irish
question is under the consideration of Parliament, that
this or that policy is right as regards Ireland, because it
has been adopted in England. No I—we have, "ex con-
fesso," the admission of the leader of agitation, an ac-
knowledgment, that every question must rest upon its
own merits. Poor laws for Ireland is an Irish question,
so says Mr. O'Connell—poor laws for England is an
English question, so says Mr. O'Connell. Sri- we say,
adopting his own principles, municipal reform for Irish
corporations is an Irish question—municipal reform for
English corporations is an English question. Let these
things, therefore, never again be confounded, and much
error and sophistry, confusion and injustice, will be avoid-
ed in the discussion of Irish measures. But will Mr.
O'Connell—will his ministerial colleagues—be governed
by this conclusion. No, not an instant. 'Whenever it
shall favour their designs, Ireland will be made to claim
the protection of the very same laws as those admini-
stered in England; and when it shall favour their designs
she will demand laws peculiar for herself. We have,
however, done our duty in exposing the inconsistency►
the gross duplicity, of this party in the state; and we
hope, and trust, our labours will not be wholly useless
when reform shall again sound the trumpet for the battle
of innovation. One further premonitory caution We
would add, as a security against this illegitimate species
of reasoning. The same faction which to-day will quote
England as a precedent for Ireland, will to-morrow quote
Ireland ass a precedent for England.' They justify the
claims of Ireland to an EngliSh municipal reform they
Will, if they succeed in destroying, or mutilating the es-
tablished church in Ireland, justify the same course in
England, and plead Ireland as an example. We warn
our constitutional friends to keep alive to this most dan-
gerous, because most specious of all sophisms—it has
already made dreadful havoc in the laws and institutions
of this country. Parliamentary reform became a prece-
dent for municipal reform, and both are pleaded as pre-
cedents for church reform ; and thus onward will it pro-
ceed, in endless progression, uniting objects that have
no connexion with each other. But we shall not suffer
our readers to slumber whilst the wolf is prowling round
the fold.

If a man clenches his fist, and stands in a menacing
attitude before another, though he strike no blow the
laws consider him as a violator of the peace; and if a
man ask for charity, and present to you that compound
of wood and iron, called a pistol, though he do no vio-
lence, and threaten none, he is considered as guilty of
robbery, and would, in a criminal court, be visited with
the "punishment assigned to that offence. Is it not a
subtle piece of political casuistry, that shall distinguish
between these cases of civil delinquency, and the ap-
pointment of an armed flt et to the ports and rivers of a
country, with which we are not at war ?—is not a hostile
intent presumable in this instance as well as in the
others, from the awe inspired by the appearance of pre-
meditated force ? " What mean ye here, riding out an
Atlantic winter," might a Portuguese say to our British
Admiral in the Tagus, " if you are a non interfering
nation ?" What answer could be given by the inc°e"
sistent ministry from whom our Admiral has received his
appointment ? Will they have the barefaced impudence
to say, that they have no other object, no other motive'
than the protection of British property
But whatever
may be the assigned motive, this formidable array
evinced its purpose, when civil rebellion threatened to
revolutionize Portugal—at the request, or command, we
care not which, of the Queen, our fleet disembarked its
forces, whose presence checked the career of insurrec-
tion, and restored the agitated, and precipitately flying
Regent to her throne. Is this non-interference ?_were
there a tribunal before which our ministers could be
summoned, and put upon their trial, would there he ett.y
chance of their acquittal ? But why do we call pub"
attention to these facts? We reply, for no other
than to expose here, as we have done in our leading
article, the uniform duplicity of our present administra-
tion—without principle to guide, or firmness to
act, they
temporize, till they lose all respect in the eyes of their
own country, and of the world—if interference be ex-
pedient, let them show decision—it non-interference be
their policy, let them not menace—wag not shall )11°r
show your teeth, .if you mean mot to bite--but not reason,