The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-07-12 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, TUESDAY, JULY 12, 1853.

we have alluded elsewhere. It will be itinem-
bered that, when the Committee On the Petition
had commenced their investigation, we suggested
the names of Messrs. HORSFALL and MOORE as
eligible candidates, in the event of the decision
being unfavourable. At that time no other names
had been proposed, and it was not until after the
Committee had concluded their labours that the
name of the Hon. H. T. LIDDELL was mentioned.
In our next publication we adopted the proposition,
and when on last Tuesday a doubt was thrown on
the definitiveness of the refusal of Mr. BRAMLEY-
MOORE to accede to the request made to him to
become a candidate, we unhesitatingly accepted it
as a refusal, applauded it as such, and urged upon
the Conservative Electors the importance and ne-
cessity of acting with union in support of Messrs.
HORSFALL and LIDDELL. We regret exceed-
ingly that Mr. MOORE should have been over-
persuaded by those who influenced him from
ulterior motives, and allowed himself to be placed
in the invidious position which he occupied at
the election. He deemed, perhaps, that considera-
tions of personal favour towards himself would have
secured his return, and he permitted himself to be
guided by the solicitations of others, when his own
better judgment would have taught him that the
certainty of two Conservatives being returned—and
which could only be accomplished by union—was
of far higher consequence than the triumph of any
particular individual. The mistake which he com-
mitted was evident in the low position which he
occupied on the poll ; but we have no hesitation in
asserting that Mr. MOORE is far more gratified at
the paucity of his own votes securing the return of
Mr. LIDDELL, than he would have been had his
higher position, by dividing the Conservatives,
permitted the Radicals to occupy the second place.
We cannot congratulate our political opponents
on their felicity in the choice of acandidate, though
there is very little doubt, from the long delay which
took place, that he was the last resort of an expiring
faction. He commenced with the advantage of
not being known ; but he availed himself so well
of the opportunity afforded him, that the Electors
of Liverpool must now feel grateful for being spared
from the infliction with which they were threatened.
Last week we exposed the absurdity of his preten-
sions, from the fact of his being a retired Indian
Judge, who hail been twelve years absent from
England. We carefully abstained from hazarding
a syllable against his personal qualifications, from
unwillingness to prejudge him, notwithstanding his
Radical professions ; but we have since heard him
on his own behalf, and feel ourselves at a loss to
do justice to his claims. Sir ERSKINE PERRY,
fresh from his infidel proteges in India, is a genuine
specimen of the genus Radical in his untamed fero-
city. His -speech on the hustings on Thursday was
amodel production in matter and in manner—a
combination of ignorance and impudence in full-
blown Imuriance, in which it is difficult to say
which -predominated. He accused the Liverpool
Merchants of the grossest ignorance of their own
interests, and then betrayed his own by asserting that
the V 6 0 millions of the inhabitants of India would be
eager consumers of the woollens of Yorkshire and
Scotland, if the Ministerial India Bill were allowed
to pass. Their religion forbids them to wear any
animal production, and he himself—this immacu-
late -Judge—avowed that he would prevent them
'from being converted to Christianity until they had
arrived at an age when conversion was almost hope-

less. It would be, however, a waste of argument
to refute the absurdities of which this pragmatical
upstart was guilty, and the House of Commons
shoull be grateful to the Electors of Liverpool
for having saved them from the annoyance
which his presence there must have occa-
-sioned. 'We must refer to our Radical con-
'temporaries for a report of his harangue, for,
•otherwise, it might be deemed incredible that any
individual pretending to the dignity of a senator
•-could have uttered such a fan-ago of insolent bom-
bast. When the conclusion of the poll had con-
vinced him of the utter hopelessness of his preten-
sions, he addresseda crowd in Clayton-square, and
we must do him thejustice to say that he then spoke
with more sense and better temper. On the latter
occasion he was supported .by Mr. ROBERTSON
GLADSTONE and Mr. JEFFERY, whose remarks
are scarcely deserving of comment, except for that
total departure from truth which even the excite-
•ment of an election cannot justify. It has long
,!been believed that a renegade Conservative makes
the worst Radical, and Mr. GLADSTONE seems
determined to prove the truth of the saying, though
we can readily suppose that in his sober moments
he would regret his profane allusions to Christianity
and his unjust aspersions on Liverpool clergymen,
for which he had not the shadow of a foundation.
Mr. JEFFERY IS, no doubt, a respectable man in his
sphere of life, but his veracity may be called in
question when he asserts that of the ten thousand
he saw before him, (which were, in reality, not
above,,two thousand,) there was not one intemperate
person, and that of the vast orowd assembled before
the A.delphi Hotel, to listen to the Conservative
members, three out of every Four were in a state of'
dinetroxsoica, tviidoen. ly
flrfoma mtbaentwruilrlbper,
bme huismt
useoltf
btoe wsaunr:
m
prised at an epithet more forcible than courteous
being applied to him.

We have little to comment on the Candidates who
have been -returned. Their position on the poll,
with such overwhelming majorities, is a sufficient
reply to all that can be given utterance to by disap-
pointed ambition; and, though some hints have
been thrown out about another Petition, we can
afford to smile at such impotent malice. The
Election was won by the spontaneous votes of the
Electors, who knew how to appreciate constitutional
principles; and, though the foul calumny against
the Freemen is repeated, that they waited till the
afternoon to be bought, and that their votes could
have been purchased to secure the return of the
Radical candidate, the most complete answer will be
found in the hourly state of the poll, by which it
will be seen that Messrs. HORSIPALL and LIDDELL
were in a majority at nine o'clock, and steadily
increased their majority hour by hour until the close.
The following are the numbers as declared by the
Mayor on Saturday :

Mr.T. B. HORS FALL 6,o34—majority, 1,361
Hon. H. T. LIDDELL s,s43—majority, 870
Sir E. PERRY 4,673
Mr. J. B. MOORE 1,274
The following were the numbers at the close of the
election last year

Mr. CHAS. TURNER .. 6,693—majority, 1,446
Mr.W. F. MACKENZlE.6,377—majority, 1,130
Mr. E. CARDWELL .. 5,247

Mr. J. C. EWART .... 4,910

So that, allowing for the smaller number who voted,
the preponderance of Conservative votes is about
the same.

THE LIVERPOOL CONSTITUENCY.
THERE is a class of persons who, having taken
up an idea for party purposes, are impervious to all
proofs of its falsity, however strong and convincing
they may be to unprejudiced minds. Such is the
position of those who wildly adhere to the assertion
that the Electors of Liverpool, especially the Free-
men, are corrupt and corruptible, and that Con-
servative majorities are only obtained by practices
unsanctioned by morality, and which the law has
declared to be illegal. It would have been thought
that the recent inquiry before the Committee of the
House of Commons had demolished this filthy
web of foul scandal against a body of men whose
sole offence is that they are not to be bought with