The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-06-04 00:00:00

we can recommend any of them to no-
The Ivy that grows on the Old Abbey

a we^,f,

and well-favoured M.P.
lty adjoining the metropolis, has been
act the particularly favourable regards
of the day, who, on hearing the youth-
,. day confess that he. was so young in
he had almost everything to learn, re-
)mmending him to begin his study by the
ion of
a capital A .13 .C.--Ar.qus. [The
introbus, the lady is Miss A. Burdett

—between eight and nine o'clock
while the ringers of St. George's
engaged in the belfry of the Julius
merry peal in honour of her Majesty's
bar of iron to which the tenor bell
wards of 40 cwt.) was affixed to the ceiling
This immense mass of metal, in its fall,
~unately prevented descending more than a few
.6 coming into contact with the stone wall on. one
ad a projecting buttress on the other, upon which it
i. Had it not been for this circumstance, its great
.ght would have forced it through the two intermediate
oors to the belfry, where the eight ringers we're stationed ;
and loss of life, most probably, would have bean the la-
mentable result, besides the destruction of the bell.

DENTIAL ESCAPE

were

, the la

ed in two

Ireland ; though he must not be understood as grounding
that confidence on their recent propositions, which he con-
sidered dangerous to the latter country, inasmuch as a fixed
duty on corn was calculated to transfer to the continent the
Irish trade in provisions. He thought, however, that the
blame of these measures was mainly attributable to Lord
Stanley, because of the manner in which he had sought to
carry his registration bill for Ireland through parliament.
Lord C. HAMILTON contended that the present House of
Commons had been called together under peculiarly favour-
able circumstances to the present government, for, at the
last election, a most unfair use had been made of her Ma-
jesty's name, in order to enlarge the number of their sup-
porters. If, in a House of Commons so called together,
they found themselves in a minority, they were not justified,

according to the spirit of the constitution, in retaining any
longer the administration of public affairs.
Sir G. STAUNTON entered into a justification of the policy
adopted by the government in respect to affairs in China,
and contended that the Duke of Wellington had acquitted
them of all blame regarding the war with China. He was
not surprised at the delay which had taken place in bringing
matters in that country to a conclusion, for he anticipated
that it would be a tedious affair; and he feared the divisions
in that house might have had their effect on the Chinese au-
thorities, and might have tended to prevent those negocia-
tions from having been brought to a close at an earlier
period.
Sir W. JAMES, in supporting the motion of Sir Robert
Peel, at once admitted that ministers were very fortunate in
the Chinese affair, as far as it had hitherto gone, but not-
withstanding their partial success in that instance, it was im-
possible, in viewing the whole
measure.

Ad tenden'ey Of these

, to repose in them that confidence without which
no government ought to hold power.
Mr. WALLACE contended that if the Queen's name was
used at the last election by gentlemen on his side of the
house, it was only in admiration of her having declared that
Nonld see equal justice done to all her subjects in Ire-
while, on the other band, her name was used by the
)ply for the purpose of being coupled with

was so good for the people as agitation, and the noble lord
(J. Russell) deserved credit for giving to the people this
great opportunity •or agitating against the tyranny of the

Mr. CaEsswELL said there had been so many recrimina-
tions with regard to hon. members travelling out of the le-
cord in this debate that he should endeavour to confine
himself to the consideration of the resolution which the
right hon. baronet had proposed for their acceptance.: He
would take up with that branch of it which his hon. and
learned friend the member for Shields had said was a truism,
and which declared that the government did not possess the
confidence of the house to a degree to enable them to carry
measures which they deemed essential to the welfare of the

country. He was surprised to hear the noble lord the secre-
tary for Ireland say that the government possessed a fair

had as large a share of confidence as they deserved, but not
such a share as entitled them to carry on the government
with advantage to the country, and they themselves knew it.
Let the house look back to the time when they expelled the
right hon. baronet from office, by carrying a resolution that

no settlement of Irish tithes could be satisfactory which did
not embody the principle of the appropriation clause. Were
they sincere in the opinions they then expressed ? He would
not be guilty of saying that they • were not sincere, for if so,
had obtained power by false pretences. (Loud opposi-
cheers,) Yet, if they were sincere, they had remained
in office for six years without attempting to carry that prin-
ciple into effect. In 1835 they brought in a bill which passed
through this, but was defeated in the other house. In 1836
they brought in another bill, which was so delayed in this
house till the vacation that it never went to the other house.
In 1837, when the enemies of the church were to be E.ppeased
by some measure of spoliation that would secure their sup-
port to the nohle lord, and he could not rob the church in
the way in which he originally proposed, the scheme
for the abolition of church-rates was submitted to
the house, and carried, on the 22nd May by 287 against 282.
What was their opinion, then, of their own position ? Did
they think they had sufficient power to carry the measures
they deemed essential to the country ? And if they knew
that they did not possess the power to effectuate their object,
why should they attempt to disturb a system which it was
now ascertained had existed from time extending beyond the
period of legal memory. So much for the confidence of the
late House of Commons. What was their positfon in the
present house? This house met in the autumn of 1837 for a
short time, and again re-assembled in 1838, when they intro-
duced another tithe bill, and on the hon. member for Shef-
field proposing to insert the appropriation clause in it, they
refused to allow him. Still desirous to satisfy the wishes of
the enemies of the church, in 1839 they brought forward
their measure for the education of the people, and, after
being obliged to make various modifications in it, at length
succeeded in having a majority of two in one of the fullest
houses that had ever met. Then came the Jamaica ques-
tion, in which he did not know what party they wished to
please; but their attempt to destroy the constitution of that
colony having been defeated, they retired from office, and
again returned under circumstances little calculated to in-
crease the confidence of the house in them. It would

not then do to let the session close without making some
effort to regain the confidence they had lost; and, in de.
fiance of the warnings from this side of the house, they, in
in compliance with the hon. member for Greenock, threw
away £1,200,000 a-year of the public revenue. True it was
that a benefit was thereby conferred on some persons, but it
was principally on those who were best able to bear the bur-
den, and especially on those mercantile houses which could
afford to keep members of parliament in this house for the
purpose of franking their letters. On the motion of want of
confidence brought forward by his hon. friend the member
for Devonshire, in 1840, the noble lord won by a majority of
20, there being, he was certain, several members on both
sides who thought they could not support that motion, yet
would not vote that they had confidence in the government.
There was next the question concerning the dignity of a
noble prince. The noble lord proposed a sum of £50,000 a
year. Hon. members at this side considered that, in the
present circumstances of the country, £30,000 would be suffi-
cient for him, and their views were supported by a majority
of this house. This was a proof that the house had no con-
fidence in the economy of the noble lord. Next, the hon.
member for Harwich brought forward a motion condemning
their financial policy, and carried it on a division against
them ; the house thus proving that they had no confidence
in the financial wisdom of ministers. Next came the motion
of his hon. friend the member for North Durham, declaring
that the pension to Sir J. Newport ought not to be made a
precedent for future governments. In vain did the noble
lord say this was tantamount to a vote of want of confidence.
The house voted against him, thus proving that they had no
confidence in•the economy, the financial wisdom, or the
political economy of the ministers. What then was the con-
fidence reposed in them ? Confidence nrerely to enable them
to shuffle through a session. After they had relinquished
their attempts to reform the system of voting in Ireland, the
noble lord, the member for North Lancashire, brought in
his bill, succeeded in carrying it against the government, and
was at last defeated, not by the votes of the house, but by
the speeches of honourable members who were opposed to
it, made for the purpose of delay. Then again, what had
the noble lord done in 1841 ? He had himself brought in a
bill to give to Ireland a new constitution. And at whose
instance was that measure blught forward? Was it upon
the noble lord's own judgment? (Hear, hear.) If so, why
had it not been introduced before ? But no, it was not the
strength of his judgment that indnced the noble lord to bring
forward that measure ; but it was the wealcifess of his posi-
tion, and the necessity he found himself under to do some-

ing to conciliate his extreme supporters. (Hear.) This
mac that had induced the noble lord min to stir 1113 the

cauldron of political mischief, to let loose upon the people
the potent charms of strife and agitation, and by throwing
over the anchors and the safeguards of the state, to endanger
the constitution of the country. (Hear, hear.) The noble
lord had recently embarked in a new species of agitation in
Ireland, and, throwing over the representative system so
recently established, was seeking to establish an entirely
different system of representation in that country. Well, had
the noble lord and his coadjutors the confidence of the house in
respect to that measure? No; a majority of the house had
decided aeainst its main provision. Then came their propo-

sitiotis oflheap timber and cheap corn ; and why were these
brought forward ? Why was a measure nuw to be pressed
by the noble lord, which his colleague in another place, only
two years ago, had declared it would be an act of madness in

my boyern'mont, and, therefore, an act of treason again
on the pared any Government to propose

county

(Hear, hear.) Surely the declaration of the noble viscount
made in the other house was tantamount to that. And the
noble lord could not but be aware that those who supported
him in his proposition for a fixed duty on corn, did so not
on the ground that it was proper to maintain a protect-
ing duty on corn, but because they looked upon it as
the first step towards a total abolition. (Hear, hear.)
This was clearly shown by the proceedings and the
speeches at the various corn law meetings by which the
country was now agitated. The noble lord obtained the sup-
port of the party around him, not because they had confidence
in his measures, but because they hoped to be able to extort
from his weakness and necessity all that they might think
proper to 'demand. (Hear, hear.) The government were
without any certain course, they had no chart to guide them,
and were content to run before the popular gale, and to con-
cede whatever was demanded. The noble lord could not
hope that the result of a dissolution would be to enable him
to carry these measures or to give him a majority. (Hear.)
Yet the noble lord thought he was entitled to stay in office
merely for the purpose of dissolving the parliament, and agi-
tating the country. (" Oh, oh," and cheers.) Could arty
one say that the government retained their offices for the
purpose of carrying on the business of the country? Was
not their object in bringing on the debate on the corn laws to
excite agitation and turbulence in the country ? (Hear, hear.)
There could be no other motive, for he would not suppose
that ministers were so deficient in wisdom as not to be aware
that that would be the effect of their proceedings. Could
they suppose that the motive of the noble lord and his col-
leagues was to fight the battle of the crown—as had been
stated—and to prevent the House of Commons from en-
croaching on its prerogatives ? Surely that would not be
urged by the noble lord as the reason for the course he was
now taking. It must be then that the object of ministers in
remaining in office and agitating those questions was to en-
deavour to render the representatives of the people odious
to the represented, and to excite such a feeling of odium and
throughout the country against the present House of
Commons, as might be the means of substituting for it a dif-
ferent House of Commons, the'members of which would be
more subservient to their wishes, or rather the wishes of a
portion of their supporters. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord
might possibly succeed in agitating the country, but he
would fail in his object. In Stroud, the borough which the
noble lord represented, the excitement had already com-
menced. The Globe newspaper of the 24th of May con-
tained an account of a meeting of many of the noble
lord'se
e
supporters in that borough, as extracted from the
Cheltenham and
the [The
Globeho n . andne w learnedspaper
member nha
then
,
giving an account of a held Stroud, L Lord John
meetingat of or
Russell's
constituents,
and the excitement that
prevailed there.] And was it describing
lord remained in office ? purpose that. the noble
aafciitr
to
e
ings in the other towns, and that theoenterzniraghe
omfmLlamromcreact-
might be exhibited throughout England, Ireland, and Scot-
land, and and that we might see the revolutionary principles of

Dr. LUSHINGTON felt it necessary, after the part he had
taken in krecent debate, to defend the course he was about
to pursue on the present occasion. He thought the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer wrong to couple three great measures
together—measures which stood upon different principles—
and to expect the house to take them as a whole ; but on the
other hand, he could not assent to the proposition that those
who voted against one of those measures had thereby given
a vote of want of confidence in ministers. The right hon.
gentleman contended that the ministry was perfectly justified
in maintaining office, and appealing to the people against the
majority of the house. He then stated various reasons why
he intended to support the government against the motion of
Sir R. Peel, one of the principal of which was, that he could
not consent to place the education of the people, a matter of
the utmost importance, in the hands of an exclusive party.
Sir W. FOLLETT said he would not charge the right hon.
gentleman with inconsistency, because he was about to give
probably his last vote in that house in favour of her Majesty's
ministers, whom he had invariably supported, except on one
occasion, when he thought one of their measures calculated
to injure a cause which, during a long life, he had most an-
xiously advocated. The hon. gentleman then said that the
fault he found with the government was not that they intend-
ed to dissolve the parliament and appeal to the people, but
that they persevered in holding office, bringing forward mea-
sures for discussion which they knew would not be passed in
this parliament—which they did not intend should be passed
by this parliament—but the discussion of which they knew
would serve the purposes of agitation, and tend to give a
chance of a majority at the approach►ng general election.
The people, however, would not be agitated to the extent
expected, for they were too wise to suffer the foundations of
society to be upturned, and class placed in array against class,
merely for the purpose of keeping a certain set of persons in
office. So little of the confidence of the house did the minis-
try possess, that since they had themselves declared that they
did not possess its confidence, they had never been able to
carry a single measure through parliament without the con-
currence of his right hon. friend Sir R. Peel. This conti-
nued inability to carry any measure without the assent of
the opposition, and their continuance, under such circum-
stances in office, was without any parliamentary precedent,
and was of itself a sufficient justificatlon for the motion of
want of confidence. _

Sir GEORGE GREY instanced the case of the reform bill
in 1831 as a precedent for the course pursed now. Earl
Grey's government on that occasion brought forward the
reform bill for discussion in a parliament by which he knew

n. bart. (Sir

Graham), who vow found fault with the ministry for perse-
vering in bringing forward the corn laws for discussion in a
parliament which would not pass them, was himself a mem-
ber of the government of Earl Grey. The right hon. gent.
then entered into a defence of the measures of the present
ministry, in the course of which he said he had no doubt but
that Sir R. Peel would be able to govern Ireland very well if
left to himself, but that he was surrounded by those from
whose influence he would find it impossible to free himself.
I.llr. HANDLEY denied that anything he had ever said could
be fairly construed into a want of confidence in the ministry.
The utmost he had ever said was, that if their having the
power to bring forward the corn laws depended on his vote,
they should never have that power. He was challenged by
the right hon. member for Pembroke with being inconsistent,
after such a sentence, in giving his confidence to the govern-
ment. He might be turned out of his seat for doing so, but
if such should be the case he would lose it because of his ad-
herence to his party and his principles, while the right hon.
baronet was turned out by the honest grey coats of Cumber-
land because he was false to both. The hon. member then
adverted to the question of the corn laws, and asked the right
hon. bart. (Sir R. Peel) to give an answer to a plain question
—namely, whether he would continue to the agriculturists
the protection they now enjoyed ; or if he would not give an
answer, would he allow an inference to be drawn ? For if
he did neither, he must bid adieu to the character for candour
which he was anxious to maintain with the agriculturists.
Adjourned.

LONDON MONEY MARKET.

WEDNESDAY EVENING.—The funds were a shade better
to-day. Consols for money 8% to 90 and for account 90} to

Bank Stock 1681 to 64. °Exchequer Bills Ils. to 13s.
premium. Money was easy, at rates varying from 4to 5 per
cent.

In the Foreign Market there is no particular feature to be
noted. Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cents were 52/ to /, the
Five per Cents 99; to 100. Belgian 100 to 1. Spanish Ac-
tive with the Coupons 231 to Portuguese Five per Cents
33 to 4, the Three ger Cents 201 to 1. Brazilian 67 to 8.
Mexican 271 to 8/. Colombian 211 to 2.

LONDON TRADE REPORT

WEDNESDAY EVENING.—The sales to-day were rather
numerous, but no spirit was exhibited. Teas still look up.
. .

TEA.—The market firm with a fair business doing. Com-
pany's congous in the morning reached ls. II id. per pound;
but on ,Change the price was Is. Ild.
SUGAR.—The transactions in the raw market are limited.
270 casks Barbadoes partly sold at public sale, 635. to 695.
for middling yellow. 430 bags Bengal sold at 61s. to 635.
for low to middling white. 200 boxes and 100 barrels Cuba,
nearly all bought in, white 28s. to 305., yellow 21s. to 235.
2800 bags Siam mostly sold ; low to middling white, 225. to
245.; 3700 bags Manilla were bought in at 20s. 6d.; and 900
barrels of Java at 19s. 6d. to 245. 6d.
COFFEE.-100 bales Mocha sold at 104 s. to 106 s. for fine
ordinary; 4,350 bags La Guayra partly so:d at 465. to 48s.
-for good to fine ordinary ; and 50s. to 525. for fine ordinary
to middling ' • 2.150 bags Brazil were offered, the sound taken
in at 40s. to 41s. for good ordinary.
SPICES.-1,300 bags Malabar Pepper partly sold at 3fid.
for fair ordinary ; 3,000 black Sumatra and Eastern at 3kd.
to 3+d.: 540 boxes Cassia sold, middling to good 945. to
975. 6d.

RICE.-380 bags Bengal sold at lls. to lls Gd. for mid-
dling white: 750 bags Madras taken in at 9s. to 9s. 6d. for
good bold yellow.

EMPTY HOUSES.—As one proof of the depression of
trade and the want of means by the people, we may mention,
that in Preston there are now 1,220 houses unoccupied, and,
consequently, not paying rates.
AN ACT OF HONESTY.—About twelve years-ago, a person
named Joseph Hall, who vi as then a hand-loom weaver re-
siding at Stockport, emigrated to America with his mother,
who we believe was then a widow. At the time they left
Stock, they were upwards of £2O in debt. Their creditors
have lately been agreeably surprised by having the whole of
their respective debts paid to them. Mr. William Holden,
provision-dealer, of Edgeley. one of the creditors, has lately
received a letter from Hall, who now resides at Baltimore.
The letter contained a draft or bill of exchange for £25, with
a request to Mr. Holden that he would discharge the debts
owing to eight individuals, whom he named, the lowest
amount being 4s 2d, and the highest, which was for rent,
£7 10s. The whole amount being £22 Os 11d. The surplus
he ordered to be given to on old acquaintance. The money
has been applied by Mr. Holden as directed. The letter
concludes with a postscript, stating the writer had overlooked
two other of his creditors, for whom he intended shortly to
send another draft.

SUMMER ASEIEEs.—The judges of the different law courts
assembled in the Exchequer Chamber on Thursday, and
chose their respective circuits on the ensuing assizes. The
following is the arrangement :
Northern.—Lord Denman and Mr. Justice Wigbtman.
Western.--Mr. Justice Maule and Mr. Baron Rolfe.
Midland.—Mr. Baron Park and Mr. Baron Gurney.
Oxford—Mr. Justice Coleridge and Mr. Justice Coltman.
Home.—Chief Justice Tindal and Mr. Justice Bosanquet.
Norfolk.—Mr. Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Williams.
North Wales.—Lord Abinger.
South Wales.—Mr. Justice Erskine.
Mr. Justice Pattison remains in town, and will attend
business at Chambers.

HINTS TO THE WORKING CLASSES.—The reason why
our exporting manufacturers demand a repeal of the corn
laws is, that such repeal would equalise the price of English
with the price of continental labour, which is stated by the
Manchester repealers as under :

In France ss. Bd. per week of 76 hours
Switzerland 4 5 per ditto of 84 ditto.
Austria 4 0 per ditto of 76 ditto.
Tyrol 3 9 per ditto of 88 ditto.
Saxony 2 6 per ditto of 72 ditto.
Bonne on the Rhine 2 6 per ditto of 84 ditto.

Being an average of 3s. 10111. per week of 79 hours' labour.
The average price of English labour in this district is 13s. a
week. Will the labouring classes exchange a condition of
comparative comfort and affluence for such a state of depen-
dence and misery ? They are the parties most vitally affected
by the projected alteration of the corn laws.
THE SLAVE TRAna.—The Conservatives are charged with
hypocrisy in opposing the promotion of the slave trade. The
charge is false, and they are hypocrites who make it. The
Conservatives have been from the first the opponents of the
slave trade. and if the Whigs, in their usual pursuit of popu-
larity, snatched the opportunity of sealing its abolition, the
Conservatives were they who had prepared the opportunity
for them by makingthe measure popular. Burke was a Con-
servative—Pitt was a Conservative—Wilberforce was a Con-
servative—Perceval was a Conservative—Lord Castlereagh
was a Conservative—Mr. Canning was a Conservative, and
these were all firm opponents of. the slave trade. On the
other side, Lord Fitzwilliam, Lord Sligo, and other Whigs,
opposed even their own party upon the question of abolition
in 1806, when the question was carried against a minority of
only fifteen in the House of Commons, and without a divi-
sion in the House of Lords. The Conservative Duke of
Northumberland has the distinguished honour of not only
having exerted himself for the abolition of the slave trade,
but the honour also of having anticipated all others in at-
tempting to provide for the extinction of slavery itself. His
Grace, in 1806, then Lord Percy, moved an amendment to
the effect that slavery should cease in the British dominions
in 1810—an amendment which the Whig Ministers of the
day resisted with success.
FRIGHTFUL ACCIDENT UN THE GREENWICH RAILWAY.
—On Friday afternoon, as the train which leaves the ter-
minus at the Greenwich end at a quarter before three o'clock,
reached that part of the line which crosses Blue Anchor-lane,
Bermondsey, and where the junction of the Brighton and
Croydon line unites with the Greenwich, the engine came
furiously in contact with a post whicmhhamfydtaebidde Br
incautiously
by
a leapcautiouoslvyerbetehne
left across the tramway. The wheels of the engine and ten-
der passed safely over the post, but the iron which attaches
the tender to the train was broken by the collision, and the
carriages thrown off the line. The train continued its way
some distance without the engine and tender. The conductor,
whose name is John Nash, was thrown from his seat, and
part of the train passed over him. He was picked up imme-
diately after the accident, with one leg broken and many se-
vere contusions of the body, and conveyed withiotghuhettoednoenl Ratrvaaietl:
to
Guy'swtnarys.
ffn
frightened
ghtfinishingeiHospital.ed a
at the
theOneth e
Ld
nao
nnf
dgtenhrne
h e
men
wase inp, 010
terminus
parapet of one of the arches, and fell into the grounds of a
market-gardener. The poor fell ow was much injured and
dreadfully frightened. He was also conveyed to the same
hospital. Fortunately there were no
to theopasse unagnelrnsinntof
thefirst
carriage, which has received damage only
DTe
ph
tef
nprods,t
twnar st onep on fr
pans numberpurpose
nfmaking r o u gah
tt
eump
pbny.
tahfeewtraPirfnrtiosn;
rary fence on the side next the Brighton line, and ought to
e tdi ima tee 1 yp
ronne
ei tesd
ebde i
tnng tthh reo wt
enr
md
ionwuns
,hcanvee
train been
raefmt
eory ead
it being so dreadfully fractured as to admit of no cure. Corn.
Poor Nash, the conductor,sihrnomrt has since had his leg amputated,
plaints atysy nerrvln.nts are inadequately
paid
considering de thatthe
greatthe railway
risksri they