The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-02-27 00:00:00

CONTEMPORARY PRESS.

DISPOSAL OF- THE NATIONAL -HONOURS.
- • From the illa,whester Courier. j-
With a tottering but corrupt ministry, at the .head of
affairs, it is not extraordinary that we should be occa-
.
sionally startled by some egregious act of roily, or some
barefaced abuse of .the high favours and distinctions
witlt which the sovereign is entrusted by the nation, to
confer 'occasionally in its name. But the Times, of
Thursday, calls our attention to a recent act of the Crim.-
Connell cabinet, that, in point of assurance and absur-
dity, well nigh surpasses all former exploits. Our,eon-
temporary commences his article thus Among the
most curious occurrences of late date; as indications of
the spirit which rules the Melbourne cabinet, is the Ito-.
mirary distinction- bestowed upon Colonel De Lacy
Evans, whereby, he has become a Knight Commander of
the.Batli. Why has such a decoration been bestowed
upon Colonel De Lacy Evans? What public service has
he
,rendered to this country to entitle hint to such an ho-
nenr? What rank does Ire hold in. the British army
consistent with this act of extraordinary favour? Why,
should the rules and regulations heretofore, for, we be-
lieve, fifteen years past, acted upon by the sovereign in
the grant of this military order; be superseded in the
case of, Colonel De Lacy Evans, and all the Majors-
General of the army of Great Britain be passed o%er
awl set aside that he.alone might. be. exalted ?„ One .of
the rules by which the grant of the decoration of the
Bath has for many years beeil restricted is, that the title
0f.." Knight Commander' should not' be conferred upon
any military person of rank inferior to that of Major-
General. Another rule—and one which has in no case,
as we are informed, of a British subject, been dispensed
with since .the year ISlS—is, that none should obtain
the distinction of a Knight Commander who had not al..
ready been a Companion of the Bath.. Now, in respect
of Colonel Evans, both the above laws have been yin.
late& • Colonel Evans is, not a Major General in the
British service, vet has obtained-a Knight Conimandery.
of. the ,Bath. The gallant Colonel; moreover, has been
made a Knight, Conimande per saltunz, never having
previously enjoyed the rank ofKnight -Companion..
repeat our question,—why have such things happened?"
For our parts we shall not dispute Colonel De Lacy
Eyans' courage, but we have yet.
_to learn in what parti-
culats, in a military. sense, nature has been so liberal to
his mind, as to justify his patrons in breaking through
all rules of precedent—all rules of military etiquette—
and force nponitim (the -instrument of their folly and
outrage) a distinction, whiiah, following so closely upon
late: isasters in the field, an only make him look more
awk rd and ridiculous than ever. We are moire aware
that, Colonel Evans has voted_ as often with the Crim.-
Cnnnell cabinet as he posWibly could, without actually
trampling consistency under root ;—we'are quite aware
tltat.his heart has always been with thetreaaary;
,but,
he owes-no thanks tolier Majesty's ministers as a body.
It is to Lord Palmerston—to the man who conferred
upon the electors of Westminster the honour of placing
their representative at the head of a parcel Of drabs and
ritraf,in Spain—that Colonel De Lacy Evans owes..the
distinction of being made a Knight: Commander. of ate
Bath. It would have accorded much better with Colonel
Evanes.deportment as a gentleman, and capacity as a
militaiy.man,.to have `given hint the clerkship of the,
ordnance, vacated by Sir A. L. Hay. la this case he
would not have -been under the • irksome necessity. of
studying a higher •standard of dignity and refinement
than' he has been accustomed to; his natural bearing
would
()are required no tutoring, but would have sufli
ciently suited iris new office, and he would have been in
the receipt of a handsome salary. This, however, could
not' he. • There were many important and influential ex--
pectants, and the fact of there being some emolument
attached to_the vacant office, was fatal to the Colonel's
application (for it. is currently reported that he did ap-
ply-,),and an honour worthy a prouder soul. was reserved
for him by my Lord Palmerston—the, friend who had
helped him to tarnish his own and the British name- in
thefield. We can easily understand-the dilemmas in
which a. weak and fallin,g,administration occasionally find
themselves, and the.•distinetion conferred on Colonel
Evans has been the restaof one of them. • • . •

NORTHERN AND CENTRAL BANK OF ENGLAND.

The ball' yearly general meeting of the shareholders in this
concern was held on TliursdJV forenoon, 'at Ladyinao's, ;Van-
chester. The object Of. the "Meeting was to enable the gliretiots
and insneCtors a p *trted twelve months ago to lay
,before the
p .01
.44 _ • •
shareholdeis a statement or the affairs of the hank vp io the.
34th Dec. last, 'and e 6 elect-tvM' directors in the or two
retiring, according tolhe of the deed of settlement.
The attendance froni all parts was very numerous.' Josenh
Atinstrogg, E 59.,, was called to the chair.
,A rdi het warm dis-
cussion now eusued, in consequence of a decnan'd for ilfe 0.0-
duction of the, minute book, and on some other questions eta-
tiie to the production of certain letters. `
The Secretary then read the &rector's report. 1t desrriltetl
the efforts of the directors to realize funds, and the linnidation
of the debt due to the Bank of England, and thus proceet.ed:
The sha'reholders will recollect that in making the last bar-
yearly estimate of the assets of the bank, the directors n.iii eeoied
uPon the principle of valuing one by one eaclshilt, 'debt. and
other assets of the bank, an I they have now to state that the
same course has been followed on this occasion. • I

The result shows, a deficiency of £45.783 125,2t1 on the last
estijnate, which they deeply regret; but mud] as this is to he
deplored, the paramount duty of the directors is to lay before
you as faithful a statement as they are able to arrive at, pie.:
liaising, however, that ttie whole of the difference lieiweeo 'his
and the previous statement does not arise trommiscaitulations
on, their part, hut a considerable portion of it is one laige ac-
count, in which the grossest deception hai been praciked: this
single account, together with an omission instating lie tialiili-
tieS at the last balance, will account for more than oue-ba.; of
the deficiency which now appears.
The statement at 30th June, 1537, was thus—
ASSETS.

Grog' amount of assets
Deduct actual loss at that period

£1,(}24,i31 12 5

LIATITLITIES.

Amount of debts due by the
Bank £33B 997 14 1
Amount of estimated loss lB2 165 5 6-521,163 0 5

Remaining assets at 30th June. 1837 £50291;8 12 0
The statement at 30th December, 1837, is as follows:
ASSETS.
The gross amount of assets in favour of the
Bank appears on the 30th Df-c. last to be £916,865 17 11
Deduct the actual loss siOtaiitted up to the same
period
.599 9 0

£811,356 8 11

LIABILITIES
Amount of debts owing by the
Bank at 30th Dec., 1837 167,665 17 11
Of which thece was
Aloe. to the Bank

Of England, for
an uncovered ba-

lanee 3,06213 7
And to other cre-

ditors, including
deposits, circu-
lation, and the
London add
Westminster
Bank ' ''.16.3,7C3 4 4
In addittnn' actuxl losses
itiBie, :the directiiri
l'hink lel:11.'60)1e' a 'furthi,"r
trg's'oltaf.ne'd in iv-ilia--
144-6 r
Which deducted from the nett assets, leaies at
30th Dee.''" 457,182 19 1.0
The ig niu g assets at 30th June, 1837, were,
Wife ' • 502 968012 0

£45,78 12 2