The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-08-06 00:00:00

Ivig been tho on

effectual

Ehr Ribtrpool `tanbatt.

tfromh our tuemory upo

tilO4C

intaegting faebi, bocamia it givoi ua additiomil WWI-
- though we wanted none, that his policy as mi-
nister, which we soon expect to see him, will be just
antipodal to that of the degraded covenanters. Ire-
land may possibly be his "great difficulty," but we
feel strongly disposed to believe that the. difficulty will
not consist in determining how it should be governed,

or how a traitor, denounced even by Whigs, should be
treated by a Conservative ministry.

That trait° though in compact alliance with her
Majesty's ministers, has never ceased to carry on those tl
malicious designs for which he was denounced from w
the throne in 1834. He has just published what he
calls a Declaration of Grievances and Rights, which is
about as seditious and disloyal a manifesto as could
well be published, and such as, were there a firm Con-
servative government in existence, he would never have
dared to have issued. Under the administration of Sir
R. Peel we should confidently expect that all such do
ings would instantly be put a stop to

The Declaration is one unbroken tissue of falsehoods
and slanders of the most atrocious description--having
for its object the excitement of hatred to England, and
the concentration of the mind of the people on the
pretended grand remedy for all their grievances—Re-

peal of the Union ; or, in other words, the political
separation of the countries and the dismemberment of
the empire. We shall make a few random extracts.
Some of the truths which it sets forth are as follow :
" No country in the world ever violated towards any other
country its plighted faith and solemn treaties so often and so
foully as England has done towards Ireland."
" So far from having relaxed in the antipathy to the Irish
people and their hatred of the religion of the Irish nation,
the English people now exhibit more venomous virulence and
acrimony than ever they did in the worst periods of our
history!'

" The aristocracy of England, the leaders of the present
hostile movement against Ireland, have employed enormous
masses of their wealth in the most profligate corruption of
the Er*lish constituencies in order to procure the return to
parliament of the inveterate and virulent enemies to Ireland
and to catholicity.--This wicked hostility to Ireland and to

her catholic people is vicious, almost to a pitch of demoniacal
insanity, inasmuch as it is exhibited at a period when the
Irish people, instead of meriting this satanic hostility, are in
reality deserving of the respect and gratitude of the English
aristocracy of wealth and rank.—Under the administration
conducted by Peel and Lord Stanley, it will be imprudent—
and, indeed, utterly unsafe to call out the Irish militia, as
that force must necessarily be constituted in the proportion
of ninety-nine catholics to one of every other religion."
" Foreign powers in dealing with the Peel-Stanley admi-
nistration, will avail themselves of the weakness and wicked-
ness of that administration, occasioned by their mis-govern-
ment of Ireland."

Next follows a list of grievances—first, " that Ire-
land has not obtained an equalisation of privileges,
franchises, and rights with the people of England and
Scotland—with a corollary touching the Union. Then
there is the " grand practical grievance that the eccle-
siastical state revenues of the nation are enjoyed by
the church of a small minority." The next " great
and outrageous grievance sustained by the people of
Ireland is, that they are inadequately represented in
parliament. The Irish ought, upon a calculation of
comparative revenue and population, to possess more
than one hundred and seventy representatives. They
have but one hundred and five." The tenth and last is
the " master grievance, the source of all others to
Ireland—the legislative union—a union brought about
by force, fraud, treachery, corruption, and bloodshed."
We might make our extracts much longer, but we
should tire our readers. The document is altogether
a most daring and flagitious production ; but it is im-
portant as showing that the writer is the same ill-dis-
posed, truculent traitor that he ever was, and that he
comes out of the hands of the Whigs with all their in-
dulgence, feeding, and coaxing, as far as ever from be-
ing well-affected towards British connection and Eng-
lish interests. There is then no more room for com-
promise or conciliation with such a character. A Con-
servative minister must not only keep him at arm's
length, but cut short his career of seditious agitation.

Declaring himself, as he does, an enemy to British
connection, he must be treated as such. There is no

rer policy for a Conservative minister to act upo:
,atever difficulty there may be in making

As drowning men will catch at straws, we shou

not be surprised if the ministerialists took an omen,
favourable to their still lingering hopes, from the fact
that Sir Robert Peel will not oppose the election of Mr.
Shaw Lefevre as speaker in the new parliament. Thai
such is the case, we learn from a London morning jour
nal of Wednesday, which states that the right hon

the member for 'l'amworth had written to Mr. Lefevre
to apprise him that such was his intention. Here,

then, is a little respite for the Whigs. Their miserable
minority will not be exposed so early as they might
have apprehended, did they judge of others by them-
selves, or conclude, as to the course which the Conser-
vatives would pursue, from what had been their own
when in opposition. Their journals, we do expect,
will immediately begin to crow, and mistranslate the
mild forbearance and patriotic expansion of mind which
has induced the great Conservative leader to acquiesce
in the re-election of the Whig speaker, into an evidence
of fear to try his strength with the mighty men of va-
lour on the ministerial benches. The state of trade,
the prospects of the harvest, our unsettled relations
with America, the war with China, and, above all, the
threatened rebellion with Ireland, they will say, have
frightened him ; he will be in no such haste to grasp
the reigns of power as his more impetuous followers

would have hirn to be ; you see he is not anxious to
begin the battle; he does not venture to oppose our
speaker. Now, however ridiculous such gasconade

would he, it would not be one whit more so than the
tale of the right hon. baronet's flight to the continent,
and a dozen other equally probable circumstantials of
scandal lately set afloat by the truth-loving organs of
the government. Here, however, they have the advan-
tage of gaining a peg to hang all their suspicions and
-inuendoes upon. Motives are easily assigned, and false

ones not so susceptible of disproof, and the lie of thi
morning has the greater chance of a prolonged exist

We need scarcely observe that, with a working ma-
jority of above eighty members, it is idle to say that
the permission given by the Conservative leader to Mr.
Lefevre to resume his office as speaker, could result
from any doubt of his having it perfectly in his power
to remove him if he deemed it necessary or prudent so
to do. Nor would the ministerialists have had any
right to complain if such a step were adopted. They
had themselves afforded a recent precedent for it, in
the case of Mr. Charles Manners Sutton, now Viscount
Canterbury. In the parliament called by Sir Robert
Peel in 1835, the Whig opposition proposed Mr. Aber-
cromby (now Lord Dunfermline) in opposition to this
gentleman. Mr. Sutton had been speaker nearly eigh-
teen years, and a more able, learned, dignified, and
impartial officer never occupied the presidential chair.
The slightest imputation had never been cast upon any
one of his decisions; he had performed an arduous
duty in arduous times ; and during a long course of

service, had upheld the dignity of the house, and added
lustre to its proceedings by his graceful eloquence, and
grave, yet courteous, deportment on all occasions.
But the right hon. gentleman was a Tory in principle,
and avowedly Anti-Popish in his sentiments, and this
was sufficient to render him obnoxious to the Papists
and radicals, who just at this time had rushed into the
house, bent upon a scramble. That their factious pro-
ceeding would saddle the country with an unnecessary
and uncalled-for expense—the retiring speaker being
entitled to a pension of £4OOO per annum, was an ac-
cident for which they cared nothing; and, accordingly,
they went through with it, and carried the election of
Mr. Abercromby against Mr. Sutton by a majority of
ten. Mr. Lefevre was elected on Mr. Abercromby's
1839, in opposition to Mr. Goul-
of 18, the numbers being, exclu-
sive 299.
sbr eiti:rierneo:nf
thebe yn ta,
tellers,
majority
317
Now Sir Robert Peel does not mean to follow this
precedent of the Liberals. He adheres to the doctrine
laid down by himself in 1835. He then said on the
occasion of Mr. Sutton's proposed election, " that
members ought to consider that the office of Speaker
was one that ought not to be made the subject of party
feeling; the precincts of the chair ought not to be con-
verted into ground on which political battles might be
fought"; and now in forbearing to oppose Mr. Le-
fevre, he will act consistently with this principle.
This is a view of the question in which we are per-
fectly sure, the ministerialists have no feelings in com-
mon with. him.
They call themselves Liberals in-
deed, but true liberality is as much a- stranger to their
, talent
conceptions as it is to their practice. Sir Robert
Peel's sentiment is the truly liberal and magnani-
proprientyo,t
in
netrhite
imme.
imnoaursoolniteie,
alliadeveraanarrye,cof ins
personan