The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-30 00:00:00

I
rived by the mother country from imports of its own
colonial produce must be added. Of late, in addition

to more than sufficient wool 101- VUL
enough has been left to export ; the valuable fishery
must also be taken into account, and the more valuable,
from the decline which has taken place in the produce
of the north.
Port Phillip bids fair soon to become the emporium
of that quarter of the world, more especially when New
Zealand has been brought into full operation as a pro-
ducing country, and it is therefore to be hoped that
greater encouragement will be given, and fewer impe-
diments thrown in the way of colonising these new
places, than has been the case with the old ones. The
papers are full of complaints of the inattention of the
Government to the wants and wishes of the inhabitants,
more particularly in checking the immigration of re-
spectable labourers. The commercial accounts state
that the stoppage of the trade with China was beginning
to be felt, and that all the produce of that country, tea
especially, was rapidly rising in price. Corn, coming
more freely into the market, had not only caused a de-
cline, but had removed much of the apprehension that
had existed of a continued scarcity. British goods in
general were in good demand.

OPEN QUESTIONS
(From the Newcastle Journal.)
A sharp controversy has been for some time past
carried on between some of our metropolitan contem-
poraries regarding the efficacy and morality of "open
questions," as well as their probable influence on the
present rickety cabinet. Although reluctant to inter-
fere where the weight of argument so largely prepon-
derates on the side taken by the conservative journals,
we are nevertheless anxious to express our opinions on
both branches of the subject. We will commence by
the bold, but confident assertion, that the resort to the
system of " open questions" by former administrations
has been the prelude to their dissolution. It evidenced
the disunion that prevailed amongst their member%
and invariably led to their downfall. We defy contra-
diction on this point. Making the " Catholic Ques-
tion," as it was then termed, an open one, broke up
various administrations, and was the real, though not
the immediate, cause of the break-up of the Welling-
ton cabinet in 1830. So far, therefore, as we may rely
upon, and augur from experience, the conclusion is in-
evitable that the attempt to "patch up" differences, or
film over chasms and chinks in cabinets by the adop-
tion of "open questions," has ever egregiously failed,
and tended only to hasten the consummation of that
event which it was intended to prevent. So far they
have been efficacious ; but as means for enabling strug-
gling and feeble cabinets to bear up against the effect
of disunion from within, and defeats from without,
they have proved utterly powerless, as such temporary
shifts ever do. The day of reckoning and of retribu-
tion cannot be staved off by such paltry expedients. Is
not the " Ballot Question" a pregnant instance of this
truth ? The pressing exigences of the cabinet, com-
bined with the growing estrangement from it of a few
dozen radical members, no sooner forced upon the
whigs the necessity of raising it to the dignity and
importance of an open question, than it effected the
detachment from the ministry of Lord Howick and
Mr. Wood, which largely contributed to the subse-
quent disasters, and ignominious defeats sustained by
the ministry. Thus the direct result of the first
experiment was unequivocally of an unpropitious
character, and we have but very little doubt, if the
trial be repeated, that it will in future be attended with
equally disastrous consequences. The adoption of open
questions is analogous to the admission of the point of
the wedge • instead of stopping up the gaping chink it
widens and enlarges it, and ultimately succeeds in
wrenching asunder even the firmest and most compact
body. And now as to its morality. We some weeks
ago denounced in terms of unqualified condemnation
the principle of " political coalitions," and pointed out
the hollowness - and treachery of their basis, as well as
the apostacy and dishonesty of those public men whose
infatuation would make them parties to such a com-
bination. Now, " open questions" are, to the members
of a cabinet, precisely what "coalitions" would be to
those who would form them—a mutual abandonment of
principle and compromise of opinions on subjects which
may vitally concern the honor and the interests of the na-
tion. No man can be justified in sacrificing his conscien-
tious convictions on the altar of a base and truckling
expediency. These convictions may be abstractedly
erroneous, but while entertaining them he is bound by
his obligations to truth and honesty to adhere to and act
upon them. Any deviation from them is downright
dihonesty, and involves a breach of moral law, and a
violation of political virtue, irretrievably disgraceful to
a public man. Actions should be guided and determi-
ned by convictions, and he who is ready to act without
or against them is a political knave at heart, and un-
worthy of support or confidence. A cabinet composed
of such persons, is, it is unnecessary to add, totally
unfit for the direction or management of public affairs,
as being devoid of principle and consistency. Open
questions are signs of disunion and emblems of dis-
honesty. What !—ls Lord John Russell looking, as
he professes to do, upon the introduction of vote by
ballot as fatal to constitutional liberty, warranted in
uniting with Mr. Macauley, who seems to view it as
the perfection of political wisdom, and the only thing
still wanted to crown the worth of Reform ? Is Lord
Melbourne, who designates the opponents of the corn
laws madmen, justified in sitting in the same council
with these same madmen, and by that means enabling
them to work out their "mad" and wicked scheme ?
Assuredly not ; were the mischief affected he would be
held a particeps ci iminis—and accessary before the
feet—and be liable to be punished accordingly. These
" open questions" indicate weakness and hypocrisy
alike; and the minister who resorts to them on every
trying emergency betrays the duty he owes to his
sovereign and his country.