The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-03-06 00:00:00

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

Our 41
Literaty Notices" are unavoidably postponed until
• Tuesday.
Several communications have been received, the insertion of
Which a press of local matter compels us reluctantly to
defer.

tbt Ethrrpool &tanbarb.

FRIDAY MORNING, MARCH 6, 1840.

Lord Lyndhurst, with his accustomed ability, intro- '
duced into the House of Lords, on Monday evening
last, a petition respecting the commercial arrangements
of this country with Sicily, particularly with reference
to the sulphur trade carried on with that country. This
subject is one of very great importance to the mercan-
tile interests of Great Britain, as well as to a large class
of our manufacturers. The losses which have already
been sustained in the sulphur trade have been enor-
mous ; and we think that those who have been the
sufferers are justly entitled to compensation. The im-
Ports of sulphur into this country have very consider-
ably increased within the last few years. The disco-
veries which have been made in chemical science have
rendered this article of very great importance in several
°f our principal manufactures. The demand for it has,
consequently, been steadily on the increase. In the
course of eleven years, which preceded the year 1837,
• the importation of sulphur had increased eleven-fold.
The import in 1826 only amounted to 4,000 tons ; and
It, 1837 it had increased to the amount of 44,000 tons,
'Nearly the whole of this article has been heretofore
Procured from Sicily, in which island it is exceedingly
anundant and easily obtained. In 1816 a commercial
treaty was concluded between this country and Sicily,
which provided that ample protection should be afforded
to British subjects and British property—that British
subjects should be allowed, without let or hindrance,
to dispose of their property at their own free will—that
they should be treated, in all respects, as subjects of
the most favoured nation—and that no duty, tax, or
impost should be levied on their property, beyond
those which were levied from subjects of the most
favoured nation. These were the principal stipulations
of that treaty. Relying upon that treaty, and upon
the good faith of the Sicilian government, the mer-
chants of this country had embarked considerable
property in carrying on the sulphur trade of Sicily.
Mines were opened, and machinery was established, at
a very great expense, for the purpose of increasing the
supply of the commodity, and to extend the trade.
Up to the year 1838 this trade had been carried on
advantageously to all parties concerned, as well as to
the manufacturers of this country. In 1838, however.
the Sicilian Government, in violation of the treaty of
1816, granted a monopoly of the sulphur trade to a
company of French adventurers, under the firm of
Taycard.and Company. The exclusive privileges thus
conferred upon this Company, enabled them to restrict
the owners of the mines to the production of such
annual quantity each of sulphur as would have the
effect of keeping down stocks and enhancing prices.
These high prices were of no advantage whatever to
the proprietors of the mines, as they were compelled
to furnish the sulphur to the monopolists at a certain
fixed and unvarying rate of price. The limitation of
the quantity exported caused an enormous rise in the
prices, entirely at the expense of British interests.
This monopoly involved a direct infraction of the sti-
pulations of the treaty of 1816, by which British
subjects were to be allowed to dispose of their property
." without let or hindrance." British subjects were

i:,:-.4[l,na longer placed on the same footing as " those of the
•
klid _Afloat favoured nation." They were compelled to pay
tkfV7 a, tax which rendered cOmpetition ruinous. The mono-
polists had the entire controul of the sulphur market,
Cc„
d what, price.e_ they pleased, provided only that
one-third of the profit front the-exam of export above
the stipulated amount should •he paid to the Sicilian

Government. This stipulation will, perhaps, afford
some clue to the motives which induced the Sicilian
Government to grant this monopoly. It is true that
the proprietors of the sulphur mines might, instead of
selling to the contractors, at the price limited by the
contract, export for their own benefit, and at their own
risk : but this could not be done without paying a
duty amounting nearly to the first cost of the article,
and twice as high as that at which the contractors had
a right to export the article. This is another infringe-
ment of the treaty, which expressly states that "British
subjects should pay no duties or imports on their pro-
perty other than those which were paid by the mast
favoured nation."

There is another circumstance connected with this
monopoly which ought to be stated. After the regular
custom of trade, the British proprietors had entered
into contracts for the supply of sulphur to be delivered
at future periods, in quantities and at prices agreed upon
before the monopoly came into operation. As Lord
Lyndhurst observed, "the establishment of the mono-
poly was announced by proclamation on the Ist of
July, to come into operation on the Ist of August,
leaving only the interval of one month. The conse-
quence was an immediate increase in the price of the
article. All those British merchants, therefore, who
had entered into contracts to furnish sulphur at a cer-
tain, price, found that it had risen to such an extent
that to complete them would be to involve themselves
in inevitable • ruin." The consequence was, that 24
British ships which had arrived for the purpose of
loading with sulphur for this country, were obliged to
return without their cargoes.

The sulphur trade, as far as this country is con-
cerned, has thus been effectually stopped. The price
of sulphur in England is now double what it was at
the end of 1837. The manufacturers have been driven
to all sorts of expedients in order to procure cheaper
substitutes. A higher price has been necessarily fixed
upon those articles in the manufacture of which sul-
phur is used, and thus the public at large have become
sufferers.

Lord Melbourne did not dispute any of the facts
brought forward by Lord Lyndhurst. He admitted
the existence of those. grievances of which the British
merchants complained. He confessed that gross in-
justice had been inflicted upon British subjects, and
that the express terms of a treaty made on their behalf
had been flagrantly violated. The truth is, that our
imbecile and incapable Government have acted in this
matter exactly in the same way as they done in all
other instances in which the interests of British mer-
chants have been sacrificed by foreign powers. In-
stead of sending six line-of-battle ships to Naples,
which, as Lord Lyndhurst . remarked, would have
settled the matter in a fortnight, they have contented
themselves with the ridiculous, because futile, expe-
dient of entering into " negotiations." The only
negociation that should have been resorted to was by
means of our artillery. Remonstrances, from such a
Government as that with which Great Britain has been
so long afflicted, are uniformly treated with contempt.
In spite of these " negotiations," which have been car-
ried on for a period of eighteen months, "the monopoly
still subsists—the losses of British subjects still con-
tinue—the trade is still interrupted"—and nothing
effectual has yet been done to remove the grievances
which so loudly call for redress.

Such is the way in which the mercantile interests of
Great Britain are now protected ! Wherever we look,
whether to Sicily, to the coast of Africa, to Mexico, to
Buenos Ayres, or to any other part of the world, the
commerce of Great Britain is left to the tender mercies
of other nations, to whose jealous interference it is
rapidly falling a sacrifice. When can the merchants
of England cease to feel grateful to the present paternal
Administration ?

Lord Ashley has succeeded in obtaining the appoint-
ment of a select committee of the House of Commons
to inquire into the operation of the act for the regula-
of mills and factories, We have had justice done to
the negro slaves of the British Colonies : let us hope
that Lord Ashley will succeed in obtaining justice for
the white slaves of England. We have no doubt that
evidence will be adduced before the committee which
will astonish those who are not acquainted with the
condition of the manufacturing population of our large
towns. The cruelties practised towards children of a
tender age in our factories are far more revolting than
anything recorded in the history of Negro Slavery. The
aggregate, indeed, of suffering, within the walls of these
prison-houses of Mammon will, in many cases, be found
to exceed the miseries endured by any other class of
labourers on the face of the earth. This is evident
from the broken-down, emaciated appearance, and pre-
mature decay of those who are engaged in our manu-
factories. The principal cause of these sufferings is to
be found in the long hours during which the children
in our factories are compelled to labour. It is fearful
to contemplate the consequences which habitually re-
sult from this exhausting system. The prostration of
strength which it produces brings on the decrepitude
of age at a period when the operative ought to be
flourishing in the bloom and vigour of manhood.

The Perthshire election commenced yesterday, with
every prospect of success to the Conservative candi-
date, Mr. Home Drummond. The opposition which
this gentleman has to contend with is, certainly, of the
most formidably character; yet we feel confident that
the struggle will terminate in his victorious return.
The government influence arrayed against him is al-
most unprecedented. The only case which we can
call to mind, in which the Ministry seem to have taken
an equal degree of interest, was the election for New-
ark, which resulted in the return of the Solicitor-
General. Mr. Fox Manic has been despatched to
Perthshire with a carte blanche to draw upon the
Treasury at discretion. But if Mr. Home Drummond
had no other opposition than that of Government and
its myrmidons his return would be demonstrably cer-
tain. Unfortunately a few pig-headed individuals,
who have made the question of non-intrusion their
hobby, have determined to support Mr. Stewart, the
Whig candidate, in opposition to their avowed convic-
tions and sentiments as Conservatives. Such conduct
appears to us utterly inconsistent in men who profess
attachment to the Established Church of Scotland,
though it is quite characteristic of the voluntary fac-
tion.

This day the Rev. Hugh M‘Neile will deliver, in
London, his first lecture on the Church of England.
The deservedly high character and great eloquence of
the reverend gentleman—the critical aspect of the times
—and the overwhelming importance of the subject,
conspire to render these lectures exceedingly attractive.
We have no doubt that ample publicity will be given
to the series, and that extensive good will result
from their dissemination throughout the kingdom.
The time has come when the members of the Church
of England must he roused from their lethargic indiffe-
rence. Popery is intriguing for the ascendancy in
every direction—Dissent is assuming a threatening at-
titude, and multiplying its expedients for overthrowing
the Church—and infidelity, in its most revolting shape,
is, like a rampant lion, " seeking whom it may devour."
At this crisis we know of no one better qualified than
the Rev. Hugh Nl`Neile to raise the voice of warning.
The following is the " syllabus" of Mr. M`Neile's
lectures :

" LECTURE I.—INTRODUCTION.--Only Divine: truth will
bear the scrutiny of these times—To be maintained and ex-
tended, our Church must be shown to be not only useful but
Sourrunta—Means estimated with reference to the end in
view—Scriptund meatlizlgs of ' the Church,' four ; the
Church mystical, testimony of Hooker ; the Church visible,
Dr. Wardlaw's argument on this point examined; the Church
local, ' tell it to the Church ;'—the Church collective—Epis-
copal constitution of the Church—The comprehensively
scriptural aspect of the Church of England.
" LECTURR APPoinblnent Vul succession of the
Ministers of the Church—The Apostolical commission—The
power of the keyn, what? The puactice of the Apostles ap-
pealed to for a decision—ln what sense St. John xx. 23, may
be used in the ordination of Ministers—Departure from
Apostolical doctrine—Completion, meantime, of the inspired
canon—Predicted apostacy of the Church—Promised preser-
vation of the Church in truth and holiness—Harmony of
these—The grace of GOD magnified in the arrangement.
" LECTURE 3.—The Church possessed of Instrumentality
which reaches to Rulers as well as subjects—Responsibility
of Rulers with reference to such instrumentality—The in-
strumentality of the Church of England with reference to
the end in view—Unrestricted use of the Bible—The vulgar
tongue in worship—Liturgical forms of prayer and praise—
Commemorations of scriptural facts—Connection with the
State; such connexion not a matter of choice; inevitable
from the nature of the case—The question is, what character
shall it be ; of well.regulated union securing mutual liberty ?

or of usurpation:and prostration, leading to tyranny on the
one side, and slavery on the other ?
" LECTURE 4.—Connection with the State—Political so-
ciety an ordinance of God ; the Sovereign, a creature—The
Christian Church an ordinance of God; The Bishop, a sub-
ject—The Bible a common standard for both—lnevitable
consequence of a disregard of that standard by either—Scrip-
tural duty of the civil Ruler—The reiterated assertion of
Dissenters, that the Scripture nowhere countenances com-
pulsory payments for religious services, answered from
Scripture—No coercion of a Dissenter's conscience involved
—Further excellence of our ecclesiastical instrumentality in
matters where Scripture does not prescribe7—Article xxxiv.
—Tradition, if not completely subject to, will effectually
make void, the Word of God.

" LECTURE s.—Practical efficiency of the Church hin-
dered by limitation in extent—The joint operation of the
Church in its present dimensions, and of the Voluntary Sys-
tem, wholly inadequate under existing circumstances. Proof
in the actual state of the country—Root of the whole evil,
want of real confidence in Revelation—English gentlemen
appealed to—Vain to expect unanimity in the mode—Right
to proceed notwithstanding—Half measures useless and dan-
gerous—lf more be not done, too much has been done al-
ready—in doing more, parochial subdivision indispensable ;
and if thoroughly accomplished, effectual as far as human
means can be.

" LECTURE 6.—Practical efficiency of the Church hin-
dered by defects in the working—False friendship to at-
tempt to hide real faults—Unfair advantage taken of candour,
no good reason against its excercise—True temper of Chris-
tian reproof—Some defects in the working of our national
Church enumerated, and remedies suggested—Concluding
appeal: the inseparable connection between religion and
politics, mind and body, cause and effect—Exceeding urgency
of this subject—The prosperity, the peace, the free Institu-
tions, the missionary usefulßess of the country, as well as the
salvation of immortal souls, all at stake."

We perceive, from our report of the Council pro-
ceedings of Wednesday last, that Mr. Bright, a liberal
of the first water; has given notice that he will, at the
next monthly meeting of the " collective wisdom" of

the Town-hall, " move that the Council memorialise
the House of Commons on the subject of their privi-
leges, which be thought were as essentially necessary
to it as the air we breathe." In other words, this sa-
pient councillor deems it to be " essentially necessary"
that the House of Commons. should have the privilege
of setting aside the decision of a court of law, tramp-

ling upon the verdict of a jury, imprisoning the swan
administrators of justice, superseding by a vote of the
House the statute law of the land, and exercising a
tyrannical and irresponsible controul over the liberty of
the subject. Such are the immunities which Mr.
Bright is disposed to claim for the House of Com-
mons. That these are his notions of privilege is evi-
dent from the earnest manner in which he deprecates
the introduction of Lord John Russell's bill " for de-
fining the privileges of the House of Commons." Mr.
Bright calls this " a dangerous thing," and says that
it would be equivalent to " going to the House of
Lords to ask them to let the House of Commons have
the privileges to which they have a prescriptive right."
A'prescriptive right, indeed ! Where did this "bright"
genius of a Councillor ascertain that the House of
Commons had a prescriptive right to the arbitrary pri-
vileges which the " tyrant majority" have been latterly
claiming ? Did the people ever confer such monstrous
and unconstitutional privileges upon the House of
Commons ? Have these privileges ever been recog-
nised by the co-ordinate branch of the legislature ?
Are they not entirely self-assumed ? Are they not also
contrary to the spirit as well as the letter of the Con-
stitution ? The House of Commons has no greater
prescriptive right to imprison the Sheriffs of Middle-
sex, Mr. Howard, or his clerks, than the Common
Council of Liverpool has to imprison us for calling in
question the wisdom or veracity of Mr. Bright, or any
other member of the " tyrant majority" in our local
mock-Parliament.

Mr. Bright has displayed a great degree of sensi-
tiveness lest " Lord John Russell should descend from
the high position which he had previously taken." We
should say that Lord John Russell, by introducing a
bill to define the privileges of the House of Commons,
which bill must be submitted to the consideration and
obtain the sanction of the House of Lords, before it
can become a law, has only sunk still deeper in the
mire of degradation. The House of Commons, in
this matter of privilege, has been floundering from one
difficulty to another, until, at length, it has involved it-
self in a labyrinth from which there is no escape but
through the assistance of the House of Lords. Lord
John Russell is fairly stuck between the horns of a di-
lemma, from which the House of Lords can alone res-
cue him. :Mr. Bright, however, would keep him fixed
in his present awkward and humiliating position.
Mr. Bright's notice of motion is perfectly in keeping
with the practice of the liberals, ever since they have
obtained the ascendancy, however contrary it may be to
their professed principles. These liberals, among whom
Mr. Bright is determined not to be a "flower born to
bloom unseen," have ever been the loudest and most
vociferous clamourers for " liberty." This used to
be the burden of all their flaming orations at the hus-'
tings, and in the assemblages of the " great un-
washed." Loud and long were their boasts that their
advent to power would prove the happy prelude to a
second golden age of " liberty and equality." Mag-
nificent were their promises of future national happi-
ness and prosperity. But how have their professions
been reduced to practice, their promises realised, and
their predictions fulfilled ? They have proved, as libe-
rals and democrats have proved in every age of the
world, that, while "liberty" and " freedom" were the
watchwords on their banners, griping and sordid am-
bition, treachery, and tyranny, were deeply and indeli-
bly engraven on their hearts. They have proved the
most arbitrary despots that ever swayed the destinies
of this country. Witness their fiendish alacrity in
"grinding the faces of the poor," and confining them
within the gloomy precincts of their " bastiles," for
the hitherto unheard of crime of poverty. Witness
their arbitrary and oppressive, partial and bigoted con-
duct in the House of Commons, as well as in the Mu-
nicipal Councils of the country.
By the way, what does Mr. Bright mean by " me-
morialising" the House of Commons ? Is he not
aware that, according to the standing orders of that
assembly, nothing but a "humble petition" can be re-
ceived. Perhaps Mr. Bright has yet to learn the dif-
ference between a petition and a memorial.