The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-03-06 00:00:00

litan member., which would, of itself make a difference
of sixteen votes in the House of •Commons !

The example of MArylebone will also operate bert,fi •
cially upon numerous other constituencies throtigliOut
the country. It is our firm conviction, that the conser-
vative strength of the whole country is.very considera-
bly. greater than the last general election would make it
appear to be. We are persuaded, that most of the un-
recorded votes in different parts of the kingdom are those
of conservatives. We hope that the glorious result of
the contest in Marylebone, will rouse conservatives ge•
nerally from their culpable indifference, and show to them,
that the first element of success is a resolute will to
conquer. The enemies of cur constitution must be met
in every place where a vacancy takes place hereafter.
The triumph of Lord Teignmouth is rendered the more
important from the circumstance that the whole power
and influence of the government were exercised against
him. In spite of this adverse influence—in spite of pro-
mises and menaces—in spite of trickery of every descrip-
tion—in spite of the strenuous opposition of the parochial
functionaries, he left Ewart in a decided minority ; and
even if there had been no split among the radicals
the conservatives would have proved triumphant. The
official declaration of the poll was as follows :

Lord Teginmouth
Mr. Ewart
Col. Thompson

From which we find that Lord Teignmouth's majority
over Ewart was 403, and over Ew•art and Thompson
together, 217. .

It is perfectly nonsensical to speak of "the division of
the liberal interest" as the cause of Lord Teignmouth's
return. The absurdity of this plea is manifest when 2ve
compare the last election with those of 1835 and 1837.
We subjoin the final state of the poll at each of these
periods respectively :

1835.—GENERAL ELECTION.
-Whalley (Whig-Radical)
Bulwer (Whig-Radical)
Horne (Whig)
Young (Radical)

Probable number polled

1837.-GENERAL ELECTION.

Hall (Whig-Radical)
Whalley (Whig-Radical )

Teignmouth (Conservative)

Young (Radical)
Horne (Whig)

Probable number polled, nearly 70(X)
1838.—ONE SEAT VACANT.
Teignmouth (Conservative)
Ewart (Whig-Radical) 3763
Thompson (Radical) lB6

Number polled

From these comparative statements it appears that at
the last election there were 251 votes polled for 'Mr.'
Ewart over those which, at the previous election, were
polled for Mr. Hall, and 812 votes more than Whalley
obtained in 1835. From this it is evident that there has
been no falling off in the strength of the radicals.. So far
from it,' indeed, that there has been an increase of hun-
dreds. The different result of the last election has,
therefore, been owing to the overwhelming increase of
Lord Teignmouth's voters. The number polled by him
in 1837 was 2925. Now it is 4166—an increase of 1241
in the space of a few months I How is this to be ac-
counted for ? Has it been owing to any reaction ? That
cannot be the case, as the radical votes are actually in-
creased. The answer has been most appropriately fur
nished by the Standard--it is not owing to reaction :
it is a much better thing—it is new action. On this view
of the case the Standard has the following very forcible
remarks :

" Our readers will do us the justice to remember that we have
never joined in the boast of re-action—that we have always con-
tended that the country must look loran awakening of the pub-
lic mind from that torpid state of abeyance into which circum-
stances had cast it, and which was confirmed for a season by the
seeming ascendancy and power that it gave in the first instance'
to evil Principles. The strength of the whig-radicals, from the
beginning to the end, has been merely fictitious; at the begin-
ning they seemed strong, because the conservatives were sullen,
silent, and inactive; subsequently, they were strong because
they seemed to be so—and noisily made so much of their seem-
ing strength. that they impressed the alarmed conservatives
with a.cortvietion of its reality. A more manly tone of speaking
among their leaders has at length awakened the conservatives
from their torpor, add each successive experiment has shown
how groundless was their timidity. The glorious result of this
last experiment in Marylebone is decisive. Let the like means
be emplo)ed everywhere, more particularly in the metropolitan
boroughs, and the like happy consequences will most certainly
follow. The bringing out of the electors, previously indifferent
and inactive, is the new action of which we speak, and to which
we attach immeaSurably more importance than td re action, of
which we believe there has been very little, except among the
intelligent and conscientious class of what is called " the reform
partr —a small section even when that party was most nume-
rous. We have no doubt, indeed, that Lord Teignmouth's in-
crease of nearly thirteen hundred since last summer was created
by the production at the poll of electors who had not voted before,
and who Were on this occasion called into activity by that man-
lier tone of the conservative leaders in parliament to which we
have referred, and by the judicious exertions of his lordship's

committee.
" It is a proof of the correctness of this view, that the aggre-
gate strength of whig-radicals has varied very little since July.
At the summer election, Hall and Whalley polled about 3400
each—chiefly whigs and whig-radicals; Young and Horne (who
was put up merely to take off the Radical second votes,) about
700 each; call, then, the aggregate whig, Whig-radical, and
radical force at the summer election, 4100. At the election
yesterday the whig-radical and radical candidates polled between
them 3934—a trifling difference—easily accounted for, by our
being obliged to take averages in the case of the summer elec-

tion, to compare with a precise number in the last election.
Lord Teignmouth's increase of strength of 1241 votes is almost,
if not altogether, exactly commensurate with the actual number
of additional votes pulled.
"1f these. considerations rebut the hypothesis of reaction,
they are not less fatal to the excuses for Mr. Ewart's defeat
offered by the Morning Chronicle:—
It will be argued by the tories no doubt that the return of
Lord Teignmouth affords a proof of a reaction in favour of the
tories. At the last election he polled 29:52, and at the present
he has polled 4166, an increase of 1241 in half a year. But
on the face of the thing too much is here proved. Col. Thomp-
son's address, too, in our advertising columns, affords a confir-
mation of what is confidently affirmed by numerous persons well
acquainted with Marylebone, that Murphy's party of ultra-radi-
cals, alter the first or second hour, voted for Lora Teignintruth,

It Was distinctly affirmed by a leading supporter of Colonel
'Thompson that at least 1000 ultra-radicals voted for his lordship.
That 200 or 300 reformers who voted at the last election might
abstain voting at this is, we think probable, fur it cannot
be concealed that there is a growing disinclination in tradesmen
to expose themselves to sacrifices in the way of business on
account of their votes ; but in estimating. this class of voters at
300, we probably rather over than under rate them.. The rest of
the 1241 is, no doubt, made up of the ultra-radicals."
" If so many radicals voted for Lorl Teignmoutb, how hap-
liens it that the aggregate of whigs, and whig-radicals, and radi.
cals, remains undiminished since last, summer? If 300 declined
voting, why are they not missing from the aggregate ?"
We sincerely hope to find this species of new action
biought into notice in every part of the United King•
doni, and that the conservatives w ill, generally, emulate
the noble example set by the friends of the constitution
in Marylebone. Simultaneous efforts of the same cha-
racter would soon rescue the government of the country
from the hands of the Crim-Connell cabinet.

RELIGIOUS TOLERATION.—THE REV. H. APNEILE'i
PAMPHLET.—The Mercury has, at length, brought his
reply to the Rev. H. M`Neile's pamphlet to a close.
After occupying about six columns of his valuable jour-
nal in attempting to demolish the arguments advanced
in the pamphlet referred to, the venerable editor leaves
the controversy just as he found it. He has, in fact an-
swered no argument, controverted no facts, disproved no
statements brought forward by the Reverend gentleman,
with whom he ventured to enter the lists.
,He has proved
nothing but his own utter incompetency to grapple with
the reasons of his antagonist.

As our readers are aware, the objects of the Rev. H.
M'Neile, in the pamphlet under consideration, were, to
set forth the parallel which exists between Slavery and
Popery, and to demonstrate the absurdity and inconsis-
tency of seeking to abolish the former without offering
any resistance to the latter. If it is true that the con-
dition of the Roman Catholics is one of slavery—mental
and physical—it surely becomes the duty of every lover
of liberty to seek their emancipation. This is precisely
what the Rev. H. M'Neile has been endeavouring to
effect ; and for doing this the Mercury, instead of ins est-
ing him with the title of a benefactor of the highest. or-
der, designated him as an intolerant bigot and a religi: