The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-01-31 00:00:00

sure,

The defeat which the Ministry sustained on Monday
evening, formed a very appropriate prelude to the de-
bate, which has since occupied the attention of the
House of Commons. A triumphant majority of ONE
HUNDRED AND FOUR recorded their votes by anti-
cipation, in favour of Sir J. Y. Buller's motion : for
what is the plain interpretation of the vote on the
allowance to Prince Albert ? Does it not imply that
the overwhelming majority of the House of Commons
are of opinion that the present Ministry arc an extra-
vagant Ministry, and therefore unworthy of the confi-
dence of the-House Was it not equivalent to•a vote
of censure upon Ministers ? Such is the only con-
struction which we can put upon it; and it. will greatly
7of those gentlemen who voted for
(orlSibthorpe'sif y
anamendment should have the hardihood
surprise
eogr us
their votes in favour of Ministers on Sir J.
Y. Buller's motion.

The division of Monday night must prove a source
of deep humiliation to the. Whig courtiers. They had
evidently made up their minds to carry the motion for
an allowance of fifty •thousand pounds. it must be
mortifying in the highest degree to find themselves
deprived of so splendid an opportunity of paying their
court to the Queen. However, this is not the last
mortification which the degraded Whig Administra-
tion is destined to sustain.

The Ministers are now upon their trial,—not before
the country, for in that case there would be very little
doubt of the verdict which would be almost unani-
mously given,—and the House of Commons will,
probably, before these remarks reach many of our
subscribers, 'pronounce- upon them a verdict of
guilty" or " not guilty." But it should be remem.

Tiered that in this case the culprits themselves consti-
tute a part, or, at least, exercise the functions,-of the.
jury. If the principals and subordinates in office had
the modesty to abstain from voting in their ownfarour,
thu.o could be no doubt of the issue of the trial now

in progress. As long as they sit as judges and jury
in their own case—as long as they have the presump-
tion to vote on their own behalf, they may command a
"measuring cast" majority in
,the House of Commons.
But if they left the non-official Members of the House
to the free exercise of their opinions, they would find
themselves :condemned: as unworthy of confidence.
Whatever may be the opinion of the House of Com-
m Ons—whatever may be the result of the anticipated
division on the motion now before the House, there can
be hut one opinion as to the judgment which the elec-
tors of Great Britain have long since formed of Lord
Melbourne and his associates. In the present House
of Commons there is a decided majority of Etagfish and
Welsh representatives who are prepared to pass a vote
of censure upon Ministers. Another general election
would considerably augment that majority. The pre-
sent Ministers only hold office through the assistance
of Daniel O'Connell and his tail. The destinies of
England are now wielded by the Popish priests of Ire-
land. Is it to be wondered at that the people of Eng-
land are anxious to be rid of an administration which
is neither more nor less than a pliant tool in the hands
of the Jesuits ? Is it to be wondered at that a disso-
lution of the present Parliament is looked for with such
intense interest ?,

The debate on Sir J. T. Buller's motion is becoming
more interesting as it proceeds. The first night's
speeches, were comparatively uninteresting. The
mover and seconder contented themselves with a gene-
ral declaration of the principles on which the motion
was brought forward. This they did with much abi-
lity. The only ministerial advocate who attempted to
grapple with the motion, during the first. night's de-
bate, was Sir George Grey, who laboured hard "to
make the worse appear the better cause." His elabo-
rate defence of the ministry was, however, very ably
and successfully answered by Mr. Colquhoun, whose
speech, as reported in the morning papers, reflects the
highest credit upon his tact and ability. Poor Mr.
Ewart essayed a few words in defence of ministers :
but his speech, like every other that he ever delivered,
was the feeble effort of a puny intellect—the very small
beer of oratory.
The second night's debate was of a far more inter-
esting character. Sir James Graham delivered a speech
which occupies five columns of the Times, in which he
thoroughly exposed the meanness, the trickery, the
time-serving policy, and the concentrated selfishness
of the Ministers. His speech will have a powerful ef-
fect upon the public mind. Mr. Macauley's reply was
an utter failure. It was " a thing of shreds and
patches," ingeniously tacked together, hut without
strength or beauty.

We shall not speculate upon the probable result of
the present debate; indeed, we care not what that re-
sult may be, as far as the division is concerned. We
view the debate as most important in the influence
which it will produce upon public opinion.

We beg the attention of our readers, and particularly
of those interested in railway property, to a report of
the proceedings at a meeting of the Liverpool and
Manchester Railway, held on Wednesday last, at which
a dividend of 5 per cent. upon the half year was de-
clared.

Our object in adverting to this meeting is tO endea-
vour to counteract an impression, which the experience
of the working of the Liverpool and Manchester Rail-
way has created, to the disadvantage of railways gene-
rally, and which in our opinion is erroneous. It was
stated at the meeting, and in part admitted, that the
per centage of expense for working this line is greater
than that on most other lines of larger traffic; and this
fact, which is pretty generally known, has for many
years been adduced as an argument against the system
.generally as one of a profitable nature, and especially
where the conveyance of merchandize has been de-
pended
upon for a portion of the estimated revenue.
How, it has been asked, can the merchandize -traffic
on this or that railway he expected to pay, when-it is
a well-known fact that on the Manchester and Liver•
pool line, with its immense resources, the cost of con-
veying goods is found to yield so small a per centage
of profit as to render it
,doubtful whether it would not
almost be as well for the Company. to discontinue it
altogether. The Answer' is 'easily found, and at the
same time perfectly satisfactory. The mode of calcu-
lating .the working expenses is not a fair mode, and
the result arrived at is incomplete, inasmuch as it.only
shows the proportion which expense of working bears
to revenue upon a certain rate of charges. The Man-
chester and Liverpool Company are compelled by water
competition to submit to the minimum rate of charge,
and hence the disproportion between their gross re-
ceipts from merchandize traffic and their revenue from
it. Advance the rate of carriage, and, the working
expense being the same, the profit will increase ; lower
it and the profit will merge entirely in expenses. On
lines where this advanced rate of carriage can be
charged, merchandize traffic will form an important
item of revenue, and the per centage of profit he
greater, whilst the per centage of working expense will
be. proportionately less. At the same .time the cost
per ton per mile will not materially vary in any ; and
we have no doubt that by this, the only accurate mode
of computation, the working of the -Manchester and
Liverpool line will be found to be as economical as it
can be made, with a due regard to efficiency. •

A correspondent, who signs himself " Mercator,"
has proposed to 'us several questions respecting the
conductors of the Liverpool Chronicle. .:We really
must confess ourselves unable to answer his queries.
We have no means of knowing whether Mr. Dignan
is, or is not, the editor of the Chronicle; nor can we
establish his identity with the Mr. I)ignan who is re-
ported to have been the writer of that abominable pro-
duction, the Brazen Head. We are equally in the
dark as to who " the Parson" is, to whom the Times so
pointedly alludes. Perhaps the late Minister of a cer-
tain church not a hundred yards from Bold-street could
throw some light on the subject. He is reported to
have dabbled pretty freely in politics, and has the
credit of knowing " a thing or two" about the secrets
of more than one Radical journal in the town.
We have only to add that we have no disposition
to interfere in the quarrel between the Times and the
Chronicle. - if we did so, we should probably meet
with the fate which usually befals those who interfere
in quarrels between man and wife—that of being
abused by both parties. "Itis a very pretty quarrel
as it stands," and will most-likely do good.