The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-01-10 00:00:00

..
\'kl.

718itrzoot 4taitharb.

'l7t-fE SD AY .3701N1N4 JAN. 10, 1854.

COBDENIC POLICY, THE INTERNAL

RIVE3fY OF ENGLAND.

Svcs is the title of a very remarkable publication given
to the world within the last few days. The value or im-
portance of that work is not derived from any intrinsic
excellence ; in point of fact, its moral claims are of a very
tainted character. Nor can its title to consideration be.
based on any high or intellectual cogitations elaborated in
its 'pages ; although abounding in shrewdly drawn con-
clusions, it is too obviously founded on the disappointed
expectations of a sordid spirit to be admitted as the off-
spring of disinterested virtue ; and every page is dis-
coloured by the rankling animosity of a discarded partizan.
For what, then, is it to be chiefly prized ? Its chief, in-
deed its only, value is the light it throws upon the hidden
machinery by which Mr. COBDEN and his coadjutors swayed

the popular mind to such an extent as led to the disrup-
tion of our social polity ; and the exposure of those secret
motives for which, after breaking down the barriers of
protection, raised in defence of our native industry by the
wisdom of statesmen, in obedience to the experience of
ventaries, the same clique still seeks so far to overthrow
our time-honoured institutions, as will render the British
people the helpless and unreasoning tool of that grasping,
_selfish, and unprincipled coterie, at the head of which,
" by merit raised
To that bad eminence,"
stand RICHARD COBDEN and JOHN BRIGHT. The book
referred to is written byALExANDER SOMERVILLE, a will-
ing helper of the tribe—an individual who, under the news-

paper soubriquet of "One who has whistled at the plough,"

was an effective instrument of evil in their hands. "Whom
the gods would destroy. they first make mad," is a proverb
of ancient application, whether it may serve in any way to
elucidate the nature of that deadly quarrel which has grown

np and declared itself between the leaders of the anti-corn-
law conspiracy and their most gifted instrument, is not for
rhs to say. When members of a certain class of the community

fall out among themselves, honest men are supposed likely
to come by their own, and symptoms of such a falling-out
among the league confederacy are becoming more and
more rife with each succeeding day's experience. It is not
so long as to have escaped remembrance since the notorious
"national testimonial" to Connxic gave rise to feelings the
reverse of amicable between that astute luminary and
BRIGHT, his disappointed confrere in the work of agitation.
Only last week the Times, another of the agitating brother-
hood, admitted that the objects of the league, so far as
It professed to increase the demand for manufacturing
labour, had, de facto, proved an inoperative pretence ;
and now we have Mr. Soxtrumax whistling such
a strain from his new plough-tail, as must put even
COBDEN'S proverbial power of face severely to the test.
in his new ditty, regardless of that honour which is said
to be observed among even the most lawless and degraded
Ishmaelites of society, Mr. SOMERVILLE "unfolds a tale,"
which even the worst enemies of the defunct Leakue-were
=prepared to credit or receive ; nay, more, he backs the
unexpected revelation with strong and damning documen-
tary evidence. Without scruple or remorse, he treats us
with such a string of " private and confidential" commu-
--mications, indited by the cunning hand of Mr. COBDEN
and a few of his select associates, as unveils a system of
hypocrisy and fraud, by which the objects of the League
were carried into effect, as we believe to be without a pa-
rallel in the annals of political rascality. Lest the letters
themselves should fail in fully displaying the nefarious
schemes inculcated in their contents, Mr. SOMERVILLE
obligingly accompanies them with such an amount and
hind of running commentary, as cannot fail to bring their
meaning fully and readily within reach of even the "mean-

est capacity," and this he does with all the alacrity and
zeal distinctive of recent apostacy. It is, however, only
justice to say, that he justifies the unmasking of his quon-
dam patrons as some restitution for the evils he was in-
strumental in inflicting on society. We readily admit the
suspicion naturally attached to the testimony of a sociis
eriminis, and acknowledging that of Mr. SOMEaVILLS to
be so tainted, we beg our readers to remember that, in

any subsequent remarks upon his version of the story, we

adduce his evidence to be received valeat quantum valere
yotest, premising simply that, in criminal inquiries, such
evidence is chiefly valued in corroboration or explanation
-4:X facts otherwise but imperfectly substantiated ; while, in
morals, the mere association of the parties is held as in a
considerable degree explanatory of their mutual tastes and
habits. Having got so far in our preliminary remarks
respecting the publication and its author, let us next in-
quire what are the charges brought by him against his
recent employers, and see by what evidence he supports
_those charges. It is true, that he complains his task-
masters have underpaid and overworked him—broadly
asserts great benefits conferred, and more than merely
insinuates palpable and base ingratitude as their chief
reward. These, however, being personal matters, we do
not feel called on to examine deeply into their nature, and
may be more readily excused for the omission by the con-
viction that Mr. SONBRVILLE is no silk-gloved champion
his owa cause, but is potent as well as deft in the use
a' a very damaging weapon.

The first grave charge brought against Mr. CODDEN,
and by implication against his brother leaguers, is that,
by dishonest means, they endeavoured to effect the abro-
gation of the Corn-laws ; one of these dishonesties was by
insinuating anti-corn-law articles into pro-corn-law news-
papers, so disguised as to deceive and mislead protection-
ists by an insidious inoculation of free trade doctrines.
How does Mr. SOMERVILLE state this charge ?
"So early," says he, p. 17, "in my acquaintance with
those people as 1842, I declined a share of the proprietor-
ship and editorial pay in a first-class pro-corn-law news-
paper, proposed to me by Mr. Cobden, on behalf of the
anti-corn-law league, rather than be a hypocrite as he
4,..esigned."

Thus far the charge ; now the support of it. At page
37 we find the following—
'The first letter quoted refers to a London newspaper
of high reputation, of Conservative politics, an able advo-
cate of protection to agriculture ; in short, a landlord's
and farmer's newspaper. To distinguish it from others
written of in succeeding letters, I call it Number One.
Its name Is withheld, as its present proprietors may not
be, though for aught I know they are, the same as in 1842.
'`` November, 1852.

"'DEAR Sin,—Could not Number One be got right ?
It appears to be taking the side of the farmers. It would
be a great move if we could purchase a share and put you
on it. Make some inquiries quietly as to what it is
Zoing, and as to the persons connected with it—Yours
truly, RICHARD COBDEN."'
" In this short letter Mr. Cobden's mind had four dis-
tinct secrets and processes of deception operating at once.
1. " ' It appears to be taking the side of the farmers.'
This was the smallest and least important. He meant to
intimate that something in the editorial department
showed that it was abandoning the cause of the land-
owners, and addressing itself to the farmers, as having
interests apart from those of landlords ; the truth being
that, editorially, the paper had taken no such view of the
Corn Law question. It would have at once lost its influ-
ence and circulation if it had. But, on behalf of the
League, a letter had been inserted, which, treating of
other matter, introduced that view of the subject; and, by
Private arrangements made, the League had reason to sup-
pose that such letters might be again inserted. This they
told me subsequently.
2. " Make some inquiries quietly as to what it is doing,
and as to the persons connected with it.' By subsequent
conversation, I ascertained that at this time the League
'knew all which Mr. Cobden desired me to ascertain, and
much more. They knew that the whole concern could be
purchased for certain thousands of pounds. Mr. Cobden,
in desiring me to sound the proprietary of the paper, was
secretively sounding me.
Z. "It would be a great move if we could purchase a
share, and put you in it.' Mr. Cobden's estimate of literary
men contemplated me, not as nibbling at this bait of
property and editorial power in a first-class newspaper,
but as swallowing it at a gulp ! He who had formed
such an opinion of ' writers and speakers' [I was no
speaker], 'journalists' and 'reviewers,' that he invoked
Punishment on them when, six years previously, he ar-
rived home from Russia, did not dream that there could
be one of the literary brotherhood who would scorn to be I
concerned in such Jesuitical deception of political oppo-
nents, particularly if that more than the Bible principle
of a certain sect in Manchester [God grant them fewness
of number, and shortness of political life] —pecuniary
profit and personal advantage—were involved.•
4 " The words of this third process of secretiveness
are the text of the fourth. The paper was Conservative in
general politics, rather Tory than Moderate, and a decided
pro-Corn Law journal. It opposed the Anti-Corn Law
League, and it was intended to be so conducted. On
League capital it was to be Tory in politics, to advocate
the Corn Law so far as to retain its agricultural readers,
but to admit occasional articles of treachery.
" Am I in error in putting this construction on Mr.
C,obden's proposal ? In the first place, subsequent conver-
sation with him and others, chiefly about other newspapers,
but incidentally touching Number One, confirmed this
interpretation. Secondly. It would not have served their
purpose; it would not have been, as Mr. Cobden phrased
rotctio
it, a great move,' to have purchased and converted it
a Free-trade newspaper, because its Protectionist
readers would have spurned it. Mr. Cobden's design was
to instil homoeopathic morsels of anti-protectionism into
houses of Protectionists unawares, the while innocent
dupes, they paid for it as a Pro-Corn Law journal."
Earther on, at page 41, we have the commencement of
another evidence how far these anti-corn-law advocates
of the freedom of the press may be carried, if in conso-
mance with their own views. The following letter, Mr.
SOMERVILLS assures us, also has reference to the same
siewspaper—

"'Waterloo, near Liverpool, Saturday.
*" DEAR Sin,—Your letter followed me here, where I
am:getting some sea air. I will be at Manchester on