The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-09-27 00:00:00

CONTEMPORARY PRESS.

We beg to call attention to a recent proceeding of the
new Liverpool Corporation, of which a report will be
found in another column. It will be seen that the Town
Council have refused the usual sums paid out of the cor-
poration funds to the organists, &e., of certain churches
within their jurisdiction, upon the principle that such ad-
vances are illegal. Our readers will be surprised to learn
from Mr. Bolton, the chief spokesman on the occasion,
that the authority from which the Town Council have
professedly taken their law in this case is not the L. ord
Chancellor, nor the Lord Chief Justice, nor any of the
law officers of the crown, no, nor any legal functionary
of their own, but the Archbishop of Canterbury. Verily
we live in strange times, and must make up our minds to
hear strange reasons advanced for strange proceedings.
It appears, however, from the tone of the discussion, that
the worshipful Corporation of Liverpool had another rea-
son for refusing the money, in support of which, it is to
be hoped, they cannot avail themselves of the same au-
thority—they are advocates for the voluntary principle.
It is pretty evident that their volition would he as to the
support of a national church. But, as they themselves
suggest, the community at large will soon make up for
their parsimony. Be it so.. There is some grace in the
suggestion, even though it spring from no higher motive
than shame, that the mischief which their decision is cal-
culated to produce will be nullified and counteracted by
the good feeling of their townsmen. But let it never be
forgotten by those who regard a Church Establishment
as a great meatis, under Providence, of preserving and
diffusing the spirit of religion, that the corporations, as
now constituted, proceed upon a different view, and, like
the poor law commissioners, have taken the " short al-
lowance system" under their patronage, probably in the
hope that starvation may purify the church, as well as the
workhouse. At all events, the church has had little to
thank them for as yet, unless it be the candour which has
led them to declare their sentiments, and make a sort of
practical registry of those sentiments by the performance
of acts which speak louder than words.—ilforn. Herald.

WORCESTER CONSERVATIVE DINNER.
WORCESTER, Seer. 2.3.—An important public dinner—im-
portant not only from its numbers, but as showing the feeling of
that influential and powerful body, the operative classes, in
favour of conservatism—took place yesterday in this city, the
operative conservative constituency of Worcester having invited
their representative, Mr. Bailey, to a public dinner. The dinner
was held in the Theatre ROyal. The pit was boarded over, and
the theatre elegantly and appropriately decorated for the occa-
sion. Between four and five hundred persons sat down to dinner.
The gallery was filled with ladies. Among the gentry residing
in Worcester and its neighbourhood who were specially and
generally invited were—R. Spooner, Esq., T. R. S. Packingtou,
Esq., T. M. Gutch, Esq., John and William Dent, Esqrs., H.
Clifton, Esq., Major Bend, C. Bailey, jun., Esq., T. Hooper,
Esq., Captain Bund, E. L. Danbury, Esq., 'l'. M. Holcroft,
Esq., &c. After the usual loyal and constitutional toasts the
health of Mr. Bailey was given from the chair, and drunk with
loud and fervent acclamations.
Mr. Bailey, in rising to return thanks, was received with loud
cheers. He commenced by stating that the kindness he had re-
ceived in Worcester had always been of the most gratif) ing
nature, but that which he had received upon the present occasion
exceeded all he had ever before experienced. He had ever done
his duty as far as it was in his power, and it gave him great
satisfaction to think that his political conduct met with their
approbation, which from the tenour of their invitation to him to
dine with them on that day he was led to suppose. Ile had ever
pursued that course in parliament which he thought would tend
to promote the welfare of the country. He had not looked to
one party or another, but he had given his support to those he
thought best qualified to manage the affairs of the country, and
advance the interests and happiness of the higher and lower
classes conjointly. (Cheers.) The present ministry were
placed in a most peculiar situation. Had they not been govern-
ed and ruled by a party, many would have united with the con-
servatives, and have endeavoured to give the country a good
government. The ministers were, however, united to a party,
who were endeavouring to make Ireland superior to this coun-
try. Ireland was not taxed in the same proportion as this country,
and yet they were continually complaining that they had not the
same privileges. It was from uniting with this party that mi-
nisters had lost the good opinion of the people of this country.
By it they had lost their chief prop, Lord Grey, who deserted,
them, or at least remained neutral, as also those two able states-
men, Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham. If they looked at
the elections which had'recently taken place they would find
that the country at large had deserted them—in towns as well
as counties. If they looked abroad they would perceive
that, through their bad management and foreign policy,
one half of Europe was in a state of anarchy and confusion.
It was so in Spain, in Portugal, and he might almost say in
France. If they looked to the north they would perceive, by the
imbecility of their government, the eagle of Russia was floating
in countries where it was the interest of this county to have pre-
vented its ever being planted. With regard to the Irish church,
a great number were desirous to pass a tithe law, which, without
the appropriation clause, would have been a great boon to Ire-
land, and would have been the means of restoring peace and
tranquility to that country. That, however, the government
would not allow ; they required the appropriation clause, by
which £50,000 were to be taken from the revenues of the church,
and applied to secular purposes. It was the principle that was
objectionable. The commons would not only have given £50,000
but any other sum, to have secured the peace of Ireland. After
some observations respecting the Irish corporations, the hon.
member proceeded to say that the minority of the House of
Commons was so large and so united that it gave a tone to the
House of Lords to do their duty, and reject that measure. Not
only upon that occasion, but upon many others, had the House
of Lords shown themselves to be constitutional barons. (Cheers.)
Had it not been for the House of Lords the children of many in
that meeting would have been deprived of a most important
right, it having been attempted to do away with the hereditary
freemen. The chairman had alluded to a vote which he (Mr.
Bailey) had given on the subject of the pension list. He had
been told that the right of his majesty placing whom he thought
proper on the pension list was a compact between the country
and the king, which right his majesty could exercise without
control. No doubt every person had a right to have pensioners,
and to do what he chose with his own; but when the subject of
the pension list came so often before the House of Commons he
could not conscientiously do otherwise than vote for a revision of
it, especially as there were some on that list whom he could not
consistently approve of. After several other remarks Mr. Bai-
leeoncluded by thanking them for their kindness.
The chairman returned thanks.
Mr. Bayley proposed " Sir Robert Peel and the conservative
members of the House of Commons." (Continued cheering.)
Mr. Packington proposed the next toast—" Lord Lyndhurst
and the House of Lords." (Cheering for some time.)
Various other toasts were drunk, and the meeting was ad-
dressed by several other persons.