The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-08-02 00:00:00

AUGUST 2,1 S&,

cords with its title and ostensible object.* It professes
to be a measure for the extinguishment of tithe in Ire-
land, that fruitful source of so mans' evils; for that evils
have flowed hem the Irish Tithe-system no man of can-
dour can deny; and we know that we speak the senti-
'lents of -the. Irish Protestant Clergy when we say, that
no set of men in the empire—not even the Roman
Catholic pavers of this tithe—more ardently desire the
change which this bill, if passed into a law as it has come
from the hands of the Peers, is well calculated to bring
about. If, therefore, Ministers suffer themselves to be
made the instruments of throwing out this bill for the
Purpose of exhibiting O'Connell's.power, and of promot-
ing his designs against the Protestant Church, and
thereby deny to Ireland what Ireland has craved for
ages• great indeed will be their responsibility. Upon
their
guilty heads must rest the bloodshed which may
hereafter take place in Ireland through resistance to the
payment of Tithe.

A contemporary has shown that, independently of the
Weighty and influential considerations above stated, the
actual interests of the Melbourne Ministry are involved
in passing the Bill as it is. To adopt it would be to
Close the session with something like usefulness, and
would at any rate insure the possession of office to those
who now hold it for at least six or eight months to come;
for even assuming that O'Connell might take offence and
stand aloof with his tail, that circumstance could do
tile Government no harm . during the recess with the
w''''sr part of the pOpulation ; whereas the adoption of
the measure with a good grace, and for the good that it
is likely to produce, would gratify the King, be a grace-
ful mark of deference to the House of Lords, and ensure
the support, if not the respect, of the conservative party
generally throughout the coushtry. In some things
ministers evince sufficient tactwith regard to their con-
venience-- or 'party interests. Why so obstinately bent
upon this mischievaus'ab4raction•which they call "prin-
ciPle ?" Ah ! they could tell Us if they Would. It is a
Part of the Litchfield .11orrecorrip'act ; a part of the bar-
gain by wldch they hate purchased .powerli and were
they to run counter to"ao4,oOnnell in this "matter, he would
11°t only, as he phrases it, shake them -off, but probably
reveal that which Miniaters WOuld as soon hear as their
Own death warrants.
We are, therefore, prepared for another of Lori John
Russell's half-insolent, half-abject speeches; that is to
say, insolent towards the Crown, the House of Lords,
the protestant Church, and the Conservative feeling of
the nation; abject towards O'Connell, the Hume-led
infidels and radicals of the English clique, and the
ucunscientious" dissenters, who show the superior piety
Of which they boast by joining in the work of those
.whose aim it is to strike down the Gospel itself. Look-
ing at the past, we are warranted in supposing that the
little leader, in more senses than one, will contrive to
/fluster a majority, and that the Bill will be rejected;
but We may confidently predict that, although Lord John
18 making immense efforts to increase his numbers by
the despatch of special messengers and circulars in every
direction, commanding, begging, praying, entreating
attendance, and although the agency of O'Connell has
been put in requisition for the occasion, the majority will
Le e
less than the memorable six-and-twenty. Momentous
consequences hang upon the decision. It is not merely
a question whether a wicked and incapable Ministry
hall remain in office two or six months longer, more or
less' It embraces much higher considerations—great
moral principles—mighty political results. If the repre-
let:natives of what may be called the unmitigated demo-
cratic Spirit are formed of that class who either Will not
°r cannot comprehend the obligations of honour, the
duties which they owe to a nation. as contra-distinguished
rom their entanglements with faction, then the remedy
14 an obvious one, but by no, means of easy appli-
tion. Woe to the Conservative. members who fail
14 performing their part from any consideration of
Personal convenience.
Not a week passes without affording additional reason
I,or thanking Providence that we have a Honse of Lords.
ut for that house there would be scarcely any limit to
Injustice perpetrated in the guise of legislation.
Our readers are aware that early in the present session
another' passed the Commons—passed, too, with a
Stafford
the Disfranchisement of the Borough of
'3lafford on account- ot.alleged. corruption 'and bribery in
tile electioriiiilB.3l ••'; :ten
What wicked if that led tlifi eie;tor'S Of.Staf-"
ford 'to firigers and sell their votes ? This
qe Tory is no less a personage than Sir John Camp-
bell, his Majesty's Attorney General, the official prose-
tutor of such practices! ' Sir John was most anxious
for a seat in Parliament in 1831. He had been rejected
in another place, despite of his money, and he went
down to Stafford, setting aside £2OOO for the express
Purpose of bribery ; and it is in evidence that one hun-
dred pounds more than that sum were paid to electors
whn had lent or rather sold themselves in Sir John's
Part.,
ses.

Now mark the mode of punishing this offence. The
t"tion made is not for the expulsion of the ‘Vhig lawyer
.41,3 unworthy of a seat in the House of Commons, but to
iring in a bill for the disfranchisement of the Borough ;
mr
taking away the votes of nearly fifteen hundred
electors, because five hundred of them had been corrupt-
ed by Sir John Campbell. The proper course was to
4'e punished the guilty in enforcing the law. But,
,1
clee. who was to be the prosecutor ? Sir John Camp-
0. course. And as Sir John would probably feel nearly
much reluctance to take a brief in such a cause as in
takingtt a peerage for his wife in lieu of promotion to the
„ership of the Rolls, his political friends hit upon the
Pedient of punishing the. whole Borough by perma-
nent deprivation of the franchise! .
b The Peers, however, are not prone to take things
"13°n trust, nor to receive with implicit faith the
ti4surances of such persons as Mr. Wason or Mr. C.
Oiler, they called witnesses to their bar, and examined
them upon oath. If the clearest testimony is worth a
°Sir John Campbell's delinquency was provedbe-
of
nd question; but it was also proved that only a portion
in the electors had been corrupted ; that since the pass-
fr4. the Reform Bill there had been no repetition of the
th ence ; and on Friday evening the House of Lords, on
b_e 'notion of the Lord Chancellor himself, sanctioned
Y Lord Melbourne, decided that there was no case
.11tg_iainst the Borough, and that the Bill must drop, and
ulvrePped accordingly. •
e apprehend that the next time a Whig candidate
:PPears in Stafford, it will not require the aid of bribery
to
induce the electors to send him to the right-about. It
Was
proved before the Lords that a Gentleman in the
linifidence of the ruling powers had offered certain in-
fluential
eutial persons in Stafford a new writ provided a Whig
e returned ; but the condition was refused, and the
riP!rseeution by Bill went on—to terminate in defeat and
"Isgrace.

'rhe Ministerial papers show the importance of the
c ewcastle Election by t
418 e gloss u he efforts they make to put a
'pon it.
~.,..eapt. Blackett, they argue, was a turncoat, and Mr.
nod
hi, Don is an honest liberal, who will vote according to
tlimtr
' conscience, and will support the Melbourne Ali-
y.
~..All these assertions are fallacies, except that Mr.
ti
t°c''gson is an honest man and will vote according to his
nscienca. In his speeches before the electors,
lie dis-
tictlY declared that he will not support the present
tinisters; that he will not lend himself to the promotion
of °'Connell's schemes ; that he is opposed to the ap-
propriation clause; and that he would rather abolish the
~ a The bill, as passed---
by 1.11-1(7------"
of Lords, reduces the
illl.oUnt of tithe by more -than one-fourth. It commutes tithe
_ions9rent-charge; it extinguishes all rnoral.possibility of colli-
_ between the clergy and the poor. If it does nut establish
it`l.arnple fund for the education of the helpless poor of Ireland,
NI: by reason that the provision for granting X. 50,000 to that
ri,.Pose was trickily and shabbily mixed up with one for autho-
411e Under the odious name of " appropriation," an endless
expung-
of
,t insatiable plunder of the clergy; and, therefore, the 'louse
in ''''''',l3, not being entitled to alter a money clause, by ofR the appropriation principle, and substituting another mode
raisinL' £50,000 for education, were under the necessity of
as abill for reforming the
tti''ili!fting both. We say, then, that,
pec,",e_systein. of Ireland, this measure in itspre present state is
curate et. It is a measure of reform in itself—liberal, ,0 mil, cal-
itistd for duration, and fraught with every clement ~1 peace,
per", and prosperity. The career' of civil war and popish
~ 4ecution hb sot out of it by the roots. Then, we ask,
that a bill hich the existing miniters will dare to throw out ?
ilmes, w