The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-03-24 00:00:00

church, iThete tonformil

can they claim to belong to the church, where authority is to
be exercised? We might stand upon the principle of all
social government, that the minority is properly bound by
the majority; and it is unnecessary to take this ground, ex-
cept for the purpose of soothing the sore consciences of too
sensitive dissenters. It is unnecessary to take this ground,
because any other system of religious education than that
through and by the Established Church is impracticable—
the legislature which should agree to such a system would
practically unestablish the church and de-christianise the
country. We hold that as long as a system of national
education reposes confidence in the church, acknowledges
the prima facie claim of the church to be considered as the
ex officio superintendent of all religious education of the
people, there is no harm in allowing very liberal exceptions
under particular circumstances."

The world has been amused during the last week
with an unfortunate mistake of that somewhat erratic
genius, Lord Brougham. His lordship—who, from
the acquaintance he has had with the fraternity, ought
to have known better—appears to have laboured under
the impression that it was within the power of ability
such as his to extract a direct answer to a direct ques-
tion, from—a quaker ! That he has been disappointed
is to us no marvel. We never met with such a lusus
naturw as a quaker so directly communicative; and
we should certainly not have expected to meet with
one in the ranks of the Anti-Corn-law League, or in
the person of that anomalous production of mingled
nature and art—a quaker cotton lord. Lord Brougham,
therefore, if he is convinced now of the quibbling pro-
pensities of members of the Society of Friends, has ar-
rived at his convictions rather late in life !
It will he remembered that some month or two ago,
his lordship—somewhat after the manner in which a
lively tiger lashes his tail through the bars of his cage
at some presumptuous urchin whom he cannot at the
moment reach with his claws—inflicted, from his place
in the House of Lords, a rather handsome castigation
upon the gentlemen (!) of the Anti-Corn-law League,
being the first—except, as Mr. John Bright, of Roch-
dale, affirms, the Quarterly Review and the members
of the " monopolist press"—to connect that body,
through " the assassination speech" of the Rev. Mr.
Bailey, with the crime of M`Naughten. At the time
that this castigation was delivered, we positively trem-
bled for the ex-chancellor. Nothing less than to be
devoured at some anti-corn-law tea party—to be cut
up in plates of bun-loaf, and washed down with de-
coctions of saloop, spent sloe-leaves, and coffee grounds
—was the doom which, in our mind's eye, we predicted
for Henry Brougham and Vaux. But no : such was
not to be his fate. The League could neither eat up
the lively lawyer, Burke him or get rid of him in any
other:effectual and expeditious manner ; and so they—
only libelled him ! The Anti-bread Tax Circular taxed
its ingenuity to fabricate a damning charge against the
offender, and at length screwed up the necessary power
of face to assert, first, that the said learned lord had,
at some period last year, prayed and beseeched the
League to be permitted to bring on a motion in the
House of Lords, on the subject of the corn-laws ;—to
be permitted to act as its standing counsel in that
assembly; secondly, that the deputation from the
League were disinclined to entrust their brief in his
hands ; thirdly that, in most moving terms, he per-
sisted in his entreaty ; fourthly, that the deputation
reluctantly consented; fifthly, that he invited them to
his own house ; and sixthly, that after all this patron-
ising condescension of the cottonocracy towards so
very humble a personage as Lord Brougham, his lord-
ship had turned out a very ungrateful fellow !

We would really have given our cigar-case, or any
other valuable we possess, to have witnessed the effect
of the first reading of this impertinence upon the
learned peer. We rather imagine the contortions pro-
duced by the shock would have been a subject worthy
of the pencil of H. B. The first transports of his rage
over, however, his lordship proceeded to write two
letters, containing a reasonable quantity of Cayenne,
Chilies, and other hot seasonings, to the gentlemen
who composed the deputation, and from whom the
alleged facts, as to the entreaties, &c. of his lordship,
must have come to the ears of the Anti-bread tax per-
sonage. And here was the instance of his lordship's
marvellous folly One of the gentlemen in questiOn
was Mr. Hamer Stansfield, of Leeds—a leaguer and
a mill-owner, but a man habited like other men—and it
was reasonable enough to ask from such a man for an
explanation; but the other was Mr. John Bright, of
Rochdale—a leaguer and a quaker—and it was palpably
absurd to expect that from such a man an intelligible
explanation, or an answer, at all direct, and in intelli-
gible English, could be drawn.

The result has been the publication of the corres-
pondence, and just such a correspondence as all the
world would have expected. The reply of Mr. Stans-
field to the question, as to the truth of the representa-
tion put forth by the Anti-bread Tax man, was a frank
and manly admsion that the statement was through-
out untrue—that his lordship's own recollection of the
circumstances of his interviews with the League depu-
tation was throughout true: in short, it was almost as
complete a negative to the scribe of the League, as we
remember to have met with. The reply of worthy
John Bright, however, was of a more undecided
colour. The honest quaker could not remember " that
thou did show any reluctance," or that any urgent en-
treaties were used on the part of the deputation. He
could in fact afford to remember nothing calculated to
impeach the veracity of the slanderer of his lordship.
His mind retained no impressions of anything favour-
able to the character of Lord Brougham. He opined,
however, (in direct contradiction to his fellow deputy,
Mr. Stansfield) that, the deputation were rather in-
disposed than otherwise to accept his lordship's advo-
cacy, (though they waited upon him to pray for it !),
and finally assured his lordship—John Bright of Roch-
dale assured Lord Brougham 1 more in sorrow
than in anger," that he John Bright P:TIED Lord
Brougham

The substance of this correspondence will be found
elsewhere. As a sample of epistolary style, they are
rare. This much, however, they establish. Lord
Brougham and Mr. Hamer Stansfield have spoken
what is true, or they have not. John Bright of Roch-
dale has spoken what is true or he has not. The world
has the opportunity of deciding between them.

We are compelled to withhold a few remarks in
reply to our contemporary the Manchester Guardian,
who has somewhat misunderstood a recent article in
the Standard On the Corn-Law question. On Tuesday,
however, we hope to be able to pay our respects to
him ; and we shall do so with the greatest pleasure
because we observe, in our contemporary's remarks, a
little abatement of his ordinary supercilious tone. We
can assure him that we have nothing to conceal upon
this or any other question.

To one portion of the Guardian's article we must,
however, reply at once, as we are unwilling to remain,
even a day, misunderstood with respect to it. Our
contemporary, out of some assumed coldness of our
advocacy of a sliding scale, infers that the mercantile
body of Liverpool are becoming converts to the argu-
ments in behalf of a fixed duty. Now, highly as we
do and ought to appreciate the value of the opinion of
a body of men, so well worthy of deference being paid
to them as the merchants of this great port, we must
inform the Guardian that such a conversion on their
part is not to be inferred from any remarks of ours.
We think and act for ourselves, and would feel de-
graded in our own estimation if we could, as the Guar-
dian implies, trim our course to jump in with the
changed opinions of others. Our mercantile friends,
we are sure, expect no such time-serving policy at our
hands.