The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-10-22 00:00:00

bove the cost of proddction

, what he can
reaiise above. say 40% a quarter for his wheat. When he
sells for 50s. he gets £zoo a year profit; that is, by the
difference between 405., the cost of production, and 505..
the price, he clears £2OO. If, therefore, prices in general
decline one-tenth, and he sells for only 455. a quarter,
his profit is reduced one-half; he has £lOO a year instead
of £2OO. But be buys for one-tenth less; that is, he can
now buy with £lBO as much as before cost him £2OO
What, then, is t" ?

Now sup

pose a farmer's profit to arise h

E Why, that he gains £2O by
buying. cheap, and loses £lOO by selling cheap. The
consumer gets a small advantage ; the producer sustains

a heavy loss. And this must be the effect to every pro-
ducer in a heavily taxed country, by the forced cheapness
_ .
)y a contraction.—Rev. T. Twell's Speech.

LORD STANLEY AND THE PROTECTIONISTS.— Lord
Stanley has sent the following reply to a letter addressed
to him by Mr. G. F. Young, calling attention to certain
comments made on the speech recently delivered by his
lordship at Bury :—" My dear sir,—l have this moment
received your letter of yesterday, and hasten to reply to
it. I have observed, as indeed I expected, that my speech
at the agricultural dinner at Bury has furnished matter
foi• -ts on to 't of a `hough J

Jr various comment, ~ne part o, ne press, tti, ,n
have not happened to see the articles to which you refer
in the Morning Chronicle. Had I done so, however, I
should have equally abstained, as I always do, from any
public notice of coy comments which may be made by
the press on the language I had used. I own, however,
that whatever observations might be made on what I said
at Bury, the last inference which I should have expected
to have seen drawn was that I had changed my opinions
on the subject of protection. In fact, I thought it right,
in opening a new society at this moment, to depart from
the ordinary course, and, distinctly referring to recent
legislative measures, to state the reasons why, retaining
my opinion on the injurious and ruinous character of
those measures to the agricultural interest generally, I
yet thought that there was room for profitable investment
of capital in the particular district in which I was speak-
ing. Those reasons I stated to be, first, that it was not
a corn growing district, and little affected by the price of
corn ; next, that not being even exclusively an agricul-
tural district, it had the advantages of an inexhaustible
market for its produce, and an unlimited supply of
manure at its very doors; and lastly, that a great portion
of it being wholly undrained, and consequently full of
water, the simple operation of draining, even if it cost
£l2 the Cheshire acre (nearly double the statute), would
increase the productiveness of the land to an extent which
would amply repay the outlay. The fact is, that the
country round Bury is either in grass or under green
crops for the supply of the great manufacturing towns,
and, a portion of it lying high, is better fitted for rearing
young stock in the summer than for any other purpose ;
but a very small portion of it is suited for any description
of corn, and a still smaller for wheat. It is, therefore,
as far as the corn laws are concerned, an entirely excep-
tional case—and I took care so to treat it—repeating em-
phatically my conviction that, in the purely agricultural
districts and most of all in those where the highest farming
p-evailed, the recent changes had inflicted, and must in-
flict most serious injury on landlord, tenant, and labourer.
I certainly said that if good farming would not pay, bad
could not ; but I even went so far as to dilate on the dis-
tinction between good and high farming, the latter of
which I contended could not be carried on at such prices
as now rule, and as I think must rule under free trade.
You do me justice in supposing that, had I altered my
views, I should have taken a very different opportunity of
making the statement, and not left it to be inferred from
any casual expressions; but my intention at Bury was
wholly different, and I hoped I had succeeded in justi-
fying my recommendations to the tenants of that district
to do justice to the land, while at the same time I ad-
hered most unequivocally to all the opinions I have ex-
pressed, in and out of parliament, as to the effect of our
recent policy on agriculture in general.—l am, dear sir,
yours sincerely, " STANLEY."

THE QUEEN AND THE SCOTCH CHURCH

(From the 21forning Herald.)

The Tractarians avow themselves fearfully shocked that
the Queen, while residing in Scotland, shows at once her
reverence for the constitution of the country, and her
superiority to mere formalism, by attending Divine Ser-
vice in the National Church. Were the Church of Scot-
land either a non-Protestant or a dissenting denomina-
tion, there.would be room for objection. But it confes-
sedly differs from the Church of England only in form,
and if Dr. Cumming's sermon, before the Queen at
Balmoral, be, as we believe it is, a specimen of its theo-
logy, we are not surprised that our Gracious Queen, while
preferring the forms and regime of the Anglican Estab-
lishment, should enjoy six or seven Sunday services once
a year in a Scottish parish church.
Dr. Cumming's sermon contemplates all historical and
possible religions as comprehended in three—what he
calls the religion of man, or man's worship of self; the
religion of the priest, or the creature's looking for salva-
tion through the priest and priestly rites; and, lastly, the
religion of God, or looking for salvation only by the
Redeemer. It is easy to see that Pantheism, Puseyism,
and Protestantism, are the topics he thus discusses.
There is no controversy, no harsh denunciation, and
yet there is so clear a discrimination of truth and error,
that a conviction of the excellence and glory of Protes-
tant Christianity is inevitable. Of course, the Mannings,
the Wilberforces, the Bennetts, and others of the St.
Martin's Hall demonstration, will feel fresh wrath be-
cause the Queen has listened to a faithful exhibition of
Evangelical truth. They not only rave because her
Majesty worships in Scotland in the National Church, as
the constitution unequivocally prescribes, and her own
enlightened mind inclines her, but because she hears in
no unoertain sounds that men are made happy and saved
neither by their own merits nor by a priest's incantations,
but in the way plainly indicated by the Bible, and enun-
ciated in the standards of every Protestant Church, and
nowhere more clearly than in the Articles of the Church
of England. It is satisfactory to know that the great
mass of the middle classes, with scarcely an exception,
have no sympathy with Tractarian views. The nation is
thoroughly Protestant—Puseyism is on its way to Ro-
manism, much of it is already arrived. A powerful reac-
tion is felt throughout England. The Saxon will not
submit to be priest-ridden. The crozier shall not govern
the Crown, nor ambitious priests shut the Bible and
dictate infallibilities to the yeomen of England.
With Dr. Cumming, in this sermon, we believe ''the
Gospel grows in influence every day." Nothing success-
fully arrests it. Mankind approach Christianity ; they
do not recede from it. The last days of Christianity are
proving its brightest. Genius has made so many and so
great discoveries that the earth has been converted into a
higher orb. But much as men have improved themselves
and their world, they have not gone above or beyond the
Gospel. Far as we have travelled, we are not yet far
from the cradle of Bethlehem and the cross of Calvary.
We have distanced Jerusalem—not Jesus. We approach
him as to a distant star, that grows more beautiful and
lustrous as we near. England and America, the choicest
intellects, the greatest scholars, the noblest hearts, still
stretch out their hands to the Eton of Man. More and
more clearly the wisest see bow perishable is all that man
thinks great—how lasting is the leak" that God proneunees
true.

THE REV. MOSES MARGOLTOUTH ON FREE-

MASONRY.

The author of " A Pilgrimage to the Land of illy
Fathers," in a letter addressed to Dr. Stanley, the late
Lord Bishop of Norwich, dated Tanis, January, 1848,
gives " a veritable cop," of a curious Jewish amulet,
consisting of several compartments and figures, with
which " the doors, windows, -chimneys, and beds," in
that locality, are posted wherever an accouchement takes
place. Mr. Margoliouth gives first the Jewish explana-
tion of the purport of the amulet. and then proceeds with
his own notion, which is embodied in the following some-
what novel theory :
" I consider the science, which now bears the name of Free-
masonry, to be closely allied to, if not the, offspring of Chris-
tianity ; and hence the secrecy, as there is nothing in Free-
masonry which might not be profitably learned by every
human being. But in the infancy of Christianity, when its
professors were searched out with great vigilance and assiduity,
It was necessary to keep their meeting-houses as profound
secrets, which were only known to the initiated by some appa-
rently insignificant, but very expressive signs. In like manner
were brother Christians known to each other.
"North Africa, in the early history of the Christian Church,
had many more such secret meeting-houses than perhaps any
other country. The early Christians there were of the stock
of Israel, and wearing about them the various secret emblems,
as signs, to be knoWn to their brethren in the faith. Those
emblems were mistaken by the large body of Jews for infalli-
ble charms, and were therefore adopted by them for that pur-
pose; but as they did not know their real intent and purport,
they endeavou.•ed to invent reasons, of their own, for their
figures and shapes; and hence the medley of Masonic emblems,
as they are termed, hut, more properly, Christian symbols,
with cabalistic mystical letters, &b.

"We must begin again with Compartment 4. The corners
of the two intersected triangles are all joined to a sort of
shamrock—your Lordship, of course, knows what this figure
means in ecclesiastical architecture. If those shamrock figures
were formerly spread out, they would produce a circle, and
thus the inmortart symbol. The two intersected triangles.

joined together by a Circle, to produce an emblem pregnani
with instruction. One of them represents " Faith, Hope,
and Charity ;" the other, " the way, the truth, and the life ;"
the upper apex represents the divinity of the Son of God, and
the lower H►s humanity: the circle joins them, and makes
them one. The shield of David, and Solomon's seal, are fables
of i comparatively modern date; at least, subsequent to the
establishment of Christianity
" Your Lordship, no doubt

knows what the

means in ecclesiastical architecture; namely, the 'five wounds
of Christ. It was a necessary emblem with the early Christian,
to show to their co-religionists that they were followers of
Him, whose banns, feet, and side, were pierced for man's
transg.ession. In the absence of a manufactured five-pointed
star, the uplifted and outspread hand would serve the same
purpose; hence the singularly-looking figure in the original
of_Compartment 5, n sort of compromise between a hand and

thers put an unnatural explanation of their intent, which
explanation is of comparatively modern date.

" Compartment 6 is indeed the most interesting
have the fish, the ixey2, the initials of the Greek words.
' Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Saviour.' This unpretend-
ing symbol was in general use amongst the early Christians,
and almost the only sign by which Christian tombs were
known. In former days, the Grand Master used to wear a

in it you

silver fish on his person'. 'but it is to be regretted, that amongst
the many innovations which have been of late introduced into
the society, to conciliate the prejudices of some who cannot
consistently be members of it, this beautiful emble has dis-
appeared. It still exists in many Christian churches, and
;amongst Masons in theory. Figure D, which the Jew called
the sea, is frequently seen in the pavement of old Christian
churches, and the best explanation of it is to be got in a m-
a' nic lodge. Figure E, the key, is the symbol of power, He
shall shut, and no one shall open,' &c. In modern Masonry
it means • the tongue of good report.'

"As far as the science-of Masonry is concerned, I cannot
say much ; hut I have said enough to show the analogy be-
tween Christianity and it, and to account for the existence of
their emblems amongst the Jews. Little do my brethren here
know that they are sheltering themselves under Christian sig-
nificant emblems. Let no traveller say hence, that' there are
no traces of Christianity in North Africa.' There are. The
Jews have unwittingly preserved them, and former travellers
have left me the honour of discovering them. If your lordship
examines the minutia of the many-coloured placard, you will
agree with me that vestiges of ancient Christianity are by no
means extinct in this part of the world."

For a better understanding of the rev. freemason's ex-
position, we must refer our readers to his book. We
conclude with the following extract from the same letter:
" Up to the seventeenth century, the Grand Masters were
generally ecclesiastics, and though no Bishop of Norwich is to
be found among the English Grand Masters, many other
bishops grace the list. I will copy here the names of those of-
ficials down to 1603, when James I. was elected Grand Master.
A.D. 597, Austin the Monk ; 680, Bennet, Abbot of Wirral;
857, St. Swithin ; 872, Alfred the Great; 900, Ethred, King of
Mercia; 924, King Athelstane ; 957, St. Dunstan, Archbishop

Bishop of Rochester; 1100, Henry I.; 1216, Peter de RupiCtis,
Bishop of Winchester; 1272, Walter Gifford, Archbishop of
York ; 1307, Walter Stapleton, Bishop of Exeter; 1327, King
Edward 111. ; 1357, William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winches-
ter; 1375, Simon I.:lngham. Abbot of Westminster: 1413, Henry
Chichley, Archbishop of Canterbury ; 1453, William Waynfleet,
Bishop of Winchester; 1471, Richard Beauchamp, Bishop of
Salisbury; 1483, King Henry VII. ; 1493, John Islip, Abbot of
Westminster; 1515, Cardinal Wolsey '

; Io4U, Edward Seymour
Duke of Somerset ; 1551, John Poynet, Bishop of Winchester.'

THE POPE AND THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION

The Times again adverts on Saturday to the danger of
the concessions which have been so unwisely made to the
Church of Rome in this empire. The report, the truth
of which it faintly hesitates to admit, that twelve Popish
Bishoprics are about to be set up in England, has aroused
it from its dreams of liberality to a sense of the real
position of affairs, and accordingly it declares open war
against the Papacy.
"With the utmost deference for the principles of religious
freedom in the person of every Englishman, we are not the
less, but rather the more, bound to uphold the policy of this
kingdom, to reject with indignation the attempt of a foreign
power to fasten its authority upon our divisions, and to resist
the reconstruction of those great energies of the Romish hier-
archy which it is the glory of our forefathers to have expelled
and overthrown. For if these projects are ever fulfilled to the
letter the Court of Rome will have recovered a greater power
over that portion of the nation which admits its authority than
it enjoyed for centuries before the reformation, as far back as
the reign of Richard 11., when the introduction of unautho-
rised Papal Bulls incurred the penalties of a preemunire ; and
England, with her Protestant establishment and her oath of
supremacy, would concede to the Roman Catholic hierarchy
and to the Pope a greater latitude of authority than they have
enjoyed for ages in the most Catholic states of Europe. That
is actually, it must he confessed, the present state of Ireland,
and the Synod of Thurles, with a host of evils that afflict and
degrade that country, are the surest indication of its effects.
These effects will probably only be mitigated when means
shall have been found to define by compact the mutual obliga-
tions of the Romish Church and of the State ; and meanwhile
we make allowances—perhaps too great allowances—for the
church which has maintained so dark a superstition, and bred
so constant a disaffection amongst a large portion of the Irish
people. But here in England we live and move in the heart of
this empire; it is here that we preserve, in the sanctuary of our
laws, the traditional polity of the nation ; and whatever
humours may affect other parts of our frame, it is by the
consent of the free people who cluster round these abodes and
crowd this island that we are what we are. Is it, then, here,
in Westminster, among ourselves and by the English throne,
that an Italian priest is to parcel out the spiritual dominion of
this country—to employ the renegades of our national church
to restore a foreign usurpation over the consciences of men,
and/to sow division in a political society by an undisguised and
systematic hostility to the institutions most nearly identified
with our national freedom and our national faith ? Such an
intention must either be ridiculous or intolerable—either a
delusion of some fanatical brain or treason to the constitution."