The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-07-26 00:00:00

MR. COBBETT AND MR. O'CONNELL.

Mr. O'Connell's Character of Cobbett's Character of Mr.
(',,'beat in December, 1828. O'Connell in March, 1829.
1 deepy regret that the "I have had three years t.")
ears of the meeting have been fathom the depth of " O'Con-
shocked and insuited by the neli's hypocrisy, falsehood, im-
name of that savage, Cobbett. pudence, and political perfidy.
After all the outrages that that it is impossible for me to de-
miscreant has been guilty of, scribe how very base the man
—upon public and private feel- is. I will make him despicable
ings—upon public and private in the eyes of the people of Ire-
reputation,—the
fell monster land. He is a fool as well as a
has again returned to strike at knave—a profound hypocrite
and lacerate the feelings of all —a trembling poltroon—a stu-
those persons who were inte- pid, profligate, impudent brawl-
rested in the fate of the late la- er. The fellow has no bottom.
mented John Bric.—This mon- He has no regard for truth. To
ster has been threatened as an deceive and delude people, and
infliction upon the Catholic to gain by the deception, ate
Association. The man whose the trades of his life. When
name was without a blot, has the toad spits his venom at us,
been made a subject for the fe- we do not answer in words.
rocious and ribald jests of one No: with stick or stone we
of the greatest monsters that knock the reptile on the head.
ever disgraced any age or na- If O'Connell were placed con-
tion.—When this assembly is veniently within my reach, I
told that it should regard the might thus answer him. He
censures of such a practised has committed an enormous of-
liar,—of such a living libel on fence against me. I never will
the human species,-1 lose my forgive him until he make a-
patience. Let not the name of tonement."
this beast—for man I will not
call him—be ever again men-
tioned in this assembly.

THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE'S SPEECH.
The ministerial papers haring suppressed the noble
duke's speech on the Church Robbery Bill, the London
Standard has been enabled to obtain a correct report,
which we also have much pleasure in inserting.
I always rise under pain and difficulty. to address your lord-
ships, and, upon the present occasion, believe me, that pain and
difficulty are increased beyond my powers of description. I had
risen several times in the course of the evening with the inten-
tion of addressing your lordships in consequence of what had
fallen from the right reverend prelate and archbishop, who have
spoken this night, and some remarks which had been made by
other noble lords in the course of the debate; but, having failed
of success, I had abandoned the idea of intruding myself upon
your lordships' notice, as others, so much better qualified to gain
your attention, are desirous of addressing you. I should have
been well contented to have been silent, but, after the pointed
in
volve,
not of the noble duke (Wellington) near me, which
not reflections upon my individual opinions only, but upon
what concerns the vital interests of the country, as connected
with its virtuous or vicious existence, I cannot sit still, and am
forced to endeavour to justify my own opinions, and to show
the fallacy and unworthiness of those pressed upon you by the
noble duke. _ _

I never could have imagined that the noble duke would have
thought of adopting such a course. My surprise, therefore,
could only be equalled by my pain, when I heard the noble
duke recommend to your lordships to disregard principle alto-
gether, and to be guided only by expediency. Your lordships
may therefore imagine the extent of the pain under which I rise
to reply to what has fallen from the noble duke, and the diffi-
culty which, under such circumstances, must accompany the
first unprepared essay I ever made to reply to what has been
said in debate in this house.

The noble duke has, if I mistake not, said something like
this, " You have been called upon by my noble friend, the
noble duke who sits near me, to resist this bill upon principle ;
I implore your lordships not to follow that advice. The clergy
are starving, and, whitst you are adhering to your principles.
they will be ruined. Principle will do nothing for you, you
must be guided by other motives, you must look to the result of
the measures which you adopt, and suit them to the circum-
stances of the times.' I have understood the noble duke to
have said something like this and much more, to enforce upon
your lordships the necessity of totally disregarding principle
and of adopting the opposite course of expediency, without any
principle at all, and this he has done, aware of my previously
expressed opinions, and he now solemnly warns you of 4,he
worthlessness of principle, cautions you not to be led by my
exhortations to abide by it, implores you to throw it aside, and
to think of nothing but the necessity of the case which requires
that you should pass this bill, which he has stigmatised as a bad
one, and thereby save the church from destruction and the
clergy from ruin. I must surely have misunderstood the noble
duke's meaning, or I could not have heard his words accurately.
If, however, there is no mistake,—if these were his expressions.
I deeply lament them. I really am shocked that such senti-
ments should have emanated from the noble duke, and it is to
combat such doctrine that I now rise.

As you know, I entertain very different notions, and I am
deeply anxious that these modern maxims should be superseded
by others better calculated to bring about an improved condi-
tion of the country. When I uttered them 1 little thought that
any sentiments or expressions that fell from me would be the
object of remark, much less that what I uttered as truisms
would be arraigned by so many noble lords as false doctrine and
erroneous theory. Notwithstanding the opinions of noble lords,
I still maintain that I am right; 1 do not retract one iota of
what I have said ; and, in opposition to the appeal of the noble
duke I would again beseech you to standupon the only sure and
solid ground—that of principle. I have not the presumption to
think that I am to give advice to your lordships, but if you will
act as I fervently hope you may, you will by upholding your
own honour and character render not less essential service to
your country generally, than you will render to yourselves as a
body which should stand high in the estimation of that country,
and by example and precept. point out the course which all
ought to pursue. For what is a country worth which is not
gurded'by a just moral and religious principle? there is no sure
basis but that: in departing from it, we have been brought into
our present deplorable condition, and we can never hope to see
better days, and regain prosperity, until we return to those good
old English principles which used to be cherished by us, and
which used to constitute the strength of the nation.

It pains me to be obliged thus to place myself in opposition
to the noble duke, but he has drawn it upon himself—he has re-
flected upon my opinions as fallacious, and he has tried to lead
you away from the adoption of them, and to join his standard
of expediency. It is on national grounds that I resist his ar-
gument. I admire and respect the noble duke for all that he
has done for the country—for his great and proud military ser-
vices—and for the eminent benefits which have resulted from
them to this nation and to the world. I owe to him a deep debt
of gratitude; but, in his political views it has more than once
been my misfortune to differ from him. lam compelled to do
so on the present occasion. The noble duke has drawn a
frightful picture of the condition of the bishops and clergy in
Ireland; he has told you that many are reduced to beggary and
want; he tells you that this is an abominable bill, and yet he
gives, as a reason for reading this bill a second time, and for
going into committee, that he will vote for the bill in order to
relieve the clergy and to save the Established Church in Ire-
land. Why, my lords, I know of no one clause in this bill
which has the slightest tendency towards this effect. 1 ask the
noble duke to point out any part of the bill which pretends to
do it; so that I am at a loss to conceive how the noble duke
can have brought himself to give such a reason for such a
course. According to my view, the bill has a directly contrary
tendency: if it had been framed by its greatest enemies, it
could not be more hostile to the Church Establishment, and it
must inevitably lead to the overthrow of religion. Again, the
noble duke gives you a history of the rise and progress of those
events which have brought about the existing state of affairs—
in this also I disagree with him.—He attributes it to agitation
in Ireland, and various circumstances attendant upon that mis-
chievous proceeding. Now, I, my lords, attribute it to other
and very different causes. I must speak the truth, and say that
I honestly think that the concession to a factious clamour was
the commencement of the evil; the abolition of the corporation
end test acts placed you under the supposed necessity of grant-
ing immunity to the Roman Catholics: these points obtained,
the step was short to the position of affairs in which we now
find ourselves. These, as I think, are the real causes, and nut
alone those stated by the noble duke.

Having nsen expressly to reply to the animadversions of the
noble duke, I, perhaps, ought to say no more, and I must
confess that 1 feel ashamed of standing before your lordships
and saying so much about myself; I cannot sufficiently apolo-
gise to you for doing so, but, with your permission, I will only
trespass upon your patience for a few moments longer, to notice
what has been said by other noble lords in remarking upon
what fell from me at the opening of the debate. The noble
earl opposite accused me of taking an unstatesmanlike view
of what should be the duty of a member of /a great deliberative
assembly. My lords, lam not offended at this accusation—l
do not pretend to be a statesman ; it has been my peculiar for-
tune never to have been placed in a situation which could call
forth the practice of any of those qualifications which, in the
accepted definition of the term, constitute a statesman. I
merely aspire to taking a plain common-sense view of a case
or question, and no more. Perhaps it might be well if others
had the wisdom to discover that they were not statesmen. This,
however, I will venture to say, that if I were a statesman, 1
would never sacrifice principle to expediency—neither would I
counsel my sovereign to violate his coronation oath,—neither
would I insult parliament by introducing such an iniquitous
bill as this now under discussion; nor could I for an instant
conceive the idea, much less execute it, of attempting to con-
trol the free discussions of this high, and, until now, deliberative
assembly by illegal and unconstitutional means. Of such fla-
gitious acts as these, if I pretended to be a statesman, I most
certainly would not be guilty. The noble earl had said, that
in standing upon principle, and shutting my eyes to conse-
quences, rappear to have taken for my motto, " Fiat justitia
rurat c;lttm." I disclaim this; neither do I, although I sup-
port the action upon principle, exclude from my calculation
what may be the consequences, but, I say, if you act ho-
nestly, uprightly, and with integrity, what have you to fear?
You may be, are entitled to be, and should be, regardless, of any
consequences which may follow from the defeat of a vicious mea-
sure, or the faithful performance of an honourable duty which is
imposed upon you ; and I must again repeat, that you cannot
swerve from this path of duty without disgrace and dishonour.
I disown the motto assigned to me by the noble earl; if I took
any motto, I would rather adopt one which was used by the
noble duke, in a manner so effective and so highly creditable to
him at the termination of one of his speeches early in this ses-
sion, which was, "Be just, and fear not." Your lordships' pa-
tience will be exhausted if I detain you longer; I will therefore
conclude with observing, that the Righ Rev. Archbishop (Dub-
lin, and Bishop (London) have treated the subject before them
in a manner which has astonished me. In listening to them,
had I not known who they were, I might have wellthought that
they were not churchmen, but amongst the epemies of that
church which they are bound to uphold and to defend. I bad,
at one time, intended to have replied to several of their observa-
tions, but I feel that I have already trespassed too much upon
your kind indulgence.
I cannot conclude without assuring the noble duke and other
noble lords, that in what I have said, I have had no intention of
giving offence to any. Had I forborne to endeavour to refute
the animadversions which have been made upon me, I might
have teen accused of unmanly silence, and I have only to hope,
that in the language which I lia.ve used, 1 may not have been
betrayed into an acrimonious expression of my sentiments.

I have sincerely to thank your lordships for your patient and
indulgent hearing—l shall vote againstthe second reading of the
bill.

A REAL REF6RMER.—We are happy to hear that Mr,
Timothy Castle, formerly Sergeant-Major. of the East Gla-
morgan Corps of Volunteer Cavalry, has st been appointed a
warden of the Tower of London by the Duke of 'Wellington,
upon the recommendation of our Lord Lieutenant. It ought
to be known that these places at the Tower were formerly sold;
hut immediately on the appointment of his Grace the Duke of
Wellington to be Constable of the Tower, he put an end to the
practice. and has invariably filled up the vacancies which have
occurred, by bestowing them on old and meritorious soldiers.
Mr. T. Castle served for more than 20 years in his Majesty's 3d
or King's Own Regiment of Light Dragoons, during a large
portion of which he was a non-commissioned officer, and had
the honour to be present at the battles of Sal; nanea, Vittoria,
and Toulouse.—Merthyr Guardian,