The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-11-17 00:00:00

N 0 VEMBER 17, IS5r)
Bence, and experience had nn value in their eyes. Th 7
municipal hill was madeli political engine, and none
were deemed fit te act as corporate officers who had not
proved themselves to he unflinching and " whole-hog"
levellers.

. In taking this inconsiderate and intemperate course,,
we suspect the Whig and,radical factions have committed
a serious mistake. They have exasperated all the mo-
derate men in the town. They have done violence to
the feelings of niauv of their own friends. They have
overlooked the thostvaluable members of their party, and
hoisted up into ill-starred importnnee and unseemly no
toriety the least worthy of their choice--men, many of
whom it is impossible for respectable burgesses to have
any confidence in whatever.

The election does not take place till the 26th of De-
cember, but already.all the radical candidates have been
named, and are in the field. Had we been allowed to
pick out, for the sake' of ridicule, forty-eight persons to
form the common councilmen, we could not have selected

more appropriate names in order to answer our purpose
and convulse the town with laughter. The trouble of
doing so disagreeable a duty has been spared us. For-
tunately the forty-eight sages whom we are anxious to
immortalize are not of our nomination. The subjoined
list has appeared in all the liberal papers, and we under-
stand that it is authentic. Who the opposing candidates
are we have no means of knowing, and we are not dis-
posed to borrow names from our adversaries. But their
own list must be taken to be official, and here we,
give them numbered, entered, and valued, as under.

1 Thomas Coglan Unitarian
2 Egeston Smith Unitarian
• 3 Charles Tayleur Unitarian •
4 Enoch Harvey Unitarian !
5 William Thornhill Unitarian
F. Jordan Unitarian
7 C. Rawdon Unitarian
8 R. V. Yates Unitarian I
9 Wm. Ratbbone Unitarian'
10 W. P. Freme Unitarian I II
11 George Holt Unitarian
12 J. D. Thornely Unitarian I
13 Thomas Bolton Unitarian I I
14 Surgeon Blackburne Unitarian ! I I I
• )5 W. R. Preston Unitarian ' I
16 R. Allison Unitarian I►I I I I
17 W. Lassell Unitarian MI II t
18 I'. Holt Unitarian ! ! !!!!..!I . ! ! ! !!
19 Henry Holmes Dissenter !
20 John Hithnes Dissenter !
21 W. W. Bulley Dissenter ! !
22 Dr. Carson Dissenter ! ! !
23 C. Logan Dissenter ' "
24 William Rushton Baptist !
25 Samuel Hope Baptist ! !
26 William Blain Quaker !
27 George Crosfield Quaker ! !
28 Edward Cropper Quaker ! ! !
29 John Cropper Quaker ! ! ! !
30 James Sharples Roman Catholic !
31 R. Shiel Roman Catholic ! !
32 R. Roskell Roman Catholic! ! !
33 Charles Birch Unknown !
31 James Aikin Unknown ! !
35 Evre Evans Unknown I ! ! •
36 T. Brocklebank Unknown ! I !
37 William Stuart Unknown I
38 Alexander Macgregor Unknown I 1
39 H. Hornby Churchman !
40 Joseph Hornby Churchman !
41 W. W. Currie Churchman !
42 NV. Earle, jun. Churchman ! !
43 L. Heyworth Churchman''' I
41 James Mellor Churchman I I
45 Woolwright Churchman ' "
46 R. Bright Churchman ! -!1 !! !
47 W. Maxwell Churchman I 'llll'.
48 J. Walmsley Churchman I " "
• These are the wise and worthy burgesses of good re-
pute whom we are called upon to elect as common coun-
,cilmen for the borough of Liverpool—an illustrious and
splendid battalion, with THOMAS COGLAN and EGERTON
SMITH at its head! If there be not wisdom and indepen-
dence here, there is no corn in Egypt. Just fancy the mo•
desty and the good taste' of placing EIGHTEEN UNITARIANS
in the council—men who belong to the meanest, most
resentful, most diskonest, and most contemptible sect in
all England,--merrwiro in• Liverpool, with its population
exceeding 200.000, cannot muster a congregation ofsoo
persons of all ages, but who, nevertheless, claim to form
the majority, and monopolise the power of this important
corporation. In fact, the unitarians, with the quakers
and baptists, amount to twenty-four, so that in carrying
any point, no matter what, they would !only have to bor-
row a vote from some Roman catholic or other dissenter,
and then they, may do what they please
We have no fear that these men will be returned; but
their eagerness to possess undeserved power, and the in-
solent manner in which they put forth their claims, must
excite universal disg We ask any honest man, no
matter to what party longs, whether the inhabitants
of Liverpool would be fairly represented by eighteen
unitarians in the new council ? The great majority of
rate-payers are churchmen anti Wesleyans, and yet they
are to be represented by their deadliest enemies—by a
snug family party of chattering and selfish demagogues—
by traders in chapels, candle snuffers in philosophy, and
fraudulent interpolators of the holy scriptures.
The ten candidates who figure as churchmen, and some
of ,whom aspire to be exclusives, aping the airs of the
aristocracy without the grace, the manners, or the gene-
rosity of true nobleness, are not much more to be de-
pended upon than the unitarians. Two of them are the
sons of socinians, who for the sake of distinction have
followed the fashion in going to church. Among the
" unknown" are a few whose ideas of religion are not
very settled, and who cannot he accused of labouring
under any peculiar predilections. Are these men in
whom we can repose confidence as the guardians of
property and the protectors of the public peace? We say
they are not, and therefore we call upon the burgesses
of Liverpool to reject them with disdain.
For many years our opponents have complained that .
too many persons of the same family connection were
members of the corporation. We are not the champions
-of the corporation and do not defend them in this respect.
Particular families have had too much influence, and en-
joyed too much of its gifts and patronage, and we regret
that the policy of admitting to. the corporate management
individuals who had conferred inestimable benefits on
the community; did not long ago come under their con-
sideration and meet their unanimous approval. But
what have we here under this precious reform bill ?. Two
quaker brothers are nominated at once, without shame,
or the slightest recollection of former complaints. Two
brothers of the name of HOLMES, who are dissenters,
are also booked as candidates, and a large majority of
'the 'whole, all of them stiff reformers, are connected by
various sorts of close and comical alliances. We shall
'enter more fully into this subject at a future day, and
'show that whatever was faulty in the old corporation,
from family connection, is imitated in a worse form, and
endeavoured to be perpetuated by the reformers !
We have spoken of the Unitarians as a mean but am-
bitious sect who cherish the most unrelenting hatred to-
wards the Church of England. We see this exemplified
in our own community by the injunction applied for and
Obtained by Mr. THOMAS BOLTON and a Mr. JEVONS,
both, we believe, Unitarians, against the proposed en-
dowment by the corporation of certain of our town
churches. The attorneys for the applicants being also
Unitarians—the London one being the famous JOSEPH
PARKES, Of.commission notoriety--slicws haw actively
these venomous sectaries work into each others hands,
and exclude all other professional men from their sinister
speculations. The injunction we have-no doubt will be
dissolved in a few days—so that delay,.vexatious delay,
was all that was contemplated by these pure philanthro-
pists. BoLToN-and JEVONS, we understand, have stated
in an affidavit that they are burgesses of Liverpool—if
so we shall have something more to say to them. They
have made certain statements, or rather misrepresenta-
tions, =parte, and the Master of the Rolls, as a matter
of course, granted a conditional injunction, which, as we
have said before, lie will dissolve when he hears the
whole truth. But why was the application not made to
Sir LANCELOT SHADWELL, the Vice-Chancellor ? This
is a tender question, which we leave the righteous trus-
tees of Dame HawLEY to answer at their -leisure. The
whole proceeding only evinces the inordinate rancour of
the Unitarians against the Church of England; They