The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-01-24 00:00:00

SUNDAY TRADING.—We have received a communication
from a person who signs his letter " A Hair Dresser,"
which states, that the lower order of that profession dese-
crate shamefully the Sabbath.
In common with our neighbour of the Times, the Liverpool
Journal of Saturday last read us a lecture on the duty of
attending to one's own business, which has amused us ex-
cessively. Speaking of the condition of the Workhouse,
which is pronounced a " disgrace to a civilized commu-
nity," the Journal expresses " astounding" surprise that
the official exposure of its condition should have gone so
totally unnoticed in the local press. " The case," says
our vigilant contemporary 7" reported in the London Times
was heard on the Monday, and it is surely due to the cha-
racters of the' Liverpool Times and Standard, whose pe-
culiar business it was to watch the proceedings of the day
preceding that of their publication, to explain how it was
that they should overlook—of suppression in the absence
of evidence we shall not accuse them—a statement of the
highest importance, and which in every point of view de-
manded the prompt attention of the appointed guardians
of public morals." Then there follows a violent denun-
ciation of the state of the Workhouse, which would have
been the more intelligible
.if the Journal had read the
text on which he was commenting. He could not, how-
ever, have put himself to that small trouble, or he must
have done so with gross carelessness. From the third
sentence of the report in the London Times he might have
found .that the case, instead of being heard on the Monday,
did not take place till Tuesday, long after our paper had
been published. This explanation will satisfy the public
that we did not neglect our duty on the day in ques-
tion ; or we hope we have convinced even the assi-
nine Journal that he has discovered, in this in:

stance, the phenomenon usually called " a mare's nest."
Is it not " due to the character" of the Liverpool Journal,
" whose peculiar business it is to watch the proceedings of
the day preceeding that of its publication, to explain how it
was that he should overlook,—of suppression, in the ab-
sence of evidence, we shall not accuse him,"—the proceed-
ings at the meeting of the Blind Asylum on Friday last ?
Perhaps the reporter for the Journal could give some ex-
planations on this subject.

!tier Zibtrpooi

TUESDAY MORNING; JANUARY 24, 1843

We are not much given to sermonising; and yet we
shall on the present occasion transgress a little, and
take a text, which our readers will find in the Morning
Chronicle of Friday last. Here it is, nicely done into
verse by some League laureate :

" Peel, it is true, has given us foreign meat,
Which all the world declare they cannot eat.
We ask no turtle soup, or venison pasty ;
But—save us from his tariff's cheap and nasty '!
By corn and income tax, with heart of stone,
He taxes bread, and gives us skin and bone."

Upon these six most poetical lines we shall take the
liberty of indulging in a few remarks ; but, first,
might we crave of our brother journalist the name of
the author or authoress ? We are confident that they
are not from the pen of any of our manufacturing
friends, from the occurrence, in them, of one expres-
" cheap and nasty !" No manufacturer of
" anything reticulated, having interstices between the
threads," and the said interstices filled up with devil's
dust, china clay, starch, sour flour, and the other
similar materials which have contributed to associate
the term in question—" cheap and nasty"—with the
products of the British loom in every market of the
world, could for shame avow the authorship of lines
containing such an allusion. The versifier must
therefore be some bard unknown; and we pray our
contemporary to allow us to hand his name—Timms
or Muggins perhaps—to an admiring posterity.
But to our text :

Sion-1

" Peel, it is true, has given us foreign meat,
Which all the world declare they cannot eat."

What a changed world it must be which cannot eat
" foreign meat !" Why we remember it handed
round, on nice little plates, by nice young gentlemen
of the Anti-Monopoly Association, at free-trade ga-
therings in Liverpool; and declared by quaker ladies—
no bad judges of feeding—to be superb ! We remem-
ber the eloquent George Thornson's description of it,
at Bolton—" fine, fresh, and tempting—fat and lean
beautifully mixed, &c." We remember how friend
Ashworth craved for it ; how William Rathbone im-
ported it, and vouched for its excellence ; bow Charles
Holland expatiated upon the quantities which his
house could supply us with, if permitted; and really,
really, have these eminent patriots and patriotesses,
quakers and quakeresses, been all the time trying to
put us out of love with the " roast beef of old Eng-
land," and beget a hankering in our minds for what
we " cannot eat" ? Shocking selfishness !
But we forget ourselves. The " tine, fresh, and
tempting beef—fat and lean beautifully mixed"—was
not permitted to be imported at a reasonable duty,
until the alteration of the tariff by Sir Robert Peel.
No doubt, in pure spite of the right hon. baronet, the
" fine, fresh, and tempting" commodity has all of a
sudden turned " cheap and nasty." The " fat and
lean beautifully mixed" is now all skin and bone."
Free-trade gentlemen and ladies pray to be saved from.
it. Their dental powers are not equal to the task of
gnawing through pipes and sinews. It is salt, it i 5
hard,
it is unprofitable—in a word, it is " cheap and
nasty"! Need worse be said of it than is conveyed in
these magical words, which so forcibly remind us of
the rotten fabrics of their utterers ?
But stop, gentlemen and ladies. " Cheap and
nasty" as is this foreign meat, it is precisely the kind
of stuff on which you would like to feed the working
men of England. Friend Henry Ashworth, we have
your autograph to prove the fact—your dictum, to the
effect that although such " highly-salted food" does
not at present suit the taste of Englishmen, yet they
would become accustomed to it in time, as they already
are to " salted herrings." You raved for this " cheap
and nasty food"--smacked your lips at it, to persuade
us that it was fit for human beings to eat—paraded it 9
cheapness as a grievance, and told the world that, Willi
free trade, every famishing mouth would be fed. We,
see now with what/ With this " cheap and nag'',
stuff; with this " skin and bone." Such food would
perhaps take away the superabundant spirits of your
poor spinners and weavers. From men, so fed, we
should hear nothing of physical force Chartism. P°°::
contented "skin-and-bone" drudges, they would wen'
on without demur, no doubt, until they could work 0°
longer
; and then, pork-broth, and the other tender
mercies of the union workhouse dietary, would do the
rest. You, therefore, gentlemen and ladies of the
Anti-Corn-law League, are not the people who oughts
in decency at least, to rail against " cheap and nasty
foreign meat," " skin and bone," or whatever else yoa
may call the commodity which you meditated makil3B
the sole food of a British working population !

In the character of leader of the opposition—self:
assumed, no doubt)--Lord John Russell has recently
issued a circular to his fellow " outs," beseechll
their early attendance in their places in the House
Commons, and informing them that " imortant 'ill
sures would be brought before their notice at an earl
period of the session."

`What be these important measures which Lord John
is about, in such hot haste, to promulgate to o
world ? Is his lordship about to out-Cobden Cobden
in his zeal for free trade ? Is he about to surpass' o
sycophantic earnestness, the crawling of the Mati
the
and Pechells to shelter under the shadow of
League ? Is he about to set up the smooth and et,..
sual faces of the " ministers of all denominatioo'o'
and worshippers of the cotton-spinning Manarn°ll'io
b the idols of his political worship, and the oracles of
ens
political inspiration ? or is his lordship merely 140
upon the indulgence of the reckless factiousness °f h';
character, and resolved upon a course of petty alert
ante and opposition to the measures of Sir 11°00
Peel's government, be those measures what they 1130/1.0
We know not; and, in good south, little do we by
what may be the " important measures" meditate, :1A
at least,
Lord John Russell. But we are quite satisfied
one important question ought iinmediateiYo,
occupy the attention of Parliament; and as that (Itl
too
tion is one in which his lordship and his collet be
are materially interested—as, in fact, it can no 01°/.
conveniently discussed, in their absence, than atr
nce
at the Old Bailey can take
place without the prose beof the prisoner at the bar—we rejoice sincerely s'osi
probability that his lordship's worthy compeers' 101
particularly interested, may be induced to ad")r abe
their countenance at an early period. Need .1)3,/eO4
wbic more explicit as to the immediate question to