The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-06-04 00:00:00

DIED.

Lately. at ralentta. SAMUEL, eldest son of the late Captain
WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, of this port.

At Bath, after a few days' illness, in his 88th year, RICHARD
COWPER, Esq.
In New Ormond-street, London, Miss JANE GASKELL, a
lineal descendant of Wiliam Penn and Robert Barclay.
At sea, on the 9th of April, on the passage hence for Havana,
Captain CALVIN HOWES, of the Knnohassett, of Boston.
On the I ith April, on board the ship George Washington, on
her passage hence for New York, Mr. JOHN THOMPSOj,
seaman, of Maine.

On the Igth April. at Elliott, Maine, U. S., aged gs years, MX,
ALEXANDER GOULD, a soldier of the revolution.
On the 24th April, at Rochester, U.S., aged 97, Mr. LEVI
GURNEY, a revolutionary pensio-er.

On the 25th April, at Pittsfield, New York, aged 95, Mr.
JOSHUA GUILFORD, a soldier of the revolution.

On the 27th April, at Conway, CLARISSA, consort of the
late DAVID CHILDS, Esq., aged 82.

On the 28th ult., at Newhaven, U.S.. aged 81, ABRAHAM
BISHOP, Esq., formerly mayor of that city.

On the 29th. April, at Cainbridge, U.S:, aged 84 years, Mrs
LUCY POTTER.

On the Ist ult., at New York, aged 84, Mrs. LUCY WHITING.
Same day, at Barnstaple, U.S.. aged gi years, Mrs. ABIGAIL
MUNROE.

On the 4th ult., at Whatley, U.S., aged 92 years, Mr. ISAMfI
BROWN, a revolutionary pensioner.

Same day, at Thomaston, Maine, aged 88, Mr. JOSIAH HAS-
KELL, a soldier of the revolution.
On the 6th alt., at New York, Mr. EDWARD STACK, formerly
a respectable merchant of Tralee, Ireland. _

On the 9th ult., at Barnoldby-le- Beck, near Grimsby, aged 101
years and 10 mouths, Mrs. MARY II A RD.
On the 14th ult., in Upper Warwick-street, aged 74, Mr.
THOMAS CLIFFORD, commission-merchant.

On the 18th ult., at the Priory, Wrexham, in his nth year,
CHARLES POYSER,

On the 20th ultimo, at Swillington-house, near Leeds, in her
74th year, the lady ELIZABETH LOWTHER, relict of the late
Sir John Lowther, Bart., whose death was announced a fort-
night ago.

On the 22d ult., at Mevagissey, Cornwall, aged 85, JOHN
PEARCE. Esq.

Same day, at Bolton, aged 83, Mr. PETER SMITH, formerly
of Burnden, near thattown._

On the 23rd ult., in his 48th year, Mr. ROBERT SHEPLEY,
of Chadwick street, Bank Top.

On the 24th ult., i❑ his 85th year, the Rev. JOSEPH COOK,.
of Newton-hall, vicar of the parish of Chalton and ShiMottle,.
Northumberland.

On the 25th ult., at Kemptown, Brighton, in her 90th year,
the Marchioness of BRISTOL.
Same day, aged 42 years, Mr. WILLIAM HAWKINS, jun.
of the firm of Hawkins and Russell, of this town.
. Same day, at his house, Elope-stteet, aged 38, Mr. J. PAR.
LANE, timber-merchant, of this town.
same nay, at West Derby, aged 45, Mr. JOHN HODGKINS,
of Bold-street.
On the 26th ult., at Waterloo, Crosby, aged 22, ALICE, sixth
daught:r of Mr. JAMES BROTHERTON, formerly of Accring-
ton, near Blackburn.

Same day, aged 80 years, Mr. WILLIAM ELLIOTT, of
Salford, formerly of this town.

Same day, aged 77 years, M. JACQUES LAFrrrE, the
banker. He was buried with great pomp, on Tuesday last, at
the church of St. Rock. The hearse was accompanied to the
grave by an immense concourse, including men of all ranks and.
professions.

On the 27th ultimo, aged 8 years, WILLIAM JOSEPH, son•
of Mr. JAMES HENTON, glass and china sealer, Chester-
street, Birkenhead.

Sallie day, suddenly, at his father's residence, Nestott, aged
37 years, Mr. E. B. LYON, Rock-ferry.

Same day, at her house, Circus street, in her 77th year, ANN,
widow of the late Mr. ROBERT THOMPSON, blacksmith.

Same day, aged 6 weeks, MARIA, infant daughter of Mr. J.
M. THRELFALL.

On the 28th u:timo. aged 14 months, ELIZABETH JANE,
daughter of Mr. JOHN HUTTO NI, Bold-street.
Same day, aged 41, ELIZABETH, wife of Mr. HENRY
FRANCIS ALDRIDGE, professor of music.
. _

Same day, at Holybourne, aged 80, Alton, Lieutenant-Colonel
THOMAS FREDERICK.

On the 29th ultimo, aged 3 years, THOMAS, son of Mr.
R. DEWHURST, Stafford. road, Manchester.

Same day, THOMAS, infant son of Mr. JOHN ECCLES, of
Great Mersey-street,

Same day, at Primrose-cottage, Egremont, MARY, wife of
Mr. T. J. FOWKES, and daughter of the late Mr. 11. Horton,
of Lord-street, in this town.
Same day, in London, aged S 2, MARGARET, relict of the
late WILLIAM TARTE.

Same day, at his house in Berkeley-square, London, in the
64th year of his age, THOMAS THORNHILL, Esq., of Fixby-
hall, Yorkshire, and Ridd!esworth-hall, Norfolk.
Same day, suddenly, of apoplexy, aged 38, HENRY, youngest
son of the late ROBERT FLEETWOOD, Esq., surgeon.
On the 30th ultimo, aged 29 years, ANN, wife of JOHN
MAINWARING, 16, Wilde-street.

Same day, at his h.ouse, Great Mersey-street, Kirkdale, aged
49 years, Mr. THOMAS WAT,ON.

On the 31st ultimo, suddenly, EDWARD, eldest son of Mr.
JAMES FELTON, printer, of this town.
Same day, at Braddon, Isle of Man, aged 25 years, Mr. WM.
CAIN, of the firm of Orford and Cain, of this town, eldest son
of the late James Cain, Esq., Nunnery Mills, Douglas, Isle of
Man.

Same day, Mrs. LINSTEAD, Crown-street, aged 57.
Same day, in London, aged 87, BENJAMIN RAWSON, Esq.
of Nidd-hall, Yorkshire.
Same day, aged 49, Mr. JAMES WEBSTER, fringe-manufac-
turer and carpet dealer, Bold-street, late of Manchester: a man
much respected, and who will be long regretted by a large circle
of friends.

On the 2nd instant, at Leamington, URIAH DAVENPORT,
Esq., aged 43 years.

ga.me'day, at Everton.crescent, ANNE, relict of Mr. JOSEPH
YEOWA RD, merchant, of this town.

PACKET LIST.
GENERAL POST-OFFICE, May 31.

°3 X I'4 .3 .-:-7, '4.) o.g' X F.'—c4
E:. .Vas gtcS;I4,V;4V2,;wE.:FtE.-ti
4' < g Nat' nmc-EV:'-',....s'2';;;a•ri.Pgav_oa2,-3
az pl 4 ~61 :;•1" A'•:,2 2A12 F; f...)'' .5, F.:' ;'''..=
>
Ki 8 ,c 2 PSAF,26:-:, 1''D;('F.,,,.., is,g,
A''...o p,',...3 l'Oiii=gmomerl6 mZi.
D.r. .-;:4 ~Pia.0.;,...,ti-,1-46 „,cno 4
2 .=vzt.l-,,-,= ,-,= --.W 0
M. 3 sz.,-3 wp,ie1tt5.g7.0...,,,
,t. % .... .rn
17.-.3 g..; r Vg•'4F-ggs. : ....
.r. 3. H
PO ;0 2iig... := .93
g, cci, t IT F .R.R. ? 3--,2 : , ib"
,--•—, ..„. —v—L_ ~__J : ,—, —........,

E-be Eiberpool &tanbarti.

TUESDAY MORAING, JUNE 4, 1814.

We abstained last week from replying to certain
remarks of the Manchester Guardian, because we
did not wish, by the expression of any opinions of
ours at such a crisis, to give encouragement to the
apathy which we saw existing amongst tl►e Conser-
vative party in this town and district. Nor perhaps
should we have been at the trouble of addressing
-ourselves to our contemporary now, were it not
rthat, whilst vindicating the tone of the article
commented upon by him, we shall be afforded an
opportunity of throwing a light upon some features
of the recent contest for the representation of ►he
division which, unexplained, are calculated to lead
to very erroneous conclusions as to the existing
strength of genuine Conservatism in our locality.
At thelrick of being tedious, we give at length that
portion of the Guardian's article which refers to
ourselves.

"THE GREAT CONSERVATIVE CAUSE."—If any
county elector in South Lancashire, who calls himself a
conservative, should have begun to feel rather doubtful as
to what conservatism truly means, we would not recom-
mend him to institute a very strict comparison between
the speeches of Mr. Entwisle, whom he is called upon to
support, and the remarks of the Liverpool Standard in
reference to the present contest, or he will be pretty sure
to feel much more bewildered than ever. On consulting
the latter authority, he will find the present administration
described as "a ministry which worships expediency,
whilst it plays fast and loose with promises and pledges ;"
and, as for the premier, he is denounc-d as having, by the
course he has taken on the Factory Bill and other ques-
tions, done his best to convince his supporters, that
"there is no principle connected with his government for
which it is worth the while of conservatism to contend."
Such, then, being the present state of things, an honest
conservative would naturally expect to find the Standard
urging upon the electors of South Lancashire to throw
base expediency to the winds, and rally round a candi-
date who would not pin his faith to the sleeve of the prime
minister; who would not give his unqualified support to
"a ministry which plays fast and loose with pledges;"
and, above all things, who would most distinctly pledge
himself to support Lord Ashley, and oppose ministers, on
"that great conservative question of humanity—the Ten-
hours' Factory Bill,"—even at the risk of turning a faith-
less and pledge-breaking ministry out of office. Alas for
the inconsistency of " poor human nature," as Judge
Haliburton says ! Aft-T all its grand fl nirish about prin-
ciple, and its horror of expediency-worship, the Standard
feels itself constrained to follow the very same course as
that which has been pursued by the ministers whom it
denounces. Instead of calling upon the electors to sup-
port a candidate of decided political principles, it urges
them to " throw aside their present apathy, bury their
present jealousies," and rally round Mr. William En-
twisle, who claims their support chiefly on the ground of
his unqualified admiration of Sir Robert Peel's abilities as
a statesman ; arid who expressly declares, that, were he
returned to parliament, he would support ministers in
their opposition to Lord Ashley's agitation for a diminu-
tion of the hours of labour in factories.

What, then, are the principles involved in that "great
conservative cause" of which we read so much in minis.
terial prints, and for which the electors of South Lan-
cashire are called upon to exert themselves so energetically
on Monday and Tuesday next ? We have seen that the
Liverpool Standard can furnish no intelligible answer to
these questions; but it may be said to be unworthy of
much notice as an organ of toryism.

This is scarcely a fair statement—indeed it is a
very unfair one —of the position taken by us in the
article in question ; but we are perfectly willing to
give the Guardian all the advantage of his jesuitry.
Grant that we described the ministry of Sir Robert
Peel as " a ministry which worships expediency
whilst it plays fast and loose with promises and
pledges;" that we have represented Sir Robert Peel
as having done his best to convince his supporters
that " there is no principle connected with his go-
vernment for which it is worth the while of Con-
servatism to contend does it follow that we ought
to have called upon the Conservatives of South
Lancashire to damage the cause of Conservatism
itself, and those institutions and principles involved
in it, by a refusal to support the candidate offered
to their choice, even although he chose to " pin his
faith on the sleeve of the prime minister"? Would
there be any " consistency" in recommending a
course which could only have had the result of giv-
ing victory to a party diametrically opposed to all
those institutions and principles which, as Conser-
vatives, we revere and trust to maintain, whilst by
an opposite course would be secured the election of
a gentleman, who, although not altogether to our
taste, is still the faithful supporter of many, and
some of these the most important, of those institu-
tutions and principles ? Surely there would not.
Surely the Guardian entertains a better opinion of
our judgment than to expect from us the advocacy
AA a policy so suicidal.
We expressed, with sorrow, our conviction that
recent measures of the ministry had produced
great apathy amongst the Conservative electors of
this district. We warned them that the conse-
quence of persisting in such measures would be de-
trimental to them as a ministry—would lead to a
permanent alienation of many of their once ardent
supporters. The result of the contest has shewn
that we were right in the opinions which we ex-
pressed. It is not the exertions of the Anti-Corn-
law League which have reduced the apparent strength
of Conservatism in South Lancashire. On the
contrary, the insolence of that League has increased
the genuine Conservative feeling of the county, of
which the number of votes recorded on the poll on
Monday and Tuesday last is not a faithful index.
It is the disappointment felt by so many sound and
loyal men with the trimming policy of Sir Robert
Peel's government, which most materially tended to
weaken our position in this contest ; and we urged
upon the Conservative electors to waive the expres-
sion of that disappointment, and rally to the side of
the Conservative candidate, not for Sir Robert
Peel's sake—not for the ministry's sake—but for
their country's sake. We felt confident that a de-
feat of Conservatism in South Lancashire—and a
seriously diminished majority is such a defeat—would
be turned, by an expediency-worshipping minister,
to the serious detriment of Conservatism ;—would,
in fact, be the ready plea put forward for further
concessions, and further trimming; whilst a deci-
sive victory would have shewn to such a minister,
that the time had not yet arrived when it was neces-
sary to bolster himself in power by such concessions.
It may be said by the Guardian, however, and
will no doubt be said by some of those Conserva-
tives, by whose apathy the Whig-Radical party has
been reduced by one-half, that by returning Mr.
Entwisle, an avowed admirer of Sir Robert Peel's
measures, by a larger majority, we in effect declare
our unabated satisfaction with his government,
whilst, on the other hand, by keeping back from
the poll, we shew Sir Robert the necessity of retrac-
ing his steps and consulting more the Conservative
feeling of the country, We aemit the perfect rea-
sonableness of the argument were it an ordinary
case and an ordinary character with whom we had
to deal. But we are not in such a case, and we
have not to do with such a man. It was not the
general policy of Sir Robert Peel's government
which was sought to be attacked or defended, so
much as the question of a rash and headlong adop-
tion of what is styled free-trade measuies. Thus
we might have intimated, by a reduced rjority and
a hesitating support, our diminished confidence in
the present ministry ; but we should at the same
time have declared our diminished dislike of Whig-
Radical and destructive measures. All England,
which was regarding this contest, would have pointed
to us and exclaimed, " See—the commercial and
manufacturing county of Lancashire has submitted
to the dictation of the League ; and even Conserva-
tive Liverpool itself has consented to receive her
convictions at the hands of its hireling seditionists !"
This is already being loudly boasted ; and instead of
the diminished strength of Conservatism in South
Lancashire being likely to operate as a warning to
Sir Robert Peel to abstain from encroachments upon
the Church of the land, and violations of the Pro-
testant feelings of its people, it may too soon, we
fear, be seized upon by him as a justification of that
utilitarian and anti-national policy, towards which
• he is already fast progressing.

Our attention has been directed to a petition, now
in in course of signature in this town, behalf
" Dissenters' Chapels Bill," which certainly does
appear to us to be one of the most impudent docu-
ments we ever met with. After reciting briefly the
nature of the bill in question, and the fact of its
now being before the legislature, this precious pro-
duction of Socinian cunning and dishonesty pro-
ceeds to declare—we give the precise wording—.
"That your petitioners, though not themselves holding
the opinions proposed by Unitarians, do not desire to see
them punished by civil forfeitures, but regard them as en-
titled to the full henefit of those wise laws by which the
once stringent condi ions of toleration have been relaxed,
and the liberty of worship from time to time enlarged."
So, in the opinion of the very wise people who
are to be got to sign this petition, the present non-
recognition, by the law, of the right of one class of

religionists to usurp the possession of property held
in trust for another class—the non-recognition of
robbery—his the effect of punishing the usurped
"by civil forfeitures !" But another clause is even
richer than this; for we find it stated---
"That the attempt, on the part of one denomination,
to wrest from the members of another, on the ground of
doctrinal belief, the chapels in which they have always
worshipped, the schools in which they have charitably
laboured, and the burial-grounds which contain, their most
interesting family memorials, cannot but engender la-
mentable animosities, and bring a reproach on the religion
of peace and love; whilst by making the courts of equity
judges of religious truth and error, the course of justice
is embarrassed with questions beyond its natural province,
and, in relation to a class of unoffending subjects of the
realm, the law is turned, in effect, from an instrument of
protection into a weapon of persecution."
The law, then, which this bill is to change,
wrests from Unitarians, on the ground of doctrinal
belief, "the chapels in which they have always wor-
shipped." This, we are assured, notwithstanding
the notorious fact that that law only so operates
upon them on its being satisfactorily proved that in
those chapels they have not always worshipped !"
Again it is ground of complaint that it takes from
them " the schools in which they have charitably
laboured," in direct and proved perversion of the
interests of their pious founders; it takes from
them " the burial grounds which contain their most
interesting family memoriala," whilst at restores
those burial-grounds to the descendants and con-
scientious followers of the faith of those who first
slept within their hallowed precincts; and finally,
notwithstanding these plaintive appeals in behalf of
the sanctity of the " most interesting family memo-
rials" of these petitioners, a new measure is prayed
for, which would enable them to wrest possession
of the graves of others as soon as ever they are
able to prove a twenty years' usurpation ;—which
in fact provides that the son or daughter who may
to-day inter, in the burial-ground of the chapel in
which he has worshipped, a beloved parent, may
twenty years' hence, when he had hoped to lie raid
in the same grave, be called upon to resign that
hope unless he is content to be buried in accordance
with the forms and service of a faith which he' pro-
tests against and detests ! _ _

This—is impudence enough; but not so thought
the concoctors of the petition. Distinctively ema-
nating as it does from a Socinian source, the Bri-
tish parliament is actually to be told that it is "the
humble petition of the undersigned inhabitants of
Liverpool and the neighbourhood, MEMBERS OF THE
ESTABLISHED CHURCH (0 and of others."

It has been remarked that the LIVERPOOL
STANDARD is the only organ which has resolutely
stood forward to protect the local interests of this
port from the injury with which they are menaced
by the bill now before Parliament, for forming
Docks in Wallasey Pool ; and; before proceeding to
offer a few more observations upon the subject of
that bill, and the projects which it is intended to
carry out, we owe to the public, and still more to
ourselves, some little explanation,. with, respect to
the motives which have actuated us in assuming our
present position. We have no objection to the
utmost possible extension of the prosperity of our
neighbours of the rising town of Birkenhead. We
have no fear of any rational dock scheme,. at Wal-
lasey or any other point upon the Cheshire shore,
being injurious to the trade of Liverpool or her
own docks. But we have contended and must con-
tend, that such scheme can be carried out to as
great an extent as is desira:iie for the interests of
Birkenhead itself without injury to the port• of Li-
verpool; and that in looking at this or any other
measure projected by our neighbours,. the safety
and unobstructed navigation of the river,. upon
which depen-ls the prosperity of Birkenhead as well
as Liverpool, should be the one absorbing object of
solicitude. In this spirit we have throughout
treated the questions involved in the measure now
before Parliament; and regardless of being mis—
understood, we must continue so to treat them.

We have certainly heard—who has not ?—strange
rumours of the doings of juntas of great men
here, and coteries of small men there, which if not
calculated to startle disinterested observers like our-
selves, were at least sufficient to tell them that, in
justice to the public at large, and the public of Bir-
kenhead in particular, such doings should be care-
fully and cautiously watched. We have done so;
we have performed perhaps an unpopular duty—
we trust faithfully, not more for the sake of the in-
terests of Liverpool, but of those of the people of
Birkenhead as well; and we must continue our
watchfulness, notwithstanding the rebukes of thin-
skinned friends, or the bitterness of those who feel
that we are an obstruction in their way.
Having said thus much to prevent our motives
being misunderstood, we proceed to supply some
omissions in our last remarks upon the Wallasey
Dock project. Assuming the evidence of seven or '
eight eminent engineers to be correct, we showed
that positive injury to the navigation of the river
would result from the abstraction of seven million
tuns of its tidal waters "at one fell swoop;" and
common sense tells us that such must be the case,
It has been asserted, however, that the pool is too
near the mouth of the river to allow any injury to
the scour to result from its being closed. We
might admit that there is something in this argu-
ment if we could be assured that the water, which
now flows into it, would go up above the neck of
the river, in addition to the quantity which is at pre-
sent held there; and thus leave the same force to
operate upon the channels and banks outside. But
we are far from being satisfied that this would be
the case; whilst the evidence is overpoweringly
strong that as at present held, the water in
Wallasey-pool does materially operate upon those
channels and banks. In answer to the question
" Do you agree with Mr. Rendel that two-thirds of
the water from Wallasey Pool is of little valve as a
scour ?" Mr. Page replies—" No, I do not ; I
cannot imagine that any abstraction of tidal water
from 'Wallasey, or any other part of the Mersey, so-
far as the tide flows, but particularly these portions,
and in that locality, will not injure the sea chan-
nels."
In corroboration of this opinion we might quote
Messrs. Rennie, Vignoles, Giles, Mylne, Walker,
Probis, Colthurst, and Fletcher, together with Mr..
Jervis, Professor of Mathematical and Natural Phi-
losophy in the College of Civil Engineers ; and with
such authorities in favour of our opinion, we are
certainly not much in danger of its refutation. In
addition, however, we 'may state that, so strongly
impressed was government with the importance of
preserving the tidal waters as a scour, some
years ago a bill was brought into Parliament by the
Admiralty itself, for the special protection of all the
government harbours from any tampering with those
waters ; and at this moment we believe its provisions
are most rigidly enforced, and no jetties are allowed
to be constructed, or abstractions of any kind per-
mitted, without the fullest enquiry being instituted
as to their probable effects. Pray what enquiry has
been instituted into the effect of the proposed Walla-
sey Dock upon our own noble river—a river destined
at some future and not distant day to be the chosen
highway to the whole western world ? There has
been no enquiry, no evidence, worthy of the name ;
and we submit, with great deference to the Lords
of the Admiralty, that where such vast inferests are
at stake, it is their bounden duty to institute a most
searching enquiry, at once, and especially before they
permit the merits of the present plans to be affirmed
by a deliberate vote of the House of Commons. At
all events, those members of the House of Com-
mons who may be induced to support the third read-
ing of the bill to-morrow night, under the impres,
sion that it has received, in its details, the full ap,
proval of the Admiralty, should
sbecuh approvalndeceive beingd,both
with respect to the fact itself of such
given, which is roundly boasted, but of which
respectnever-
never-
theless we are very sceptical, and also with
to the question whether the Admiralty has ever yet
had an opportunity of arriving at a we
ill groun
to ded
conclusion. Before such a bill is permtted pass
the House of Commons, let the plans be submitted
to a Committee of Enquiry on national grounds—
for national interests are involved in its successful
or injurious operation ;—and not be permitted to be
decided upon by private individuals only, who may
be warped by considerations of a private and even
personal character, and who have never looked at it
in the broad light, in which alone a scheme so im-
portant in its tendencies ought to be viewed. Let
the most eminent engineers be called upon to ex-
amine and report, instead of trusting altogether to
naval men who, however eminent in their own noble
profession in all its details, may not have the know-
ledge or the habits most required for the satisfactory
prosecution of such an enquiry as is here necessary.
To revert, however, to practical matters. In our
former remarks we omitted to notice one of the pro-
minent features in the proposed scouring of the
great tidal basin, which is intended to cause so vio-
lent an agitation of the waters as to keep the silt in a