The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-02-21 00:00:00

and und(
would fall to had I

t. L. HAY moved the

which was imrced

ately agreed t(

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDA

The Duke of WELLINGTON informed the Marc
downe that inquires bad been made
had referred to relating to the Aff

rghanistan

only able to find one of them, which he laid upon the tabl
He could not find the letter of General Nutt, but he mu

state that that gallant officer had never disobeyed anv orders
from. Candahar, and had actually stat
had not done so

In reply to a question from Earl FITZWILLIAM.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE stated that ei5,0(0 had been col-
lected in consequence of the Queen's letter, to which was
added £25,C00 collected by public subscriptions. This
money was placed in the hands of the committee, who had
the distribution of the money accruing from a royal letter
some 15 years ago, and they had distributed it most exten-
sively over those parts 'of the country in which distress was
most prevalent.

Their lordships adjourned early

HOUSE OF COMMON

'9rged, Exchequer lit

-FRIDAY

The adjourned debate was resumed by Sir A. L. HAY, who
observed that if he were unacquainted with parties in that
house, he might easily have supposed that Lord Howick was
bringing forward his motion as a minister of the crown, in
order to carry out that portion of the royal speech relating to
the distress of the country. If the debate should have no other
effect it would at all events inform the country who the mem-
bers were in that house who were determined that the general
distress should, if possible, he relieved.
Mr. RASHLEIGH believed the motion of Lord Howick to
be intended as an impediment in the way of the government,
and should therefore oppose it.
Captain LAYAR,D, after expressing his thanks to Lord
Stanley and Sir James Graham for the lessons of liberty he
had in his boyhood received from reading their speeches said
that parliament ought not to leave the country in its present
position without some attempt to relieve the prevailing dis-

Mr. BLAcicsToNE would oppose the motion, but still must
state that he was not satisfied with the speech of Sir R. Peel
at the commencement of the session, as far as that speech
related to the corn-laws ; nor was he better satisfied with
the conduct of the government in reference to their avowed
intentions as to the introduction of American wheat into

Mr. M. PHlmps said that even since the commencement
of the session the state of trade in Lancashire had becbme
more unsatisfactory ; and with respect to China, he was of
opinion that our merchants and manufactruers should be very
cautious how they shipped mote goods to that country than

was justified by the demand. With regard to-the sliding
scale of duties on corn, he firmly believed the trade and com-
merce of the country must decline under its operation. He
regretted that although on all sides the greateit sympathy was
expressed for the distress of the people, yet from the govern-
ment side of the house he had heard no one proposition
suggested for its relief.

Mr. DAnnY opposed the motion, which was admitted even
on the opposition side of the house could lead to no practical
result. It was intended as a decided party move, in order to
lower the government in the estimation of the people. Hon.
gentlemen talked of free trade, but he never knew a free
trader in the article he dealt in himself. They heard a great
A -- .L • n - •

dear of the repeal of the duties on corn, but why should not
the protection be taken from all other articles as well? The
Anti-Corn-Law League would not advocate a doctrine like
this, and therefore it was that they had not adopted the name
of the Free-Trade League, because they only wanted free
trade in matters which did not affect their own interests.
Lord H. VANE reluctantly opposed the motion of Lord
Howick. One of the objects in view was clearly an altera-
tion of the present corn law, and he could consent to no
sudden change in that law which would have the effect of
leading to serious perturbation in agricultural affairs.
Mr. BRoTHEB:roN supported the motion of Lord Howick,
not from any party motive, hut from a sincere desire that the
dreadful distress of the people should be alleviated. From
the justice or humanity of the landed interest he expected
little, but he expected a good deal from their self-interest,
when they should become convinced that their own welfare
depended upon the prosperity of commerce. He admired
the principles of the present government, but he wished to
see

those principles carried into practice.
Mr. M. ATTWOOD said the feature in the state of the coun-
try which caused him almost to despair of its recovering from
its present depressed condition was the absence of any sug-
gestion as to the causes of that depression from either side
of that house. The hon. gent. then proceeded to refute the
inferences drawn by Sir James Graham as to the increase
of labour as evidenced by the increase of deposits in the
Lancashire saving banks. The fact was that those banks
were trading banks, and were paying a much greater interest
for money than they could obtain for it. If any joint stock
or private bank were to proceed upon the same principle,
bankruptcy must be the inevitable result. He could not
agree with the remedies suggested by Lord Howielc, nor
could he therefore vote for his motion. • The principles of
free trade were first broached in the year 1820, when a pe-
tition was presented to that house from the merchants of
London, in which the doctrine was laid down that the pros-
perity of the country dmended upon being able to by in the
cheapest market and to sell in the dearest. Those princi-
ples were taken up, and measures of free trade had been
gradually adopted until they now saw in the present state
of the country that they had sacrificed the industry of this
country for the advantage of the industry of their neigh-
bours. The shipping interest had also been sacrificed to the
free-trade theory to an enormous extent, and was now in a
most alarming condition.

Mr. M. GIBSON said the question resolved itself into an
emphatic appeal to the Government to do something to re-
lieve the distress of the country, and the plain meaning of the
division would be that those who voted for the motion would
vote that something should be done to relieve the distress,
while those who voted against it would vote that nothing
should be done. He impeached the accuracy of the statistics
read by Sir James Graham respecting the establishment of
new mills, &c., and contended that instead of improving, the
state of things was most disastrous. With respect to the
pending commercial treaties and negotiations, he must say
he did not expect much from treaties which were made a pre-
t .*;--' n laws. It was this country that

.ex. .or continuing the corn
should concede instead of requiring concession from others,
for while the Brazils levied only 15 or 20 per cent. on our
manufactures, we bad placed 400 per cent. on their sugars.
He repudiated the notion of maintaining a preponderating
landed interest, and said that the manufacturing and mercan-
tile community would not submit to be treated as a secondary
class. The landed proprietors created a vested interest as a
reason for not repealing the corn law. He called upon the
Government to consider the responsibility they were incur-
ring by refusing to do anything to mitigate the sufferings of

the people.
Lord F. EGERTON admitted the distress which prevailed
to an extent which demanded all their attention. It was said
that no one had proposed a remedy for this distress, but he
temporary, as he trusted was the cloud
was prepared with a remedy--partial it is true—of no great
weight, and only
which hung over the country, and that remedy was the volun-
tary dissolution of the Anti-Corn-Law League. The distress,
he contended, was more fairly attributable to an unusual
stimulus given to trade at a time when the application of the
power of steam had given the fullest development to our ma-
nufacturing power, than to any protection given to agriculture.
Mr. COBDEN denied that this was a party move, and said
the motion should have been to inquire into the state of the
manufacturing and agricultural distress, and then the landed
proprietors would be placed upon their defence, to say how
they.allowed their dependents to fall into such a terrible con-
dition. The hon. member for Dorsetshire, on his own estates,
paid his labourers only Ss. a week, so that if their families
consisted of five they were forced to live on less than paupers
in the workhouse, or felons in the gaol. And yet the landed
proprietors, who reduced all around them to a condition
worse than that of felons and paupers, still asked to have
this state of things continued. He (Mr. Cobden) lived in
the country, he employed out-of-door labourers—labourers
utterly unskilled—and to those labourers he paid 12s. per
week, while agricultural labourers were receiving only Bs.
Light was, however, peeping in upon the farmeis, and next
quarter
in terdaDy landlords
otrhseetshirei and every farmer also, had received a
would find it out, for every free-
holdernaa
sealed packet from the Anti-corn-law league. The hon.
which chw
said as
thatthe
were necessary.
corn-laws
gentleman then commented at great length upon the injustice
of thet c
hcbour
whenll, w, w
admitted,
be said, by Sir Edward
ic
in order to keep country gentlemen in their present posi-
tion—in other words that they must continue to live upon
the industry of the labouring classes of the community. The
capital of the country was wasting away—pauperism was in-
creasing—and while trade and commerce were rapidly de-
clining, the taxes were fearfully increasing. In such a state
of things, what assurance could the right hon. baronet give
to his sovereign or the country, that this state of things was
likely shortly to terminate? The corn law of last session
was disapproved of by the whole of the mercantile and ma-
nufacturing classes throughout the 'kingdom, and it formed
no portion of their orders abroad. The trade consequently
fell into the hands of speculators, all of whom were ruined.
In the course of his speech Mr. Cobden made use of the fol-
lowing remarks :—lt was the duty of the independent mem-
bers of that house to throw upon the right hon. baronet at
the head of the government the whole responsibility of the
present position—to throw the responsibility on him, the
right honourable baronet, individually—(cheers and counter
cheers)..

Sir PEEL said he would never be influenced by the me-
naces of the hon. member, that he would be held responsible
for his measures.
Mr. COBDEN said he did not mean personal responsibility,
but responsibility in virtue of his office.
Sir It. PEEL said that the menaces of the hon. member
should not influence him in the discharge of his public duty.
He regretted that the debate should have taken a character
so objection to the form of the motion
of political. He
,ol,hlailid rid ho ew
ould meet the question entirely
upon its own merits. If 'hey went into committee would the
noble lord propose a reduction of the duty on tea, cotton, to-
bacco, and wool, and, if
so, what, he would ask, was to be-
come of the revenue? Or, if he proposed to reduce the du-
ties on wines and fruits, what would become of the pending
commercial negotiations?
The fact was, that the country
had not yet recovered from the effects of the suspension of
trade during the passing and immediately subsequent to the
passing of the new tariff. The right hon. baronet then gave
a sketch of the difficulties he had to encounter on entering
office, and defended the course he had pursued as the best
which could be adopted under the circumstances in which the
country then was. With respect to the Corn-law, he did
not intend to alter it ; but he would never, for the support
of any gentleman, pledge himself to the maintenance of that
law if it should be Found that it was injurious. The right
hon. baronet then proceeded to retort upon the late Govern-
ment the charge which Mr. Baring had, on the previous
evening, made against the present Government, of having
unsettled everything
and settled nothing, and contrasted
in their conduct, in 1840, ;
voting against Mr. Ewart's motion
for the reduction of the duty on foreign sugar from 635. to
355., with their recent conduct in pressing the reduction of
the duty upon their opponents, as if they had themselves
been all their lives the most strenuous advocates for such
reduction. The present Government had brought to a close
two wars, and he hoped would he able to effect reductions
in the army, navy, and ordnance estimates to the extent of
£850,000 this year, and that in future years still further re-
ductions might be made. The right hon. baronet concluded
an admirable speech by an enumeration of the various objects
which the Government had been enabled to effect during the
short period they had been in office, and adverted to the
present position of the Duke of Wellington and Marshal
Soult, in their respective countries, both anxious for peace
and soothing the jealousies of the two nations, which the
anonymous writers in the public journals were endeavouring
to excite by misrepresenting tne motives for every proceeding
of the Government of either country.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he was too ill to make any very
extended observations, but he felt it necessary to reply to
some of the arguments of the right lion. baronet. In 1841
he had stated the necessity of adopting principles of free
trade, and predicted that, unless they did so, foreign nations
would adopt systems of restriction. The right hon. baronet
subsequently admitted the correctness of the principle, but it
was thql too late, because foreign countries had already de-
tern:4lld upon the restrictive system,
and some five or six
hostile tariffs were already adopted. If the right hon, baronet

vere elfacked-foi Ira ha-ritg: dune towarda tht iarthet:
ance of free trade, he immediately quoted his tariff; but if
nny of the Agriculturists Attacked him for injuriht then) by
replied that it

for the

- . - -
tariff of which he boasted had had littleor iiu effect at all in
reducing prices. With respect to the corn laws, he was of
opinion that an eight shilling fixed ditty would not now soda
the question, but he had no doubt if agreed to when he first
proposed it, the question would have been settled for many
years.

Mr. COI DEN explained, that by the use of the words
" individually responsible" he meant nothing more than as
the head of the government.

Mr. ROEDUCIti called for an explanation from Mr. Cobden
of the word " maniacal" used by him, in reference to some
arguments used by a noble lord in another place. He had
used the same word to him before the debate, and he told
him he would defend that noble lord, upon which Mr. Cob-
den told him he had better have nothing to do with it, or the
Corn Law League would go down to Bath. (Tremendous
cheering.) He regretted to be called on for this explanation,
and he would only say that he had nothing but contempt for
the judgment of the man xho could use such language in re-
ference to his noble friend. Mr. Roebuck then quoted from
the speech of a clergyman at a corn-law meeting, a passage in
which he spoke of a person who talked about casting lots as
to the taking away the life of Sir R. Peel.

Mr. BANkES denied that the situation of the peasantry of
Dorsetshire was such as it had been described to be by Mr.

Cobden

Mr. COBDEN said that Mr. Roebuck had misrepresented
his words. He had not described the noble lord alluded to
as a maniac. He had said that if the noble lord spoke as he
had been reputed to have done, his language must be consi-
dered as the emanation of an ill-regulated intellect.
Lord HOWICK shortly replied, after which Mr. FERR AND
having withdrawn his amendment, the house divided, and the
motion of the noble lord was defeated.
For the motion
Against it

Majority

MOSEIMIM=

.
THEATRE ROYAL, WILLIAMSON-SQUARE

MR. BROWNE AND MR. STUART.

Shakspeare's Play of TH E TEMPEST, with the whole of
the New Scenery, Machinery, &c., at HALF PRICE.

'PHIS present TUESDAY EVENING, the 21st instant,
the Opera of
THE BARBER OF SEVILLE.
After which. the New Farce of
FORTY AND FIFTY.
To conclude with
T E M P E S T.

T H E

ROYAL LIVER THEATRE

PHIS present TUESDAY EVENING, the 21st instant,
the performance will commence with a new Drama,
called

YOUTH AND AGE ;
OR, THE YOUNG COLONEL AND HIS OLD WOMAN.
Michael Witzgoff Mr. Buckstone.
The Countess Xenia.. (the Old NVuman).. Mrs. Fitzwilliam

To be followed by a new Vaudeville, called
FOREIGN AIRS' AND NATIVE GRACES !
Emily Staples.. Mrs. Fitzwilliam.
Sam Buckland Mr. Buckstone.
After which, the original Duo-Drama; called
THE SNAPPING TURTLES;
OR, MATRIMONIAL MASQUERADING.
Mr. Timothy Tantalus Timms Mr. Buckstone.
Mrs. Matilda Timms .
To conclude with the laughable Farce of

JOSEPH BRAG ; OR, HOW s'o MAKE A WILL
Joseph Brag .... Mr. Buckstone.

TO CORRESPONDENTS

" Curliamis" in all probability on Friday

We cannot insert the letter of " A Reformer" without Ms

name.
The letter of " A Pewholder" was received too late to be
attended to in our publication of to-day. None of our
correspondents are justified in expecting us to insert or
notice any anonymous communications which contain
remarks on the private conduct of private individuals.

Zitnrool OtAnDarb.

TUESDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 21, 1843

On this day, we commence the fifth year of our
proprietorship of the Liverpool Standard, and, we be-
lieve we may state, with truth, that our own case is
the only one in which an English provincial Con-
servative paper has been published twice a-week for a
similar period by the same proprietors. We do not
refer to this circumstance in a boastful spirit. It is
one, nevertheless, of which we may justly feel proud,
at the same time that we feel grateful to a discrimi-
nating public, by whom our efforts in its behalf have
been appreciated and rewarded. Relying upon our
own resources alone to carry it on, we entered first
upon the arduous career which such an undertaking
involves; unaided, except by the kind preference of
our friends, we have thus far carried it on, with much
occasionally to annoy us—much which might have
tempted some men, less earnest than ourselves in the
cause Ivhich has ever been next our hearts, to abandon
the effort—and the reward of perseverance is now
before us. We enter upon our fifth year of proprie-
torship with brightened and brightening prospects,
with added friends to support us—with increased in-
fluence with the public to render our exertions useful
to the cause and the principles which we advocate—
with ample resources of talent, information, and the
other indispensable requisites in the successful ma-
nagement of a newspaper property, within our reach,
to enable us to command attention. For this we
should be less than human if we did not, along with
the gratitude which we owe the public, entertain at the
same time some little self-pride. The public has
been good to us; we feel that we have deserved well of
the public.

In i eturning our thanks, therefore, for the past, and
making our profession for the future, we have little to
say. The former we pay in all sincerity; the latter we
take to he somewhat supererogatory. We shall continue
to follow the straightforward path of honesty, as we
have, to the best of our judgment, followed it hitherto.
Vtre shall maintain, at all hazards, our independence.
In politics, we remain the unflinching supporters of
the Throne, the Church, and the Constitution. We
take our stand, as we have ever done, upon the " old
ways" of our fathers, with

" Hearts resolved and hands prepared,
The blessings we enjoy to guard."
We adhere to the Protestantism of the Reformation ;
and abjure popery and every system hostile to the
principles, discipline, and doctrines of the Established
Church. Need we say more, to entitle us to the con-
tinued favour of the Conservative community of this
great commercial metropolis, when we have the past to
point to as the surest and best guarantee of our prin-
ciples, and of the truth and faithfulness with which
they have ever been upheld ? We need not
And now, a word to our advertising friends. In-
disputably, we now occupy, in influence and respecta-
bility of circulation, a prominent position amongst the
Conservative journals of the country, and are fully justi-
fied in claiming to be regarded as second to no journal
in the town, of whatever politics, as an advantageous
advertising medium. We beg to impress this fact upon
the attention of our friends amongst the advertising
public; and whilst we assure them of our gratitude
for past favours, we can now with confidence urge our
claim, upon grounds which they will readily acknow-
ledge, to future patronage and support. We can give
ample circulation, in the most influential circles, to
whatever advertisements they may honour us with.
Men of business require no more !

It may now, we think, be viewed as an established
fact, that every effort is to be used, of which agitation
is capable, to prolong the existence of the present de-
pression in commercial affairs—in the hope of using
the consequent sufferings of the people as a lever for
the attainment of the political ends of a party. What
is it which the mercantile classes, and the working
classes as well, have most to pray for at the present
moment ? The answer, which thousands of voices
throughout the country are ready to accord in is CON-
FIDENCE IN MERCANTILE TRANSACTIONS ! The
amelioration of the tariff, during last session of Par-
liament, unsettled for a time many important branches
of foreign commerce and native industry. Some mil-
lions of active capital during the past year, partly
owing to legislative changes, and partly to the prospect
held out of further changes, have been withdrawn from
productive employment, and are lying idle in the
coffers of the Bank of England, and other similar
places of security. What does it want now to set this
capital in motion—to give impetus to the wheels of
commercial enterprise—to remove the icy chain which
binds up the fertilising streams of industry ? The
answer is still—" CONFIDENCE"! Vast markets in
India and China are open to us. We are in the en-
joyment of peace with all the world. The food of the
people is almost unprecedently reasonable in price.
What aid then do we require to enable us to avail our-
selves of those facilities to the attainment of our usual
condition of successful commercial energy ? The an-
swer is again—CONFIDENCE; and the cessation of
that political agitation which alone retards our return
to that position !

We submit then that, in such a state of things, the
mercantile community of Liverpool have an imperative
duty to themselves to perform. Why are WE to be the
unresisting sport of a few reckless and incendiary ad-

venitiret6 hO,g,hbourinA

Why are the important conimere'ial interests of this

influential community to wait, cap in hand, upon

creatures as these ? Are wz to lie down, In helpl

:inactivity, whilst these mountebanks play out their

farce ? We say, distinctly, No ! Such is not the
course which the mercantile body of. this great town
ought to pursue. We have a duty to perform, not
only to ourselves and to our children, but to the com-
munity in which we live—aye, and to the God-who
gave us wealth and influence to be used for the benefit
of his creatures! That duty is to place ourselves in

the path of this insane agitation ; to say to these
reckless men, " You shall no longer be permitted to
obstruct the commerce of the empire ; you shall no
longer sow mistrust, and stir up revolution ; you shall
no longer dash the cup and the food from the lips of
famishing men, to speed on a frenzied and selfish poli-
tical object !"

This is the duty—the plain and palpable duty of the
Conservative merchants and tradesmen of Liverpool;
and its performance is an easy one. Let a meeting be
called at the Amphitheatre—never fear that it will not
be a crowded meeting !—and is
voice of this great
community be heard expressiiWts confidence in the
Conservative government of Sir Robert Peel, and de-
precating, as the main hindrance of a return to a state
of healthy commercial activity, the incendiary agita-
tion, with which we are surrounded, and the obstruc-

tive policy with which that government is threatened
in Parliament. Let that voice be fearlessly and stre-
nuously raised ; and we venture to say that it will be
echoed, and blessed, by nine-tenths of the industrious
and deserving population of Great Britain, and do
more, in a single day, than all which mere legislation
can effect, to save the land from the anarchy into
which it is rapidly sinking !

Unqualified disgust and indignation must have been
the uppermost feelings in the breast of every right-
minded Englishman on perusing the report of the epi-
sode which occurred, during the debate in the House
of Commons, on Friday night. The organs of the
Anti-Corn- Law League will attempt, we doubt not,
to explain away the circumstances and expressions out
of which it arose, and to divert from that body the
store of execration which it is calculated to call down,
and has already called down upon them. But we ask,
let the people of England look attentively and dispas-
sionately at the facts; let them look at the atrocity of
language, at the atrocity of action by which that lan-
guage was followed up, and by which tee life of an
amiable and exemplary servant of his country was sa-
crificed; at the attempt of an eminent leader of the
offending body to suppress the publicity of the fact
that such language had been uttered—(by a threat le-
velled against an independent member of the legisla-
ture)—and, lastly, weigh the tendency and spirit of the
remarks of that reckless man himself, on Friday night,
in which he held up the prime minister of Great Bri-
tain as the party alone " responsible" for th 6 existing
sufferings of the people. Let the public weigh these
things well, and then say if any contemptible and
shuffling palliative can, or ought to, divert from the
authors and abettors of a course of conduct so revolting,
the disgust of a Christian community.

For the information of, and as a warning to, the
thoughtless amongst our fellow-townsmen and towns-
women, who have suffered themselves to be entangled
in the agitation of the seditious body in question, we
shall briefly place the whole case before them for their
serious and calm contemplation. On the 17th of July,
then, a convocation of Anti-Corn-Law delegates held
a meeting—if we remember tight—in palace-yard,
within a stone's throw of the houses of parliament, then
sitting. At this convention a certain Rev. (!) Mr.
Bailey—a minister of the Gospel I—represented1—represented the
Leaguers of the large town of Sheffield; and in the
course of his remarks gave utterance—according to
the,Morning Chronicle—to the followiug atrocious lan-
guage, which, for the benefit of dim-sighted people who
can only see one side of a controversy, we print in very
readable type. Hear, then, the Rev. Mr. Bailey, of
Sheffield :

"IT WAS NOT WORDS WHICH WOULD MOVE

PARLIAMENT, BUT FORCE ; THIS SHOULD HAV

EFFECT IF THEY DID NOT CHANGE THEIR SYSTEM.
HE HAD HEARD OF A GENTLEMAN WHO, IN A PRI-

VATE COMPANY, SAID THAT :F A HUNDRED PER-

SONS CAST LOTS AMONGST THEM, AND THE LOT
FELL UPON HIM, HE WOULD TAKE THE
LOT TO DEPRIVE SIR ROBERT PEEL OF
LIFE." (! !!)

Most Christian sentiments these, ladies and gentle-
men of the League party ! a most patriotic and Chris-
tian character this Reverend Mr. Bayley! If WORDS
could not move, FORCE should. What kind of force ?
The answer, which we gather from the subsequent
sentence of the reverend dissenter, is scarcely sought
to be cloaked. There cannot be the shadow of a doubt
as to the interpretation which would be put, by igno-
rant and brutalized men, upon the word " force," re-
ferred to by the reverend gentleman. But he pro-
ceeded, as if startled

" Even at the sound himself had made,"
to deprecate such a mode of advancing towards the
achievement of a political end as follows :—We give
it in the same type.

" HE FELT CONVINCED THAT NO SUCH ATTEMP

OUGHT TO BE MADE ON ANY. PRETENCE WHAT-
EVER"—(the consciousness of his clerical duty told
him that the doctrine of killing no murder'—the doc-
trine by which regicides had sought to defend their
crime—was not defensible on scriptural grounds, or
even on scriptural morality; but mark the gingerly
and delicate terms in which he virtually counterpoises
the denunciation to which he had been constrained !)
" BUT RE WAS PERSUADED OF THIS, THAT
WHENEVER SIR ROBERT PEEL WENT TO
HIS GRAVE, THERE WOULD BE BUT FEW
'l'o SHED ONE TEAR OVER HIM"! !! Hove
irresistibly this conclusion reminds one of the great
Daniel ! " Don't hurt him, boys; but •if ye kill him,
there will not be a wet eye at his funeral."

Well, this seditious, this inflammatory speech, was,
according to the Morning Chronicle, made on the 17th
of July, and on the 18th of the same month was duly
reported in that journal, frym which we have copied
it—shorn, perhaps, by that organ of the League, of
somewhat of the baseness which characterises it. In
August parliament was dissolved. Shortly afterwards
her Majesty and her Royal Consort, accompanied by
Sir Robert Peel and the Court, proceeded on a visit to
Scotland ; and there it appeared that the carriage of
the Premier was an object of attention to an individual
of the name of M`Naughten ;—the carriage in ques-
tion, however, being occupied by his secretary, Mr.
Drummond, who, throughout its route, from the city
of Durham to Glasgow, was mistaken for the right
hon. baronet himself. Upon the return of the royal
cortege to England, the party was dispersed; the
premier proceeding to his seat in Staffordshire.
Shortly afterwards, it would seem that the individual,
previously mentioned, betook himself to the Metropo-
lis; and, in the beginning of January, began to pa-
rade the neighbourhood of the Government Offices,
with a regularity which acquired for him the reputation
of being a police officer. On the 20th of January,
the secretary of Sir Robert Peel—the same gentleman
who had been mistaken for him in Scotland by the
miscreant before alluded to, was, treacherously as.
sassinated in Parliament-street by that individual,
M`Naghten ; and subsequently, during his confine-
ment, the intimation was made by him to the police-
man in attendance, that it was his impression that he
had shot Sir Robert Peel—the same party who had
been pointed out as one whom a band of Sheffield
patriots had marked for assassination, and over whose

grave "THERE WOULD DE FEW TO SHED ONE

TEAR."

The world set down this attempt as that of a maniac.
We admit this much of the apology offered for his con-
duct by Mr. Richard Cobden. But this maniacal
effort was, by a character no less illustrious and re-
splendent in talent and worth than Lord Brougham—
by a lVhig Exchancellor—denounced in a recent de-
bate, as incited by the speech of the Rev. Anti-Corn-
Law Leaguer in question ; and what was the course
pursued by Mr. Cobden ? The dignified denunciation
of Lord Brougham had cut deep into the withers of
the Anti-Corn-Law League; and the apostle of that
body—Cobden—having learnt, from a private conver-
sation with that gentleman, in the library of the House
of Commons, that Mr. Roebuck had determined to
defend Lord Brougham from an attack to be made
upon him, by referring to the passage which we have
quoted, to which Lord Brougham referred during the

etiaie in the 14ot

..„.et,

honautabie them

lothitith tine_
attcmpteJ to interfere

gitntd to

flee niluigters,

,vould bring iTon bitnsvli the hose interfereixe
the league in 13ath—the city w iicl he represented
with a view to oust him. hy tr.icls and "the holding of
tea parties," (1) from its representation. The. honour-
able ultra-radical, however, was too chivalrous an or
ponent to be thus put down. He detailed, to a startled
house and country, the atrocities of the Rev Mr.
Bailey, and, as well, the threats held out, by the paltry
man of cotton, in the library of the House of Com-
mons ; and by so doing, we maintain, rendered 10•
fatuous, to all future ages, participation the most slight
in the sayings and doings of the Anti-Corn-Law

League!

The climax, however, it remained for Cobden him-
self to perpetrate. Since the opening of the present
session the gentleman in question has not milde his ar
pearance upon the arena of political agitation. P- de-
mestic bereavement, we regret to say, has been the
cause. Well, on Friday night, for the first time, lie
made his appearance ; and, fresh from the bed of
death—with one assassination before his eyes, the re'
sult of the murderous appeals of a.ferocious agitation
he proceeded fo the utterance of the following language
directed against Sir Robert Peel :

" It was the duty of every individual member of the
house to throw on him" (the Premier) " the INDIVIDUAL'
AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of the present

state of affairs."

The hungry and starving, maddened by the sedi-
rious appeals of a revolutionary faction, are to hold
Sir Robert Peel,—not the Government, but the Premier
himsey,—individually and personally responsible for
their sufferings ! But proceed—.
" He would tell the Right Honourable Baronet that
the whcr r responsibility of the present lamentableland
dangerous state of the country RESTED UPON 018
SHOULDERS V'

Need we wonder that the response of nine-tenths of
the House, before which this infamous language was
uttered, was a perfect shout of indignation ? There
was not, we venture to say, one member present who
did not recognize it at once in the sense in which it
was understood by Sir Robert Peel himself, AS A
THREAT—an attempt to turn that statesman from his
course by the fear of personal consequences.
Now we ask the dispassionate consideration of our
readers—we ask the attention of the female portion of
this community who have given their countenance to
the agitation of the Anti-Corn League—to the case
which we have placed before them. Can any human
being, from this time forth, esteem it an honor to have
to do with a party which fights with weapons so atro-
cious ? Surely no Englishman can ? Surely no mo-
ther, or sister, or wife of an Englishman, can in future
countenance an agitation so cowardly and disgraceful
With reference to the speech of this Mr. Bailey the
Times of yesterday says that "if he had intended to
suggest and familiarize men's minds with the idea of
assassinating Sir Robert Peel, without directly, or at
' least, without avowedly flying in the face of that re-
ligion from which we suppose he derives his sustenance,
he would probably have said just what he did ;" and in
relation to what fell from Mr. Cobden, the same journal
remarks as follows, " We must observe, that we do not
impute to Mr. Cobden an intent to murder; but we
do impute—we cannot avoid imputing—to him this---
that with his eyes open, knowing fully the threaten-
ing consequences to Sir Robert Peel's life of popular
odium, with no other purpose than to increase his
own credit and power with the most violent class of
politicians. he feels no scruple at recklessly and un-
ceasingly labouring to direct that odium "personallY
and individually" on the Minister whose life has been
once already attempted. If he is not anxious to put
the Premier out of the world, like the "gentleman"
that he wots of, he cannot by the extreme of charity
be fancied very careful to keep him in it. And further,
his movement in favour of Mr. Bailey, taken with
all its circumstances, makes it difficult to avoid the
suspicion that, though he has no intention to use the
pistol himself, he does not find himself at liberty t°
affront those who have."

Well, the debate on Lord Howick's motion, which

at one time threatened to

" drag its slow length along"

to the end of the session, has at last been concluded;
and, we ask, what has it added to the previously exist-
ing stock of human knowledge, beyond a somewhat
better acquaintance with the morality and designs of
the Anti-Corn-law League furnished by Mr. Cobden?
Not a single stray fact, or conclusion, with which We
were not acquainted long before the various philoso'
phers who have exhibited during the week, left their
various homes to enlighten the atmosphere of the me-
tropolis ! Yes—we beg pardon—one fact we have
learnt; and that fact an astounding one : the fact that
one hundred and ninety-one members of the House of
Commons entertain the opinion that an enquiry, by
committee of that house, into the distress of the na-
tion, and the propounding before such committee—of
the whole house, mind—of all the various nostrums of
its assembled sages ;—the interruption, during their
performances, of the entire business of the legislature
—the interruption of every negotiation in which go-
vernment may be engaged with foreign nations; the
unsettling of the public mind, and the stop put to all
commercial transactions, by the uncertainty which
must exist as to the result of its deliberations :—such
a course we have learnt is, in the opinion of the mitio".
rity in that house, the course most likely to relieve the"
eaisting distress of the country, and to snatch the any'.
merce and industry of the nation from its state of
stagnation and difficulty !

Surely, this is a fact worth recording ; for only ask:
yourself, kind reader, what must have been the prac-
tical result of the success of Lord Howick's wise pro'
position. Imprimis : the Speaker must have left the
chair, which would have been forthwith taken by Mr'
Greene, the chairman of committees, and then--
what ? Was Lord Howick prepared to propose a re-
medy for the national distress, and what was that
remedy ? Perhaps he was so prepared. We ).hould
have been told, in very general terms that we must
" unfetter the commerce of the country"—the last
new recipe propounded in a very elaborate article 10
the Edinburgh . Review, just published--and, in party
cular, we must change our present corn-law for
fixed duty. And then up would have bolted the mem-
bers for Stockport and Manchester, and Bolton, and 11'
host of other places—about half of the Whig-radical
phalanx—and kicked the fixed duty proposition out of
the hands of the heir of the house of Grey, and spit
upon it. Then William Ewart, perchance, would have
proclaimed the repeal of all protecting duties—the;
annihilation of customs and excise, and ten millions or,
annual revenue—to be replaced by "direct taxation J
and at the mention of these words—

" unpleasing to a Whiggish ear",

we should have been treated to such a storm from th°
left of the chair as would have set the very hairs uP°ll
the Speaker's wig

bristling on end,
Like quils upon the fretful porcupine,',
whilst from some Dumfries baillie, in the Strangers
Gallery, a groan would have burst, at the horrid pr°'
position of the member of his choice, which would'
have melted the heart of a stone or a philosopher W.
hear. And all this time, whilst this amusing scene;
was enacting in the House of Commons, not a pipe of
wine, or a hogshead of sugar, or a cargo of tea call°
have been sold for love or money; our merchants and
brokers must have looked on with folded hands; our'
vessels must have been laid up in dock; exery
ported article must have been bonded on arrival, an°
the lawyers and bankruptcy officials become the onlY
busy people in the community ! A hopeful way troll
of relieving the distress of the country !
Such must have been the result of the success of
Lord Howick's proposition. There was no practical
good to which it could possibly lead. It was a mesl
and despicable party movement ; an attack which _
wanted the quality which makes its author respected-7
boldness. It said to the Government against who;
it was levelled, " Your policy is erroneous ";
proposed, for the decision of the house and the ceuP_

_
try, no plans of its own. It was, in fact, one of th°l
efforts of obstructive policy, which we fully expect
be the policy pursued by the opposition party dttri4
the present session.
Do we regret, however, that it was made ?
for it drew from the Government of Sir Robert rev
several declarations of opinion which we hold to