The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1832-12-18 00:00:00

TO. THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STAT,'D.IRD.

Ewart, by the clear statemlanlike views which he
developed, in his speech at the hustings on the day of nomina_
tion, on every branch of our foreign and domestic policy, has
no doubt won golden opinions from all sorts of men, and nobly
"vindicated himself from the suspicion of entertaining any bu,.
"a genuine'and a pure ambition " in aspiring to represent thi'
great trading community. How striking is the contrast, for in_
stance, between his eloquence, where every word is pregnant
with meaning, and sense is never sacrificed to sound,- and the
mere verbiage and puerile declamation of a Sir Howard

Douglas!
But however hazardous it may be to differ in opinion from so
great constitutional an authority as Mr. Ewart, I wig venture,
with all becoming humility, -to d oubt Whether it is a very wise
or a very safe principle to procee I up on, that every existing In-
stitution must be changed. It is not very fashionable perhaps
to advert to the wisdom of our ancestors; but there is an adage
of one, Bacon, a man of some reputation in his day, which has
been adopted as the motto of cue of your fellow-journalist:3, it
runs thus--." It is not good to try experiments in states, except
t he necessity be' urgent or the utility evident,-; and it is well to
beware that it be the reforination that draweth o n the change,
and not the desire of change that pretendeth the reformation."
'this appears to me almost as wise as Mr. Ewart's reasoning in
favour of so !great a change as the introduction of the ballot
would. be, that he has never heard any sound reason against
it." • - . ,

Others may, 'Perhaps, be found so self-willed, as not to adopt
any opinion implicitly, merely upon the authority of; him. Who
has -propoiniclea it. Such persons may in all probability :take
up tilt cudgels in the defence of the Corporation, and the other
various monopolies again-St which Mr. Lwart, with true Malay-
an courage is .inclined.to run a=muck; eepe,cially as they wit'
• not find; in Mr. Ewart's speech at least, " any sound reason "
why they should be at once overthi own. 'I here are, however,
high matterseancl I will not meddle with them.
• I will, therefore, content myself with a few hints respecting
the sad abuses in our Established Church; not at all doubting that
pure friendship induces Mr. Ewart to take it under his protec
tion,. although I have heard of the bear that. unfortunately stran-
gled the babe which it officiously undertook to nurse. Mr. E. mus .
be a religious man, perhaps aprofessor of the unknown tongue,
as he is favoured with visions assuring him, that, " by a special
interposition of Providence, with the increased numbers of the
constituency thenumbei of the candidates was augmented also.',
It has never before happened; that at any one time there have
been four candidates for the representation of Liverpool. Some,
however, may think that such a sentence, if it had fahen from
the lips of a less-gifted individual, , had savoured of nonsense, if
not of rank blasphemy.
Mr. Ewart has "long considered tithes and pluralities as
evils," why, he does not condescend to say. Ido nut defend the
laSt, though I.may perhaps be able to advance something, sound
or unsound, in favour of the former. He also wishes that " the
working clergy should be better remunerated." In this wish I
most cordially join; but I cannot, for the life of me, guess how
they are tote better
.remunerated, if their present support, the
tithes, be swept away.
Ido not propose to enter upon the question, whether tithes
are enjoyed by diyineriglit, or no ? It is sufficient for my pur-
pose that such a mode of providing for persons employed in sa-
cred thingS prevailed, by the.appointinent of God himself, in a
nation which was under his own immediate government. There
can, therefore, be no "sound.." objection to tithes ou the score
of principle.
-And if long possession can confer a'righ; it may be a "sound',
argument, in the es of alawyer at least, that clerical persons
have a title to tithes far anterior to that by which any propeity
whatever in this kingdom is.held. It, therefore, appears to nie,
that forcibly to deprive- the, clergy of the tithes, would Shake
the foundation of every title in the country. It would also re-
quire ninre ingenuity than ;Hr. Ewart can boast of, to prove by
" sound reasons " that he wha wont(' so rob the clergy would be
any better than a pickpocket. He will, perhaps, say that, the
tithes were conferred by the public, .and, for the public good
they may be resumed. I defy him to prove that the tithes in
England ever did belong to the public. They were, so far as
any researches can discover, conferred by private individuals on
clerical bodies, to pay for the religious instruction of their
tenants inhabiting that distriet from whence the tithes were to
be derived. • They had a right so to burden their estate with this
payment, and ev,:ry subsequent possessor of the property, how-
ever he may have acquired it, whether by descent or purchase,
has never had a title to more than nine-tenths of that estate.
The landowaee is, therefore, clearly not injured by the payment
of tithes; nor lass the government of the country a right, upon.
any known principle of justice, to interpose in the matter, :ex-
cept to see that the clergy duly perform the duty for which they
ace so paid.
This letter has already been extended to an unconscionable
length, I will, therefore, hasten to a conclusion. I firmly be-
lie ve that to the wise establishment of tithes, that is a provisionjin-
the payment of the clergy inalienable from the soil itsey, the-pa-
rochial clergy at least owe their principal means of support.
When Henry the Bth overthrew the spiritual dominion of the
Pope in this realm, his own profuseness and the rapacity of his
courtiers did not spare the temporalities of the church ; but, as
the tithes could not be extinguished, and did not, generally
speaking hold out any sufficient temptation to the cupidity Of
the spoilers, these were left to remunerate the ministers who.
succeeded to the ecclesiastiCal duties of the popish priesthood.
The crisis may arrive, when another Henry, in the shape of an
ungodly mob, may be permitted for. a time to sweep away every
thing sacred and. •profane ; yet, by God's blessing, the means
may he left whereby, 'when 'the :vessel of the state shall have
righted, the 'ministers of religion may again have it in their
power to preach those doctrines which Mr. Ewart professes to
admire, and to impart spiritual advice and consolation to the
poor and afflicted. And the labourers will be worthy of their
hire.— 1 ours, &c.
15th, 1832. C.
S. Will it be quite consistent with gratitude, should the
first measure of the rejonned Parliament be directed against the
property of the ceiebrated author of the Bill? Laymen surely
will not in common justice be allowed to retain titheS, &C. &c.
for which they perform no service. There is something in the
name or h w,ain Abbey leads me to fancy that it once belonged
to the church.

Mit. THORNELY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

Stu,—Unwilling as I have always been. in any way to keep
up the contention of an election after it is over, I cannot, in
justice to myself and many others, suffer an observation made
in the Journal of this day to pass unnoticed, namely, that "every
household elector, but 1800,. voted for Mr. Thornely; and as
those qualified who did not vote, may be regarded as favourable
but timid, we must concede to him the honoUr of being_ chosen
by fully two-thirds of his fellow-townsmen, 'men of the greatest
respectability and independence."
Now, Sir, I for one did not vote, although I had promised
Mr. Ewart, to whom I most certainly should have kept my pro-
mise, if he had not, on the day of nomination, falsified my pre-
vious opinion ofnim, that he was a considerate moderate Re-
former; but when, from the hustings, I heaid him -.speak in
terms of_such 'complacency respecting the destruction of West