The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-06-24 00:00:00

ITICKH

M,A. Landoll

124, Oxford-

a Luc eighth edition of this noble poem.
1 talented author of " Luther." Upon
nrst enter. It is beautifully got up,

t Truth• London : Francis Ba

Oxford-street

-up little work is a compilation, by a female

Protestant truth," from the speeches and

Edward Dalton, Esq.,

the able secretary to the

The whole are pertinent, and ex-

,tid sot

ions are be

autifully

,pressed with most touching fervour and

send it cordially to our readers

Tract for the Times—The " Cht

.ch Principles

and Oxford, compared with the Christian
New Testament. By a Member of the
1. London : Francis Baisler. Oxford-

Princi,

Church of I

street ; Mewling

Liverpool

hen the Christian world is de-

ml preachings of Rome
and, and the insidious writings of the Oxford

cation of any work of sound

Protestant principle should be welcomed by every genuine
an. The present " Tract for the Times" is written
a plain and intelligible style, and deals with plain and in-
principles, erring, if at all, in the inculcation of

_ . .
somewhat too great laxity of interpretation of the Scriptures,
which the writer contends to be the only rule of faith.

Tha subjects upon which the writer brings to bear a vast
riptural arguments and authority against the pro-
positions taken up by the Oxford and Romish party, are—
baptismal regeneration, lay baptism, and the ancient mode
of baptism. These subjects are well handled, and the con-
flicting opinions with respect to them of fathers and councils,
and of the scriptural writers, brought into strong contrast,
in order to spew the coincidence of the latter with the opi-
nions and practices of the Protestant world, and at the same
time the fallacy of the notion that there is safety in any
church, when all have erred from the beginning. The writer

mass of

is eminently successful in his maintenance of the positions
for which he contends; and we can recommend his "Tract"
to our readers as one which effectually demolishes the most
dangerous fallacies which are at present being propagated
throughout Christian England.

inpf fiitivitaitient,

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
Sic J. GRAHAM stated that it was not the intention of the

Averment to pass any Registration of Electors Bill for
England during the present session. It was, bowover, in-
tended to introduce a bill on the subject before the close of
.he session, and to proceed with it as early as possible in the
upon excellent paper, by its present next session of Parliament.

In reply to a question from Lord J. RUSSELL.
Sir R. PEEL said it was not the intention of the govern-
ment to pass any registration bill for Ireland during the pre-

sent session.
In reply to a question from Sir H. W. BARRON,
Lord ELIOT said that he could not precisely state what
the expense would be of the special commission for the
county of Tipperary ; but a former commission had cost
£3063, and he bad no reason to suppose that in the present
instance it would be greater. The commission would open on
the 28th inst., and the assizes for Tipperary would commence
on the 28th of July. To attempt to hold the assizes earlier,
and thus supersede the necessity for a special commission,
would inconveniently alter all the arrangements of the whole

:ircuit.
On the motion for the house resolving itself into committee

on the poor law amendment bill,
Mr. C. BULLER called the altention of the house to the
recent proclamation respecting the depreciation of the gold
coinage, and declared his strong disapprobation of the course
pursued by the government. The loss of weight on the gold
coinage was owing to fair wear and tear, and should not be
suffered to fall upon the accidental holders, particularly as
the loss to the public would not have exceeded £90,000, the
deficient gold coin in circulation being estimated at six mil-
lions, and, as was stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
the depreciation not exceeding one and a half per cent. He
dwelt upon the period of distress at which this loss was
thrown on the holders of gold coin, as being singularly un-
happy, and condemned the government for issuing light gold
by their agents while they were calling it in by the proclama-
tion which had been issued. He understood it to be a fact,
that light sovereigns were issued in one part of the Bank of
England which when taken to another part were refused as
being short of weight. He was of opinion that all the ad-
vantage to be derived from the new tariff in a whole year
would not compensate for the mischief done by this measure
in the course of one fortnight.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHERUER thought this a most
inconvenient mode of bringing forward a discussion upon
such a subject. It would have been better had the public
been more frequently warned upon this subject, and he took
blame to himself that he had not done so when last in office.
The longer the delay the greater became the deficiency in the
coinage, and the greater the evil to the holders. In fact the
government had received some intimations respecting the
dereciation of the coinage which rendered the interference of
the executive absolutely necessary, and if they had not taken
advantage of the moment, he had reason to believe that an
equally advantageous opportunity might not again present

itself.
Mr. HAWES condemned the conduct of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, in thus discrediting the value of the gold
coin, without making any previous inquiry, without pro-
viding any facilities of exchange, or any remedy for the evil
which such a proceeding must necessarily entail. He also
contended that the loss accruing from the wear and tear of
the coin should be borne by the public and not by the holders.
Mr. F. T. BARING said, considering the state of the ex-
changes, and the flow of gold into this country, the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer ought not to have delayed very long
adopting some step with respect to the depreciation of the
coinage. It was to be remembered also, that it was the duty
of the government to give notice to the whole public at the
same time, and it might easily happen that in selecting a fa-
vourable time to do this, the government might find itself
unable to provide all the facilities that they could very easily
do if they were not thus limited in time by more powerful
considerations.
Mr. BERN AL said that within the last three days the
channels of retail trade had been dammed up by the difficul-
ties arising from the proclamation. In the country the evil
must be much greater than in the metropolis, for in many
parts of the kingdom the small traders would have no means
of changing their gold at all.
Sir R. PEEL said that nothing could be more discouraging
to public men than to be found fault with when they were
acting right. In January last a representation had been
made to the government by the bankers of London that the
quantity of gold coinage of deficient weight in circulation
was so great as to be a serious evil, and they suggested that
the Bank of England should be empowered to clip all light
sovereigns, and to purchase them at the mint price. This
was a proof of the necessity of the measure, and as to the
time chosen for carrying it into operation being injudicious,
on account of the distress prevailing at the moment, he
would only say that in the state of the exchanges, government
had not seized the opportunity when circumstances were so
favourable to this country, it would have incurred a very
serious responsibility. Under such circumstances it was
unfair to bring forward individual cases of loss, as if they
were a true criterion by which to judge of an important
measure like the one in question. The right hon. baronet
also contended that the loss attending the calling in of the
coinage ought not to be borne by the treasury.
Mr. HUME said that the government had done right to
seize the opportunity of calling in the light gold, but they
should have provided greater facilities for its exchange, and
should have taken care that there should have been a proper
supply of silver ; whereas it appeared that on that very day
the Bank of England had not a single pound's worth of silver
with which to accommodate the public.
Captain BERKELEY complained that since the proclama-
tion light sovereigns had been issued by the government
offices. The men in the dockyard at Portsmouth had been
paid in light sovereigns.
Sir G. COCKBURN said he had the authority of Admiral
Bouverie for contradicting a portion of the statement in a
Hampshire paper, respecting this payment of light sove-
reigns to the men in the dockyard, and in a few days he
hoped to hove further information from the gallant admiral
on the subject.
Aftep a few observations from Lord EBRINTON, Mr. M.
ATTWOOD, and Mr. TURNER, the subject dropped.
On the motion that the Speaker should leave the chair,
in order that the house might go into committee on the poor
law bill,
Colonel SIBTHORP moved, as an amendment, that the
committee be postponed until that day three months.
Mr. NV AKLEY said the more be saw, and the more he beard
of it the greater was his repugnance to it. It was to be con-
sidered as the measure of the great tory party, the individuals
of which, with few exceptiull3, had dccricd it at the hustings.
He thought that every obstacle should be thrown in the way
of the progress of this bill, which, he believed, would sow
the seeds of revolution in the country. It was a coercion
bill against all the poor of England, and was denounced by
the people of England as a tyrannical and detestable mea-
sure. This bill was introduced, not for the purpose of pro-
tecting the poor, but for the purpose of grinding them into
dust • and for that purpose powers were conferred upon the
poor 'law commissioners which the two houses of parliament
and the crown united did not possess. It was said that the
poor law act would have the effect of raising wages, but lie
would ask the house if it had done so ? Why, any man of
sagacity must have known it would not have such an effect,
when the poor were compelled to accept whatever wages were
offered to them, with the only alternative of a gaol. The
hon. member referred to the dietary in London and some
parts of the country, showing that in London it was nearly
double what it was in the country, and appealed to Sir R.
Peel to say if it was justifiable thus to give a starvation die-
tary to the poor in those places where wages were lowest ?
The whigs were hated and despised for passing the poor law
bill, and now the great tory party were treading in their foot-
steps ; but they might rely upon it if this bill passed ad-
dresses would pour in from all parts of the country praying
her Majesty to dissolve the present parliament, as inimical to
the best interests of the people. There was no proposition
in the bill to diminish the size of unions, though it was one
of the most important recommendations of the committee.
The hon. member commented on the purposed mode of pay-
ing medical men (under the last order of the commissioners)
according to the nature of the operations they might perform,
which held out an inducement to perform such operations
when they might not be absolutely necessary. He concluded
by heartily seconding the amendment.
Lord COURTENAY in supporting the original motion, re-
ferred to the evils which prevailed under the old poor law,
and argued for the necessity of a stringent and definite law to
correct the abuses and the idleness of which the former sys-
tem was the fruitful parent.
Mr. LAWSON opposed the bill.
Sir R. PEEL said, he was the opponent of the government
which had originally introduced the poor law bill ; but upon
that measure he had given it his support, and he had since
seen nothing to cause him to regret having done so or to
change the opinion upon which he then acted. The house
should not forget the idleness, the indecency, and want of
moral feeling arising out of the old system. It would be
easy to acquire a temporary popularity by opposition to this
law; but convinced as he was that no period short of five
years would enable them to appreciate the operation of the
poor law commission, and believing also, the vices of the
former system were too inveterate to be removed, be gave
his cordial support to the bill before the house.
The house divided, and the amendment of Col. Sibthorp
was negatived by a majority of 219 to 48.
Mr. FERRAND then moved the adjournment of the debate
for one week, and
Mr. FIELDEN, in a speech of considerable length, second-
ed the motion.
Mr. M. PHILIPS defended the motives of those who were
the authors, supporters, and administrators of the Poor Law
Bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM, in reference to some statements made by
Mr. Ferrnnd respecting the proceedings in the union of
Keithley, said that if the hon. member would move for a
committee of inquiry to ascertain the facts, lie should have
the support of the government in a searching investigation.
Sir J. HANMEIt opposed the adjournment of the debate,
and said that such motions as that of Mr. Ferran(' were cal-
culated to produce much mischief.
Mr. COLVILLE supported the motion for adjournment.
Mr. FERRA.ND said, if he could have the committee re-
ferred to by Sir James Graham, he should not divide tho
house. - - -

Sir J. GRAHAM said be did not wish him to give up his
motion upon a misunderstanding. The committee he would
not oppose would be one to inquire into the management of
the poor in the Keithley union.
Mr. FERRAND said in that case he would divide the house,
for what he wanted was an inquiry into the conduct of Mr.
Mott and Sir John Walsham.
The house divided, and Mr. Ferrand's motion was de-
feated by a majority of 255 to 18.
The house then went into committee pro forma", and tbe.
Chairman immediately afterwards reported progress, and ob-
tained leave to sit again next day.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the house adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUESDAY,
The Earl of CLARENDON presented a petition from the
Cape of Good Hope, praying for an extension to the Cape of
the principles of the British constitution. The petitioners
were dissatisfied with the present form of government, and
were of opinion, that if they had some share in it, it would
be better.
The Earl of RIPON said that government was naturally
anxious about the well-being of that important colony, and
hadcausedsome
thecom sumubnjieccat.tions to be made to thd governor
of
the Cape upon
Lord BROUGHAM was opposed to any immediate extension
a the
British constitution to the Cape : first, because the
were only inhabitants
scarcely
apply;
were composed of various races to whom it would
ri
e secondly, because, in our colonies, such ex-
tensions w
only nominal, and not real ; and, thirdly,
because where portion of the population had been but
recently relieved from bondage, it was not likely that they
could become at
once as fitted to exercise the right given by
the constitution as a
After a few words froms those peons who had never been slaves
Lord HOWDEN, the petition was
laid upon the table,
under which Mr. St. George The Marquis of
—LAI.:
magistracy of the county of Galway, stated the circumstances
by himself (the marquis) to obtain had been dismissed from the
Y, and the attempt made
attempt failed in consequence
to retract the letter which had led toM
tfa'n his restoration, which
Mr. St. Geoarge refusing
informed
dismissal. He had,
to his surprise, been recently
that Mr. St. George
had been restored, which was perhaps to
Lattributed to an
article in a leading Dublin newspaper,
restoration if it were correct ; and he was glad of his
begged to ask the
noble duke if it were so, and also if he had an
produce the correspondence which led to his 'bection to
restoration.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the former govern-
ment could not have acted otherwise than they had on
dismissing Mr. St. George, and he had been restored inceonn
sequence of the strong representations made by other person;