JB/004/070/005

Click Here To Edit

THE EXAMINER. 133
-----

of the female dancers. We do not hear of any proposal to change
the style of dancing at this theatre; therefore we must have pirouettes,
and the ladies must make some exhibition of under drapery. This is
most commonly a sort of elastic fawn-coloured pantaloons, of tolerable
substance, which at the most, gives a flying glimpse of something like
a Venus, sculptured out of the same sort of stone as Tam O'Shanter
and Souter Johnny. The only alternative is in volumes of white
muslin drawers, which set forth the shadowy semblance of something
like a Dutch farmer's wife skating to market in a high wind. On
the score of taste we prefer the Venus, not to say that the more
cumbrous drapery renders grace and good dancing impossible. As to the
influence of either costume on the morale of the spectator, it seems
to us to be absolutely nothing—unless perhaps, in the case of such
imaginations as Tiberius liked to have about him in the island of
Capreæ.

SURREY THEATRE.
The whole of this establishment is greatly improved, under the direction
of Elliston, who, for the second time, has redeemed its character
from being nearly the worst, to be among the best, of the Minors. In
the house itself he has been even too profuse of decoration; in winter
its gorgeous crimson produces comformable appearance of warmth,
which may not be equally pleasing in the dog-days. A theatre which
is to be open all the year round, should be painted of a colour equally
adapted to all seasons. We were not fortunate in the night which
we, by accident, selected for our visit. We saw Rob Roy fairly
played, and a farce called Law and Lions, which only wants
concentration to be highly amusing. The Dog of Montargis followed; but
these are not the things best adapted to a suburban stage: our minds
are driven to comparisons, and the result is generally unfavorable.
We shall probably be better pleased with the Skimmer of the Seas,
and Swing, which we intend to see in the course of next week.

OLYMPIC.
Taken by Surprise is a failure; but Misapprehension is no mistake.
The plot is new, the incidents comic, and the dialogue smart. The
male performers are seen in this piece to more advantage than in most
which we have witnesses here. Generally, the ladies and their leader
absorb all our attention, and monopolize the applause. Olympic
Revels retain their attraction, and promise a long run.

THE QUEEN'S THEATRE.
Thursday having been the appointed day for celebrating Her
Majesty's birthday, this house was in its glory; a brilliant illumination,
and a splendid silken standard without, indicating that extra
entertainment was to be expected within. We were not disappointed.
The Merry Wives of Barbican is a pleasant trifle, on the somewhat
antiquated plot of many women combining to make a fool of one
man. J. Russell played his part, of an amorous turner, among five
dames and a damsel, with considerable humour. The author's song,
however, in praise of turning, was but poor, considering the fertility
of the subject. The usual entertainments followed, with an occasional
interlude in honour of the Patroness. The Pyrotechnist must mend
his matches. The girls went off much better than the fireworks.

-----

UNITED PARLIAMENT.-----
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, Feb. 21.
Lord King moved for a copy of the report made by the Archbishop of
Dublin, to the Duke of Northumberland and the Privy Council, on the
subject of uniting the Living of Wicklow with two adjoining livings.
The union of many parishes into one benefice was a great abuse. These
unions prevailed to a great extent in Ireland, and a number of the parishes
were thus deprived of resident clergymen. The union of Wicklow, it
appeared, was to be annexed in commendum to the Stall of St. Patrick.
—The Archbishop of Dublin did not mean to oppose the motion; he was
not answerable for all the unions; some of them depended solely on the
Privy Council, and the bishop was only called upon for his assent.

Lord Farnham complained that a system of attack was adopted, in order
to subvert the church establishment. In this country, that attack was
carried on by speeches, publications, and libels. But in Ireland, there was a
conspiracy to subvert church property by violence and intimidation. This
conspiracy was led by the Catholic priests, who instigated the people to
resist the payment of tithes. The noble lord then related, that at the parish
of Gray, in Kilkenny, the tithes had been paid in the most cheerful manner,
until lately, when a near relation of Dr. Doyle came to the parish, and at
a Sunday meeting, harangued 3000 persons on the subject of tithes, telling
the labourers that if they could get no redress from that grievance, they
ought to right themselves. At another meeting, he recommended them
to refuse to pay tithes—and told them if their cattle should be distrained, to
be present at the sale, to see who purchased the cattle, and hunt them out
of the parish. The object of this priest was to excite the people to violence.
This same Martin Doyle came to a parish in Carlow, where the lessee of
the tithes had distrained some cattle; Doyle had a conference with some
Roman Catholics, and the result was that a bull-baiting was appointed to
be exhibited at the place where the cattle were to be sold. The lessee
did not venture to proceed with the sale, otherwise a riot would have been
the consequence.

Lord Melbourne did not suppose there was a systematic conspiracy
against tithes, but the irritation and bitterness with which the subject was
treated called for acting with temper and moderation, and the removal of
abuses.—The motion was agreed to.

TRADE WITH PORTUGAL.
Lord Strangford moved for copies of the different treaties concluded
with Portugal, and of all communications between the government and the
consul-general of Lisbon since the 20th November, together with copies
of any instructions sent to the commanders of British vessels of war in
Portugal, for the protection of the property of British subjects. He said
he was induced to make that motion, in consequence of a noble lord, holding
a high situation in the government, having intimated his intention to
alter the commercial relations of this country with Portugal. The Methuen
treaty gave certain advantages to the manufactures of this country on
their admission into Portugal, as a return for corresponding advantages
given by this country, in the admission of the wines of Portugal at lower

---page break---
duties than the wines of other countries. Up to a certain period, either
party was at liberty to put an end to this treaty when they thought proper;
but after that period, it became necessary that notice should be given by
either party, of their intention to abandon the treaty. He hoped that
government had not disregarded this regulation, because it would be a
violation of national faith, and a proof of disrespect to our ancient ally, who
was not able to resist it. France was a commercial rival of this country;
and never could be brought to enter into treaties of reciprocal advantage
with us. Various attempts had been made to break in upon the Methuen
treaty, without success. And in 1810, a new treaty was concluded, in
which the Methuen treaty was noticed. It was then stipulated, that the
same system of duties should be preserved for fifteen years longer, and
that notice must be given by either party of their intention to abandon, or
suspend the terms of that treaty. He wished to know whether the
government had given this notice?

Lord Goderich contended that neither the Methuen treaty, nor the
treaty of 1810 required the government of this country to give notice of its
intention to equalize the duties on French and Portuguese wines. The
conditions of the Methuen treaty had been violated on the part of Portugal,
as long ago as 1750, by the establishment of the Oporto Wine Company,
one of the most detestable monopolies which ever destroyed the commerce
of the country that was afflicted with it.

Lord Ellenborough thought that government were bound to give
notice to Portugal of their intentions. And it was the more necessary to do
so, as Great Britain was a strong power, and Portugal a weak and feeble
one. The alteration of the duty would not benefit this country, particularly,
if Portugal resolved to prohibit our woollens.

The Lord Chancellor.—The stipulation in the treaty was simply this,
that so long as we chose to give an advantage to the Portuguese wines, so
long we might continue to have a market for our woollens; but that whenever
we chose to deny them that advantage, it should be on the penalty of
forfeiting the introduction of our woollens into Portugal. The noble lord
(Strangford) had earnestly declared that he would not embarrass the
government, and he had kept his word, (whatever his attention might have
been) the noble lord had set down without embarrassing the government in
the lightest degree (laughter); though it was customary for noble lords
to make such declarations when they were minded to do the government
all the mischief in their power. With regard to the commercial and
economical advantages resulting from such treaties, he (the Lord
Chancellor) had the authority of Dr. Smith and Mr. Pitt on his side; Dr.
Smith quoted the Methuen treaty, as an instance, to shake the reverence
of such treaties and puts it into his book as one of the worst of the class.
Mr. Pitt, in 1786, brought in a measure to repeal the Methuen treaty, and
put the wines of France and Portugal on a similar footing. He lost it after
a manful struggle. Upon that occasion, the interests of the public, of the
landowners, of the consumers of the country, were sacrificed to the clamour
of the Portugal merchants. On what kind of policy was that treaty established?
What was the temptation to the Methuen treaty? Was it not
the notion that the Brazil gold came over to Portugal, and that only through
Portugal could we get our share of it; and, therefore, all sacrifices were
to be made, to enable us, by the sale of our woollens, to draw some portion
of this gold from Portugal. Now, to make this attack on the government
to-night, all the exploded doctrines of the olden time were revived not,
however, for the purpose of embarrassing the government—for, God wot,
little able to stand would be that government which was embarrassed by
the hostile array of such doctrines—the pick and choice of the exploded
errors of the worst school of policy. If these arguments were miserably
ridiculous in 1703 (as Dr. Smith had shown they were), what must
they be in 1831,—when the labourers were called upon to make bricks
without straw—when Brazil no longer belonged to Portugal—when we take
our woollens at once to Brazil, and get gold from thence? As to the
equalization of the wine duties, Lord Ellenborough had said, that "the
consumption of French wines was already increasing, and what might not
be expected if you were still more to lower the duties." It was impossible
to select a stronger fact in favour of a further reduction, than the fact that
a preceding reduction of duty had been followed by an increased
consumption. Many persons preferred port at present; but he thought
that cheapness had more to do with this than predilection; for undeniable it
was, that some French wines were at once more palatable and more wholesome.

Identifier: | JB/004/070/005"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 4.
Date_1	1831-02-27	Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	004	Main Headings	lord brougham displayed
Folio number	070	Info in main headings field
Image	005	Titles	the examiner / sunday, february 27, 1831 / no. 1204
Category	printed material	Number of Pages	8
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	(130-144)
Penner		Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year
Notes public	[[notes_public::"john fonblanques eulogium on brougham" [note in bentham's hand]]]	ID Number	1991
Box Contents