The Sun. — London, England, 1829-12-28 00:00:00

srina OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. (THE TIMES.) The public will see, we doubt not, with satis faction, that the poor man Davies, who has been for so many days exposed to the misery of an investigation as to whether he was or was not a lunatic, has at length been declared, by a una iiimoui verdict of the jury, to be of '4 perfectly bound mind, and fully capable of managing himself and his affairs." This is the verdict which even an early observation of the evidence for the (persecution we were near saying, but for the) commission had led us to anticipate. But who is to pay the expenses of this trial ? Is it the law of England that any one of us may be seized by a pair of ruffians, under the warrant of a mad-doctor,—immured i❑ that den of abomi nation called a madhouse,—compelled to see a score of medical men whether we will or not, — to be insulted by long strings of questions framed so as to provoke the soundest mind and the most patient temper,—the answers, let them be gentle, resentful, or pathetic, twisted by these presumptuous, and, from their contradictory statements, evidently ignorant persons, into so many proofs of insanity, on which a man is to be despoiled of the fruits of his in dustry, and plunged for life into that hopeless prison which is calculated to unsettle the steadiest iirellect, and to inflict on the most cheerful spirit, agonies, the description of which by these who have endured them, it is almost impossible fur any humane heart to bear ? The melan ehoiv fact is, that your thorough-going-mad doctor takes for granted that hardly any one is sane. We shall not allude to individuals, but it is clear from the testimony of some of the wit nesses examined on this deplorable inquest, that there are professional men to be found who will swear the most natural and reasonable action to be conclusive evidence of the worst kind of lunacy, and from whose gripe, if once within it, there would, for the strongest headed men in England, be little or no prospect of release. We wish that some active Member of Parlia- . _ went would shortly move for returns of the Dumber of patients discharged as cured from private madhouses within the last 20 years, and thus give the nation an opportunity of seeing what proportion of good is effected by medical treatment : a part of the return ought also to give the sums annually charged by the keeper of the mad-house for the care of each unhappy patient. Who is now to pay Mr. Davies his costs ? and has he no action of damages again =t those who have instituted these proceedings ? THE )IORNING CHRONICLE.) We have to announce another signal victory gained by the Press of France, in the acquittal of the Journal des Debats. " Religious Li berty," says the Courtier Francais of Friday last, " received eight days ago a brilliant con secration ; Political Liberty has obtained this day a triumph not less memorable. In both cases, the doctrines of the public Ministry tended directly to the destruction of .the right of examination and discussion. To see an out rage to religion in a simple negation, to see an attack of the authority of the King in the disapprobation of the choice of a Ministry, was placing France under the sway of the Inquisi tion and absolutism. The Magistracy have once more opposed a barrier to the menacing hostilities of a Ministry armed against the public liberties. If in the sanctuary in which they are placed, the Magistrates endeavour to remain strangers to the passions which agitate society, nothing obliges them to be deaf te the expres sion of the alarms and the just griefs of the na tion." When Mr. Brougham, in his inaugural addlcsa to the students at Glasgow, declared that man was not accountable for his belief, what an outcry was raised against him ! This principle has been consecrated, and made a rule for all inferior Tribunals by the Cour Royale. The same Court . has given its sanction to the principle, that even an article of which the " ex pressions are unsuitable and contrary to the mo-; deration which ought to be observed in the dis cussion of the acts of the Government," ought not to be considered as constituting an offence. Compared with any of the articles for which the Morning Journal has been prosecuted, the article in the Journal des Debatc was violence itself. Yet in this country, with our boasted institution of Juries, as a safeguard of our li berties, disapprobation of the conduct of the Minister has been pronounced a libel. la France the Judges have every where proved themselves the bulwarks of the national liberties. Yet it is only necessary that one man out of • twelve should have sufficient clearness of head not to be led away by the clumsy sophistries of the Attorney-General and his supporter, and sufficient resolution to be able to resent the so licitations of appetite for a few hours ! We trust that succeeding Juries will rescue the na tional character from this mortifying comparison between our neighbours and ourselves. We do not expect that Jurors should possess the rea soning powers of the distinguished Magistrates, who confer so much lustre on the French Tri bunals; but surely we may expect that they should be able to see through the most obvious fallacy. To punish writers for a tendency to bring an Administration into contempt, or for the indecency of the terms used, is to lose sight of all principle, and to clap an extinguisher on free discussion. It is supposed by some of our contemporaries (the Standard and Examiner) that the State prosecutions, of which we have had a tolerable temple, are part of a system of operations agreed on by several Governments. The Exa miner of yesterday observes— " Surveying the history of the last twenty years, the condition of things offering the slenderest pre text for an attack on the Press will be found in the present period ; and in no other way can we account for the wanton proseoutions now pending, than by supposing them to proceed from a resolution unpro voked by existing circumstances, and only seeking out of them its wilful satisfaction. When the Bully has tet his mind on a quarrel, it is not offence which gives occasion for his brawl. When the Wolf in the fable desired to eat mutton, it was not the sheep's troubling the waters that gave exercise to the glut ton's tooth. With one exception, the prosecutions under consideration have the relation to their sub ject matter which desire has to the pretexts foe its gratification. The exception we have in view is the charge of pecuniary corruption insinuated against Lord Lyndhurst, which, as it is the most specious of the prosecutions, has been made to stand in the front of the battle, and to cover the absolute hivolity of its successors. We do not admit that case to have peremptorily called for prosecution; for if the Chancellor's character needed the vindication of a Court of Justice, the country would need delivery from his judicial authority ; Let cer tainly that libel is malignant in its matter, sail the recourse to the vengeance of the law allowable. The matter, however, as we have before observed, was a slender part in the motives of these prosecutions, which appear to belong to w idely-extended system for the subjugation of the Press. Months ago we remarked that the simulta woos operations against the Press by the Welling. ton and Polignac Governments were to be regarded as a remarkable, if not a; a suspicious coincidence. The late measures of the King of the Netherlands, 'tending directly to the same object, seriously strengthen these evil appearances. The Standard, we think, offers the true explauation of the pheno menon : " ' The war now raging between Power and the Press in roost of the States of Europe where any Press is permitted to exist, naturally stiggests the important question, whence this simultaneous sensi tiveness on the part of public men, so variously circumstanced ? Can it be the effect of any parti cular conjuncture, operating alike in States present ing so little similarity of condition in other respects? We think that the question nearly answers itself; the sympathy is not of Nations, which have no direct communication, but, of Statesmen, who, liv ing in a kind of family community, have set up a canon of public rights which they choose to impo-e upon the several nations submitted, for a time, to their authority. It is much more natural to believe that Prince A, the Duke of B, and the Marquis of C, living, though in different countries, in constant correspondence, should conspire against the expres sion of opinion, than that all the several Presses of Europe should at the same moment discharge their libels in volleys upon these important letters of the alphabet.' " The King of the Netherlands goes straight to his object, and gags political censure; the French Judges are nearly as direct; but the course in Eng land is to wield the terror of punishment, and to mystify and to confound the understanding, by hold ing out, involved in clouds of quirk, quibble, and fiction, a rule of chastisement which is no rule for guidance." There is much plausibility in all this ; and we know that manypeople, who at one time laughed at ' the idea of the Wellington Administration hav ing had any thing to do with the appointment of the French Ministry, now maintain that the Duke of Wellington has, from the first, taken a deep interest in the success of M. de Polignac, and that the State prosecutions here are net to be viewed so much with reference to any advan tage our own Ministry cm derive immediately from them, as to the effect they may have in France. They pretend even to retail expressions which have dropped, from time to time, from Lord Aberdeen, from which the existence of a common plan of operations is to be inferred. We must own, however, that we are very sceptical as to the existence of any such general system of operations. We are inclined to believe that the proceedings in each of the three countries have had an inde pendent origin ; and, indeed, the circum stance of the Catholic Priesthood, in the Ne therlands, being in opposition to the Govern ment, while the Priesthood of France, who sym pathise warmly with their Belgian Brethren, are all•powerful with the Court, almost puts concert between the Netherlands and France out of the question. It is so natural for men in power to wish to check the expression of all opinion not favourable to themselves, that it is hardly neces sary to seek for a mysterious organ for what can be accounted for on such an obvious principle. We attribute the prosecutions in this country to the irritation of the Duke of Wellington, which has warped his judgment, and to the influence of evil councils. Sir James Scarlett has not he skated to declare that it is his opinion that the Press has not, during the last ten years, been sufficiently restrained ; arid we can hardly be surprised that the Premier, under the influence of irritation, should have allowed himself to be influenced by this Doctor, who, no doubt, pro mised to perform such wonders by his skill in managing Juries. We by no means state this as a justification of the Duke of Wellington ; for Sir James Scarlett cannot relieve him from the consequences of a course for which he is alone responsible. He ought to have ap preciated more correctly the difference of the circumstances in which he and Sir James are respectively placed ; that all the conse quence of Sir James is derived from his management of Juries ; and that as a bull in stinctively uses his horns, and a tiger his claws, men are also led almost instinctively to prefer that in which they appear to the best advantage, but that every laurel acquired by Sir James is acquired at the expence of his own reputation as a wise and considerate statesman, able to ap preciate correctly the service as well as disser vice he derives from the Press, and not so far blinded by the irritation caused by the unjust attacks of a portion of that Press as to be in sensible to the aid lie has derived from the sup port of a far greater portion of it. We have always understood that it was to the late Lord Londonderry that we are indebted for the system of forbearance towards the Press. This is not generally known ; but when it is considered that his Lordship possessed great coolness and com mand of temper, and was, therefore, little liable to have his judgment warped by considerations personal to himself, and that a system of inter ference with the I'ress keeps up a constant irri tation without effecting any good purpose ; it is as likely that sound views on this subject should occur to him as another. We know that in the case of the prosecution of Mr. Finnerty for a Letter in the Morning Chronicle, the prosecu tion might have been averted ; and he did not, as in the case of the Letter of the Duke of Cum berland's Chaplain in the Morning Journal, select Mr. Perry for his victim, but at once sought out the author of the libel against him.— In this respect his conduct appears to great advantage, compared with that of the Duke of Wellington. (THE MORNING HERALD.) We look upon the decision in the protracted and cruel inquiry into the alleged lunacy of Mr. Davies, both in regard to the public and the in dividual, as one of the most salutary and im portant which has occurred for a great length of time. Among the novel restraints upon the Press, with .which, in these days of Liberalism, we are threatened, that of publishing the names of Jurors is one. However, we should like to incur time peril, if we had the means of publish ing the names of 'the Jury in this case, who, with so much fortitude, independence, and pati ence, have passed through this painful inquiry, and have brought it to an issue which, we are quite sure, will entitle them to the gratitude of every one not interested in an opposite result. We mean to cast reflections upon no one ; and we feel, also, that it is due to the gentleman who has been the unhappy object of this melan choly investigation that a curtain should be drawn over its details as speedily as possible. But every man, woman, and child, in his Majesty's dominions, are too much inte rested in the system which has developed itself upon this occasion, not to make it imperative upon us to call the attention of the Legislature to the monstrous state in which the law and the practice upon this subject at' present appear to stand. It would seem that, as the trade in in sanity is now carried on, a man may not only be imprisoned by the mere fiat of a member of this new college of medical jurisprnclenae, but may be so tormented and hunted into its toils as to run every risk of becoming, or at least of being deemed insane, before the judicial question can be brought under the notice of a competent tri bunal. It is to be hoped that, for the honour of science, many of those who have taken up this branch of practice exclusively are not fair specimens, either in head or heart, of English medical professors. If they were, we should say, that the medical art, as at present practised, is at a low ebb in point of intelligence and hu manity. But, be this as it may, all men, we think, must agree with us that some alterations in the law and in the practice of this peculiar department of science are wanting by which the self-interest both of connections and of professional men should be excluded from the overbearing influence which it at present pos sesses. Above all, it is desirable that where a regular judicial inquiry into alleged lunacy be comes necessary, it should he instituted promptly, and not postponed, and the object kept in a state of harassing uncertainty, till torture of sus pense, acting even upon minds of no very pecu liar weakness, produces, as it too often does, that very irritation which it is sought to prove. Recurring to the medical part of the subject, we should say that, judging from experience, it is rather a misfortune that this disease should be a subject of such distinct and confined practice. Looking at the wonderful and nice texture of the human mind, an 3 how much its impressions are acted upon by sanity or disease, surely the latter influence, which is nine times in ten the sole cause of alleged aberration of mind, ought to be made the study and the practice of the medical profession in general, and not to be resigned, as now, to a small and exclusive circle. (THE MORNING ADVERTISER.) The report has been again revived, that a reconciliation has taken place between the Duke of Wellington and Mr. Huskisson, and that they have lately had several meetings and con sultations on the state of the country. We were the first, about two months ago, to men tion the former fact, and we can now vouch for the latter, though it will no doubt be called in question by some of our cotemporaries. The country, however, will learn with satisfaction that the Ministry is likely to have the benefit of Mr. Huskisson's advice during the ensuing Ses sion, and that at the end of the Session at all events, if not sooner, he will form one of its members. Our limits will not permit us to enter again to-day upon the subject of the ex-officio inform ations against the newspapers ; but our readers, we are confident, and indeed every one who va lues the liberty of the Press, will be gratified to learn that the opinion which we expressed of their itnpolicy, has been loudly re-echoed by the whole of the Sunday Press, and so far as we have yet had an opportunity of seeing them, by our provincial cotemporaries. All agree that nothing could have been more impolitic or un called for than the prosecutions in question; and that the blow which has been dealt against the newspapers, will recoil with tenfold force upon the heads of its authors. (TII2 1101LNING JOURNAL.) The Courier, which, to its disgrace, if it can be further disgraced, is, of all the papers of London, the only apologist for the merciless prosecutions of the Government, took up new ground on Saturday night in defence of the At torney-General and its employers. Speaking of our censures of men and measures it says that " public duty was violated, domestic privacy in vaded, and, when these sources were exhausted, invention was set at work to supply the mate rials for further calumny." We shall reply to these charges in their order. First, as to the violation of public duty ; we protest we cannot divine what the writer means unless it be a sort of penitent sarcasm directed against himself. It is the Courier who has violated public duty. It is the proprietors of the Courier who have violated their solemnly recorded apinions—who have apostatised from the creed to which they set their hands and seals—who deserted those principles which they bound themselves, by a written document still in existence, and to which their names are affixed, to maintain under all circumstances, " whether the Ad ministration should be tory, Whig, or a mix ture of both." We can, indeed, conscientiously say that we have nothing to answer for on this ground—tee have no jobs nor Government con tracts to place to the credit of wounded pride and dishonourable and heartless apostacy—they have all this and much more, to answer for. As to our invasion of domestic privacy our reply to the charge is simply that it is fidse! We ap peal to our pages since the establishment of the Horning Journal, and deny our bitterest oppo nents to point out even a solitary instance where we have intruded upon domestic life—where we have invaded the sanctuary of the closet or the fireside--where we have dragged the follies, the secret offences, or the conjugal errors of the Mi nister or any other man, into the glare of day. Mean vices, even in hoary delinquents, have been beneath our notice. We have strictly avoided any notice of degrading and disgusting immora lities in order to spare the feeling of our readers and protect the innocent from the contamination of such examples. Not that we had not mate rials at hand to gratify the most prurient appetite with a full satiety of scandal. Not that these low vices were not more reprehensible in a grave senator and Minister of the Crown than they are in the humblest cobbler who is the father of a family. God knows it was from no lack of domestic arenas, no sterility of repul sive immoralities, no want of tales of profligate in trigues, of loose morals, of debasing excesses, or of instances of violated confidence and outraged -de cency, that we did not dip our pen in gall, and hold up the guilty parties to public exposure and public shame. We had a more sacred duty to discharge. We had public rather than private error.; to expose. We had to lament the infraction of public trusts and public duties—the treacherous abandonment of re corded principles—and the con artily and uncalled for surrender of that Constitution which its pro fessed friends had sworn upon the altars of their God, and at the foot of the Throne, to maintain in all its original and exclusive supremacy. It was for these acts of shameless and unpardonable apostacy that we were found in the ranks of opposition. It was on public grounds that we attacked the Ministry ,and their measures. It was because we saw them do evil by design, without attempting to neutralise the crime by committing even one good action by mistake, that we considered it our duty to impeach them at the bar of public opinion. It was because we saw them plunging into follies without so much as an excuse—ruining the monarchy, without even a decent pre'ext on the score of democratical predilec tions—undermining the Church, unurged by the rob ber's plea of a chance of sharing in its spoils— starving the artisan, without even a hope of enrich ing themselves—and superindtteing auarchy without having an asaurance from Heaven that they would not be its first victims—it was because we saw these Minis'ers utterly innocent of doing a good deeii even by stealth, and guilty of --no one error with reason, that we did them the justice to condemn their measures, and the folly to laugh at their mistakes. But into their private habits, or domestic indulgences, or secret vices, we never pryed. VVe left -these meretricious blandishments of the modern school to the admiration of stale rake!, and the execration of rigid spinsters. The ►nsinuation therefore of the Courier is unjust. Its charge is merely a falsehood—a story invented by a military slave to divert public attention from a graver offence imputed to his employer. The Courier in vents a third charge. It says that when we had exhausted the sources of private slander " invention was set at work to supply the materials for further calumny." What calumny ? What invention, slave ? If this annuls to the convicted squib, which Baron Vaughan, Lord Bexley, and Mr. Courtenay, swore applied to Lord Lyndhurst, with out pretending to the slightest knowledge of the merits of the case—without weighing an oath against their own superficial judgments, which, as consistent and honourable men, they were bound to do—if this be the ground of charge we plead not guilty, and solemnly deny the intention. But, beyond this, what invention or calumny had we re course to Let it be remembered that none of the inuendoes with which we were charged, and for which we were tried and convicted, had been, as is invariably the case in private prosecutions, denied upon oath by the complaining parties. The informa tions " ex-quicio (lid not exculpate the parties aggrieved. They were not purged and purified before they came into court, They had not lifted up their hands to Heaven, and called God and the Gospels to witness their purity and innocence.— They came before the jury as Ministers of the Crown, unpurged by an appeal to Heaves, and the defendant was charged by the Attorney-General with having written and published the articles, with the intention, whether the allegations or insinuations were true or false, of bringing the Government into contempt. We Dever denied—we never will deny—that our object was to bring these Ministers and their measures into contempt. It is the object of all strictures upon public measures to bring them into contempt. The censures of every public writer must have this tendency, or they fall pointless and harmless. If a public measure be ridiculed the natural object and intention of the writer is to bring that measure into contempt. If any Act of Parlia ment be condemned as unjust, or absurd, or ineffi cient, the object is to bring it into contempt. Mr. Canning's Government was brought into con tempt by the opposition of Mr. Peel, Mr. Dawson, Mr. Bankee, Sir Thomas Lethbridge, Lord Grey, arid the Duke of Wellington.— Lord Goderich was brought into contempt and actually laughed out of office. Mr. Iluskisson was dismissed with contempt. The Times and other Jou►nals brought the proceedings against the late Queen into contempt. Mr. Brougham and Mr. Denman, by their severe and personal censures, b-ought even his Majesty into momentary contempt. The Herald brought the jobbers and bubble-mon gers of the House of Commons in 1825 into con tempt. The Chronicle has, to a certain extent, brought unpaid magistrates and country justices into contempt. 'The Morning Advertiser has brought Ministers and informers into contempt. The Edinburgh Review has brought Lord Rosslyn and the Whigs into contempt. The Westminster Re view and our excellent contemporary of the Globe have brought Mr. Huikisson, Colonel Torrents, and political economy, into contempt. The Quarterly and a certain number of apostate Bishops have brought the prelates of the church into contempt.— Mr. Peel has brought himself, his lilted', arid the Currency Bill, into contempt. The Courier has brought itself and its unprincipled proprietors into contempt, as we shall fully demonstrate some of these days. To charge the act of bringing men into contempt as a high crime and misdemeanour is, therefore, not only extreme folly, but gross injustice. Opposition would be fruitless if it had not this intention and this effect. It is not merely oppo sition to measures which brings men into con tempt—their praise and advocacy have a similar ten dency. Witness the efforts of the Courier. Its prostituted support of the present Cabinet, aided by one London morning journal, and one obscure Edin burgh paper published three times a week, has done more to bring the Wellington Government into contempt than all the direct attacks of its open ene mies. In short, if it be an offence to bring Ministers into contempt, there must be an end to the liberty of the press. If this doctrine is to be countenanced by juries the sooner we burn our books and toss our types into the Thames the better. The sooner a censorship is introduced the better. Better that journalists should live with the fear of scissors arid a board of controul before their eyes ►han the fear of ex-officio:, Sir Jame■ Scarlett, and a dungeon. Better be restrained before committing the offence than punished afterwards. Better know how far we can with safety go than be at the mercy of juries, collected God knows how, who seem disposed to find a man guilty without even looking at the paper which contains the offensive paragraph, and who are impatient to convict without the annoyance of listening to the whole defence. Far better would it be to have a pure and imperial despotism at once, and the consolation of living under the blessings of the House of Brunswick, without recollecting en what conditions, or by what tenure, they hold the Crown of England in trust for the people. (TILE STAR.) It gives us great satisfaction to find the general strictures of our contemporaries upon the lute libel proceedings assuming hourly a tone of graver and intenser reprehension. Even those journals, whose blind devotedness to the Noble Duke has done so much to consolidate his unconstitutional power, alarmed at the use to which he now so palpably aims to turn it, are showing signs of recalcitration. They look to the gathering storm as we do, and are in• stinctively buckling on their defences. Nor are they one moment beforehand with the necessity, seeing that the first blow bas been already struck, and an earnest in the verdicts which oppression has obtained is given of other verdicts which it will soon demand. Let it not be supposed that a fit of temporary irritation has brought the Duke of Wellington before the tribunals to inflict on a mere personal vitupera tor condign correction. Nothing of the kind. In his attack upon the Morning Journal he has declared war openly a;ainst the Press—a war to exterminate opinion— since, if he destroy it not, opinion will exterminate his power. It is of the first importance to the Noble Duke to have the Press under his immediate subjection and con t roul. He knows well that only by its acquiescence arbitrary Governments can maintain their sway. The Morning Chronicle has well said to-day that Sir James Scarlett is admirably fitted for his work. His mind is indeed riberal: nature designed him to have been born in the feudal ages. There is al arrogance about the West In dian character which we too seldom find belied by natu rails ition here, and Sir ,limes does lot certainly belie it. We feel it quite unncessary to he delicate on the score of origin with the lion. and Learned Gentleman, or to apo logise fi-r so tempting a personality as this, when we re collect the low and coarse vulgarity with which the At torney-General derided the origin of one of the defendants, whose origin is at least as honourable and as fair as his ; nay, Cateclon may surely yet carry it over Jamaica—the Highlander over the d r i ver o f negroes . B ut t h ese are only petty details ; light p enc il t ouc h es 'i n t h e great histo ricalvthich ha s b een j us t ex hibi te d a t t h e Old which hold s u p a mora l warn i ng t o - pu bli c r they prostitute th e i r t a l en t s t o d o th e wor k o f r.aimperiousitee ygrs hown d , grouping apo w e r (Tax NEWS.) From the Odious complexion of our present num ber, one might suppose that the good old Press prosecuting times of Sir Vicary Gibbs and Lord Sidmouth were about to appear again ; and ro we believe they would, did not the progress of public opinion, in some measure, operate upon the !rope. rious n ature of our military Premier, and his active subaltern, Sir James Scarlet. He, a " Whig At torney-General," forsooth !"—the term " Whig," is grossly libelled by being applied to such a man— into whom the very spirit of his predecessor, Sir Vicary, seems to be tranfused, and to have displaced every trace of Whiggism ; if, as we much doubt, he ever possessed any in his composition. Four Go vernment prosecutions against one Paper!—and those tried, day after day, so as hardly to afford the prosecuted time for breath to de fend themselves. We will however admit that there are shades of difference between these pro secutions. The first, brought by the Lord Chancellor, for imputing to his Lordship the having been bribed by a fee, or a loan, of 30,0001., to procure the place of Solicitor-General for Sir E. Sugdan, is indefen sible on any ground, beside that of proof; which, on the trial, was not even hinted it. We so far agree with Sir James Scarlett as to be of opinion that (circumstanced as Lord Lyndhurst was known to be, as to pecuniary matters, at the time of the pub lication of the libel in question) he could not, with a due regard to his honour and character, have passed this publication by without notice. Not so, how ever, the three other Government cases. They ex hibit, on the part of the Minister, a soreness as to what is said, of him, but little in accordance with greatness of mind. We leave our readers to judge, after reading the alleged libels in the three last trials, whether the hero of Waterloo has added aught to his fame by prosecuting them. To ob.ain four verdicts against one man, when one :would have sufficed to crush him, if that were the object, is a poor triumph for the " great Captain of the age" to add to his laurel wreath. It involves a moral species of bathos--a descent from the sublime to the ridi culotis, which few besides Sir James Scarlett will be found to applaud or advocate. There are, however, gra dations in folly in these three latter prosecutions; in which the last of all stands distinguished. But folly alone is not the only characteristic of this proceeding. It also indicates a dastardly aveidance of eoming into collision with a particular individual, which does not say much foi• the impartiality of the prosecuting parties. We confess that, in our opinion, the Rev. Mr. Croshie, " domestic chaplain to the Duke of Cumberland, and Minister of Syrienham Chapel," was a fit subject for Dr. Burrows's " Retreat," when he wrote the letter which constitutes the libel—therefore it was silly to notice it at all ; but, having so done, surely the author should have been fixed on for prosecution ; the more especially as he, in a manner, boldly dared and courted the result by affixing his name and address to his production. In nearly every libel case which has fallen under our notice, the author has been looked on as the most guilty party ; and many in. stances might be cited where, on giving up his name, the publisher has been allowed to go scatheless. Sir James Scarlett, to suit his own purpose, and in defence of his Nobl► client, now holds a very different doctrine :—the author may write with impunity, but the publisher must be punished. Thus the poison is in the conduct pipe, not in the water. We turn from the consideration of the libels themselves te the manner in which they have been prose cuted; and here we think no Attorney-General ever be trayed a greater jealousy of the influence of the Precut, or a greater ignorance of English history, that Sir James Scarlett. His impotent threat against the newspapers, as to publishing the names of Jurors, resembles the growl of a 81 r:y mastiff, who shows his teeth, but cannot or dare not bite. What law is there in existence to prevent the publishing of the names of Jurors ? And why should not their conduct, in the exercise of a public function, be sub jected to the same revision of popular opinion, as is the conduct of others, sitting in judgment on their fellow subjects? Indeed, why should Jurors wish for privacy, if they are conscious of acting honestly and impartially ? It is not because men differ in opinion from us tbst we are to consider them as acting venally or cor ruptly. Had we been upon either of the Juliet, in the three last cases, we would have strove hard before a verdict of " guilty" should have been recorded : but we have no reason to suppose that the verdict of guilty, was not a conscientious verdict on the part of the Juries who delivered it. Why, then, wish to conceal their names? But the truth is, that Sir James Scarlett is i►► his element when employed against the Press; and even goes out of his way to threaten it, where there is no necessity. Of the subject of these prosecutions, we shall say but little. To us ke appears an enthusiast, little short of mad, upon some topics—such as the Catholic Relief Bill, &c. ; and therefore by no means meriting the vengeance with which he is visited. His coadjutor of the Standard labours hard to excite a popular feeling► in Isis favour—but they both belong to a party, the High Tory, to which the people are little indebted for any favours. It is only when, by a kind of political retribution, they experience persecution at the hands of their quondam friends, as in the present case, that they ever think of the people.' THE ATLAS.) We present our readers, in another part of the paper, with a faithful report of the proceedings which took place on Thursday last in the Court of King's Bench, at the suit of the Lord Chancellor, against the Editor of the Atlas. It would not be come us, in this place, to offer any commentary upon a matter which is so exclusively personal to our selves. But it - may be allowed us to observe gene rally, that the conduct of the prosecution, and the result, must be considered in every - point of view highly satisfactory. The characters of the Lord Chan cellor and Lady Lyndhurst were fully vindicated, and the Editor of this journal exonerated from the imputations: which, under other circumstances, might have rested span his name. This was all that could be desired by us. We had no wish- to justify an accidental error at the expense of the reputation of those noble persons; and we felt that, next in intensity to the regret which an honourable mind feels at having committed a wrong, is the pleasure of ren dering ample and honest atonement. THE A 68.) It is we know expected of us that we should say something on the very extraordinary proceedings against the Press which have made this week re markable ; and in ordinary times we should not shrink from taking up the position which we are aware it is generally supposed should be that of the freest speaker of the age. But we must throw our selves on the mercy of our readers. We dare not—dare not, for that is the word we must use now-a-days—venture to give our opinions as they really are, on the merits of the movements of the Attorney-General; and, though we are afraid (we admit it) to speak as we think, we have not yet been trained to say Whet we do not think. It may he said, and we are quite sure it will be said, that this is cowardice ; that the Age is mute, dumb, dead with terror. Very well: we can't help it. We can only plead with Queen Dido the res dura. Let not any one think that in abusing this our craven posture he will meet with any blame from us. Most true it is that we are reduced to the behaviour re commended in the sernaon on the mount, we turn one cheek to him who smites the other, and sooner than go to law for the recovery of our coat, are quite contented to surrender our waistcoat. Abuse us, therefore, good people, and call us cowards and pol troons. Submission is the badge of our tribe. All things must be sacred. Paint two snakes (Sir James Scarlett and Sir Edward Burtenshaw Sug den, who are so very accomplished as scholars and critics will, of course, catch the allusion), and scatter far from their neighbourhood any of those asper sions,which,in the opinion of the rash thinkers of tho world, might be so appropriately cast in their faces. But we submit, in defence of our utter prostration, of our avowed and confessed sneakery that there are some palliations for our conduct; white-feather as it is. 1. It was proved, last week, that being supposed to impute, that though you disclaim the application by all the means in your power, any sort of malversation to any functionary. is a libel. 2. It was proved that what smell in other times and places be considered a mere squib—a piece of nonsenee— is at present to be looked upon as a grave matter, to be tried, and condemned with as much ceremony and severity as if it was a matter of high treason. " Adzooks," said one of cur pleasantest poets, " Adzooks! who will swear to the truth of a song ?" " I do not know," answers Mr. Attorney, " who will swear to it, but this I know, that if you crack jokes which I do not understand, or which I and my witnesses understand in a way quite different from that in which the author himself understood them, you must go to gaol." And; in plain truth, it is no fault of his that the remain . - der of the verse is not sung—that the obnoxious Journalist does not " hang upon a tree." S. It was proved that a Tory may not look over a hedge, while a Whig may steal a horse. Sir James Scar lett himself makes no scruple (who, indeed, would ?) of asking little Moore to dine with bin, whenever that small poet and pleasant companion comes in his way. The same '" The High Tory Papers are very fond of terming the Duke of Wellington's Cabinet a Whig Cabinet—we sup pose because they feel ashamed at being ill-used by their own party ; far they have in fact no other reason so to call it. Out of the twelve Members, there is but our, Lord Rosslyn, that has the least pretension to the name of Whig. Every other member was cra dl e d among t h e Tories; and the major part of them ou t o f p l ace scarce ly a year in their political lives. Surely such cannot be ealls , d Whigs, A • pi 0 Learned Gentleman @reeks with, th e utmost ,(16 1 " 1 ', expresses the deepest horror of little Alexander, fur darid to speak by inuendo in " pity" of the IC :Ti P ti bia has Mr. Moore :pollen his Majesty ? Why he *r of ; called him—but no ! The columns of the fir abi l l,„, — eveia by quotation, be a vehicle for insult to the "" ; 7:1, Out readers need hardly be reminded of the atrocious 10"`i to which we refer. And was Mr. Moore punisheaTo at by legal functionaries, abused and sent to gaol? IYOt he indeed. Ile is a smart, spruce, good-htnouredr qu is zicel-looking, dinner-haunting little _gentleman, ie.'t nothing of Newgate about him—while the poor Marl. Journal, which has always upheld the cause of Church an State, which never —no, not in the article w hioh a Jati has declared to be insulting to the King—}Poke of Sovereign but in terms of the highest and well-dose th e praise, is .levoted to the infernal gods. Why, theft, is difference ? We answer in two words. Moire is Whig --- the Journal, Tory. 4. It was proved that it is quite consisten! with tbe f purest whip principles, liberty of the press, freedom 0 , discussion, and, as little Keeley says, " all that sort thing," to bring prosecutions, by the cart-load all at *Mee against an obnoxious newspaper. Mr. Brougham , " th ! great sQ,.iu, eew Queen' s Counsel--Mr. i c ut i hn n es :t . lr—suact3tierr—.3lr Bro u gham,.l r B B ro ro u u g g h4 l w i Brougham, hi the w a K i ng's on a C e ; 1 ; or half-editor of the Edinburgh Review, one of the antagonists of the press! We wish that' h°., 4 would write another review of the _Newman Candide''. another review, to show that, although It was very loec ir " rect in Sir Vicary Gibbs to prosecute for (ermine!, libels ott all that was honourable and respectable in the land, most marvelously correct for him, Mr. Brougham, of the Loudon-college, to prosecute for the slightest jokey, or th°.. most vagu e insinuations against any ministry which threw* him a silk gown. 5. It was proved—but no more. Pocas palabras, Christopher Sly has it. As these are Christmas tune" obey the order of the quack doctor in Prior's verses---oe bow to the voice-that cries— o -0 " Go, eat your pudding, slave, and hold your Mugge- Oh ! gentlemen of England ! gentlemen of England If you think that what has been done last week, and what is threatened to be done after the holidays, i"" ei g ht "a proper, do not he so unjust or so absurd as to fancy hat you can shuffle off your duty, the duty delivered to ru t. % awedo if you shrink ? What can we say your ancestors, of defending the liberties of yonr pa! What was is y na s, co ol tirr ita s e i ,, land, upon a handful of poor newspaper writers. Ca if yell invite' despotism, and bend the willing neck to slavery ? N othillg• • w a • • • • • • • • • a. • ' We began this article in a spirit of melaneholf jest—we find we cannot go on without getting; Lng a vein of still more melancholy earnest. We an. " not proceed, because we are perfectly serious in po t ; apprehensions. The liberal papers may blew* on censure the proceedings of the Attorney-Gen era ' , but they are comparatively safe—we should. ket pounced upon with the talons of a hawk if we vett• tured to whisper half what they utter loudly. .W . must say, however, that these said liberal papers were a little tardy in their defence of the freedom of the Press; for, with the exception of the Morning Chronicle, the conduct of which on the present occr sion has been greatly to its honour, and in perfect keeping with the character which it has always maintained in all matters of moment, not one o f them stirred until they thought the danger migl 4 come to themselves—until the common enemy Ws° threatening indiscriminate vengeance. Who that enemy is we do not choose to say. Justice, however, requW° us to state what has come to our knowledge, from quarters which can neither deceive nor be deceived, that it is not the Lord Chancellor. Bitter enemies as we have been, and continue to be, to the politics which his Lordship has of late adopted, we do do not see why that c ircumstance ex cuseorL o appte. it hilg is to Lordshi p Satter, should make us con c ed e th e f ac t that nobody regrets the!! prosecutions, or th e s pi r it i n w hi c h they have b een . rarried on, more u s from tiian flattering,Ld udrh appe aring even in a case where we think him in a fal se p osition before the public ; but w e are sure he is right in thinking (as be does) that Lord Eldon consulted his own honour and respectability in not teasing himself abort libels far more furious than those which have been lately brought before the King's Bench, an;: that Sir John Copley's coo' duct in despising, or not noticing, the squibs and eraeirsl of the days of his Attorney-Generalship would be a go o ' precedent for all who f o llow him in office. THE ARMY. day arms ( b F e ro lon m gi t n i g te to Li s r i n ?a er l i a c t h e arrived he re Yesterday eight Commissariat W aggon s , the 11 lone, under an escort of an officer and thirty of "- from Nenagli. The at ms were deposited in the ordnance establishment in this Garrison. • On Wednesday last Major-General Thornton made hi._ half-yearly inspection of the 9 th - Begimsnt —at— ' l under the command of Major Watkins, when he paid she Corps the highest possible 'compliment, not only for its clean, steady, and soldierlike appearance under arms, bet its admirable system of interior economy, particularly that part connected 'with the school, and nou-conunisiaone ft officers, and private's libraries. Ensign Thomas O'Grady, 15th Regiment, son of 0.. Chief Baron, is appointed to a Lieutenancy in the 7 4 th ,- daily expected at Cork from Newfoundland. John Igasaft." Esq. son of the Hon. G. E. Meaty, of this city, is neat'nated to an Ensigney in the 48th Regiment. A letter received at our Office this day from Cal cutta states, that since the arrival of the 49th Regiment, b eside the loss of officers, the following deaths occurred :_ .oo ' serjeant-major, one band-master, 48 seijeants, 82 privates, 19 women and 24 children. Cholera moiling has been very destructive to the 4th Regiment of Dragoons at Poonah, in the East Indies. W° learn from letters received at our O ffi ce yesterday, that t he serjeant-major and eleven men of the Regiment fell victims to that horrible malady in one day, after a few hours il l ' ness only. this co l he rcni t 6 eyt : dGißsaegyi appointedni Regiment e e teasrte to 00 0 n p a r o o f c L e A e i eidniettheoanetalluxecGylll.ll s E s t i a is the 1 6 " Lancers. Captain Henry Stuart, son of the late Thorax, Stuart, Esq. of this city, has taken command of the depot of Ill ° 48th Regiment at Deal. The contemplated reductions in the pay of the It Army are abandoned for the present. Major-General Codd died in London on Friday last; b e formerly commanded the 60th Regiment, and Was o r '. intendent at Honduras. t.ionoi The Duke of WELLINGTON left town 43 E 1 _ Saturday afternoon on a visit to the Marquis add Mar, chioness of SA LISBUILT, at their residence at Mar►" Herts. There was a select party invited to meet his Gro.e! . . Mr. VESEY FITZGERALD has been ind i fl posed during the last few days, at his residence in Sotn e '' set-place. The Ri g ht Hon. Gentleman is, however, P °ll ' much better. BIRTH. Oa the 23d inst. in Gower-street, the lady of Capt• B. Henderson, of the Bengal army, of a daughter. MA RRIED. On the 24th inst. at Welford, Northamptonshire , It J. liens:can, of Northampton, to Mary, eld es t daugl" of Mr. W. Wilkinson. DIED. On the 23d ult. at Madeira, in *his 17th year, Wi ri : . worth Huyshe, only son of the Rev. F ra ncis Harbor , 7 Clisthydon, Devon. Oa the 27th inst. at Marston House, the seat of 11 1 . Earl of Cork, L a dy Is a b e lla Boyle, agrd 32, daughter 0 the E.rl and Countess of Cork. On the 25th inst. at her house in Bedford-equal, S ea 98, Mrs. Hare. On the 25th inst. in the Haymarket, Mrs. Keller ° Simmons, aged 52. On the 24th inst. Violette, the wife of J. Bloat, 1 1°4 Esq. of Torrington-square. On the 26th it:st. the wife of Mr. B. Bower, of Lorre% Thames-street, aged 41. On the 26th inst. in Southampton-street, Bloom:bolt Mrs. Rebecca Wilson, aged 75. On the 25th inst. at Islington, Mr. Wtn. Ilutt, i 0 - 79th year. On the 25th inst. Mrs. Le Grix, of Gray's-Inn- l o' terrace, aged 78, relict of the late Mr. Francis La GO P ' of Long-acre. •. On the 27th inst. Maria, third daughter of W. ?bilge Esq. of Clapham. On the 23d inst., at Oxford, Robert Bourne, - 1% 1 ,,,• 11 ', Clinical Professor in that University, and formetir Fell g " of Worcester College. On the . 21,1 inst. at Standish Rectory, Catherine, lil t of the Rey. W. G. Orrati, Rector of Standish, Wigan, Lancashire. Patxrwa .Axn .PwaufsmEn my lICTRDO YONNO, ittpv °rues, 112, Stualcu, tommiti