The Sun. — London, England, 1833-11-21 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF TIIE PUBLIC JOURNALS. It does not appear that any of those among our brother journalists who have most strongly censured the recent conduct of Lord Durham, in proceeding against one newspaper for origi nating, and one or to o others for copying, a scandalous libel upon his Lordship in his cha racter as a private citizen, have undertaken either to justify that particular libel, or to defend the practice, too general with worthless individuals, of launching their calumnies at personal reputa tion, in that confidence of impunity which springs from the well-known disproportion be tween the number of libels published, and of those against which either actions or prosecu tions have been instituted. It is not the first time that we have declared our full concurrence in the sentiment of discontent and indignation whiich prevails so widely amongst our more respectable Contemporaries, and the great body of intelligent men throughout the country, with regard to the mixture of injustice arid inconsistency to be found in some portions of the English law of libel. That the mere disclosure of a demonstrable truth, respecting the public conduct of a public man, should subject the party who writes or circulates that truth, to legal punishment,—that the party prosecuted should be tongue-tied, and prevented by the rules of law, from giving in evidence facts which would have made it apparent that he uttered no syllable of slander, and that he merely informed the public of truths which went to determine the rightful claims of individuals to offices of trust and power,—that every just principle of law should be so smothered by barbarous technicality and fiction, as to screen the wrong doer, and to chastise the detector, thus assuming that the discovery of guilt is more mischievous to society than its unpunished per petration ;—all this must appear to a sane mind an extravagance hardly to be credited of any civilized race of men. Again, that a man may be punished in his purse and person for words of which he may not plead the truth when pro secuted, but of the truth of which, under an other form of proceeding, he may, by going into evidence, save both his person and his purse, is an inconsistency as ludicrous as the first-mentioned injustice is deplorable. That (to offer an additional example of the equity of our libel law) a London or any other newspaper should be fined (or the printer be imprisoned) for copying— and avowing that it copies —an article of local intelligence from a provincial prie.t, which the editor must naturally sup pose to be cognizant of the facts which it promulgates, is a still further reason surely for demanding, on behalf of the community, a revisal of that whole department of English law. There is one circumstance with regard to actions, as well as prosecutions for libel, which cannot be safely overlooked, viz., the facility with which the full meaning of the most serious libel may in many cases be conveyed in terms which yet no stretch of legal inuendo can ever be made to bring effectually within the grasp of any law, but of one under which the most innocent or praiseworthy language might on some occasions be construed into libel. As the matter at pre sent stands, the uncertainty of the law for the so-called defence of reputation, and chastise ment of libellous offenders, is a grievance hardly tolerable. The indefinite power of the " inuendo" leaves so much to the discretion, or, in other words, to the temper of the jury, that no publisher who, with the most upright inten tions, names an individual, whether in public life or private, and relates of him a fact to which any degree of animadversion, direct or implied, is appended, can have the slightest confidence that he may not be found guilty of libel. Some modern lawyer, when asked to define a libel, stated that it was anything written or spoken, at which any man or any woman chose to take offence. And, unfortunately, this comes so near the practical signification of the term, that not only in so far as concerns newspapers may the most temperate and conscientious editor be in alarm, lest the most innoxious paragraph may be pounced upon and made the subject of in - formation, indictment, or action for damages by an irritable party, or his rapacious attorney, but, what is no unnatural consequence of the oppres sions frequently practised under it, the libel law itself, which might assuredly be made a whole some safeguard to private character, and to the peace of families, has become what, if it were a real protection, and nothing else, it could never be—an object of dislike and terror to the great bulk of the community. This is an effect of clumsy legislation, however designed for the en forcement of a useful principle, which cannot be too deeply lamented. In the first place, in dividuals, ever so seriously aggrieved, may well be afraid of resorting to the legal remedy, from an apprehension that the general odium attached to prosecutions, and even to actions for libel, would tend to bias the minds of the jury against any party seeking redress through such a channel, whilst the consequence of a defeat must be to fortify the impression already stamped against the plaintiff, and to give increased credit, as well as circulation, to the calumny. Secondly, it is too obvious that a certain portion of the press, conducted by adventurers, without shame or principle, without place in decent society, having neither property nor character at stake, and therefore nothing to lose by a prosecution, are encouraged by the uncertainty of the law of libel, and by the repugnance of individuals less desperate than themselves to run the risk of an appeal to it ; and therefore, like other gamblers, are ever eager to try their luck against all who are most respectable and estimable in society, by launching against them the most atrocious falsehoods. This characteristic of a portion— s very small one, we are proud to say—of the London press, and of a portion somewhat larger of the country press, which, though but local in its circulation and influence, is more than suspected of an ignoble subserviency to fac tions of which London is the focus, must have struck all observant persons to be of comparatively modern date. It commenced about the year 1821, and has spread and ripened to the present hour. Now, it behoves the larger and more re putable division of the periodical press of England to consider how its members may in future be best protected, not only against the abuse of justice under the existing law, but against the results of an abuse of liberty by their own un worthy brethren. From the malignant and base attacks upon public and private character in dulged in by the latter class of journals, it is too manifest that the general reputation of th e press itself has suffered. The discredit thus inflicted on its general management must go far to impair its beneficial power, and by weakening the influence of even its best founded censures, must render all men more insensible to what might otherwise be the most healthy restraint upon dishonesty or vice, because it would be regarded as the true representative of unbiassed public opinion. The reckless and desperate encouraged by the infliction of fines, stimulated by the promise of imprisonment, with sticks lambent round his head and stones dancing about virulence of falsehood with which these journal ists pursue their victims may produce another fatal fruit. If from the precarious and unpopu lar working of the law of libel, and the frequent reluctance to appeal to it, men find no substan tial redress from the Courts of Westmin4er, is it to he supposed that tilt resentful feelings ge nerated by the attacks of unpunished miscreants will subside without some sort of satisfaction ? Offences in private life, which are not suscepti ble of legal remedy, have, for near two centuries, in this country, been wiped out by an appeal to the sword—a practical evil, nay, dreadful in itself, but one to which we mainly owe the improved spirit and amenity of modern conver sation. With vile and mean slanderers that redress is out of the question, but will all at tempts at personal violence be laid aside ? Men will have some satisfaction for their wounded feelings, If they find that the law is an obso lete security, they will try the cudgel. If they can have a legal remedy, well ; but if that be impracticable, why then they will infallibly have recourse to the violent and illegal. Civil so ciety will in that case be broken up into a state of war. These considerations, however, can have little weight with the transgressors on whom we have been remarking ; yet, bad as they are, we wish not to see them assaulted as a New castle journalist appears to have been, with weapons no less audacious and lawless, though possibly somewhat less envenomed, than those by which Lord Durham has been systematically persecuted. The public services of that Noble Earl, which so abundantly entitle him to the respect of every patriotic Englishman, have ex posed him in the same degree to the ran corous revenge of a faction which ill deserves the name of English. The Noble Lord has ap pealed to the law of libel for redress,—all honest men must sympathise with his injured feelings, but many wise men will wish that he had rested, as he could well afford, on a character which might set such puny reptiles at defiance,—and that he had been satisfied with a public denial tinder his hand of the malicious and despicable charges brought against him, which we are sure would have more than answered all the purposes of the most successful prosecution. We repeat that the feelings of society must be with Lord Durham ; but, guessing from our own minds, we must question whether men's judgments arc not adverse to the policy of this prosecution, right or wrong, in point of rigid justice. We shall say no more than express our concern that the same of Lord Durham should be connected with an act of hostility towards the periodical press. Is it yet too late to drop this superfluous prosecution ? Times. We copy from the Durham Chronicle an ac. count of a fracas at Newcastle, originating in a hand-bill published at the office of the Newcastle Journal. We are only acquainted with the n attire of the hand-bill from what is stated in the paragraph of our Durham contemporary. It is described as conveying a false and malignant account of the part taken by several gentlemen at the dinner given to Lord Durham at Sunder land, and as assailing them in a quarter in which men of any feeling are generally sensitive —namely, their wives and families. There can not be a doubt that the attempt to do justice to themselves, by personal chastisement, is a viola tion of the law, and the only question will be the extent of the amercement. We will avail ourselves of this occasion to notice some of the expostulations with us of our liberal corres pondents on what we have lately written on the subject of prosecutions for libel. It has been said—Why, because the libel law is bad, do you wish to screen from all responsibility writers and publishers who state what is false, and what they know to be false ? Supposing the libel law were as perfect as you could wish it to be—that it distinguished between inten tional and malignant falsehood and accidental inaccuracies to which no malice can attach—be tween the originator of a falsehood and those who take it on trust, having no means of verify ing statements derived from distant sources — still, under such an improved state of the law, writers would not surely be allowed to deal in calumny and malignant falsehood with impunity. If, then, under an improved state of the law, neither the originator of a malignant falsehood nor the writer who copies such falsehood, aware of its character (for though malice is not in all cases to he inferred, the proof of it is not to be excluded), ought to escape punishment, why should Lord Durham or any other individual, conceiving himself aggrieved, be precluded from seeking redress under the present state of the law, for what under any state of the law would be deemed an offence ? Lord Durham has pro ceeded by criminal information, as it enabled him to contradict the assertion on oath. This course allowed the parties to file affidavits, contradicting any of the statements of his Lordship. It may be true, that in the present state of the libel law, statements may be pro ceeded against by criminal information which no honest man can condemn ; but, surely, if it can be shown that the statements pro ceeded against by criminal information are of an Indefensible character, there can be no reason why they should be suffered, because statements of a very different character may be made the subjects of criminal information. By making ' common cause with all who avail themselves of the press to circulate false statements, you not only bring discredit on yourselves, but you are the cause of the apparent indifference occa sionally shown by Juries to the liberty of the press. You blame men of the class of Jurors for giving verdicts in trivial matters, which enable prosecutors to ruin journals with heavy costs ; but you should remember that many of these Jurors may be smarting under improper liberties taken with their feelings by a portion of the press ; and if you treat their calamities as a light matter, and suppose that they ought to put up with their wrongs, you cannot be with justice angry if they look with indifference to your calamities. Such is nearly the substance of several representations which we have re ceived on the subject. We have to say in answer, that we have never justified attempts to traduce, because the law which is appealed to for redress may be made the instrument of punishing the innocent. The Whigs, too, may or may not be justified in having hitherto de layed to amend the law of libel (we think they are justified); but whether that law be improved next session, or be suffered to remain as it is, we have never contended that an injured man is bound t o see k no re d ress so l o n g as it remains in its present state. All that we said was, that it was peculiarly hard on individuals who now sought redress i"rom the law for unquestionable wrong, that they should be obliged to " submit with patience to the wrong, or have recourse to a law justly detested on account of its being in general called into operation only by the worthless, and being equally efficient to crush the innocent and the guilty." So long as human nature is human nature, men will be more or less affected by the general character of the law appealed to. 'We will put the case, for instance, of a man who has six times suffered severely for indifferent actions. Let us suppose that a seventh prose cution is instituted for an atrocious libel. Would a jury leave altogether out of consideration the sufferings of the defendant, though, in strict justice, the plaintiff's claim to redress was pre cisely the same, whether his prosecutionwris seventh in order or first ? The elder Cato is said to have ended all his speeches, on what ever subject, with the observation, a'eletula est Carthago. Our object in dwelling, on the un just and mischievous character of the present Libel Law was not written with a view to injure one party or to favour another, by w ithdrawing attention from particular cases to a general dis cussion. We conceived that public men, knowing less of the noxious character of the Libel Law than we do—indeed being in general utterly ignorant of it, it was our duty to seize every occasion, when the public was alive to the subject, for exposing the monster in all its hideousness. The present time is peculiarly favourable for obtaining attention to the subject ; for the English are a people peculiarly led by great names; and the spec tacle of a great and justly popular States man, like Lord Durham, invoking the libel law, is not an occasion that will occur every day. We have not taken the ground of some of our contemporaries, that an individual should put up with false imputations, because his known character gives the lie to them, or because if one journal assails him, the columns of another are open to his vindication. Procrustes's bed fur nished the hint for this sort of argument. All men are not affected in the same manner by the same kind of injury. One man of an iron temperament may care nothing for what may sting another to the quick. Besides, the feel ings of near and dear connections are to be taken into consideration. A statesman seeks to solace himself for the cares and anxieties of life as well as others in the domestic circle. It is nothing to him that he may see those suffering by the circulation of slander who are connected with him by the dearest of ties, and whose hap piness or misery must be shared by him ? So much for one mode of seeking redress for the wrongs suffered from the press. But the proceed ings in the journal office at Newcastle open ano ther view of the case. It is observed by the Presi dent Dupaty, a French judge, who travelled in Italy before the breaking out of the revolution—that in the then state of the law of Europe, which was everywhere made by the rich, and in their favour against the poor, that the Italians, by trusting for their protection to their own arms, and not to the law, had an advantage other the other nations of Europe. This is strange lan guage in the mouth of a judge ; but he offers some very ingenious arguments in favour of his views. However this may be, it is quite clear, that if men are precluded from having recourse to law, they will become judges in their own cause. Lord Durham is blamed for having recourse to law. Here are five gentlemen who redress their own wrongs, real or imaginary. The publisher of the Xewcast l e Journal com plains of this. He says, the law is open ; why do not my assailants appeal to the laws of their country ? Lord Durham says he is slandered, and he does appeal to the laws of his coun try, and he is abused for it, not only by the offending party, but by a very large portion of the Liberal press. The Scripture says, " Ac cursed is he who deals with two measures." The proprietor of the Newcastle Journal, by repudiat ing the law of the land, betakes himself to the law of nature, and must be prepared with a force to repel aggression. When he libels five men another time, he must hire five as good men to meet them. This is returning to the state of things so well described by Sir Walter Scott, when a Seaton or a Murray durst not walk the streets of Edinburgh without a strong band of retainers. The proprietor of a journal must look as much to the sinews of his editors as their brains. An editor must be prepared not only to meet adversaries difficult, from the slight. ness of their figure, to hit by one sort of weapon, but to knock down the bully who may try to crush him by superior bodily strength. The law of the land may be bad, but, after all, we suspect it is better than club or fist law. How ever, the proprietor of the Newcastle Journal seems to have placed himself on the horns of a dilemma. He cannot complain of prosecution for injurious and false statements, and complain of attempts to seek redress by other means at the same time. He must be hit some way or other, and he must not, like the soldier at the halberd, complain of being hit too high one moment, and too low the next. FRACAS EXTRAORDINARY.—SUMMARY AND EXEMPLARY PUNISHMENT. (From a Correspondent in Newcastle to the Durham Chronicle.) On Wednesday last, an extraordinary sensation was produced in Pilgrim-street, Newcastle, by a fracas which took place in the office of the celebrated " lying Journal" situated there. It appears, according to report (for no official account has yet been published), that the spleen of these veracious journalists not having had full vent in their weekly discharge respecting the dinner given to the Earl of Durham at Sunderland, they had recourse to a hand-hill, which was pretty freely distributed among the clique in Sunderland, in which malignancy and falsehood are so conspicuous, that even Judas himself cannot tell which predominates. The object of this miserable pro duction was still further to malign some of the gentlemen who attended that dinner ; and with the accustomed tact of the party, at the same time to traduce their wives and families, and bold them up to the derision of this degraded and disgraceful faction. Immediately on the atrocious fa brication making its appearance on Wednesday, a party of gentlemen who were attacked resolved to punish the heartless instrument who gave the trash publicity, if they could not reach its skulking and cowardly author. They immediately came to Newcastle, and five of them repaired to the office, where they found its much-to-be-pitied proprietor. They inquired if be was the printer of the calumny, which he avowed ; but, on his declining to give up the writer, two of them immediately bestowed upon him a tremendously severe castigation, regardless of his cries for mercy or assistance. Mr. Jonathan Walton, who has figured there as an assistant since the commence ment of their foul career, thought it his duty to assist his patron, when unluckily he transferred a smart portion of the punishment to his own shoulders, and, report says, found it necessary, to avoid further chastisement, to hide himself underneath the counter. The justice of the party becoming satisfied, they left their howling victims to soothe each other's sores, retired to their inn, and subse quently left the town. Of course legal proceedings will be the first step which the libellers will take ; and though there cannot be a doubt that the other party have laid themselves open to arnercenient, yet the Land of every honest man must be raised to applaud the meritorious deed. —Morning Chronicle. 1)r. Lushington, in his addre ss t o hi s consti tuents on Monday night, reminds u s o f the painter in Hora ce, who painted what in them selves might be pretty enough, but not what were required. The Doctor pledged himself, according to one of the speaker s , w h o was not contradicted, at a meeting at Mile-end during his canvass, to vote for the repeal of the assessed taxes. He says he voted for the ballot, triennial Parliaments, and against the impressment of seamen. This is good ; but what becomes of the pledge ? It may be right or wrong to give pledges, but having given the pledge, was it right to break it ? The Doctor says, that if he had voted against the repeal of the assessed taxes, he would have thrown out the Ministry. This would have been an evil, but we do not believe that the repeal of the assessed taxes would have had any such effect. In fact, they must and will be repealed. But does not Dr. Lushington see that he is sapping the foundation of all morality by doing evil that good may come of it ? It destroys all confidence between man and man to disregard pledges. Why do we preach patience to the people ? Why do we tell them—you have now a Reformed Parliament, w hat tnadness to seek that by anarchical means, which you may obtain by constitutional means, if the men whom the people depute to represent them on the faith of pledges to obtain that on which they have set their hearts, violate their pledges in this manner ? We condemn all attempts to combine against the law, but we must equally condemn all at tempts to delude the people by pledges which are not kept. If we wish men to obey the law, we must not drive the people to do without it. —Morning Chronicle. The history of the Romish Church is one continued display of spiritual domination in civil concerns, and that such is still its characteristic the contest which has long been going on in Portugal, that which has just arisen in Spain, and the unhappy state of Ireland, are proofs abundant and irresistible. Among the inscru table designs of Providence, this, perhaps, comes the least within the reach of man's finite capacity —that religion, which was given to insure his happiness both here and hereafter, should become so often the bane of his present existence, and the parent of enormities least of all calculated to smooth his passage to a world to come. We should ourselves partake of the bigotry which we thus condemn were we insensible of two facts —the one, that there are among the Romish priesthood many highly exemplary characters to whom this imputation does not apply ; the other, that too many of the clergy of the Protestant faith have been found to prefer an interference in civil concerns to the performance of their spiritual duties. But even admitting this latter fact to whatever extent it may be desired, what does it prove, but that the genius and spirit of Protes- tantism has that within which resists the too evi dent effect which Catholic priestcraft produces upon a Catholic community. With a show of liberty such persons are at once the greatest slaves and the greatest tyrants. From persons who have recently travelled through Spain and Portugal we are happy to learn that this priestly dominion is by no means so extensive as it was ; that in the former country, especially, the number of Monks is greatly diminished, and the influence of those remaining neither so great, nor submitted to so implicitly, as here tofore. Our informants, too, agree in stating that this alteration is most apparent in such parts of the country to which commercial in tercourse has found its way ; in short, that where light is let in, darkness claims no longer the dominion. How strikingly does this apply to the cultivation and improvement—we might say to the civilization of Ireland—to the misgovern ment and neglect of which may be attributed the long reign of priestly dominion under which that limb of the empire Las long suffered. Error, while fostering by neglect, is not to be rooted out by violence. Of all wars those which are undertaken to induce men to change their re ligious opinions have been the most senseless, intolerant, and fruitless. Would we destroy the political dominion of priestcraft, it must be done by ameliorating men's condition, by enlightening their minds, and fitting them to enjoy that free dom to which those who profit by their bodily and mental vassalage would have them to be for ever strangers.—Morning Herald. It affords us pleasure to learn that " a circu lar has been transmitted from the Home Office to the different revising Barristers, calling upon them to say whether any, and s,‘ hat objections have occurred to them to the working of the Re form Act on their respective circuits," because it evinces, in the first place, a desire on the part of the Government to amend whatever has been found to be amiss in the operation of the Act, and, because, in the second, we trust that it may be taken as the certain forerunner of some of those extensive alterations being made in it, which are now so unanimously called for by the public, and more especially that which re gards the payment of taxes and rates ? The ne cessity of these taxes being paid up to a certain period, in order to qualify the renter of a house or piece of land to vote at the election of Members of Parliament, has been justly complained of, as an injustice to individuals, and a narrowing, beyond the extent comtemplated by the framers of the Act, of the number of qualified electors. The first substantial improvement, therefore, to which the public has a right to look, and which we trust the Government will not fail to effect, will be the blotting out of this disquali fying clause, and the consequent throwing open of the franchise to all who are nominally in cluded in its multifarious, but well meant pro visions. The speech of Lord Durham on this subject, at Gateshead, leads us to believe that our hopes are not misplaced, and that the rec tification alluded to will be one of the first mea sures of the session.—Morning Advertiser. Lord Durham, as our readers are already aware, is prosecuting three newspapers in his zeal for the liberty of the press. His friends in the north became alarmed, with some reason, lest the triple exertion should be too much for his physical force, and proceeded to effect a diversion in his favour. A detachment of them about half a score strong marched on the 13th ultimo to the office of the Newcastle Journal, and succeeded in establishing the liberty of the press there by the infliction of sundry blows, bruises, stripes, and kicks on the body of the obnoxious editor. He is a bold man who meddles with Lord Durham. His Lordship is armed at all points—happy, tarn Marte quails illercurio. See with how formidable an array he marches into action. Here frowns a crafty attorney ; their scowls a sturdy pitman. A cri• urinal information is discharged from the right ; a brickbat is volleyed from the left. Sir John Campbell wields a weighty brief ; Mr. John Coal Carr wields a weightier bludgeon. Vi et arrnis completes what Brnco Regis begins. A rule is to be made absolute to-day, and a head is to be broken to morrow. Lord Durham loves the liberty of i t t h . e I they e e s yi s s , (a l t h n e e d he has . airs utrheelyy t a b u wr g eea h t t his friends ahree biofut hnedy t t ho o love a vceonit _ g n r ° a t tulate the Noble Lord and the Noble Lord's noble imitators upon the success of their simul taneous efforts in this great cause. Henceforth the author whose task is to enlighten mankind shall be free from the fears and the anxieties with which Toryism surrounded him. He shall pursue his honoured vocation in peace, his windows. As for the Editor of the New- castle Journal, we are unwilling to judge harshly of any man, but we must say appearances are ___ sadly against him. We are afraid he must stand convicted of a fatal honesty, an unfortu nate virtue ; for who but one incorrigibly in dependent and treasonably loyal could be, within one short week, horsewhipped by Lord Durham's admirers and prosecuted by Lord Durham ?—Morning Post. The refusal of the great Company of Mer chant Tailors to bow down before the illegal behests of the Corporation Commissioners, the dignified language in which that refusal is con veyed, and the learned and constitutional opinions (albeit incomprehensible to Mr. Sampson Augustus Rumball or Mr. Joseph Parkes) on which it rests, have naturally enough attracted the " thunder" of our Ministerial Contemporaries. The Radical Press would fain emancipate itself from the law's restrictions. No wonder, then, that it is equally anxious to deprive the rest of the world of the law's protec tion. Accordingly, in their utter inability (for which we are far from blaming them) to combat the arguments by which the illegality of the Royal Commission is established, and eager to vilify all resistance to unlawful authority, the Whig journals, with the baseness of their party's character (so signally contrasted with that party's ancient creed), at once fling aside all pretence to the countenance of the laws, in their crusade against the rights of property, wisely reflecting, doubtless, that in the arena of public justice they must expect to encounter such cumbersome and, peradventure, inconvenient obstacles as untainted evidence in the place of ex parte fic tion, direct proof instead of vague calumny, and in lieu of clamour and intimidation a fair field and an impartial tribunal. With a spirit wor thy of Scroggs or Jefferies, they resent the no tion of " questioning the King's witnesses" as an affront to the good cause of confiscation in which they wish to embark the King's name. The insolent railing of the Times, the dull malignity of the Chronicle, and the vulgar rant of the Herald, are all, therefore, called into play to scoff at the presumptuous proposition that an accused party is entitled to be heard in his de fence in due course of law ; and the pains and penalties of ex post facto enactments are trip pingly and fluently appealed to by these shame less advocates of pretended freedom. All this would in other times and different circum stances have been simply ridiculous, or at worst offensive ; and such gentle epithets as " rot• ten," " jobbing," " swindling," &c., applied too, be it remembered, to untried persons, might have passed as the natural effluvia of the kennel from which they rise. Not such, however, is the case now. Feeling as we do, and as indeed the very nomination- of the band of" Rovers" but too sadly demonstrates that the Crown and the Government, upon the new patent Durham principle of "goipg," are but too likely to lend a willing car to this audacious appeal of their partisans, we cannot let the occasion slip with. out a few words of warning, however fruitless— a brief expression of indignation, however inef fective. We need not say that our hopes o success are anything but sanguine ; for have w e now to learn how feeble are the expostula tions of reason amidst the storm of innova tion, how forlorn the chances of real liberty when the authority of the Crown is prosti tuted to the vilest purposes of faction, and sedition swaggers through the land tricked out in the trappings of prerogative ? Still vve cannot quite persuade ourselves that die Monarch can in reality be a willing agent in this pernicious scheme, or even aware of the necessary result to which these arbitrary proceedings tend. " True," say the Vhig organs, " we have no law to justify us, but, then, we can easily obtain power to defy the law. If the right be not with the Govern ment, a reforming Parliament will not refuse them the means of trampling on the right. Granted, that the Royal Commission is at best waste paper, and the edicts of its bearers mere blank cartridges, which, though they may ter rify the timid, and here and there perhaps frighten a nervous magistrate into self-destruc tion, are yet impotent against those who have " nothing to fear" for themselves, and would rather brave the vengeance than surrender the li berties of their country ; but then an Act of Parliament will soon supply the wanting ainmu ; nition ; the representatives of the people will gladly forge bolt and bullet to bring down new victims for the popular appetite ; and the people themselves, in their present temper, will exult over those who have dared to vindicate their rights against the mandates of the execu tive." Alas ! all this may be so. Would to God we could meet the insinuation with the same indignant shout of scorn with which in other days it would have been greeted. But we have outlived surprise, and can, at most, only be shocked by whatever degradation it may please a House of Commons (for of the House of Lords we of course hear not one word) to submit to. It may be then that the Executive will be armed with power to compel the production of deed and document, on which an Attorney-General's ingenuity is to be tortured to detect or to devise a flaw—that the property and good name of every man in Eng land (for the principle is equally good for indi viduals and for Corporations) may be prostrated by Parliament at the foot of the Throne. What then will be the conduct of him who sits upon the throne, whose interest is most vital, as his assent is most indispensable, in any trafficings with public or private rights ? Is there no one to whisper in the royal ear that there are us, so t hat le as the wel blow which l a s aggr e gate to be found among levels one can scarcely miss the other, that each are built on the same basis of law, and that one part of the foundation cannot be disturbed with out straining the whole edifice ? The preroga- ' tives of the sovereign, the privileges of the subject, the franchises or the freeholds of a corporation, are all bound together by one com mon chain of law ; snap but one link, and the severance is fatal. Once more we would entreat his Majesty's attention. The Royal eye cannot be the only one closed to the gigantic strides the House of Commons is making and medi tating towards universal dominion. It will readily lend him aid against corporations. There is a fable of the man having assisted the horse against the stag ; the moral may not be without value. But, come what will, those who, like the Merchant Tailors, have had the manliness to refuse submission where no one was entitled to exact obedience, will have, at least, this comfort in addition to their self approbation. They will have escaped the taunts of their assailants, with which their inure supple brethren have been unsparingly visited, lt r ' P i their very submission being construed into f and so converted into a confession of e Those meantime who have succumbed , as ma ma rt doubtless have done, from an anxiety to °Lill inquiry, where they had nothing to concea' kill learn how futile is the attempt to conciliate convince those who are bent on their destruci-tj. and how much better would have been a Ps t , ri ,„%., resistance to illegal power than fruitless uu". sion to an enemy.— Alorning Post. THE MARKETS. COAL MAIti(ET.—Nov. 20. 6. o. Per Tor.. s. d. Per Ton. 1 7 6 Holvwell —.... C0 „..7 , .0 3 17 6 W.E. Clarke and C • I , ( Pontop Windsor--.... .. 17 0 Walls End Hilda.- - :: 0 20 3 l'an field —,...--.......... ... IS 9 Walls End RiddelPs "-- 21 0 West Hartley .......—.— 17 6 Walls End Hetton ~.." 51 Walls End Carr and C., 17 6 Walls Ent? Stewart Ships arrived since ast market-day, 1. • IN(4 k•oUN'I'RY COlt Wheat. Barley. Oats. 41 1 e, 38 ••• 46 ••••" • 3 6 • 46 43 40 • 46 36 ▪ 1 56 36 sw ; • 46 44 , 34 46 3 4 4 6 44 0 2, ri 0 1 1 ? 0 A 2 0 0 'oust./ 41. d• t° 1 ei 1 0 1 0 1 6 6 0 Per Quarter. Abingdon Andover ---- Birmingham 8 ridport Cirencester aringdon-- Guildford Henley—. Hereford H igh worth Maidenhead Monmouth. Reading Salisbury Southampton .—... Stroud Tewkesbury Uxbridge .--. Warminster Worcester S. to S. 31 43 24 28 30 40 32 36 24 29 36 40 23 32 30 35 32 34 32 42 34 44 32 36 22 36 26 2:) 33 40 37 38 48 74 58 80 48 58 59 - 50 57 26 34 27 32 25 31 30 32 LRWES MARKET.—Nov. 19. White Wheat (per quarter).,,.,..,.X2 13 0 to £' Red ditto,.. 2 10 0 8ar1ey.......—. 1 12 0 Oats, NC w ........4.4,.......w0m.w• 01 8 0 Pease ...... 1 19 0 Oil Cake. New----..----... 12 0 0 per th CHELTENHAM MA RKET.—Nov. 19. Per Bushel. a. d. to s. d. Per lb. Wheat Barley 3 0 4 0 Mutton .................. Veal Pork Lamb to 3/. I3s. 04.1. per ton DUMFRIES MAR Oats Beans Pease 26 33 46 53 50 70 31. lOs KEI S.—Nov. 13. 0. 0 9 Butter, 16oz. ........ „„0 B° l o Eggs, 0 g Beef, per score •6 9, 0 Mutton, per lb ....... .„0 xi Veal 0 4 0 I Q artern Loaf 0 0 s. d. s. d. Wheat, Imp. Bush 6 0 to 7 0 8ar1ey....... Oats . .......... 2 0 2 6 Flour, 141 b. 3 0 3 4 Oatmeal 1 6 1 9 Potatoes, cwt. MEETINGS OF CREDITORS AT THE COURT, BASINGHALL-STREET' 11 , (From the London Gazette.) M , t lt TO-MORROW, Nov. 22. 1 , y; H. Thompson, merchant, Blackheath Park ............ 11 1 J. H. Biddle, carpenter, Grays, Essex... ........................ G. Watkins, grocer, Horner-street, St. Marylebone. ..... DREADFUL ACCIDENT IN HUNGF. IIII: 7I; MARKET.—About nine o'clock on Monday night, as t he Smith, butcher, of Hungerforl market, was descendinl'oef ladder which communicates from his shop to the slogoo house, he missed his footing, and about halfway 8 caught in the principal tendon of the right knee by 40 iron hook. He remained suspended for several w ebs' before he could be extricated. The wound is four ° eef in extent, and 31r. Smith now lies in a very dlt4t condition. ; n gtli g SHETLAND AND ORKNEY.—It is a fact that education in Shetland and in Orkney itbo advanced than in any portion of the Highlands; a n or language of these islands, both written and letiotO approaches nearer to the bi , st English of the sout b 'bera the common dialects of Scotland, or of the O r ' aft counties of England itself. The poorer i n habila ° : o ll! chiefly engaged in the fishery, although they g e ' to es', occupy small patches of land on which they rear Pt bo o f corn, &r. They fish principally for cod and ling , co si' late years the herring fishery has been tried cvit h d an d derable success. The people are reckoned ligh t adventurous seamen, and very frequently sail in t he. , 10 4 skiffs thirty or forty miles out of sight of the big bes ; i e gfr in pursuit of their occupations. A strong feeling I 13„et. not untinctured in some instances with superstition , go vales the whole of these solitary isles. It is gratifyi" fiord the sterility of the soil and the nakedness of the 1 ‘,. ° 0 scape thus more than relieved by the presence of id ) intelligence and those kind and generous qualities oh ennohi' human nature.—lncerncas Conrier. SPECIMEN OF A BEAUTIFUL LANGUAO''kee The following is an extract from a speech of I (a , b oe waquonaby, alias the Rev. Peter Jones, a native ° l ` 01 Chippewa tribe, who has keen educated by the Wele'orig Missionaries, and who is now himself a Missions:l l,o v, , the uncultivated natives of the American forests• h t he scribing the early intercourse of the red men Wi t whites, Mr. Jones said that whisky and ruin were c- oro 6 fire water by the former ; and that, when the) ! ott tasted these pernicious compounds, they used to says' in an ecatacy of delight, " 0 kagait saki kecbe we" e gio ti bahgahmeh menwaligahmepedamon Ah pakish obego, tebabon equabegakebun ewhningoodahgunchegeg ooda mepedalimontiondushgoomanhnouzh." The literal Iti e : 0 11 1 ' of which is, " 0 how sweet and delicious it is ! ' te my throat were two miles long, that I might 01 0 all the way !" Notwithstanding the sesquipe dali° pre inensions of some of the words, the language, a' Oa flounced by Mr. Jones, is really beautiful. Som e ° l , e isr j Rev. Edward Irving's disciples had, no doubt , him i ; Kahkewaquonahy, and stole their best flights fron i de but the rogues, being ignorant of his " tongue," ma work with the harmony of the real Chippewa. S. tO S. 22 30 818 THS. On the 19th inst., in Fitzroy.square, the lady of John Lysley, Esq., of a son. voter.On the 20th inst., at the Dowager Lady Arundel! 8, street, the Hon. Mrs. Neave, of a son. SOPPe tt On the 19th inst., in Guildford-place, Mrs. Charle s f of a daughter. is ° On the 15th inst., in Fitzgibbon-street, Dublin, the ti the Rev. C. H. Minchin, of a daughter. co t° The lady of the Rev. James Smith, of Island Magee/ Antrim, of a son. • -- ~ 1 MARRIED. le , , '4P On the 19th inst., at Croydon, the Rev. John snw o r i a Hebrew Scholar of the University of Cambridge, °.- cer r .n , 0 sistant Minister of St. Bartholomew's, Birmingham, .- ~,,,q; , Susanna, eldest daughter of the late Musio Clementi, '",,,f;' On the 20th inst., at the Church of St. Mary, Ai de v r 1 , 4 Henry, eldest son of Mr. Wiz, of Battersea-rise, to 1 ,-), third daughter of Mr. William Row, jun., of Little St. . Apostle. o f Pg , On the 19th inst., at Dorking, Mr. George Russell, te ington, Surrey, to Mary, youngest daughter of the la re, George Eives, of Dorking. s IV s e t, On the 19th inst., at St. Mary's, Islington, Samuel 'yrs' , Esq., of Norwich, to Mary, only daughter of Williams 00j , Esq., of Islington. C i''',.. On the 19th inst., at Henley-upon-Thames, T. OP Esq., surgeon, of I'entonville, to Ann, daughter of r ,i; Parker, Esq., of the former place. .4iither" On the 19th inst., at St. Mary's, Beverley, Yor. s ( so , ' Merry, of Whitechapel, to Jane, youngest daughter °' ° 1 b Stephenson, Esq., of Beverley. tV 1 On the 12th inst., at St Omer, Lewis Cachelot, of Jo Dragoons, to Miss Levison. . pitv;t, On the 13th inst., in St. Andrew's Church, ~fote Melville Gore Matson, Esq., Lieutenant in the 59th t he ' I only son of Admiral Matson, to Charlotte, daughter o f 94' W. Butler, Esq., and grand-niece of Caesar Coleloug lt, ,f• i 4 C Tintern Abbey, county Wexford. ~ . , On the 13th inst., at Abbeyleix Church, the P": Coeer I Tatam, of Church Kirk, Lancashire, eldest son 0 ' (ll y Tatam, Esq., of Dublin, to Elizabeth, sister of S ir I King, Bart., of Charlestown, county Roscommon. DIED. o °Jit On the 19th inst., at his chambers, in Verulallt . i , so Gray's-inn, Mr. Beverley, solicitor. 0/ 1" , „ On the 19th inst., Catharina, wife of Mr. Edward OW of Loraine.place, Holloway, aged 56. ,„ Alo Ili' On the 18th inst., at I3rentford, Mr. Rowlands, .- year. M il/ V P C ' On the 19th inst., at Castle Hedingham, Essex, srl'iii, 111 beth Stevens, third surviving daughter of the late,pst i Stevens, rector of I'anfield, and vicar of Helions, Il°' - 1 , 0 the same county. 110 / 400 On the 20th inst., Eliza Frances , wife of Mr. J o ts‘ ' Carey-street, Lincoln's-inn. 1, On the 17th inst., Georg e, eldes t son of George er" Esq., of New Basinghall-street, in his 27th year. Ih (A e On the 15th inst., at Clapham, Mr. John Henne tli 4 i o tiv ringdon-street, aged 28. ,31 - v i t. On the 27th May last, during the Lite awfu l 1.10 51 7 East Indies, Septimus Edward Atkinson, of th e poo , t e. l,any's Bengal Marines, youngest son of the la te s iV 0 kinson, Esq. of O r c 1 1; On the 19th inst., ag 14 ed 49, Mr. Joseph New ee l .....,...„/ cross-street, Cripplegate. Ile was the author 0 1 i ,io: 0 on the liberties and privileges of the citizens o f 14 a ' PRINTED AND PUBLIPIIZD avMU RDO Y OU Sim Onus, 112, `OT SOD!