The Sun. — London, England, 1850-12-07 00:00:00

I alai' is party who app ear . ; i n p ers on being expose::: any 'take in hi, contest with au a dimeam, I have ~Itearaay feuad th a t t h ere i s muc h more s y m p at hy ex d 4,0,41 favour of a parson in that poaieon than for the a to who is opp ose d to hi m , an d w h o is supposed to Possessc,,, those su p er i or advantages over him. It is gene- Z Y consid ere d that we a; counsel aro arme d h ere w i t h e re !" of mail, and that a person who ventures into this esns into the lists against not clad as weai n, a t ere,s. Betl t corrias unarmed and defence !it theot z e pr a e e a teit;t occasionhe ofnyou will be of opinion that that position of his Highness the Duke p er ßr unswick, for he has unquestionably had 'pre ., 'e for him what may either be termed thi c k "of offence or of defence—a folio volume, as en ci as the seven f o ld s hi e ld o f Aj ax —(Laughter)— ba, h e has been clad in a complete suit of armour by to attorney. He camps, therefore, armed at ail points is ureter difficulties with an experience of courts of ye ar , at now ranges over a considerable number of b et and not trusting to his own extempore effusions, 40 ve . ith the aid of that volume, to which I have already e a st', prepared carefully and deliberately in close and 4 t e le t' t eftl i sultatio n with his legal advisers, to present the fo r h`: the jury in the most favourable way possible itla c e -I r m se l f- Now, gentlemen, the disadvantage is labour under by having such an antagonist F r i - 'i la rent. If one of my Honourable and Leaseesi einds near me had been engneed as counsel fur his n ‘ !” the Duke of Brunswick, not only would he testes himself restrained by those conventional cour alk;,,which belong to society in general, but fettered t l alwri :Y ru t t h io o t ee i technical rules which prevail in courts of • end which are necessary for the right and due ad of justice; he would have been forced to to l ine himself within certain acknowledged limits. It e ali er toy Learned Friends had bean counsel for his Re e l a ess the Duke of Brunswick on tile pre ocCasion they would have known their duty u the e ' sren would have repected their own characters too tities_e venture upon anything beyond the limits of the e on l ets to be fairly and properly submitted to your the —they would have felt themselves degraded af th e Position which they held if they had ventured out lta te e Path of their duty to malign the characters of the ft ~,1 1 ,! and the dead, or to make an inquiry of this kind ti/e;" ( eie for every species of slander and contumely d e i n t hose who are utterly helpless and unable to th e e t t d themselves. And, gentlemen, why is it not h is Highness the Duke of Brunswick has 4,,, t esorted to the assistance of some of my fee s Z ed Friends? It is not for want of his r• The Duke of Brunswick has spoken to you of resit s revenues, he has spoken to you of his gene distil' which can afford to distribute tbe proceeds of a ver peor'.er 8 ,000/. recovered in alforeign country amongst the Whi c h he is not destitute of those means, the want of visual sometimes compels :helpless and unhappy indi ally, to confess their own poverty and appear person is 1 ,,, dt Courts of justice to plead their own cause. That his IT the motive which has governed the conduct of g ee , . i ghness the Duke of Brunswick upon the prese n t t ' pa e at en, but the motives which have guided him are ap - Oha a - Z t S You cannot for one moment doubt what his oih" casein coming here in his own person presenting his va l i ch before you, gentlemen. I think the imputation am 1 , he has made to-day is one of the most painful hen lstressing it was ever my lot to listen to. That he his d hare ventured to come here himself to vindicate ee• reputation against slanders which he says have been s il ai a l S,: ra s e i t ea ifi te a r h o ly f uttered against him, and say what he has to me surprising, and that be. who appears in the a man complaining of libels, which he says his tai h e e en published against him, should in the course of • la e ;"ress to you have been guilty of stronger and fouler rea' a lla g e, imputing calumnies against absent and de , thitted i ndividuals, than anything I will venture to say tra e l ia !,aPPeared in this paper against the Duke of tlatry. to w Lea during the whole of his residence in this It leas Duke of BRUNSWICK—I did nothing of the sort. s„ a question of fact, and I said nothing else. pai r e THESIOER continued—Has his Highness the he , of Brunswick forgotten Out he assailed the cha rer`ars of absent persons? Why the memory of George b s " a member of his own family, has been assailed by truervations repeated by his Highness the Duke of k oa naw iek, over and over again directed to that deceased itreh, and his conduct, saying that he and his family had_ endeavoured to prove that he was mad, in order to .Js rive him of his Duchy; that his late Majesty George ' hi v e • bad treated him worse than he treated Queen Caro ' th n as his Highness the Duke of Brunswick forgotten ese ot. l oot ha pressions and other similar ones? And is, col ditto I la, gentlemen, we, in the eagerness and haste of ao , a ussien which takes place in courts of justice, aro • moment Imfortunately led away by the heat of the f i '_u_n e sent into the use of intemperate expressions. Ibe ti o r_ there is not one of us who may not on some occa ifiloratehunra:eeitf:ailed in that way, but we find some excuse es, and others are kind enough to excuse us sits of way, by urging that from the hu b, sY of discussion and the heat of the mo • . _e at a _ paw. we cannot always guard ourselves against . to ul expressions or tho introduction of in- D 2e , ra e language. Not so his Highness the Which of Brunswick, for here be has a printed volume, lie ' s; c ue has been reading to you by the hour together. eat Taa l a careful and deliberate preparation of the h: a - 7 1 es which he has been uttering, some of which I to a - t a l r eady alluded to, and it will be my painful duty ha r et t to others in the course of the observations I shall on tt e " I . ° Maka. Now, gentlemen, a remark which I made that C t er ,mer occasion seems to me to be so apposite since ; 8 quite impossible for me to omit it now, bek a 't shows the position in which the h e h " of Brunswick has placed himself by the course 33uke" adopted. Suppose, gentlemen, his Highness the of Brunswiok had thought proper to go to the neo.u.rt of Queen's Bench, and apply for a criminal infor ., ! loe -a • against the proprietor of The Sun newspaper for ulla very article now before us —suppose in his affidavit ur in his address to the Court he had said or uttered h alf of the slanders which he has directed not only against the proprietor of The Sun newspaper, but against other individuals unconnected with this inquiry —.I venture to say that he would have completely pre cluded himself from the remedy he was seek ing, and his application would have been dis missed in consequence of the conduct he had adopted. Now, can there be any fair or reason . able difference or distinction between that case and the present, supposing it should ultimately b ec ome a question of damage s , w hi c h I h ope i t w i ll not? Can it be said of ', a party who complains of libels which he says have been - published upon him, and who seeks reparation in da 'Ate Mages fur those lib e l s , and at the very time when he is „ It • sUilsg for tho s e damages, assails the reputation of the Party of w h om he complains in terms more unmeasured l a. t han those used against him—can it be said that if it be '" c ame a questi on o f damages between these parties, a jury ' w ould b e f oun d to g i ve t h e same amoun t o f damages to hint that they would award to a person who had been more abstinent and more careful, and who had directed his attention solely to the question of the injury he ha d sus tained, and addressed that simply to the jury? Well, that is the position in which Mr. Young stands with btterre garda to his Highness the Duke of Brunswick on the present occasion; but we have not yet done with this 19ntilia4 v o vinch . appears to be a little preliminary to the n which you will have to enter, because we cer bultj are indebted in some degree to his highness . the e ttirutlisc')era Brunswick, or his legal adviser, for having t tro "justiceof this case placed before you in the most 11 -4 ` n g manner. His Highness the Duke of Brunswick Ali told a yen that an action was broug h t a g ainst Mr. e a so — e r i n en Harmer for this very libel of whic h he now ei f Plains against Mr. Young, and that the jury—a spe c,: jury, empanelled as you are now to t r y the h a s "tinn of the amount of injury which the Duke sustained for this publication— awarded him one af: e lin g damages. Now, undoubtedly, if Mr. Young, ' • p u b r i .a Verdict of that description, had published, or re this art exposed himself icle, there wouhave been round to Y that he had to the most serious t e lr: a e i g li elsees, that he had, in fact, defied the law, and • a,;„ — e '°re ought to have the most exemplary damages e as -rue d against him; but so far from this being the t h -e i there is no republication at all of the article. It is the,, very Same article and the very same injury of which y r ; Duke of Brunswick is now complaining against Mr. e a - re un g , and he seeks to make the parties liable for am in respect of the very same injury, the very to me n ewspaper, the very same article, the very same la so a l 7 r Y. New it has been suggested by his Highness the b e ll e of Brunswick that Mr. Harmer was rendered tot e only for nominal damages in consequ ence of his s ay ; be ing the re a l authr of tdis libel; but 1 beg l eave to te - t e ' ll the atroneest possible manner, !hat t his is as ut tiet,; w ithout foundation as many other of the asser ae—s which th e D u k e of Brunswick has been instr ucted p f a t he Duke of BRUNSWICK—That is a question of itsraY Lord. t % Justice ERLE—That was one of the matters pass ttle„,_ll my mind when I told you, that if y ou made state- Eo ur ' t which had no reference to the question before the ' You could not complain of the other side reply sitor those statements. of A TRESlGER—Gentleme n, his Hi g hness the Duke • te e , r t ~m swick has thought proper to st ate that Mr. Har r not responsible for the article. Wa-; - °Duke of- BRUNSWICK —Why, Mr. Murdo Youn g called as a witness to prove it. r • Justice ERLE—These interruptions, Sir, are no tin aCCOrdanc e • B,r F. with the sages of the Court. of /3 a TIIESIGER— uGentlemon, his Highness the Duke me. r answick distinctly stated that Lord Campbell ex --sd his opinion that Mr. Alderman Harmer was not t : h ie for substantial damages, because he was only proprie , mortga gee of the paper, and that it was on that 'c unt, and that account only, that the jury awarded the Z i nal damages which they did. I beg leave most Sa ne tlY to deny that his Lordship held that whether itkr• Alderman Harmer was only the mortgagee or the • 'solute proprietor was totally immaterial, that he was sustained responsible to the full extent of the injury for any libellous article which appeared in his new.- a -Paper, and it was upon that footing the jury pro ceeded in their estimate of the damages. They disap- P l aitq a e me, I must confess, in their giving damages Elt but they c a m e t o the conclusion that after his Lord -411413 ruling th e y oug ht to find a verdict against Mr. armer with one shilling damages, which they awarded his Highness the Duke of Brunswick. Now , g e ntlemen suppose a trespass is committed by s everal individuals, and the party aggrieved chooses , Proceed against them separately for the injury which -e has sustained. I apprehend be can only obtain one satisfaction for ono injury. Mr. Justice ERlE—That is an argument upon a point of law which might be available hereafter upon this t ` i subject. Lord, to urge e rF. TUESIGER—I am not going, my , "No - It a ,stlt as an answer to this action in point of law. am t ,:eitit tot ° a—thearte,lY‘v:illnitrP,ting 'nob nestion. I' was going to state teise,,/..„- could nob talee any' such , objection on the ,n ee " e ns' iftMsl4,loM,w; action engainst ' Mr. ' 4114 h; `•tht`'" ,a " 42 cllfit - cMPAR ther e fore ,merely against m r . we • -'- are placed with regard tOthiS ''' ll/011 i` Mai — bias‘ tilrettdY bun nagged between Mr. Alderman Harmer and his Highness the Duke '• Reinhold. And I have yet to learn that any thing of Brunswick. We tare in precisely the same position which has been stated in this newspaper on the subject now that we were when that action was tried—indeed of that verdict, under the circumstances which have been the tame article and the very identicti papers are pro- stated, can be at all considered as too strong. duced now that were brought forward teen. Now, gen- Well then, having thus been introduced to the Duke of demen, just let me advert to the mod-, the very inge- Brunswick through this verdict which he had so ob nious mode, of conducting this case which has been re- tained, the article proceeds to comment on his conduct, sorted to by his Highness the Duke of Brunswick, of on the opinion which is entertained of him, on the course under the able legal advice of his attorney. Let judgment which history will probably form of his cha me point out to you the ingenious mode which has been racter; and here let me come at once to issue resorted to for the purpose of preventing all the truth of with the Duke of Brunswick. It may be this case being made known to us. His Highness the that the Duke of Brunswick was an amiable and ex- Duke of Brunswick has over and over again spoken cellent Sovereign, reigning in the hearts of his people, of the verdict for 5001. which he obtained until, in some moment of wayward caprice or fickle against Mr. Alderman Harmer as proprietor of the ness, his subjects, like the frogs in the fable, thought Weekly Dispatch, and he has made some observ- it right to dispense with his ruling over them. It may ations about it. He has told you that an application be, on the other hand, that the Duke of Brunswick was was made to the Court of Queen's Bench for a new trial, a cruel and tyrannical Sovereign, outraging and and the Court granted the new trial. Ilis Highness the insulting day by day the feelings of his subjects Duke of Brunswick observed that he attributed the sue- " gagging" the press, and rousing the indignation of the cess of that motion to th© perjured testimony of the people by repeated acts of tyranny, until they rose in officials and clerks of Mr. Alderman Harmer. disgust, and, to use the strong expression of an eloquent The Duke of Brasswion--I do not think I raid that. advocate, broke their chains on the head of the op- Sir F. THESICER—You will find it in your book.— pressor. (Laughter.) Now, gentlemen, supposing his Highness The Duke of BRUNSWICK—You ought to have pleaded the Do ke of Brunswick is right in suing that there justification. was a motion made for a now trial, and that the Court Sir F. THESIGER continued—lt may be that there is granted the new trial, why is it, that in framing this de- a counterfeit present of two brothers, and that we may duration for bringing forward the complaint of his look on that picture and on this.—(Laughter,) Now, I Highness the Duke of Brunswick, this most impor- have a right as a public journalist, to look on the dark taut part of the article is entirely omitted. side of the picture. I may be wrong, I own it, but I will '• For apart from the circumstance of the striking differ- put it that the Duke may not be the indulgent sovereign etice of tone assumed by those publications, it must he who was removed by the caprice and tyranny of his borne in mind that the principal charge wade by the subjects, but that he was a malignant, cruel, oppressive ex•Dulte of Brunswick in the present instance had re- tyrannical prince, who was heaved from off his kingdom fererci to an article contained in the Weekl y Dis p atch b y the uprising of his indignant subjects. But I have a so far back as the September of 1830. After a lapse of right to take my view of the conduct of the Duke of no Ices than 19 years that article is produced in a court Brunswick in respect of that revolution which hurled of justice as sufficiently libellous to enable the plaintiff him from his throne; and, to be sure, you may just as to obtain compensation. As to the obstacle presented well confine the records that we receive of what is pas against such a decision by the Statute of Limitations, it sing in the world to the fashionable intelligence, will be observed that that was peremptorily overcome of dinner parties which public persons give, or to the bythe evidence given by a witness named Casimir Reinhold walks that they take, than to attempt to fetter the press who swore distinctly to having purchased in the March of by preventing their free and strong observations on the 1848, a copy of the paper printed in the September of conduct of public men, according to the view which they 1830, thereby asserting the fact of a recent re-publics- think they are entitled to take in the fair exercise of tion. It will scarcely cause any astonishment to learn their judgment. Now, just let us see is there anything that measures will be adopted by the defendant for the which is not directed entirely and carefully to the purpose of setting aside the verdict when it is known public character of the Duke of Brunswick, and I say that not only can the circumstances of a re-publication that you can find nothing which assails his private cha in 1848 be disproved, but conclusive testimony can racter, the whole Merely being directed against his public be afforded that one of the most important witnesses on position and the circumstances accompanied by the loss behalf of the plaintiff, on a former occasion, tendered of his throne. It is very deeply to be regretted that any his services to the defendant as one ready to verdict should have been pronounced against Mr. appear in court against the Duke cf Brunswick for Harmer for an article of this description, even though it a consideration. When these things have been ex- is for the trifling damage of one shilling, because posed, there cannot remain a moment's doubt I say it does violate the liberty of the public as to the ulterior decision of the judicial anthorities." press, if they are not at liberty to publish The Duke of BRUNSWICK—I.said nothing about the strictures on public men quite as strong as those con thing. tained in this article. Now, just let me, if you please, Mr. Justice ERLE—I think I understood you to do so. call your attention to the particular parts of this alleged The Duke of BRUNSWICK—I don't think I did, my libel. I regret being compelled to trespass so much on Lord. your time, but this is really a most important Mr. Justice ERlE—About the clerks being perjured, question, and I shall endeavour to discharge my I don't remember anything, but there was a statement duty as shortly as I can. After alluding to the of a new trial being applied for and granted. verdict in the action against the Weekly Dispatch, The Duke of BRUNSWICK—I did not say it was article says:—" Long and deservedly has this coun granted, my Lord. try boasted of its capacity for affording shelter to the Mr. Justice ERLE—What you said conveyed that im- refugees from all the other dominions of the habitable pression to my mind. globe. Long has the nation prided itself upon that Sir F. THESIGER—These are the expressions—"Har- social security - and that constitutional freedom which mer's servants at the Dispatch-office, although they sold have rendered England the haven of those unfortunate the papers, they swore that they had not." That was persons who are expatriated either through the un taken down word for word. grateful fickleness of some continental race, or through The Duke of BRuNswlcle—That . may be true, but I did the vengeance of a whole people, rising to vindicate not say so. their outraged nationality by punishing with one Mr. Justice ERLE—I can't pretend to have any certain sudden and awful blow a protracted reign of enormities." memory of what has passed, but certainly the new trial Now that is a digression which applies generally to all was alluded to. political refugees, under whatever circumstances they Sir F. THESIGER—And that it was obtained by the may be driven out of their own country to England. perjury of some of those in Mr. Harmer's office. " Between those very opposite classes of fugitives Eng- The Duke of BRUNSWICK—I solemnly protest against land draws no distinction whatever in so far as the cir cumstances I did not say so. curnstances of affording them alike a place of repose is A Juror—What was said was this—" They may have c oncerned. The objects of execration find themselves as sworn not to lose their situations." freely admitted to participate in the advantages afforded Sir F. THESIGER.—Those are the very words. by our institutions as the men entitled to general sym- Mr. Justice ERLE.—I think the commentary of the pathy and reverence." Now, does anybody mean to Learned Counsel for the defence was perfectly justifiable, contend there are not political objects of execration, because the expression used by the plaintiff, that the persons who, holding high stations, have more extended servants at the Dispatch office had sworn in a particular moral responsibilities, and who are the greater way, in order not to lose their situations, was pregnant criminals, the greater and higher the duties of meaning. The expression is short in words, but full are which they have to perform, when they of meaning—" Swore not to lose their situations." Of neglect them ? Is it to be said there is not course, then, they swore that which was not true. to be found in England a haven for persons of that de- Sir F. THESIGER—NOt only was the passage omitted, scription, who are the objects—the political objects—of but to show how carefully everything relating to this up- execration; is it to be said that if some of those persons plication for a new trial has been excluded from the de- whose names are perfectly familiar to you, and which claration, there are those three lines omitted towards the are mentioned in this very article, had brought an action close of the article:—" Especially seeing that the verdict founded on the expressions contained in the alleged is one obtained through evidence so rotten and article, article, alleging that they were among the per fraudulent as to promise its ultimate reversal." sons alluded to, can it be supposed they could have rested The statute of limitations was pleaded to the libels pub- on those expressions and entitled themselves to damages lished on the 30th September, 1830. Now if tbis per- at the hands of, a jury? It would be perfectly mon tion of the article which I have read to you had been in- strous to suppose anything of the kind. The alleged troduced into the declaration upon this occasion, it libel then goes on to say—" Whether it be with a view would have been competent for the defendant (Mr. to assuage the griefs of the latter by commiseration, or Young) to have pleaded that it was perfectly true that to facilitate the expiation of the guilt of the Casimir Reinhold did mean that he had purchased a former by affording them an opportunity of repent copy of the newspaper in the year 1848, and that this ance, certain it is that Great Britain is accessible at all circumstance of the republication of the libel had been times to the political victim and the political criminal, disposed of; that he did tender his services to the de- irrespective of all creeds, of all countries, of all colours, fondant as being ready to appear in court against his of all policies, of all antipathies, and of all pre- Highness the Duke of Brunswick for a cons i dera . dilections." Whether the writer has not extended the Lion. Well now, gentlemen, just suppose that we had arms of England rather too widely may be a question been put in that position, which I think in fairness which you will hereafter have to decide;—" Red Repub it ought to have been put upon the record, we should beans, and Conservatives, and Aristocrats, each find in have had an opportunity of pleading and of proving the England refuge from the pursuit of difficulties. Prince truth of that plea, and I think that even if his Highness Metternich and M. Louis Blanc, the Count de Neuilly the Duke of Brunswick was entitled to damages in re- and M. Marc Caussidiere, Signor Mazzini and the Prince sped to the other part of the article, any jury who of Prussia, Don Miguel and General Pepe, the Conde exercised a judgment upon the subject would not regret de Montemolin and General Espartero, Prince Louis the necessity of being compelled to find a verdict in his Napoleon and M. Guiaot, nodg on amultitude of continent ethers, favour, and would not consider the sme_lle4t coin they have, from time to time, hu over from the might be compelled to give him quite sufficient to satisfy during those moments of peril when tho shelter of the him for the alleged libel. By excluding artfully, de- United Kingdom presented to the wearied and the panic liberately, and carefully this portion of the ar- stricken an irresistible fascination. And one and all title from the consideration of the jury, and depriving have been admitted with the same cordial and indiscri the defendant of the means of justification which he would minate frankness within the guardian bulwarks of our have been entitled to use, had it been fairly and properly renowned and matchless constitution. It was left set out; I suppose his Highness the Duke of Bruns- for the ex• Duke of Brunswick to attach an additional wick and his attorney (who is at his ear) thought that notoriety to a name already sufficiently notorious." by means of this omission justice would be defeated, and How notorious? Notorious by his having been the a very considerable verdict would be obtained in respect subject of a revolution, which revolution, according to of the other part of the article to which lam calling the view of a journalist, was produced by his own inces your attention. Now, ge n tl emen , just let us come to the sant tyranny, and by the disgust which he occasioned to article itself, and to the considerations which fairly arise his subjects. out of that article; and here I must confess that lam The Duke of BRUNSWICK—You ought to justify that not at all disposed to accept as a rule his Highness the assertion. Duke of Brunswick's definition of the liberty of Sir F. THESIGER—The article continues, "by being the press. He says the liberty of the press the first to repay this national generosity by a petty consists in their being allowed to publish what they action against a journalist—an example which, among like, but that they must be punished for it. Well, now kindred refugees, may prove so far contagious as to be it seems to me, gentlemen, that that is liberty of a very inaugurative of a system of continual annoyance and extraordinary character; it appears to .me to be very extortion." Why, it is perfectly clear that what the much like the liberty w hi c h a man has to comm it f e lony journalist means is that a verdict of 500/., with respect or any other crime. He is quite at liberty to do so, but to a publication like this, may induce other refugees to then the consequence which will undoubtedly follow is risk the same means of obtaining damages for injury to that he will be punished for it if h e d oe s, But, gentle • their reputation, contained in articles published perhaps men, that is not the liberty the press which we find re- twenty years ago, when they , were in another country, cognised here. We have always considered, and no when they were moving in a different sphere, and when doubt you are of the same opinion, that there is certain probably they were discharging political duties f very ground which is public property, which belongs to the g reat importance. " The result, by way, i snot at public at large, over which the public journalist: may a l l im p robable, seein g that the verdict given on Tuesday range at his pleasure—that he may form what notion he will act as a lure to those who, besides finding in such pleases of public events and public character, and he actions a means of gratifying their own evil and more may express himself in the strongest and most unn3ea- ignoble passions, may perceive in them a method of re sured terms upon this subject. True, if he invades the plenishing their attenuated purses, and of generally im privacy of domestic life; true, if he assails private cha- proving their dilapidated.fortunes." That certainly does meter, he is properly amenable to justice, an d w hatever not apply to the Duke of Brunswick, after the statement he position I may fill, whether. as the advocate for or the has made to-day, and it can only have reference to those c ounsel against him, I will invariably admit th e r i g ht to other persons who are alluded to in the article. "By damages in the fullest possible manner if a ny p r ivate elan- such a proceeding battening upon the very race to whom der finds its way into the columns of public they should have regarded themselves as bound by the journals; and unless they can justify the bonds of eternal gratitude!" Now, gentlemen, we come slander by showing that it is true, they ought to be to the passage on which the Duke of Brunswick has thought proper to place his veto, and which he distinctly called to account for it and made to answer, and I hope will be made to answer for it with the fullest measure of says is the particular part of the libel of which he justice. But, gentlemen, if confining itself to its own complains. " All turns on this," he says, "on this you are to form your judgments, and I am conten t to leave legitimate and undoubted provi n c e of refer rin g merel y to public events and public characters , a journal sh ould take my case on this ground alone." Now, if I do not even an erroneous view of the conduct of public men, satisfy you that what the Duke alleges to and expr ess that in the most unmeasured language most be a libel upon him, is not a libel on his pri undouetedly m y no tions of the liberty of the press in vate character, but only assails him as a political person, this county are en ti re ly m i sa pprehended if any jour- why then I will consent to abandon to y our mercy the y midst can be made liable in a c o urt of justice for any- defendant, wi th whose interest lam on the p resent thing he published in that way, however powerful or occasion identified, and allow you to give such damages strong the language may be, if it is only directed to such against hi as a petherson i an n the position n of the plaintiff c ircumstances and such characters. Now, then, gentle - ought to receive at hds f when his cha men, bearing that rule in view, let us turn for a moment racter is so assailed. But let us come to the passage in to the article of which his Highness the Duke of question:—" In such a case as that of the ex-Duke of Brunswick complains, and apart from all the tortured Brunswick, the veracity of the old axiom—bile greater construction and meaning which he has endeavoured to the truth the greater the libel—becomes more than ever and fix upon particular expressions, I will defy any dis- most painfully perceptible." Upon that the Duke treats, passionate m i n d to come to any other conclusion than and on that does he pin his comments, but by what is that this article, from the beginning to the end, with the that paragraph followed up?—" Since the first instant exception of the point which relate s to the previous of his expulsion from the dominions of his ancestors, the action against the Weekly Dispatch, to which I shall public mind of England has not hesitated as to the ca advert presently, is directed against his Highness the lender upon which should be inscribed the name of this Duke of Brunswick as a public man, and to his public personage—whether among the political victims or acts, and to the opinion and judgment which his con- among the political criminals." Now, what a diseased temporaries have formed and which posterity will form mind, and what a morbid imagination a person must have with respect to his public character in connexion with who, seeing an article of this kind, and resting on this these events. Now, as to the action itself, to be sure under paragraph as the part in which, he alleges, the the circumstances which we have already heard, it was sting of the libel is to be found, should have rather startling to the public to be informed that a made those observations, which I shuddered to libel which appeared in a newspaper some nineteen or hear, with respect to the supposed dark insinuations twenty years before the am ion was brought, a par ty as t o his private character. Now, is it not quite evident could be rendered liable for damages to the extent of that the whole of the passage refers to the opinions 5001, and this surprise and astonishment at such a which were entertained of the Duke of Brunswick connexion with verdict breaks out at once in t his article , and justly so , re g ard to his political in for it was alarming undoubtedly to everybody connected with the revolution which terminated in his being with newspapers, it it could be supposed that he was deprived of the throne of his ancestors ? to be made liable at a distant period for the sins Why, gentlemen, if we are to deal with the subjects of of his predecessors. Even putting this in the history, take the case of any deposed monarch. Just most favourable way it can be imagined, that compare, for instance, the account Clarendon gives of a person bad gone to the office in 1848, and from Charles the First with that written by Mr. Macaulay in some old file of newspapers procured ono of his new production, and I think you will find expressions urchasing it in the shop, and then al- used in the latter histor y q uite as stron g the year 1 830, p leging it to be is recent publication. It was a libel at with regard to Charles the First as any the time, and is an account of an Insurrection in Bruns- used in reference to the Duke of Brunswick. wick, which led to the expulsion of the Duke of Bruns- The only difference between Charles the First and the wick in the year 1830 ; and a journalist might Duke of Brunswick that I can see is this—l cannot have been at the time of the original publi.' say the latter has lost his head, though he:has acted to cation of that article an infant, or certainly not day as his own counsel in this case.—(Laughter.) "Be in the slightest degree connected with the new: paper. sides, in speaking of the Duke of Brunswick as the Duke That is a very different thing to a recent publication, of Brunswick, the journalist is as much entitled to deal because in a recent publication Sou of course assume honestly and candidly with his character (as affecting that the libel is being scattered all over the country, the aceuraty of his deductions) as he has to deal with working its effects at the time; and which is very dif- the character of any other man similarly situated. ferent from one published so long ago as nineteen or We would undertake to aver with confidence that accu t wenty years, and now lying on dusty shelves,which would sations as bitter and damning to his personal character never have been published except for the party himself base been written, and printed, and published sending to the newspaper-office for it. Well, now this regarding Don Miguel. and yet be it said to the certainly was alarming and startling to the editors and honour of that royal personage, he has never de proprietors of a ll ne w s p a pers, and therefore they began graded himself so far as to come into a eourt of justice by alluding to that verdict, and to the extraordinary da- with actions for libel, seeking money as a salve to a t w h e e r m e t a e w h zdecl : l iunnd_erteitnahoss! circumstances, damaged and decomposing reputation. ' Now the Duke Met9:.Pg'reeltßhgwienhgie which verdict e n d, w ith, eespect of BeuidsWiek harps a great deal on the words used at en writs which , the end of the "wilified reputation," but they arnyet to undereiandu journalist is riot-at' liberty to use, are not half so strop as the expressions " damning ..„ g . . and more especially not •• to . use them la .this.c,ase with and 4comPosing:reputation;" AS' applied to Don Miguel,: respect to the alleged sale et the : news paper to Caoimix and yet - no 0110 ever imagined that that . personage woo •, • • , THE STN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, charged with any private vices, and was entitled to sue the printer in a court of justice for damages; and, look ing at the whole spirit of the article, and comparing passage with passege, as against the character of the Duke of Brunswick, I find that he bad perverted the meaning of it by resting on particular passages, and torturing them in to insinuations which I at once disdain, and I should be ashamed to defend a newspaper which either directly or indirectly made such insinuations. Well, Don Miguel never degraded himself by coming into a court of justice to complain of the strong articles, which, you will recollect, were frequntly introduced into the newspapers, reflecting severely on his character and conduct. We now come to another subject for consideration. " Since the revolution of February, the press of England, as a whole, has in no degree at tempted to slur over the heinous guilt of the exile of Claremont." Now, we have nothing to do with that illustrious . person, we have nothing whatever to do with the (pinions which were entertained with regard to his conduct, and which led to the unfortunate revolution that hurled him from his throne. I think myself it is generous to spare those who were driven in exile to seek a refuge here, bat nobody ever attributed to that illustrious individual any vices of a private character to which . the terms " heinous guilt" could be applied; and he might just as well have come into a court of justice as the Duke of' Brunswick to complain that, under those expressions, were hidden insinuations with regard to some dark and mysterious vices of which, it was at tempted to be said, ho was guilty. Now, gen tlemen, here are two persons who are repre sented in strong contrast with the Duke of Brunswick with respect to their conduct, in an article published at the same time, and very strongly expressed. But how published, and in what character? Why, against them as public men entirely; and therefore the contrast would be absurd. There would be no possible comparison between the two if the , paper meant to represent that they had not brought ac tions for the publication of libels; and therefore that the Duke of Brunswick ought not to have brought an action for a similar complaint. The expression of the old poet holds good here— "A just comparison still is Of things unjust and generous;" and it means nothing, saying the " heinous guilt" of the exile of Claremont, the " damaged and decomposed reputation" of Don Miguel, and the " vilified reputa tion" of the Duke of Brunswick, unless it is that both of them as public characters have been assailed in that capacity and relation only, and in no other way can you make this article intelligible. Now, gentlemen, I address myself almost with disgust to the latter part of the article, because the Duke of Brunswick endeavoured to excite a strong feeling and prejudice in your minds—a feeling and prejudice which I admit would be properly and justly excited supposing there was any foundation whatever for the suggestion made by the Duke of Brunswick; and he has endeavoured to torture and twist this into a direct in sinuation of his having been guilty of those crimes on which he has laid such stress. But what is " natural and sinister obscurity," saying nothing of the epithets in the article, ,though I must confess there is a certain style of writing which is thought very fine. A Learned Friend at the bar was generally only content with about six, and he was represented as having driven a substantive of six, but this alleged libel only drives a substantive and pair, his expressions being " damaged and decomposed reputation," and " natural and sinister obscurity." The Duke of Brunswick was hurled from his throne, as it was supposed, deservedly, and he still affects and styles himself to be the reign ing Sovereign of Brunswick. Now that is certainly not a position which becomes the Duke of Brunswick under the circumstances; it is not his natural position in society. His position in society is that of a monarch driven from his throne, and who has taken refuse in this country, and that is the obscurity to which the edi tor of the newspaper alludes; and I must confess I think it would be infinitely better if his Highness the ex-Duke of Brunswick would confine himself to the ob scurity of his own domestic life, for he has ceased to be a sovereign and is a subject of this country—it would be infinitely better if he would confine himself to that particularly contracted circle, instead of coming into a court of justice time after time, not choosing to resort to the assistance of those who are accustomed to courts of justice, but either indulging in some petty vanity or gratifying some malicious feeling, in order to make a court of jus tice a vehicle for venting every description of slander against the absent and dead which he thinks proper to bring together for the purpose of gratifying his own vindictive feelings. Gentlemen, I do trust you will not take an erroneous view of this article, and in order that you should not do so, I have endeavoured to discharge my duty by carrying you, step by step, over every passage of it; not like the Duke of Brunswick, putting an unfair and improper construction on the article, by selecting insulated passages, and even in some instances single expressions. With regard to the observation which the Duke of Brunswick has most irrelevantly introduced, I took the liberty of making a remark in the course of the inquiry, that irrelevant observations were not always harmless. The Duke of Brunswick was allowed to allude to the recent event connected with the visit of General Haynau to this country. Now, all I say on the subject is, that if it was not competent to public journalists— and I believe all expressed themselves in strong terms of reprobation of the conduct of the Ge neral—that if it was not competent to them to so express themselves, the liberty of the press must be considered at an end; but the violent acts of those persons who might have been stimulated by the knowledge which they acquired through the columns of the newspapers of the conduct of those gentlemen,lare not to be ascribed to the newspapers themselves. Gentle men, if I can establish to your satisfaction that this article reflects solely on the political character of the Duke of Brunswick, I shall then, most unquestionably, feel that I am entitled to demand from you, under his Lordship's direction, a verdict for the defendant. On the other hand, if his Lordship should be of opinion that it is libellous to that extent as to give you cognizance of it, to enable you to take it into your consideration to estimate and value it, why, then I trust you will not forget that his Highness the ex- Duke of Brunswick has already received from the hands of a former jury in respect of this identical article full reparation in damages, because whatever the Duke of Brunswick may think as to the amount of that verdict, you cannot believe that a jury on their oaths would not endeavour to do justice between the parties. Mr. JusticeErle is of opinion that the result of another trial ought not to be a guide to this jury, observing that though it may be the ground of an ap plication in another place, the verdict must not weigh with you in deciding on your verdict on the present occa sion. Therefore, I bow immediately to the sugges tion of his Lordship ; but I do trust, seeing the position in which the defendant is placed, that you will carefully judge of the whole of this article, and, viewing it by the light which is reflected by passage on passage, see whether it does refer to anything else but the public character of the Duke of Brunswick; and if only on his public character, then I consider I am entitled to say you ought to pronounce your verdict in favour of the defendant. Mr. Justice MILE then proceeded to sum up the oai case to the jury. He fB said Brunswick this was against n a s n t t a h c e t i de fendant, complaining o f a lib e l on hi s c h aracter; an d he (Mr. Justice Erle) might s t ate to t h em t h a t th e general ' presentby his Highness the Duke rule of law in respect to libels was that any publication intended to expose another to hatred, or contempt, or ridicale was a libellous publication, and, if such, would render the author of it liable to damages, such damages as in the opinion of the jury would compensate the party injured, unless that publication was brought within some of those exceptions which limited the general proposi tion. He said, generally, that which tended to expose a man to hatred, contempt, or ridicule was libellous; generally that was the rule, but it was subject to several limitations, and, among those limitations, was the one which had been adverted to by the Learned Counsel for the defendant, and was the one to which the attention of the jury was to be directed. By our law full and free comment on the public characters of those who held public situations was permitted, if, in the opi nion of a jury, the party making those com ments believed them to be well founded, and made them in the spirit of fairness, and was not actuated by private malice. With that limitation to the exercise o the freedom of the press—that which gave a wholesome public opinion —there was a protection for comments that were made in that spirit ; but then the party who claimed that protection must satisfy the jury that he was not actuated by private malice in making and pub lishing statements respecting another, being the gratifi cation of any similar feeling; and that the general rule of law applicable to this matter, he said that the comments that were permitted were full and free. They might vex and expose a man to ridicule and contempt, but, if made in the spirit be had mentioned, they were protected, and the party making them was entitled to a verdict at the bands of the jury. But the Learned Counsel for the defendant had asked whether he (Mr. Justice Erle) would lay that down as a matter of law, whether the party who bad made comments of that na ture was to be taken out of the protection of the law by the-decision of the jury? He (Mr. Justice Erle) was not of that opinion, because the proposition, such as he had laid it down, must always be guarded by the intervention of a jury; and the jury should say whether the party who claimed that protection had been actuated by a spirit of fairness, or by private malice. That being so, the nature of the libel had been carefully brought within the attention of the jury, and he (Mr. Justice Erle) had said earlier in the day, that be thought it highly requisite, as a matter of justice towards the present defendant, that they should exclude from their attention, at present, the language that had been read to them from the Weekly Dispatch of Sept., 1830, and several years subsequently to that time, unless they should be of opinion that that lan guage was adopted and in a manner repeated by the pre sent defendant. Besides, the jury would observe that the libel now complained of arose out of an action against the proprietor of the Weekly Dispatch, for a libel published so long ago as 1830, and unless that had been adopted or repeated by the present defendant, that libel was a matter for which the defendant was not an swerable. And in respect to the comments made by the editor of the Dispatch, which had been read by the plain tiff, he (Mr. Justice Erle) should observe that those comments appeared to him to relate mainly to the pub lic conduct of a person holding a high political office — they related mainly to the revolution that had taken place in the state of Brunswick, and they stated that which had been reported to the editor of that paper, for perhaps it might not be right to say they stated what had been invented by the editor; it was stated as a matter of public report, and although fhey.contained a charge affecang painfully the character of the reigning Sovereign of two state, DECEMBER 7, 1850. rity," was ;it , t printed in larger type than the rest, as hail been stated by the Duke of Brunswick. His LORDSHIP thanked the Foreman for making that discovery, which the defective light had renducd him unable to perceive for himself'. The jury, having expressed a wish to retire, they were permitted to do so, and, being absent for about twenty minutes, returned into ,court with a VERDICT FOR TUE DEFENDANT. The announcement calk d forth audible expressions of applause in the court, which was crowded to excess throughout the day. The trial lasted upwards of five hours. pleased to grant to his Catholic children in England—it shocal undoubtedly be a thy of rejoicing and thanksgiv ing; no because any one given individual has heed raised to dignity, or distinguished by honours which none is more conscious than himself how little he deserves, but be cause God has again restored here to us a chair, a seat, in which Catholic doctrine, such as recognised by the whole Catholic Church, is taught; and though through the Divine mercy that chair of Catholic tradition which formerly had a link added to it by each successive pre late in every see in this country had not been altogether broken among us—though in the humbler ministrations of the pastors o f God's dispersed flock unity of faith and ot discipline had been inviolably preserved — though during that interval of 300 years the commu nion of Catholies in this country with their supreme head and with the bishops of the Church has been in terrupted, yet surely we must feel that it is a con solation to us and a privilege to be again put on the same footing on which the churches of our Catholic neigh bours are—a position in which the bishop acts, not merely by a simple delegated authority, but himself holds a see in which he is directly authorised to teach. Then, what consequences flow from this? As far as I am concerndd, I feel that I have this day taken upon myself a solemn engagement before the altar of God— cli engagement, not which careadd strength to my pre vious convictions, but which may add more solemnity to them in the face of the Church—an engagement not to sacrifice or to compromise any the smnllest tittle of the fizitle the glorious faith, el the Universal Catholic Church; but, as I have received it, so to hand it down to him whom it may please Almighty God to appoint as my successor, so as to be able to say, " I have preserved the faith"—that it has not been allowed to be weakened or perverted during the time that it has been in my keeping —that I have not withdrawn from you anything com mitted to my charge, anything that is useful or profitable towards your eternal salvation; but endeavour, however imperfectly, still with all zeal, to keep together the sheep of God's pasture, and to exert myself to the very utmost, by every legitimate and holy means in my power, to propagate that faith, to extend the tabernacles of God's true abode, and to increase the sheepfold of the Son of God, that it may take in many who, though not of this fold, do wish to join the communion of his own true Catholic Church. Then on your side, dearly beloved brethren, you hereby enter into a compact with me not to listen to evil doctrines—not that I accuse you, for of your docility and teachableness I, surely, have no cause to complain. But that you will aid and support me by your prayers, by yoar supplications day by day, to the Throne of Mercy, that God will bless, will confirm, will maintain the work that He has begun, and that the faith may not be shaken by any efforts of men, and that it may not be weakened by any individual imperfection of the individual chosen; but that, protected by the right hand of God, it may go on brightly and calmly, in meek and patient bearing ; but still, in gradual and certain progression, even to the end. Pray to Almighty God, especially, that he may preserve in our hearts a deter mination to be true to the doctrines and precepts of our Holy Church, not by words only, but far more by ex ample, to conserve and maintain that precept of our re ligion which teaches us to be submissive, and docile, and obedient, and affectionately attached and loyal to those powers which God, in his goodness and wisdom, has placed over us—that your religion makes you worthy and active members of everything that is good in society, attached to all that is sound and good in every part of the constitution of your coun try; that it makes you friendly, kind, and charit able to your fellow-men, without distinction of creed or politics; and that it makes you able to bear with misunderstanding and misrepresentation, and so weaned as to wait till God's appointed time. You, when op pressed or persecuted, show that your religion makes you good and virtuous. You, members of every family with which you are connected in your own or more strict communion, show charity to all—show them that your religion calls on you to be not only good men and honest, but serious, devout, holy ; and to give an example of every good gift, however difficult it may appear in the eyes of men. That is the resolution, dearly beloved brethren, which I implore you to make this day; and, with God's blessing on his flock, we may hope that from this day forward there will be a new race run in faith and in truth, in justice and in charity—a race in which the goal may be won by us all; and, recollecting this duty, and the solemnity imposed upon us, we may assure ourselves that God will give us our reward in the enjoyment of being hereafter around him in happiness and in the inexhaustible blessing of glory. His Eminence then pronounced a benediction on the congregation; after which he descended from the pulpit, and, attended by the officiating priests, resumed his posi tion on the throne erected on the right of the altar. The mass having been celebrated, his Eminence pro ceeded to the sacristy, where he addressed the assembled clergymen: ho exhorted them to be diligent in the dis charge of their spiritual duties; and impressed upon them the propriety of bearing with patience all trials, however severe, but more particularly at this important period, when men's passions got the better of their rea son, and so led them into unchristian feeling against the Catholic body. His Eminence then dined with twenty of the principal clergy, the largest number the refectory was capable of accommodating, and subsequently gave a grand seine at the episcopal residence in Golden-square. It remains to be added that the strictest order and de corum prevailed throughout. "ENTHRONIZATION"ofCARDINAL WISEMAN. The ceremonial, prescribed by the Roman Catholic Church for the induction of an Archbishop to his see, was performed at the church of St. George's, Southwark, yesterday, with a rather uncommon solemnity, that day being the feast of St. Nicholas, the patron saint of his Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop. Consider ing the great excitement which prevails on the subject of Cardinal Wiseman's installation, it might have been expected that some indications of that excitement would have been presented to our view as we approached the scene of the ceremonial. But the reverie was the fact. The precincts of the building wore the usual aspect of Sabbath tranquillity, and the exterior calm was re flected by the most stilly and decorous silence inside doors. _ _ The sombre character of St. George's derived addi tional dimness from one of the foggiest mornings of the winter season. Nor was the artificial lustre, that gorgeous accessory to the service of the Roman Catholic Church, much resorted to in aid of the feeble light which glim mered through the Gothic windows of St. George's. For half an hour after we occupied our seat nothing preparatory was observable ; the organ was hushed and the choir silent; but about half-past eleven the pre parations were observable in every part of the edifice. An acolyte came in this direction with a thurifer. Another carried a crucifix to the spot where the procession was to form. A chalice was trans ferred from one altar to another by a third. At length the order for forming the procession was given by the tolling of a bell, and the at tendant clergy of the new " archdiocese" formed into regular order at a summons. The Cardinal himself, robed in scarlet and white, and wearing a small scarlet cap, proceeded from she sacristy, his flowing train borne by two train bearers. After a brief pause—during which the Cardinal Archbishop was being robed in the alb, the stole, the anna, and the girdle, and afterwards solemnly invested with the insignia of his archiepiscopal dignity (all of which ceremonies took place in the open air, outside St. George's Cathedral) —the choir commenced chaunting the Hallelujah chorus, from Beethoven's " Mount of Olives," and presently the procession was observed to move up the nave in the direction of the central altar. Fore most was borne the cross, with lighted candles on either side. Then came the Roman Catholic clergy subject to the new Archdiocesan's jusisdiction two by two, habited according to their respective ranks and orders. The peculiarity of the Oratorian costume was striking. At length the Cardinal him self appeared, wearing a gorgeous mitre and pallium. A graceful canopy, fringed with silk and gold, was borne over his path by, as we were informed, the " converts " exclusively. There were at least two hundred between the secular clergy and the various religious orders in the procession. Lastly came the Very Rev. Dr. Doyle, robed in the usual sacrificial vestments, preceded by the Very Rev. Dr. Cox, the Rev. Mr. Cotter, and the Rev. Mr. Daniel, as masters of the ceremony, deacon, and sub-deacon. Having reached the screen, which fronts the sanctuary, the Cardinal was led into a small compart ment at the left of the principal altar, called the Chapel of the Blessed Eucharist, whence, after a brief interval, the procession moved within the sanctuary, Cardinal Wiseman kneeling at the foot of the altar, and the celebrant clergyman as cending its' steps—assisted by the deacon and cub deacon. The customary form of prayer having been read, the mitre, which bad been exchanged for a scarlet cap a short time before, was for mally placed upon the head of the new Archbishop, whilst the crosier, emblematic of his authority, was also placed in his hands. He was then conducted to the archiepiscopal chair, at the foot of which the whole body of the clergy made the usual obeisance — kissing the Cardinal's ring in recognition of his spiritual authority. The solemnities of High Mass were then proceeded with ; after which the bull was publicly read, in virtue of which Car dinal Wiseman assumes the archiepiscopal jurisdic tion of Westminster. The proceedings closed with the presentation of an address to the new " Archbishop " and an exhortation, in which ho impressed upon his clergy the duties and obligations incidental to their im portant mission. The mass was Ilayde'e, and per formed by the choir in the most impressive style. After the intonation of the Gospel was concluded, the Cardinal then ascended the pulpit, the mitre on his head and the crozier in his hand; the train was held by the Rsv. F. Searle and the Rev. G. Wenham, the deacons, who remained by his side in the pulpit. His Eminence addressed the audience nearly as fol lows:—In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is not necessary, my dearly beloved brethren, that I should detain you long in explaining the meaning and the purpose of that sacred ceremony of which you have this day been a witness. It is one so natural, so obvious, that it may be said not to be, strictly speaking, of an ecclesiastical character. It is only employed in the more solemn forms which the Church always uses—it is a customary and almost a spontaneous mode of giving expression and solemnity to any public appointment. You are aware that in this city, that in every commonwealth, those who receive any post requiring the public exercise of functions are not merely appointed thereto by the word of the Sove reign, or of whomsoever has the power of so appoint ing, but there is some public ceremony or form gone through whereby they are said to be installed in their new office—that is to say, that the public are thereby made acquainted that from that mo ment forward they enter into the actual ex ercise of those duties and the enjoyment of those privi leges of which they were before fully possessed. For let it not be understood, dear brethren, that when a bishop takes possession for the first time of his see, or of his cathedral, that he becomes by that act invested with jurisdiction, or authority, or power, or prerogative of any sort. That must come from a superior source. That must be bestowed upon him by a competent autho rity. This is only a proclaiming to the faithful, to the clergy and flock, that he has come publicly to discharge the duties of his office. It has bwen my happiness to day, solemnly and in the presence of God's altar, to take possession of that seat, of dignity indeed, but of heavy responsibility, in which it has pleased the supreme power of the Church to place me. I will, therefore, rather content myself with explaining what more particularly is the meaning of this function when employed in the Catholic Church. From its very commencement it has been usual to associate the idea of the Episcopal seat, as it is called in the Catholic ritual, with the exer cise of episcopal jurisdiction and the discharge of ponti fical duties. When we descend into the very catacombs themselves, we are delighted, though perhaps somewhat surprised, to find, as has been the case in some of the most recent discoveries, in front of the altar, and above the very tombs of marble in one of those solemn chapels which were made for the public worship of the Chris tians in the time of persecution, a marble-fixed throne or seat facing the people, so that he who presided, seated there, would instruct the humbler crowds of the perse cuted followers of Christ who gathered round him in that the first abode of sublime Christian truth. And no sooner had the Christians emerged from those their hiding places, and either taken possession of the temples of the heathens, or had built for themselves those basilicas which yet remain as a monument of early Chriptian zeal, than pursuing as far as they could the example of their predecessors, they placed the episcopal throne at the very extremity of the church, a fixed, a stable, immo vable, well-built up throne, round which the presbyters sat, and before which the altar stood; so that by the stability of that seat, and the permanency of the session, the everlasting unity and sameness of the doctrines that were there to be taught might be fully and completely symbolised; and so those seats and sees of the ancient Bishops of Rome preserved their character. They still remain in the place in which they were occupied by the venerated Pontiffs in early ages, and we see even that the piety of the faithful has since sculptured upon them the very homilies which they recited to their flocks. Thus, then, my brethren, came the idea of the Pontifical chair or seat to be associated with the dis charge of the great office of a bishop—that of teaching sound doctrine to his flock. And that word which at first signified only that chair in which he sat, came by degrees to be synonymous with the extent of his juris diction. Hence the " see" of a bishop is the same as his " seat" in our own language, as it is in the Latin and other foreign languages, in which the throne or chair of a bishop is expressed by the same words as the see or diocese over which he has jurisdiction; hence that word intimates that a bishop's taking possession of his seat, see, or throne, was the same as to say that he had taken possession of the entire diocese committed to his care. And, in fact, my brethren, the connexion between being seated on the chair and the having authority to teach is so natural and obvious that our beloved Redeemer him self was pleased to make use of it, stud to employ it in a manner that affords us great instruction; for at the time that He was reproving the corrupt practices of the rulers of Israel He was pleased to say to his followers, " On the chair of Moses the scribes have sat; whatever .; therefore, they shall tell you to do, that do." In other words, " By the fact of their being in possession of that seat of authority which has been held in the synagogue from the time of Moses, they have acquired a right to your obedience whenever they impose on you religious commands;" though, he was obliged to add the caution, that their works his followers were not to imitate. Then, the taking possession of the chair implied the taking charge of that deposit of faith—of those truths—which each bishop had received from his predecessor, and which he was bound to hand down unimpaired. Hence, the foundation of a church, by the constitution of a new chair, or see, became an object of such veneration as to lead to the establishment of festivals to preserve its memory, for the Church yet commemo rates the establishment of the two great sees of Antioch and Rome, both being founded by the same saint, the Prince of the Apostles; and in the Catholic Church, to this day the chairs of St. Peter at Antioch and Rome are to be found in the calendar as days of solemn obser vance. We know that every church commemorated by yearly festival the original establishment of an episcopal see, and the great St. Augustine tells us that one church solemnised the establishme n t o f an episcopal see in another or neighbouring church. Then, my brethren, when here we have these two combined, when not only the chair is taken possession of this day in this church, but the first act of that new ecclesiastical jurisdiction is solemnly performed, which our holy Father has been COURT CIRCULAR. WINDSOR, DEC. 6. The Queen and his Royal Highness Prince Albert took their usual early morning walk. The Royal Family took walking and pony exercise in the Slopes. Her Majesty rode out on horseback this forenoon in Windsor-park, accompanied by his Royal High ness Prince Albert. Colonel Bouverie was in attendance on the Queen and Prince. The Rev. Henry Howard (Rector), Lord Foley, and the Hon. Col. Henry Fitzroy (Churchwardens), and Mr. T. B. Chappell (Vestry Clerk), had an inter view with Sir George Grey yesterday, at the Home office, and delivered to the Right Hon. Baronet a loyal address on the recent Papal aggression, from the Rector, Churchwardens, Vestrymen, and other inhabitants of the parish of St. George, Hanover square, for presentation to the Queen's Most Excel lent Majesty. To the address were attached the sig natures of the Rector, the Churchwardens, 80 Vestry men, and 21,342 inhabitants of the said parish. Mr. Thomson! Hankey, jun., had anlinterview with Earl Grey yesterday, at the Colonial-office. Mr. Edward Wallerstein, Consul-General for the Republic of Guatemala, had an interview with Vis count Palmerston yesterday, at the Foreign-office. The Privy Council appointed to be held on Tues day, the 10th inst., has been postponed until Thurs day, the 12th inst., at Windsor Castle. The Right Hon. M. T. Baines, President of the Poor-law Commissioners, had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday. Mr. John Wood, Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue, had an interview with the Right Hon. Baronet on Thursday, at his official residence in Downing-street. ExFLOSION OF GAS AT THE CHARTERED GAS. WouKs, HORSEFERBY-ROAD, WESTMDISTER.—This morn ing, between one and two o'clock, an alarming explosion took place at the Chartered Gas-Works, in the Horseferry-road, Westminster. The cause of the disaster is unknown. The explosion was terrific, and carried away a portion of the purifying-house. The engines were promptly on the spot from the different stations, but it was unnecessary for then to be used, as the workmen immediately cut off all communi cation with the gas-meters, or the damage might have been exceedingly great. DEATH OF MR. ROBERT GrILFILLAN.—This gen tleman, known to the public as the author of several beau tiful songs in the Scotch dialect, and some pieces of poetry of considerable merit, we regret to say, died suddenly yester day forenoon. He appeared to be in his usual health in the morning, and was in attendance in his office as collector for the Commissioners of police at Leith, when he fell down in a fit of apoplexy. Medical aid was immediately procured, but he never rallied, and was conveyed to his house, in Her mitage-place, where ho died. He was possessed of man amiable qualities, was good-natured even to a fault, and wiDI be much regretted by a large circle of friends. —Edinburgh Courant, Thursday. DEATH OF THE MARCIIIONESS CORNwALLIS. This noble and venerable lady, whoaa demise we announced yesterday, at her mansion iu Park-crescent, in her 74th year, was fourth daughter of Alexander, fourth Duke of Gordon, and sister to the late Duke, and also to the late Duchess of Richmond, the present Dowager Duchess of Bedford, and the late Duchess of Manchester. Her Ladyship married Charles, second Marquis Cornwallis, 17th April, 1797, who did 9th August, 1823. Her Ladyship has left issue, five daughters— namely, the Countess of St. Germans, Lady Braybrooke, Lady Mary Rosse, and the Ladies Louise and Elizabeth Corn wallis. GLASGOW.—DEATH OF MR. FAWCETT.—We re gret to state that this gentleman, who, it will be remembered, took a leading part in the discussions connected with the affairs of the Caledonian Railway Company, died oe Tues day morning, in the Queen's Hotel, George-square, after an illness of three weeks. The cause of death was inflamma tion of the chest. The deceased, we understand, was in Glasgow on the business of the Caledonian Company, when he was overtaken by his last illness. —North British Mail. FUNERAL OF LADY JOHN HAY.—DEVONPORT, DEC. s.—The remains of the late lamented Lady John Hay were taken from the dockyard early this morning, and con veyed by the 6.45 train, and will arrive at Leamington this evening. Commodore Lord John hay went on leave of ab sence this morning. His flag will be struck on board the St. George this evening. DINNER TO CHARLES COWAN, ESQ., M.P.—Mr. Cowan, M.P. for the city of Edinburgh, was entertained at dinner in the Waterloo Hotel, on Wednesday afternoon, by a large and influential body of the publishers and paper makers. of that city and neighbourhood, in order to testify their sense of his services in Parliament and otherwise, in forwarding the movement for the repeal of the Excise duty on paper. There were about fifty gentlemen present. Robert Chambers, Esq., was in the chair, supported on the right by Mr. Cowan, and on the left by the Lord Provost. Tho mas J. Boyd, Esq., acted :as croupier. Apologies we r e received from various gentlemen, who expressed their entire concur rence in the object of the meeting, but from various causal were unavoidably absent. ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL.—The Prebendal Stall of Holborn, in this cathedral, has become vacant by the death of the Rev. H. Hendley Notts, M.A., rector of South Hackney. It is in the gift of the Bishop of London. The Rev. W. C. F. Webber, M.A., student of Christ Church, Ox ford, and perpetual curate of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, has been elected to a minor canonry in the cathedral, rendered vacant by the promotion of the Rev. J. T. Bennett, M.A., to the office of sub-dean. ARCHDEACON MANNING. It is understood that Mr. Manning is preparing for a j ourney to Jerusalem, ther he will be accompanied by Ir. Dodsworth, and'. other* —Church and State Gazette. J ;U..- v. 6. fore lir' ING• :runefo, published Fa case ill ly rer r Stb f e w dsl ough t o bi ° rover , - dari fin e ,o coo— ocor $, a to ow° he (to itis 64l Ole 9 olO irj ,l r ce Ea rsjr° those matters were all brought fore ard as resulting out of the revolution that had taken place there, end were in the nature of comments on the public character of a per son holding a high political situation, end which had affected the public interest. The subject was introduced entirely with reference to the revolution in the state of Brunswick; and in reference to that revolution a great many matters were stated highly disparaging to the subject of them. It was for the jury to consider whether they fell within the rule of law to which be had ad verted, and in the opinion of the jury at the trial of that action they did not fall within that protection, because the verdict was for his Highness the present plaintiff. They did not fall within that protection, although they might have alluded to the revo l u ti on as a matter of puhlicopinion; but that was the question between the editor of the Weekly Dispatch and the present plaintiff, and that action being tried in 1849, at all events 19 years after the publication of the original libel, and a verdict having been given on that oc cas i on f or t h e present pl a i nti ff, the article to which the attention of the jury had been drawn in the present action was the result of that ver dict. As that action had been r ea d t o t h em b ot h b y t h e plaintiff, the officer of the court, and by the Learned Counsel for the defendant, he (Mr. Justice Erie) did not propose to read that article to the jury again. The paper could bo handed to them, and if they chose it could be examined by them. But the main spirit and drift of the article he would state to them; and he would draw their attention to some of those passages which had been read by the plaintiff. Now, the general spirit of the article had respect to the action which had been brought by the Duke of Brunswick against the proprietor of the Weekly Dispatch, after the lapse of so long an interval after the publication of the original libel. There was not a word either in the spirit of praise or blame said with respect to any of the political exiles who had taken refuge in this kingdom. The article written by the editor of this journal had respect to a party holding a high public station, and towards whom much public attention had been drawn. Certainly, that was a question that would deeply interest the freedom of the public press, and the drift of the article all the way through had reference to one particular event, that after so long a time a journal should be made liable for a large amount of damages for remarks that had been made on the political character of a person holding a high station, in which the public had an inte rest. That being the drift of the article, it stated that a verdict had been obtained, and it accompanied that statement with an expectation on the part of the editor of this paper that that verdict would be set aside, be cause it had been obtained on evidence, which he thought insufficient, and that a part of the libel had been left out. It should be also taken into consideration that the pre sent defendant was in a manner united in interest with the owner of the Weekly Dispatch. Mr. Harmer was the proprietor of the Weekly Dispatch, and answerable for the articles in question, and he stood in relation of mort gagee of this paper, the defendant being the mortgagor; and in those respects the two papers might be identical. But no inference would be drawn against the defendant on that ground; it only accounted for the defendant having a personal knowledge of what had been done in the action which had just been tried, and stating the grounds on which the witnesses were to be impeached, and on which the application for a new trial was to be made. The article was directed throughout to the defence of journalism against the party by whom that verdict had been obtained. The subject having been intro duced, the writer dwelt on the universal reception which this country afforded to those who had been politically unfortunate, whether unfortunate without blame to themselves, or unfortunate in their political prospects by reason of their misconduct. It spoke of that universal reception, and its remarks were entirely general. It spoke of persons taking refuge in this kingdom on the ground of political difficulties, some of whom commanded the public sympathy, and some against whom there was a great deal of indignation; and then it adverted to the Duke of Brunswick as being remarkable for having been the first to repay that national generosity by bringing an action against a journalist for certain comments made upon him. The editor of the article in question drew a marked distinction between attacks made on the cha racter of a private individual and observations founded on his public conduct, in which the public had an in terest. At least, he said, "in such a case as that of the ex-Duke of Brunswick, the veracity of the old axiom— ' the greater the truth the greater the libel'—becomes more than ever and most painfully perceptible. Since the first instant of his expulsion from the dominions of his ancestors the public mind of England has not hesitated as to the calendar upon which should be in scribed the name of this personage, whether among the political victims, or among the political criminals." Now, the jury would see how far the editor of this paper had adopted all the charges contained in the articles pub lished by the Weekly Dispatch, by saying of the Duke of Brunswick, " the greater the truth the greater the libel became painfully perceptible." He (Mr. Justice Erle) was not aware that in the article in question the editor of The Sun had adopted all that had been con tained in the Weekly Dispatch ; he (Mr. Justice Erle) was of opinion that it contained a statement by the pre sent editor that in his judgment there were matters that might be alleged against the Duke of Brunswick, so far as he knew, of a political and public nature, which would tend to bring him into contempt, hatred, and ridi cule, but which might be perfectly true, though he trusted to the contrary, and yet might render the editor stating them liable to an action. He (lair. Justice Erle) did not think that any person was attacked specifically in all these charges which had been read to the jury. The article went on to say that the public mind of Eng land had not hesitated as to the calendar upon which should be inscribed the name of this personage—whe ther among the political victims or among the political criminals. The jury would observe the fre quent use of the word " political," and that it was the intention of the writer to describe the plaintiff either as a political victim or a political criminal. The article did not therefore, so far, contain any charge beyond what was merely political. Again, after mentioning the persons on whom journalists had made very strong comments, it said —h Let this parson rest assured of one thing, namely, that the judgment of history will in no respect be favourably affected either by the verdict of the jury in the Court of Queen's Bench or by the 5004 damages. In his instance the decision of history has been perceptibly anticipated by the loud and unanimous opinion of his contemporaries." Again, that was asserting of him that which had reference to his political character, and that was a matter of history. The writer said, "in his instance, the decision of history had been perceptibly anticipated by the loud and unanimous opinions of his contemporaries." Then what followed was what the Duke said was beyond a fair commentary, as charging him with an unnatural crime, which he said was the meaning of that portion of the article, and upon that point the jury would be called on to give a decision :—" That opus h ion is dark and damnatory—so dark and damnatorf as to defy the purifying influence of a favourable verdict, accompanied by*heavy damages—by damages so large as to have created quite a sensation in the court: by their enormity. His Highness has, consequently, but little reason to congratulate himself upon his more than questionable success on Tuesday—especially seeing that the verdict is one obtained through evidence so rotten and fraudu lent as to promise its ultimate reversal. Unless he may be solicitous to proceed as upon a rather profitable specula tion is his attacks upon the liberty of journalism, we would suggest to the ex-Duke of Brunswick the propriety of withdrawing into his own natural and sinister obscurity. For two reasons this would be advisable—first, because he will find it little short of an impossibility to vilify still more his already sufficiently vilified reputation; and, secondly, because the effort would be as futile as ablutions to an Ethiopian." He (Mr. Justice Erle) should state to the jury that the whole of the article would be capable of application to the ex-Duke of Brunswick in relation to his political conduct, in which the public in a manner had an interest from the high posi tion which he held, unless the Duke of Brunswick was correct in putting the meaning which ho did on the sen tence he (Mr. Justice Erle) had just read. His own opinion was that, on hearing the sound of these words, probably none of the jury would attach any particular meaning to them more than the words would fairly bear, viz.—Retire into your ",own natural and sinister obscurity," and not come before the public and raise a discussion respecting the revolution in Bruns% ick,— that was the idea which they suggested. The meaning of the written words would still be the same. But a grave ‘, barge was made against the present defendant for hismode of printing those words. It was said the word " natural" was printed in italic type, and the word "own" in larger type than the rest; and the Duke of Brunswick suggested that by the words his " own natural obscurity" to printed was meant that he should retire into his unnatural obscurity, and that their further meaning was that he was a person addicted to unnatural practices, which was what the editor of the paper in tended to convey. He (Mr. Justice Erie) could only say that the sound of those words was far from calling up such ideas in his mind. The jury, however, were to try that record on the evidence that was before them, and they were to judge whether on that evidence they were led to the conclusion that the defendant intended by the italics, and that change in the size of the typo, to charge that the Duke of Brunswick was a person ad dicted to unnatural practices, for that was the allega tion in respect to which their opinion was to be taken. If that was the meaning, of course it would be a very aggravated libel; but they had heard the meaning which the Learned Counsel for the defendant had suggested the words were capable of ; and if there was a doubt of their meaning, unless it could be made out t o their satis faciton that that aggravated meaning was intended, the present defendant ought not to be made answerable for it. It was, therefore, for the jury to decide between the observations made in this matter. If there was an attack on his private character, in which the public had no in terest, the plaintiff would be entitl e d to dama g es ; but if they thought the plaintiff had no right to put that con struction upon that part of the article,. and if the expla nation given by the counsel for the defendant was justi fied, they would take the rest of the article into their consideration, and say whether it fell within the protec tion which he (Mr. Justice Eric) had endeavoured to de scribe to them, taking into mind the ground of the former action, and into their account, also, the general drift and specific language of this article. If they thought it was taken, out of the protection to which it might be prima facie entitled, either on the ground of the attack being on the private character of the plaintiff in a very grave matter, or of comments beyond what ought to be fairly made, and :which were actuated by private malice, it would be for the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff, with such an amount of damages as they might think sufficient to compensate him. If, on the other hand, that was not made out to their satisfaction, and if they thought it fell within the protection to which ho had alluded, they would find a verdict for the defendant. The Learned Judge then handed the jury a copy of the paper containing the alleged libel. The Foreman, who had examined the paper, with the rest of his brother jurors, for a few moments, called the attention of his Lordship to the fact, that the word " own," preceding the words "natural and sinister obscu-