Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-12-15 00:00:00

against the personal conduct and character of an individual,
considering, too, the time,at which it was written, and the
evident spirit in which it was written—why, then, I
would say that it is your duty to say se, and if you do net
say so, you—who are the guardians of the liberty of the
press, as it is celled—you will bring yourselves, and
everybody who lives iu this town, into the danger of
constant and recurring annoyance. Gentlemen, you must
know from the opinions which Mr. Gladstone holds, that
of nll men he would be the last to interfere with the liberty
of the press. But to say thet, because a man thinks it his
ditty to protect himself, and protect his neWebours, and
protect everybody living here, by taking notice of that
which is libellous, that such a step can be celled, in any
sense, an attack upon the liberty of the press, is perfectly
iele and monstrous. The next thief or criminal sent from
this bar convicted of felony, may just as well say you have
attacked the libeny of the subjett. The liberty of
the press nobody in Engleud wild ever attack.
The liberty of the press nobely in England
will ever deny. But the only check upon the license of
the press is an appeal to a jury, end you are now
placed in the rEeTensible position of being guar-
dians oft the liberty of the press, to see that
that liberty shall not be disgraced by license. Now,
Gentlemen, I gall proceed to reed to you the libel of which
we complain, which was rubliehed by the defeed3nt in hi 3
newspaper of the lOch of last October. I do not know
whether any of you are acquainted with this newspe6er.
It is a paper called the _Liverpool Ireia.V. I confess, foe
coy own part, that long a time as I am acquainted with
Liverpool, I never saw it before, but I believe it is a paper
having a certain circulation, and I think, from what you
will observe in the article I am now about to read to you,
it will be quite deer that the circulation of this paper is
confined to, or principally intended for, persons v 100 hold
very strong opinions in pelitical matten, and who are
popularly called " Oran,getnen," in politics and in religion.
Mr. Brett then read the article in question, which was as
follows 7

the time, by the men who were called Sepoys. I have
already asked you whether any one of you would not have
considered, that no more deadly insult could b 3 offered
to him at the time, than to be likened to those people. I
ask you whether if any man stood before you, and appl-ed
that term to you, so insulting at that time, you would not
have felled that man to the ground, and have been justified
in the eyes of every one of your countrymen ? I ask you,
therefore, to consider whether this was merely a fair com-
ment upon the public character of a man, or whether it
was not as gross an insult ae ever was deliberately and
calmly written by a man in his closet, without the smallest
provocation, and whether it had not a tendency to bring
Mr. Robertson Gladstone into the hatred and contempt of
every one of his fello eatownsaten ? What was there in
the conduct of Mr. Gladstone, or in the observations which
he use I in the Town Colleen, that could justify any one in
writing this article ? You will find that the article is
headed —"Mr. Roberteon Glad.stene's religion and loyalty."
Do not suppcso that the writer of the article was a person
carried away by the excitement of passion. He is a man
conducting a newspaper for a particular class of persons,
and eciaing the opportunity of Mr. Gladstone having made
a certain remark with regard to the Romer' Catholics, he
wrote an article insulting to Mr. Robertson Gladstone,
deliberately and calmly in his chamber, for the mere pur-
pose of panderiaa to the paesione, of the sect of persona to
whom he sells his newspaper. I ask any one of you to
think of it in his own mind, and say whether he could have
any doubt that the defendant deliberately and dispassion-
ately wrote these insulting expres,ione for the mere purpose
of increasing the circulation of his newspaper among the
sect for whom he writes ? If you believe that the phrases
to which I have called your attention passed every bound
of fair comment upon the political or public acts and conduct
of Mr. Gladstone—if you believe that they were designed
as a personal insult —if you believe (and I think you cannot
doubt) that they had a tendency to bring Mr. Robertson
Gladstone into the contempt and hatred of his fellow-towns-
men, I ask you then whether it is not your plain and simple
duty to say that, in your judgment, this is a gross and
infamous libel ? Gentlemen, you are the guardians of the
liberty of the press. The liberty of the press is not attacked
here, but the gross and scandalous licence of the press is
sought to ba brought under the control of a jury. I leave
it, therefore, in your hands simply to say whether,
in your judgment, this article was calculatel to bring
Mr. Robertson Gladstone into hatred and contempt.
Tae evidence in this case will be small indeed. By the
Act of Parliament, it is now sufficient for me to put in a
certificate, showing that the defendant is editor and
publisher of this paper. Bar, gentlemen, I shall not stop
at that. In the indictment, we have set forth that Mr.
Gladstone was at the time a magistrate and a Town-
councillor. We en: ght have proved that fact by any
policeman standing in the court. Bat Mr. Gladstone is
not a parson to flinch from showing himself in public to
support any complaint he thought it his duty to make ;
and although it is wholey unnecessary for him to appear,
yet Mr. Robertson Gladstone would not allow me to bring
a case into court in which his name appears as prosecutor,
without putting him into the box, to see if any question
can be asked which could derogate from his right on this
occasion. Mr. Gladstone will therefore stand in the
witness-box, and you will see whether anything can be
said to his dishonour, or which can in any way derogate
from his right to ask at your hands protection from a
gross and infamous libel.
The certificate setting forth that Mr. Onsley was the
proprietor and publisher of the Herald, was then put in,
and after some objection on the part of counsel for defen-
dant, admitted.
Mr. Robertson Gladstone s eorn and examined by Mr.
Lushingeon : You are a justice of peace for the borough?
I am.

MR. ROLZRTSON GLADSTONE'S RELIGION (?) AND
L')Y.ILTY !

Some people cannot exist without a grievance, like the
hyena in his den, they are constantly moving about, and
uttering discordant sounds Mr. Robertson Gladstone is
one of those grumblers; no one can satisfy him. At a
Meeting of the Town Council, on Saturday last, the
monthly meeting, which should have taken place on
Wednesday last, was postponed, owing to that day being
set.apart, by the Queen's proclamation, tbr a general fast
and humiliation. This did not meet the approval of the
ever discontented member of the Abercromby Ward, who
observed that :
He could not discover, really what the Council had to do with the
ord.!, fir hrtmiliat ion and prayer. Of the necessity for humiliation
and prayer, and the duty which was i,cumbeat upon each of them
in re-pect of tho•e two objects, he did not ;I*(37end to hold any
question for a mo,nent. But, consider:, g that the parties really in
tanl7 were the East India Company, who nad hat golden opportuni-
ties of doing good, but had negl,cted and abused the trust reposed in
them, why otter parties were to ba held responsible in the sight of
God for ti:e acts of that company, was ready a matter which he
for one could not co,,prehend. He did n)t purpose upon that occa-
s.on gong into the sulject. Ile felt very strongly upon it, and
perhaps upon no point more than this did he enter his protest
against it than because a day in the week was selected, a day of
labour, when the p,!crer classes must of necessity be the suffzierers
by the loss of that day's work. Nt'hy t.,ey could not have imitated
their trethrel of tire Rona Au Catholic C:,urch, and fixed Sunday as a
day of humiliation, ha could Lot comprehend.
Mr. Gladstone questions the neeessity of praying to
God to protect our fellow-ciuntrymen, women, and child-
ren from the merciless Sepoys, because the East India
Company have neglected their duties We ask this
brutal specimen of humanity. whether the soldiers, their
wives, and children, are to blame for the conduct of the
Government in laths ? " 0 her parties " are not held
responsible in the sight of God, for the acts of the Com-
pany, but it is our duty, as Christians, to implore the
Divine Mercy upon these who are surrounded with peril.
He objects to a week-day being fixed upon. Had Sunday
been selected, there would have been no sacrifice of
selfish interests, and bat few would have recognised the
day more than the usual sabbath. As for imitating the
Pope's Sepoys. as proposed by Mr. Gladstone, that would
only be exhibiting a disloyal: spirit. Why could not the
Papists, as well as the Jews, and all other sects, obey the
Q ieen's mandate 2 And what benefit do the poor Papists
derive from having Sunday set apart for their day of
humiliation, when their chief sacerdotal ruffian well knew
that all work would be stopped on Wednesday. We are
not surprised at anything emanating from Mr. Gladstone.
A man who can jump from Toryism to extreme Radical-
ism may, if it suits him, rush from Christianity to
infidelity, or, if it suits hi-n, Popery, of which latter creed
he now appears to be the champion. According to the
theory or Mr. Gladstone, as the East India Company are
in fault, we have no right to attempt to relieve Luekno;v,
bat leave nearly one thousand of our fellow-emu:try-men,
women, and children, to be butchered. The power of
British Troops, we admit, is:great, but the:!power of God
can evert all evils; therefore to him we pray, for His
strength is not as the strength of mortal man. The Town
Council of Liverpool is disgraced so ling as this Eng,ish
Sepoy has a place at its table; and we hope the electors
of Abercromby Wart], of all political opinions, will com-
bine to oust hire. when his term of office expires. We had
thought he had reached the lowest depths, but we are
sorry to find there is a lower still—one that smacks
strongly of blasphemy as well as disloyalty.
Now, gentlemee, the observations of Mr. Gladstone you
may agree with or not. I have not asked what your
feelings may be in political of in religious matters.
I have been too bag in Liverpool to think of
asking such a question of a Liverpool jury, because I can
say to you, in all truth and sincerity, that I would trust
any case I conduct, without any challenge, to the honour
ofa Liverpool jury, in the fall conviction that whatever may
be your political or religious opinions, after having heard the
law which the learned Judge will lay down, you will only
endeavour, honestly and sincerely, to give a verdict accord-
irg to the law. But I cacnot help observing that whatever
may be your opinions, and whether you agree with Mr-
Gladstone or not, the whole of his observations do seem to
breathe that regard for the poorer inhabitants of the town
for which he has long been eminently distinguished. His
principal objection to the fast day was that it was fixed
upon a week day, and that thereby the poorer people
would lose their wages for the day. But, gentlemen, it
must be perfectly elevJoue to you, as you will see from some
of the expressions of the article, what the real grievance
on the pert of the newspaper was. Mr Gladstone never
questioned the propriety of public humiliation and prayer ;
you must have observed, from one of the paragraphs I
read to you, that he distinctly guarded himself against
anything of the kind. You cannot, any one of you,
suppose, for a moment, that Mr. Gladstone was not
as much grieved and horrified as any parson in the
country by the calamities which had occurred in India.
Now, recollect, you are to turn your attention to this,
whether there are not expressions and statements in this
article which go beyond fair, or even, as I have said,
violent comment, and whethee it does not descend in.°
personal abuse and personal insult, tending to bring Mr.
Gladstone into the hatred and contempt of his fellow-
townsmen. i. Ws ask this brutal specimen of humanity."
Is this the language of fair comment upon a gentleman
like Mr. Gladstone who never did any harm to any mortal
? What does the writer 1110311 by saying that Mr.
Gladstone was only actuated by selfish interests ? If he
meant that Mr. Gladstone feared, by the appointment of a
public fast, to lose the profits of one single day on the
mart of Liverpool, then again I say that that is a grievous,
a deliberate, and an indefensible insult. The writer asks,
"What benefit do the door Papists derive from having
Sunday set apart f r their day of humiliation, when
their chief sacerdotal ruffian well knew the; all
work would be stopped on Wednesday?" Whom
does this person mean by "chief sacerdotal ruf-
fian?" I hear my friend say "he did not mean Mr.
Gladstone ;" bat I shall, nevertheless, take notice of the
phrase, because it will show you the spirit in which the
article was written ; and if you find that this geneeman
applies this sort of abuse to persons who could have had
nothing whatever to do wi'h questions of the kind which
were being raised and discussed in the Town Council, it
will help to show you the spirit in which the article was
written against Mr. Geadstone. Does ho mean by that
phrase the Pope of Rome? Gentlemen, you may agree or
not in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church You
may hold, as most of us do, that the discipline of the
Church of Rome is not suited to a free country, but I
think you will agree with me, that when the doctrines and
discipline of that church have engaged the minds of some
of the most intellectual men of our day, they ought to be
spoken of at least with respect. Yeu must all know that
the P. ope of Rome is a sort of prince—that he is an
an nointed High Priest ; and if you know anything of the
history of your own time, you must know, if one may
speak thus without irreverence of a high personage,
that the present Pope of Rome is as mild and
gentle a gentleman, and as holy and virtuous a
clergymen as ever graced the position he now occupies.
Can it be tolerated, then, that where there was really
nothing whatever referring to the Roman Catholic Church,
except the expressions the Gladstone used, that this
person is to cast abroad in every direction insulting
expressions of this kind, to which I have now called your
attention ? Gentlemen, it ought to to recollec ed that
there are, I believe, in this town of Liverpool, so many as
30,000 Roman Catholics, who look upon the Pope as
their father, and a person whom they are bound to regard
with the greatoe t reverence.
Mr. fowler : But we really are not now trying a libel
upon the Pope of Rome, or the 30,000 Roman Catholics
of Liverpool.
Me. Bret : It is true we are not, but this throws a
light upon the reckless way in which this person wrote
the article—if we find him thus describing a prince and a
gentleman, as a sacerdotal ruffian, it will show you the
spirit in which he composed the article of which I com-
plain. I have already drawn year attention to the time
at which this article was written. I have already asked
you to recollect the atrocities which had been committed at

How long have you filled that office? Ten or twelve
years—more, perhaps.
And you are also a member of the Town Council ? I
am. lam one of the members for Abercrom')y Ward.
Cross examined by Mr. Sowler : You say you have been
a rnagistra'e fir ten or tweive years ? Yes.
And I suppose, whilst sitting in that capacity, you are in
the habit of herring complaints against publicans ? YO3.
Was there a complaint before you of certain publicans
who kept open their hou3es on this day of humiliation ?
His Lordship : What has that to do with this matter ?
Mr. Sowler : It goes to show that his mind W%4 still the
same when he was acting as a justice of the peace.
Hl3 Lordship: Tao question is whether there is a libel
or not.

Mr. Sowler : Yes, but the jury must take all the circum-
stances into consideration.
' Mr. Gladstone: I have no objection to state what took
place, if your lordship wish it,
His Lordship : It would be irrelevant.
Cross. examination continued by Mc. Sowler : May I
a,k you who was the good natured friend that pointed this
matter out to you in the newspapers ? I read the news-
paper in the Palatine Club.
it pviuluti vitt to you? No.
It was not ? It was net.
Were yon acquainted by any parties in reference to it?
I saw my name in large letters on the placard as I drove
into town.
I ask you, hal any person drawn your attention to the
article contained in this paper ? Not before I had
read it.
Did any person afterwards ? I cannot recollect any
particular person, but I was spoken to on the subject.
You c-nnot recollect any particular person ? No.
Well, have you strong opinions as to the impropriety of
days of humiliation? No, none whatever.
Then the opinion you expressed in the Town Council
was really not a very serious opinion on your part, after
all ? It was perfectly serious.
Was it, indeed ? It was.
You still think it was wrong to appoint a day in the
middle of the week ? I do.
Then, notwithstanding that her Majesty, by an order in
Council, had set apart that particular day as a day of
humiliation, you were desirous that the Council meeting
should be held on that day ? Clearly ; bat that was not my
ooject in making the remark.
Did you complain that the meeting of the Town Council
was not held on the Wednesday as usual, and that it was
inteerupted by the appointment of this day of humiliation ?
I complained that that day of appointment caused an
interruption.
On that particular thy, to the holding of the Town
Council meeting—is that what you mean to say ? It is.
You felt yourself to be quite at liberty to state this
publicly in your place in the Town Council ? I did.
You thought, also, that it was clearly your duty as a
magistrate, flaying the custody of the peace here in Liver-
pool, and representing her Majesty, to make that state-
ment in the Town Coancil of Liverpoel ? I made that
statement in the chamber of the Town Council as a town
councillor.
I believe you are also a magistrate of the county ? I
am

Aud accustomed to act as such ? Not very frequently—
my duties in the borough prevent it.
But you do act as a magistrate for the county ? Occa-
sionally.
_ _

And for the borough frequently ? I take my regular
routine of duty, and sometimes something more.
I believe you have taken rather a prominent part in
political pr.iceedings in the borough of Liverpool ? I have.
And have been in the habit of expressing yourself
strongly on various matters that occupied public attentioo
I expressed myself according to what I conscientiously
believed to be just and right.
No doub ; and you are rather a zealous politician ?
I am.

Did you state "you hoped we could get rid of this ob-
servance on this day of humiliation ? No.
You never stated that ? No; I never did.
Nor anything like it ? I have no recollection whatever
of having said anything like it.
You did not say, " For my part, I hope we shall soon
get rid of such observances ?" No, it would not accord
with my opinions. What I complained of was the appoint-
ment of the fast day on a work day.
But you said the East India Company were to blame,
and you did not see what the nation generally had to do
with it ? I did so.

And because you thought the Company were to blame,
you also thought that the nation generally had no occasion
whatever to humiliate itself? I thought I had none.

r the Towa Council of Liverpool? I spoke for
myself.

No 77, did it so happen that any persons were brought
before you for breaches of the law on that day ? There
were, certainly.
And you dismissed the summonses ?
Mr. Brett objected. Mr. Gladstone had no objection to
answer the question, but he (Mr. Brett) apprehended his
Lordship would not go into such a matter.
His Lordship asked if it was before or after the
pobli-
cation ?

Mr. Bowler replied that it wag 'before publication.
Mr. Lushington replied that such was not the case. It
was five days after.
His Lordship observed that, that being so, it would not
justify the libel.

- Mr-. Sowler did not say that it would—they had not
pleaded justification.
His Lordship observed that he might ask 3[r. Gladstone
as to his opinion.
Mr. Sower : Was it right for you, as a magistrate, to
dismiss the summonses that had been broaght before you,
of publicans, for breaches of the law in keeping their
houses open on the day of humiliaticn ? I ask you a
simple abstract question—whether it was right, in your
opinion, as a magistrate, to dismiss the summonses because
they had lept.oien their houses on thAtda.ynfhuntilisitiou

THE N ORTIIERN TIIVIES.-LIVERPOOL, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1857.

et_
I think it was wrong to dismiss them on such a ground. statesman, Mr. Robertson gladstone'a brother, the Member reported to have expressed. He had a perfect right ;05
Did you dismiss them ? I did dismiss cases, but not en for Oxford, and late Chancellor of the Exchequer. He (Mr. express that sentiment—a perfect right. Mr. Ousley,
big that ground. Sowler) said all honour to that man, and he could forgive the editor of a newspaper, had a perfect right to mimeo ,
On what grounds? That was not the grounds on Mr. Robertson Gladstone a great deal because of the high comments, and to criticise that sentiment, and,
which I dismissed them.
. 008 0
respect he had for the statesman-like quali des and the to express his entire dissent from those opinions
_,l
Well, we should like to know the grounds ? I dismissed upright course which the Right Hon. William Ewart Gladstone. He was entitled to criticise and discuss all
the summonses bought before me—eight or ten—on the Gladstone had pursued as a public man in that country— that fell from Mr. Gladstone on that occasien, but be jog
ground—first of all, it was not proved to my satisfaction not more distinguished too as a public man than for his not warranted in mingling personal abuse by the occnot
that the parties had an accurate knowledge that they were blameless private life—a man who would be a honour to It would be for them to say, whether what the defers by
doing wrong; and the second reason was, that it was a any nation. But it was a piece of almost unheard-of published as comment was in their judgment warranted by
first offence. On those grounds I allowed them to go audacity for Mr: Robertson Gladstone to get up in the the occasion, and whether the limit of that fair, well
away, cautioning them, that if they were brought before Town Council of Liverpool and dare to dictate to the reasonable discussion which all journalists, as
upon
me again, they would be punished, and that the law, people of that country what was right and what was as the public generally, had a right to make, tiPneg
whether right or wrong, was to be respected as long as it proper. He thought it extremely probable that Mr. the conduct of all public men, had been in this insitaorg,
was the law. Gladstone could not comprehend the propriety of the overstepped by him. This was the comment :—[ads -1-.' it
libwrs
Were you not assured by the police that they had proclamation of her Majesty's ordering a day of humili- ship here rad the passages forming the subject of the
tr.
cautioned them ? That assurance was given by soma— ation and prayer. If everybody else agreed with Mr. There could be no question that the defendant had a per-
not not in every case. , Gladstone upon that subject what a pretty spectacle the feet right to say that, to complain that Mr. Glaris on
But you dismissed all ? I did. country would have presented upon the memorable day of should question the necessity of prayer and humilialitros
morfeollirr;
Although the police stated that they had warned all the public humiliation. So far from being a spectacle calculated the occasion by the whole country, but there followed ants
parties ? The police stated that they did not warn all. to shed honour in the pa mof the history of the country, of those passages which it was said overstepped the' Atict
Still you dismissed those, summonses ? In ovary case it it would have been a spectacle for demons to have rejoiced of all reasonable criticism and comment upon the eoll.'i
was the first offer ce. at. -Without entering into a discusuion as to the gentleman- of public men, and which was charged as one of the 11bes
Then you did not express any opinion at all with refer- ly character of the Pope of Rome, he thought the Roman in the case—" We ask this brutal specimen of huraanity,
once to the propriety of keeping the houses closed on that Catholics would have done better if they had followed the &e., &c. Now, was Mr. Ouseley justified by the occalst
day ? I did not. example of all other sects, than by opnesine the proclanit- or warranted in fair discussion and fair criticism, 00 'mg
I suppose you are aware, as a magistrate. that it is tion of the Queen, and which even the Jews, who were which might be taken to to an objection on the part of Tx
obligatory on keepers of public houses to close their houses not Christians, had obeyed. It was well for Mr. Gladstone Gladstrne to have a day of humiliation and prayer a teci
upon any day appointed for a public fast or thanksgiving, that he had net lived and expressed the opinions he die or at all events to have it on a work-day— was he warren°,
to
just the same as on Sundaes, Christmas Day, or Geed some reigns back. Had he done so, his language wool! in using this expression in regard to Me. Gladstone, an
eg
se
Friday ? I believe that is the law.
probably have been celled sedition, and he m•ght find call him " a brutal specimen of humanity ?" It tr s
as ht
It is stated here that you jumped from Toryism to himself awaiting his trial in prison. It would seem that that, in the heat of discussion, a phrase of that kind 1121f0
extreme Radicalism ? I once was a Tory lam sorry to the gravemen of the present libel was in the fact that Mr. be used, but there was a difference between verbal of
say. (Laughter.)l
Gladstone was called a '- brutal specimen of humanity." written expressions. A man in the heat or the hur 1, r
d for
suppose is a very candid avowal on your part, Now, I Now, on the manner in which an expression was used speech -might use a phrase which he would regret, an
se,
suppsse you are a very entitles member of the opposite depended very. much whether it was offensive or no'. which he would be sorry ; but this was written—it fia's
party ? Well, whatever Ido I endeavour not to do by Suppose, instead of calling him a brutal specimen of the deliberately expressed opinion of the writer. It 71,6
halves humanity, Mr. Ouseley had called him an ass. (Laughter) for them to say whether it exceeded or was within the
That what I believe is your reputation—you never mince What was an a=s but a brutal specimen of humanity when limits of fair and
geasonable criticism? Whe her assigning
od
matters ? No applied to a man ? He did not know whether Mr. Glad- liberal and fair allowance for criticism and discussion up.
Mr. Brett : Did you state to the Council something to stone would have been better pleated if Mr nuseleY had the conduct of public men, the defendant was werrentedL2
this effect ? [The learned gentleman here read the written him down an ass ? (Laughter.) He would not using the expression, " brutal specimen of humanity ?" '76
remarks of Mr. Gladstone, the comment on Which was the have been singular even if he had been thus distiognished, to the rest of the paragraph, about imitating tse "Pope alleged libel ] I spoke toe that effect substantially, but I for no doubt he . had all which Dogherry room- Sepoys," it might he considered a strong expression, bas
0
cannot answer for the exat words. - seated himself to have, and yet Doyberry was no more. It might be very strong language in respect
e
You objected to the fast-day because it was held on the written down an ass. (Laughter.) No doubt the Pope, but the Pope was not now before thew, nor weft,
week-day ? I did. he was as pretty a piece of flesh as any in Messina, N ) they considering how far Mr. Oaseley would be justifiedli;
You! have been asked as to your decision as a magis. doubt he had, like Dogberry, two gowns—an aldermanic using such expressions in reference to him. The paragral).
trate. lam afraid I almost insult you, but did you decide gown and a night-gown. (Laughter.) Mr. slimier, about " •jumping from Toryism," &c., though strong It
according to the best of your ability and jadgment as to however, had saved him that indignity, and not mute the guage, would not be beyond what might be said of the
the cases before you ? I did, they were not aggravated insinuation. (Laughter.) Mr. So vier contended that at conduct of a public man who rendered himself open to
cases. . the time Mr. Ouseley wrote the article, the recent horrors criticism, but in the subsequent passage (and here ''';
Do I understand you that you were not satisfied that in India were fresh in his mind, and that he conceived Mr. Lordship read it) Mr. Ousley seemed to treat the OPPc5i some of the parties had knowledge of the Fast-day? Gladstone's observations to have implied something like tion of Mr. Gladstone to any day of humiliation Milt.
There were some notices served by the police, but we en extenuation of those horrors which all in that country prayer, on the ground that the fault was that of the
know how such notices are served, and the many accidents felt so intensely, and this feeling might accounkfer an Y company, and not of the nation generally, and In which might prevent their being read in time. I took little intemperance which might appear in his lifituage. therefore the nation need not humiliate itself as it was not
that into consideration, coupled with its being the first He did not mean to say that it was a judicious article, but its fault—he to
to have treated that ex erosion
cf
offence. he denied that it bore the interpretatioa sought to be put Mr. Gladstone as if Mr. Gladstone was not that mistral °
hs
This closed the case for the prosecution. upon it, or that it could be regarded, in fact, as anything the mutinous Sepoys that it was to be hoped all Englis
Mr. Sowler submitted that there was no evidence that more than a political squib. It was absurd to suppose men were. It was for the jury to say whether ,311„:
the libel was false to the knowledge of the defendant. that Mr. Ouseley was actuated by any malicious intention Gladstone, by his objection to the day of humiliarg,T, His Lordship: You say that Mr. Gladstone is a " brutal towards Mr. Gladstone. It might have been an injudicious sympathised with the Sepoys and the atrocities of wntli2,
specimen of humanity." Is he to prove that he is not ? comment, but it was penned under the influence of excited they were guilty. But then came the passage—" 1!, :his
(Laughter.) Or that he is not en "English Sepoy ?" Or feelings, when the memory of the Sepoy atrocities Council to be any longer disgraced by the presence or `," t
that ho has not reached the lowest depth of " blasphemy were uppermost in the mind, not only of Mr. Egtsh Sopoy ? ' What was to be understood by tt!talt
and disloyalty ? ' (Laughter.) Ouseley, but of every other man in the country and but that M Gladstone • idyll
~ r. adetone was a person who sympathise to
The objection was not pressed. it was not the malicious and malignant libel the Sepoys ? Now it was for them to judge whether what
Mr. Sowler then addressed the jury on behalf of the which was sought to be proved. The limits of tree die- said at the Council would warrant the idea that he ever
itg
defence. He said, his learned friend, in opening his case cussion might, possibly, in the heat of the moment, have entertained any sympathy with the Sepoys, or
that 'g had stated that he had the honour to appear for Mr. been overstepped, but not overstepped in such a manner as Council was disgraced by his sitting amongst them, beau',
Gladstone. He (Mr. Sowler) and Mr. Wheeler had the to render Mr. Ouseley liable to the consequences with of the views he had expressed ? And they should also Fop
honour to appear for Mr. Ouseley. A great master of the which Mr. Gladstone would visit him. No attack was whether the defendant was warranted in staling that fir,
was English language had said that the greatest curse of folly made upon the private character of Mr. Gladstone ;he was Gladstone had reached th© " lowest dew hof blasplieLlds
simply dealt with as a public man, who, by means of his
was that it could not hide itself ; and the present case was ;as well as of disloyalty," because of the opinions he le e ono of the most singular instances of the truth of that say- public position, had become public property, and liable to I reported to have expressed on the occasion in queslic'n't
comment. He denied that the tendency of the article was
ins. • How any man occupying the position which his learnedi If they believed that he was, they would find him il'g friend had ascribed to Mr. Gladstone, could have been so to bring Mr. Gladstone into contempt, or to disparage him 1 guilty ; but if they were of a contrary opinion, and believe
foolish as to institute such proceedings against a respectable in the estimation of the public. Mr. Ouseley Lad done that he overstepped all the bounds of reasonable criticiser'
member of society—a gentleman, he should be allowed to nothing to disparage Mr. Gladstone in the estimation of suck ns
ranted in maleing on the conduct of public men, they well
public journalists in this country would be wati.ci
say, quite as respectable as Mr. Gladstone—he could not the town. Mr. Gladstone had done this himself scores of
for the life of him understand, unless there had been behind times. His public addressee, his denunciations, his find him guilty.
Tad
Mr. Gladstone one of those good-natured friends spoken of declamations in Ahercromby ward and els.etvihere, Lad The Jury retired about a quarter past two o'clock, end
by "Puff" in the Critic, who were continually occupying en 'bled the people of his native borough to eussm.of him remained in consultation for several hours.
ma
themselves by showing everything which chanced to be I Welged of hick, He
for themselves, and no doubt they had t r „
About half-past six o'clock his Lordship said he feat, . offensive to their best friends. It seemed to him that Mr. (Mr. Sowler) had no doubt that, if Mr. Gladstone were to there would not be the slightest hope of the jury acsreeluw become a candidate for the representation of that borough
Gladstone would have better consulted his dignity, his Mr. Lushington said if the opposite party wonld el;
in Parliament, he would meet with a very warm reception in
honour, and his character, if he had not taken that withdraw word of regret for the libel they were ready
to
proceeding, John's Market. (Laughter.) Mr. Our ley and his paper
proceeding, than by endeavouring to persecute a respectabl©
the prosecution.
had nothing to do with this; they had dealt
with him only asthe
man, because, iu the conscientious and honest dischagge . Mr. Wheeler said is ha I' been already stated that
a public man and not in his private character. If Mr,
of a duty, he thought proper to comment on Mr. Glad- defendant did not in the slightest degree intend to impair
stone's speech in the Town Council. His learned friend had Gladstone thought proper to buy fish cheaper than any
the private honour or character of Mo. Gladstone, and, Iti
one else, what had they to do with that ? (Laughter.) taken care to inform the jury, that Mr. Gladstone was a
point effect, the strictures were upon his public character
e
Suppose Mr. Gladstone chose to pat only 6d at a fish stall
person of the highest station and fortune. He believed 1 altogether, Whether they were temperate or intemperaj,
for an article for which the poor man had to pay Bd, what
that his learned friend had in no degree stated what was judicious or injudicious, right or wrong, they did not COn!,
hard they to do with that ? (Laughter.) He (Mr. Sowler)
beyond the tenth. He believed Mr. Gladstone to be a Mr. Gladstone's private character. That was all he w".
paid the 6d or the stsl.
did not ask whether Mr.. Gladstones . . .
person occupying the very highest position in the town ofauthorised to say in the matter.
He had nothing to do with Mr. Gladstone's private affairs MO
Liverpool; a gentleman who had a mighty large fortune, t ' Mr. Lushington said the prosecution decd fedi)" could
and, d with -
and contended that Mr. Onseley a only dealt him
and, what was more. who know very well how to take carenot be satisfied with such an apology.
fir' article
Of it. (Laughter.) Now, was it allowable to him to tell as a public uaau ; and- that Mr. Gladstone, having had His Lordship intimated a concurrence in ner• wime
thorn who Mr. Ouseley was ? Was it allowable for him to experience of piablic life, should not have been so thin- ington's remark, and added, that if the words in the c'tn
tell them that this libeller, this false malicious libeller, was skinned with regard to comment.. Finally, Mr. Sowler were hastily used he could not see the least diffioullY
submitted the question to the jury, urging them, as
a gentleman, the son of a general officer, who fought in thewithdrawing them. He observed that there were decidedly
i
Peninsula, who was decorated by his sovereign, and by the Englishmen, not to forget, when they came to deliberate
to one of some expressions in it which ought not to have been 1115,geg
upon their verdict, that the liberty of the subject would be sovereigns cf foreign states ? Would he be permitted tosuch as " brutal specimen of humanity,
the most ancient, respectable, and honourable baronets in Beg-
tell them that Mr. Ouseley was a near relative' crembling in the Ealance, and reminding them that, when
sepnyd, a lower getbd, &p.
üblic discutsion was stifled, and the press put down, they
P Mr. Wheeler said the last was a Miltonian expressi°°.
might depend upon it the liberties of the public would the country, Sir William Ouseley, and was very closely
His Lordship said it was not the less too forcible. b
not be long secure.
sue
connected with Sir Robert Gore Ouseley, who had been Mr. Lushington said if the defendant would make we
' employed in the diplomatic relations of the country Tile Lordship then proceeded to charge the jury. He an apology as his Lordship would suggest, the presecutm*
abroad with great benefit to the country, and said that the defendant wss indicted for publishing that would accept it.
no less honour to himself ? Might he, since Mr. which was stated to be a defamatory libel on Mr. Roberson His Lordship :I do not understand, as yet, that he Pr°'
Gladstone had been trumpeted forth as a person Gladstone, and it was stated that what had been so poses to make any apology at all.
el I
of such high distinction and great fortune, be permitted, in published was calculated to vilify and bring lairn into Some consultation here took puce between Mr. Oase-eo
these few words, to tell them what Mr. Ouseley was? It hatred and contempt with the public generally. They and his counsel, and after much evident urgency on
th
was Mr. Ouseley's misfortune, not his fault, he pre- had heard many strong remarks on the great advantages t part of the latter, to
sutued, not to be blessed with such extensive means as those in a free country of having a free press. He quite con- ; Mr. Wheeler said that the defendant had consented
of which Mr. Gladstone was possessed. Ho was a gentle. cursed in all such remarks. Thee had also been warned ' place himself in his Lordship's hands. r'
mau in moderate circumstances. He felt earnestly and to beware of the effects which would follow the stifflerag of After some conversation, it was suggested by ?J
of zealously for the cause which he supported, and which Mr. discussion upon the merits of public men. Undoubtedly, Lushington that his Lordship should draw up a f crraos
Gladstone had deserted. He felt as strongly in the interest all those who filled public situations should consider them- apology to be signed on behalf of each party. This by
of that cause as Mr. Gladstone felt in the interest of his selves (men to have their public conduct commented on, agreed to, and the following apology, drawn up by 14,
new political friends ; and no doubt it was quite as much reviewed., and criticised, and that, no doubt, might be lnc Lordship, was accepted on either sides, and signed
to the credit of Mr. Ouseley to espouse the cause which he in strong terms and strong language ; but care should be counsel
:
conscientiously believed to be right as to the credit of t .ken not to overstep the bounds of decency or prop icf.ll, Mr. Ouseley regrets that, under the influence of strove,,,, Mr. Gladstone to espouse the cause of his new friends, or to use such language, under the pretence of criticising .4'oe -
feelings
upon the subject cf Mr. Robertson Glad-- ,
who were his former enernicp. Mr. Ouseley was one of pnblic conduct, which tended to vilify and bring into- 3rd c'
those who endeavoured to maintain the Constitution of contempt the person to whom it was applied. Ther., observations at the Town Council on Saturday, tae he
England, and to preserve it against the encroachments of should be such care, otherwise, that which was a October, relative to the day of humiliation and praier'
those foreign tyrants of whose actions they had had many blessing would become a curse, and opportunity would should have used expressions calculated to weeded the 6 examples during late years. Mr. Gladstme washed it to be offered, under the pretence of free critichm of the
feelings of Mr. Robertson Gladstone,ithdl'avi
and he ws
go forth that the setting apart of a day of conduct of men holding public situations, to vilify them
humiliation and prayer was an idle ceremony. by personal abuse. The question on the present occasion such expressions, and regrets that he has used them,
Did he mesn to tell his fellow-townsmen that it I which they had to try was, whether the defendant had Dimes NYBEI LER, of counsel for defendant.
was not right for • them to humiliate themselves overstepped the limits of fres and of reasonable criticism VERNON LUSEIIN GTON, of counsel for froeecution,
before Almighty God as an occasion, when as much as at allowed to persons in his position. It was said that, at m, a
any time in the history of any country, the mercies of the time the defendant published the alleged libel, his jury
ne were than sent for, and came into court. a
ve
Providence were imperatively called for ? Did he moan feelings were excited, but no man should allow his feel- His Lordship intimated that the jury had been relic.toss
that the Queen was wrong in issuing her order in council ings to be excited to the prejudice of another person. He from the necessity of further considering a verdict, 'we
that that particular day should be of apart as a day of might have his own feelings, but there was no reason much as, the prosecution being a private one. it haa, ti
humiliation and of fast, The pretence was that a day of why he should bring into contempt those who entertained withdrawn on an apology being tendered. He addeacie
labour and wages would be takes away from the working opinions different from himself, though he might comment there were unquestionably some expressions in the amen'
clauses. Was not the poor man entitled to make his in strong language on the views of his opponents. At which exceeded any reasonable limit, and which one ts
sacrifice as well as the rich? Was the poor man to be the period in question, no doubt a great national calamity tleman must, regret having applied to another. eel
a -
deprived of the advantage of making his sacrifice of a day had befallen this country ; for, from whatever cause it had The Jury were then discharged, and the court stele urII
of labour for such a purpose? His learn° I friend had arisen, there was no doubt that it had been, and was at to half past nine this morning. e 'yea
endeavoured to argue that no disloyalty was shown in this moment, a great national misfortune. At the time of The announcement of the result of the trial was reel. et, opposing the appointment of the special day of humiliation, the publication of what was alleged to ho a libel, in the with loud applause by the parties who
filled the bo YtoDe
on the ground that it was not the act of the mum
up
herself. month of October, the most disastrous excesses of cruelties the court. A faint effort was also made to get
Bat he disputed the interpretation thus sought to be given had been perpetrated by the insurgent Sepoys, and " Keatish Fire," but it was at once suppressed.
to the meaning of a proclamation issued by the Queen's the calamity was considered such, that her Majes'y
express authority. His learned friend had said it was the thought fit to appoint a day for humiliation and prayer.
act of those who advised her Majesty in ecclesiastical That day was fixed for Wednesday the 7th of October.
affairs. In this view of the proclamation he contended Now, whatever opinion men might entertain as to the cause
that his learned friend was under an entire misapprehension. of the revolt, all would agree that the calamity was such
It was the act of the Privy .council. Although his learned that there might well be appointed a day for public humi-
friend would have th,rn believe they had come to such a liation. That day was appointed, as he before observed, fer
state of things in England, they-had not Set done so. Her the 7th of October, and on the 3rd of October, which was
Majesty had still a voice in the Government of the country. Saturday, there was a meeting of the Town Council ; and
His learned friend surely did not want them to balky° at that meeting it was proposed not to hold the meeting of
that they had dropped down altogether to Gladstone's the Town Council that would, in the usual course, take
method of political philceophy, or that they were living place en the Wednesday, but to postpone ir, en account of
in the midst of a Republic, which was really the effect of that day being fixed as the day of pub'ic humiliation. It
what his learned friend had pet to th -m. 'the Queen had, seemed that at meeting Mr. Gladstone appeared to have
so long as the Constitution of the country was maintained made some objection generally to the day of humiliation
and ever must have, a power and authority independent being fixed at all, but more particularly to that day being
of all Ecclesiastical authorities. The speech of his learned fixed on a week day, rather than on Sunday. What he was
friend seemed intended to rival the violence and unreason- reported to have said on the occasion was—
ablcness of Mr. Gladstone. Mr. Gladstone set himself ue [His Lordship here quoted Mr. Gladstone's speech, and
as an arbitrator and an instructor, as if he were the only continued: —]
true prophet, !and every ono else was false and fallible. Of the general duty of humiliation and' prayer upon every
Why, who was Mr. Gladstone ? Who cored about the one at all times, Mr. Gladstone, as might have been sup-
opinion of Mr. Robertson Gladstone ? (Laughter.) No posed, seemed to have entertained no doubt whatever.
doubt he was a great roan among the Towns Ceuncil of What he seemed to have doubted was the necessity
Liverpool, which conuted its debates ith uch infinite for public humiliation and prayer on a particular
propriety—although he thought it was oily the other day occasion ; and the reason assigned for his opinion was
that some of them were reading its proceedings in an ad- that the public generally were not in fault—that they had
joining room, and thought them not very gentlem inly. nothing to do with the mutiny of the Fiepoys, or with the
No doubt Mr. Robertson Gladstone was a very great man, cause of it, or were at all to be considered as the mum of
the member for Abmwromby Ward, who set himself up in it—that the nation had nothing to do with it, but that it
the Town Council of Liverpool to dictate whether a day was the peculiar fault of the East India Company, and that
of humiliation was right and proper. He could tell Mr. therefore the nation generally had no cause for humilia-
Robertion Gladstone that, with all his wealth, his voice tion and prayer. Mr. Gladstone had a perfect right to
was not potential in the country. He did not wish to be have his opinioa upon that, or upon any other matter--he
supposed to cast any personal reflections upon Mr. Glad- had as much right as any man in England to have his
stone. He was dealing now with him as a political and a opinion upon that subject-, and he bad a perfect right to
public man, who had made himself a mark for the arrows express his opinion. There was within in that which he
of criticism. It was Mr. Gladstone's own Melt if his con- was reported to have said, which he might not very well
duct w.s criticised. He had chosen his position, and, having have stated as bring his opinion, whether others agreed
done so, and having taken so prominent and zealous a part with him or not. Many might think that it was a wrong
as he had done, ha ought not to complain because his public opinion, but he hail a right to entertain that opinion,
acts were canvassed by the editor of a newspaper. All just as the defendant had a right to make comments on
honour to the name of Gladstone. All honour to the name any statement of Mr. Gladstone. Mr. G. was a public
of Mr. Robertson Gladstone's father, a man who, by a man. He was a magistrate of the borough and the county
course of honest industry and integrity, built up for him- He was also a member of the Town Council, and it was in
self a large fortune. Alt honour to the family whom he that character of a public man, as a member of the Town
had introduced into society. All honour to that gifted ' Council, Clint he expressed the sentiment which he was

THE BOROUGH BANK AND MR. -D003113

CASE.

To J. P. G. Smith,
Sir,—Your letter only reached me this morning. 12:
solicitor conducting the prosecution of John Dohertl,
the Town Clerk of Liverpool, who managed it in the tivsils
way by the official prosecutor, to whom I must refer 1()y
for information. I made no statement except fr(firaji °so
instructions. I may say, however, that Ido not 're" 00
how Mr. Walter, could have sul:pcened you beM:ed of
sth December. The charges upon which your °°"ate
was material, were not those upon which the os'slistr'llg
committed: Inasmuch, however, as some evidence feistle:e
to them appeared on the depositions, and as tileCirge,
introductory to, and tended to explain the principsl
it was advised by counsel, on drawing the indiJnistitAt nee
they should be inner ed, and that the additional eciuhe-tild
requirel to support them, including your ow°' s-°,90rl
sf,:ero
to
be procured. That advice was only given on the
of the 4th December. Mr. Walter will be best ti,bteled
your A':
explain to you what steps he took to procure
ance upon receiving the advice, and also What fa
were given to him, or withheld from him, at the 13°r°
to
Bank for ascertaining your address.--I am, dear sir, 9°
truly, J. B. AsPINAI'I.

St. George's Hall, Dec. 14, 1857.
As I observe that you have published your lector
I take the same course with regard to this.

NOTICE TO ADVERTISERS. ts,
biERSONS seeking Employment, Seer::est
Assistants, Clerks, Apartments, or Lodging'. oilfr,il3
bri
~,_ntr, their wants under the Nutice of the Public bY 'dytl ablica
!,,,oirlitTllEßN TIMES, which Is the most efficient meoiniu tiLv„idati
in this district. The cash price for this special c ass of adver ,"-
Is reduced to THREEPENCE for TWENTY WORDS'