The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, JANUARY 23. 1837.

pressed to both those places, as well as to Liverpool,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Edinburgh, and other places. They
can see that the Herald, which brought a report of the
Peel banquet, of six closely printed columns, to Glasgow, at
half-past eleven o'clock on theOlonday forenoon, and to
Edinburgh, at six o'clock on the Same Monday, contained
the London news, and Continental arrivals, of the Saturday
morning. Is not that enough to know ? and, we ask, whe-
ther, under any circumstances, that conld be effected with-
out the most extraordinary efforts and the best-comhinod
arrangements?
[The best answer we can give to the above, are the fol-
lowing extracts from our Morning Contemporaries. We
must, however, add one word. In his tame and trem-
bling answer to our Saturday's brief remarks on his " Ex-
traordinary Glasgow Express," our Contemporary (the
Morning Herald) is pleased to say, " We have never
troubled ourselves about the expresses of The Sun, though
perchance they may sometimes illustrate the maxim of far-
fetched and little worth." Now this can scarcely apply to
us on the present occasion. Our express was, indeed, " far-
fetched," for it was fetched all the way from Glasgow to
London, and re-expressed thence throughout the country.
We worked hard, and fortunately succeeded in our effort
to obtain the earliest intelligence of the Peel banquet.
We did not print at Manchester, or at any rate, half-
way, between London -and Glasgow ; and then call that.
Edition a London Edition, of our Journal. We did
not shirk the labour and the expense of an express, and
then take credit to ourselves for our enterprize. We did
not perpetrate a fraud, and then lay claim to honesty. 'We
did not fall asleep, and then swear roundly that we are all
diligence. In a word we played a part the very reverse
of the Morning Herald. Our respective claims arc now be-
fore the public, ani we leave that public to judge between
us. With respect to our Contemporary's sneer that we are
but " lamp-lighters," we take it in excellent part. We shall
never quarrel with him for his sarcasm, though we may at times
fall asleep over his twaddle. A "lamplighter" is at
any rate one who diffuses light, and the Herald may
be honourably acquitted on this score. The only light we
ever knew him throw on a subject is in the present in-
stance, where he has been the clumsy means of throwing a
broad radiance on his own " fraud" by the attempt to prove
an impossibility.—En. SUN.]
(From the Times.)
HUMBUG EXPOSED.

Our attention has been attracted by several extracts from
Scotch papers contained in the Morning Herald, with a
view to puff off the alleged " extraordinary exertions" of
the proprietors of that paper in the transmission and publi-
cation of the report of the dinner given to Sir Robert Peel
in Glasgow on the 13th inst. If any merit is due to the
proprietors of the Morning Herald, it would be for trans-
mitting to London, and printing there, and returning to
Glasgow, Edinburgh, and places equally distant, a report
of the proceedings on the 13th inst. at Glasgow. If they
have not done this—if the report in question did not arrive
in London on Saturday the 14th inst.—if it was not printed
in London on that day—or if it was printed in any town
between London and Glasgow, or nearer Glasgow than
London, they are not only not entitled to any praise for
their alleged " extraordinay exertions," but, upon the con-
trary, deserve severe censure for having imposed on the
public by uttering and publishing, as printed in London, a
Paper which was not printed and published in London on
Saturday the 14th inst., with the report of the dinner to
Sir R. Peel on the 13th inst.

The Morning Herald of Saturday the 14th instant, pub-
lished in London, contains the report of the installation of
Sir Robert Peel as Lord Rector of Glasgow, occupying,
together with other intelligence, the six columns of the
third page. The Morning Herald which appeared in
Glasgow on Monday last purports to be also the Morning
Herald of the,l4th instant, containing in a " second edi-
tion" the report of the dinner given to Sir Robert Peel on
the previous day, Me 13th instant. To make room for this
alleged " second edition" of the 14th, the whole of the six
columns of the third page, including the report of the in-
stallation-of Sir R. Peel, arc omitted, and in lieu thereof
the report of the dinner on the 13th is inserted. How was
this magical performance accomplished ? Some of the num-
bers of the Morning Herald of the 14th were printed with
the third page left blank. These papers were forwarded to
Manchester. The report of the dinner of the 13th was
sent to Manchester, and having been set up in type there,
the third page of the alleged Morning Herald of Saturday,
received on Sunday, as a second edition, the report of the
banquet, which was returned by the next mail to Glasgow
and Edinburgh as the result of " the extraordinary exer-
tions" of the proprietors of the Morning Herald. We know
that the report published in London in the Morning Herald
of Monday last did not reach London till a late hour in the-
night of Sunday last ; and what are the remarks in the
leading article of the Herald of Monday the 16th inst. ?
Of course, if they bad succeeded in publishing in London a
second edition of their paper on Saturday, containing the
report of the dinner to Sir Robert Peel, they would have
modestly mentioned the success of " their extraordinary
exertions." They would have stated that they had pub-
lished a second edition containing that report. No, they
do no such thing ; they merely say—" On Saturday we
laid before our readers the report of the inaugural
speech of Sir Robert Peel, upon being installed Lord
Rector of Glasgow, &c. To-day we give a report of
the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet at the great
banquet given in his honour by the citizens of Glasgow."
Not one word was said about this celebrated second
edition, and why ?—because no second edition 'of Satur-
day's Herald containing the report of the banquet was
printed or published in London, either on Saturday or
Sunday. After all their trickery, what do their "extra-
ordinary exertions" amount to ? They have published in
Manchester, or some place nearer to Glasgow than London,
a report of Sir Robert Peel's speech—they have dated
their paper on a day that it was not printed and pub-
lished—they have represented it by the imprint to have
been printed and published in London, when it was not
printed and published in London ; and have even imposed
upon the public by tendering for sale and selling as a Lon-
don paper, containing a particular and important report, a
paper which was not published in London with that report.*
What have they done that could not' have been done by the
proprietors of any other paper if they had been equally re-
gardless of the law ? The proprietors of this journal, or of
the Morning Post, might as well have published their re-
spective papers in Glasgow, where, we have no doubt, ar-
rangements might have made for that purpose, but they
would have been Glasgow papers for the time being, and
not London papers. And why should the Glasgow and
other local papers, who really made great exertions to pre-
sent their readers with an accurate report, be subjected to
a competition in every respect so unfair ? Competition is
out of the question. The person who undertakes a race to

a given point and back again, but who runs only half Way
and returns, does not complete his task, but commits a
fraud, and in this instance it is not only a fraud upon the
public, but a fraud upon the revenue, which we suppose
the Commissioners of Stamps will not suffer to pass un-
noticed.

(From the Morning Post of Saturday.)
Upon the subject of the above extracts (copied from Me
Sun of Saturday) we feel no other interest than that which
arises from our desire to be deemed, as we were, second
to none in cur sympathy with the character and objects of
the great Glasgow festival, and second to none in our le-
gitimate efforts to diffuse throughout the country-a full and
accurate report of the proceedings at that magnificent and
glorious celebration. That a Contemporary of the metro-
poitan press was so far intoxicated by the splendour of the
the occasion as to play a game of masquerade ; to divest

himself for the moment of the character of a London jour-
nalist ; to invade in disguise the domain of our valuable
provincial journals ; to violate the express letter of an Act
of Parliament recently passed, after consultations with the
Minister of the Crown, in which he took a part ; to place
himself at the mercy of the Ministers of the Crown as
to the enforcement of penalties to an enormols extent ;
to raise a question even as to the future valility of the
copyright in his own journal, which must be a London
journal or nothing ; are circumstances which, however, we
may be disposed to overlook and forgive them, so far as
they may be supposed to affect ourselves, we cannot but
lament when we regard them in reference to their probable
influence upon the character and permanent interests of
the London press. It is our unalterable persuasion that
the character and permanent interests of that press are
never exposed to so much danger as when any important
part of it condescends to resort, for sake of momentary eclat,
to the mean and vulgar expedients of charlatanerie and
fraud. And we pronounce with unfeigned regret, but
without the least doubt or hesitation, that these, and these
only, are the qualities which the Morning Herald has ex-
hibited upon the occasion to which we refer. The terms
may sound harshly ; but we shall show that they are not
misapplied. It will not be disputed that there is an ex-
hibition of ellarlatanerie and fraud when, for the purpose
of gaining a real or supposed advantage over competi-
tors, a publication is presented to the world for that
which it is not. Now the fact is undeniable, that the
paper circulated in the north of England, and in Scotland,
in the manner which the above extracts describe, and which
purported to be a second edition of the London Morning
Herald of Saturday, " printed by John• Ryan, printer, at
No. 104, Shoe-lane, Fleet-street, in the city of London,
and published by Edward Robert Hearn, publisher, of 103,
Shoe-lane, aforesaid, at the office in the said place last
mentioned, and at No. 18, Catherine-street, Strand, in the
county of Middlesex, Saturday, Jan. 14, 1837," was any-
thing but what it purported to be, This paper was not
printed by John Ryan, printer, at No. 104, Shoe-lane ;
nor was it published by Edward Robert Hearn, at 103,
Shoe-lane, or at 18, Catherine-street, Strand, on Saturday,
jan,uary the 146,1837. These statements are absolutely
and ent rely fafsg. The thing dispersed throughout the north
of`, „,
Engian and SpOqand vas printed only in ilart, and never

&dished at all in Lon lon. Sheets of the Mornirg Herald
of Saturday, the 14th of January, 1837, containing three
pages of printed matter with one page left blank, were
sent to some town in the north, to Carlisle, or more
probably to Manchester, in order that the blank page
should there be filled up with a report of the Peel
Banquet at Glasgow, and that the papers, thus made com-
plete should be published in the northern part of the island
‘6th a loud flourish of trumpets, in celebration of the ex-
traordinary enterprise, diligence, talent, and so forth, of the
conductors of the Horning Herald. The performance, in
truth, affords no evidence or presumption whatever of ex-
traordinary enterprise, diligence, talent, or of any other use-
ful or honourable quality. It was a trick, the contrivance
of which implies no ingenuity, the execution of which re-
quired no effort. It might have been performed quite as
well by any other London journals, had the conductors of
any other been equally prepared to set the law at defiance,
or equally equally eager to snatch a momentary and un-
fair advantage, at the expense of the local press. But
we have yet exposed only part of the merits of this extra-
ordinary case.
The Morning Herald of Manchester or Carlisle, for

we arc yet uncertain as to the local habitation of our new

provincial contemporary, introduces its report of the ban-
quet to Sir Robert Peel by the following modest tribute
to its own surpassing merit :
" By the most extraordinary and unprecedented exertions
we are enabled to gratify our readers by a report of the pro-
ceedings at the dinner given to Sir Robert Peel at Glasgow.
yesterday. Sir R. Peel's speech is given at length ; but we
are necessarily obliged to abridge the other speeches in this
edition. A full report of the whole proceedings, however,
will be found in our Monday's publication."
The Morning Herald of London (and this alone is suf-
ficent to negative all idea of identity in the two journals)
has not ventured as in truth it had no pretensions, to utter
any such boast. Our metropolian contemporary had the
misfortune, owing probably to its exertions on behalf of
its ephemeral namesake in the north, to be some hours
later than most of its competitors, in its first publication in
London on Monday last, of the proceedings at the Glas-
gow festival. For sake of an advantage in the north, which
we believe to have been an illegal and know to have
been an unfair and dishonourable one, the legitimate
claims of the south seem to have been in a great degree
disregarded. The coaches which set out from London
early on the important morning of Monday, the 16th inst.,
deeply freighted with copies of every other Morning Paper,
each containing a full report of the Glasgow dinner, de.
parted to the east, the west, the north, and the south, with-
out a syllable of the proceedings at the important celebra-
tion, conveyed through the columns of that particular
Journal which pretends to have outstripped every compe-
titor. To play the impostor on the shores of the Solway
and the banks of the Tweed, and to discharge at the same
.• . .

time with diligence and success the honest duties of a Jour-
nalist towards the inhabitants of the home, the midland,
and the western _circuits of England, are found by experi-
ence, we suspect, to be incompatible avocations. We, en-
tertain, indeed, very little apprehension that the feat of
jugglery practised in this instance by our Contemporary
will ever be repeated.