The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-19 00:00:00

ANSWER.

" Fulham, August 31, 1829.
" Rev. Sir,—ln answer to your note of the 29th in-
stant, which has just reached me, I have only to state,
that you quite misunderstood me if you supposed me to
make any such assertion as that which you have been
pleased to attribute to me.
" I am, Rev. Sir, your faithful servant,
" Rev. Th. Williams." " C. J. LONDON."

It having been stated by Mr. W. Wilberforce, at a pub-
lic meeting, that he had been promised by the commis-
sioners a copy of the opinion which they were about to
take from the Attorney and Solicitor-General, Mr. Wil-
liams was advised to request the same favour. Having
made this request, lie received in reply the following letter
—a letter which, at least, proves that the Bishop is occa-
sionally incorrect in his statements; for it is an undoubted
fact that copies of the opinion had been given away, and
one of them, as we are informed and believe, by the Bi-
shop himself.

" Fulham, Nov. 11, 1829.

" Dear Sir,—Mr. Jelf informs me that Mr. Wilberforce
has not had a copy of the opinion referred to in your let-
ter. I imagine that he has only the substance of that
opinion, as to the difficulty of assigning districts under
the 7th and 9th George IV.
" The commissioners do not think it right to give copies
of opinions, which are obtained for their own guidance.
" I am, dear Sir, your faithful servant,
"Rev. T. Williams. " C. J. LONDON."

On February the 17th, Mr. Williams sent to the
Bishop of London two copies of his Address to the In-
habitants of Hendon, nor did he receive any reply what-
ever in referencelb their contents. On March the 12th,
Mr. Williams called on the Bishop respecting the Marriage
Validity Bill, which was then passing through the House
of Lords. He had scarcely spoken to the Bishop on the
subject, before he was told in the most abrupt and offen-
sive manner, that he had stated a falsehood in his Ad-
dress, 6-c. Mr. Williams replied, if the Bishop would
inform him to what statement he alluded, he no doubt
should be able to exculpate himself from such a charge.—
The Bishop hastily answered—" To that in which he was
said to have informed Mr. Williams that Mr. W. Wilber-
force had complained to him of a neglect of duty," &c.—
Mr. Williams immediately recalling to the Bishop's re-
membrance not only the day on which the information
was given, but other and peculiar circumstances which
were connected with this information, and which pre-
cluded the possibility of a mistake, was again told by the
Bishop, in extreme irritation, it was a gross falsehood.—
Mr. Williams, feeling that he could not continue to listen
to such degrading and unworthy language, left the Bishop;
and, after communicating with some professional friends,
wrote to him in these words :

" March 12, 1830.
" My Lord Bishop,—After the unwarrantable and
indecent terms, gross falsehood,' used by you this morn-
ing, I feel, in cnmmon justice to myself; I ought imme-
diately to make public all that has transpired between us,
from your first intemperate letter, and your subsequent
conduct repecting the ordination of my curate, to the pre-
sent time.

" As a clergyman, and awfully responsible to my God
for my words, Ido most solemnly and sacredly assert, that
you did inform me that Mr. W. Wilberforce had com-
plained to you of •my neglect of duty, &c. And I can only
regret, with too many others of your diocess, that, from
the hasty manner in which you are in the habit of ex-
pressing yourself, you should be so continually forgetting
what has fallen from your lips.

" I am, my Lord Bishop, your bumble servant,

. .
-"
THEO. WILLIAMS.
" The Lord Bishop of London."

For what purpose, except to prevent Mr. Williams from
placing a curate at Mill-hill, and to further the design of
Mr. Wilberforce, did the Bishop of London refuse to or-
dain a gentleman of character, of talent. and connexion,
unless he withdrew his name as a subscriber to a brlnch
school of the British and Foreign School Society ? What
will the world say of such an act of mental tyranny? And
what will they say when they are told that the individual
who in these times had dared to exercise it, has since
(with his usual consistency, and after having been told
that the circumstance would be brought before Par-
liament) himself become a benefactor to the same society?
And with ref .1 ewe to the indecent and unjustifiable
language used by the Bishop to Mr. Williams, we can only
remark, with unfeigned regret, that no excuse can be given
for it, but _ _

- -
" He bath been rash from his youth upwards."

And again, as to what Mr. Williams so solemnly asserts
that the Bishop told him, if it had not been the case, it is
impossible to suppose that Mr. Williams could have been
(we will not say so unprincipled, but) so blind to his own
interests, as to malvt a statement which the Bishop could
have immediately contradicted, but which he did not, and
to send the paper containing the statement to the Bishop
himself. That Mr. W. Wilberforce and his nearest rela-

tiveshave been circulating such wicked reports in other
quarters, equally injurious to Mr. Williams, will soon he
made public, in a manner which will not admit of con-
tradiction.

That the Bishop of London might be aware of the manner
in which Mr. Williams intended to give publicity to what
had taken place, a copy of the above correspondence, &c.,
previous to publication, was sent to the Bishop, with this
accompaniment :
If Hendon Vicarage, April 20, 1830.
" My Lord BL.L have taken the liberty of en-
closing to you a copy of the correspondence, &c., which I
a.n about to publish. I sincerely regret that there should
be any occasion fur such a step, not only from the many
years which I have known you, but from the respect which
I feel for the high and responsible offiee in which you are
placed. The language, however, which you have thought
proper to use, leaves me no alternative—language which
I am sore you must have regretted, and which you must
be conscious I have not deserved.—l am, my Lord Bishop;
your humble servant,
(Times.)

" THEO. WILLIAMS."

• It appears from last night's proceedings in the
House of Commons, that the odious law of banish-
ment for libel is to be erased from a statute-book
which it ought never to have polluted. Lord Mor-
peth having given notice of a Bill for the repeal of
the law in question, the Attorney- General announced
his own intention of introducing a similar measure,
to which Lord Morpeth at once gave place. It is,
however, a pity that the Attorney-General should
hang a rider upon his humane and liberal Bill of
a nature to bring into unmerited disrepute his mo-
tives for so much of the proposed law as will have
in view the relief of the subject from oppression.
A guarantee of 1001. is but a paltry security for good
conduct. Those who are at once able and willing to
make themselves formidable by attacks upon their
neighbours, will indulge the fancy at a larger sacri-
fice than that of 1001., while there is something un-
gracious and irritating in the preliminary demand of
such a safeguard against libel, which is not in keep-
ing with the general relation between the Govern-
ment of England and its subjects. There is assur-
edly law enough in the country to repress libel as
the law already stands; for it is clear the man who
proves himself unable to pay in money the sum of
1001., will be unable to resist an execution, under
which the whole materiel of his business must fall
into possession of the adverse party. We would ad-
vise the Attorney-General to do the thing hand-
somely, and levy no fine by anticipation upon fel-
low-subjects as yet innocent of transgressing.-Times.
It will be seen from the proceedings of the
House of Commons last night, that the Attorney-
General announced his intention of bringing in a
Bill for repealing that part of the law of libel which
subjects the editors, printers, and publishers of
newspapers to banishment, upon a second convic-
tion for libel. This is so far good, though only a
; but it would Lave been more
Government to have brought for-
iii:maerdpdilleabthaelee tmo to
the s
ef jurasueicoefits own accord, instead of be-
ing forced into it by a motion from the Opposition
side of the House. This measure is also to be
accompanied by a demand of an additional hun-
dred pounds of security against the commission
of libels, from the proprietors of all newspapers
which may be commenced after the passing of
the intended 13i11; and to this clause we see
no other objection except that it is not mutual be-
tween plaintiff arid defendant—that it demands se-
curity for the result of an action for libel from the
proprietors of newspapers, but leaves the latter un-
protected against vagabond pettifogging attorney
frivolous and vexatious actions, An insolvebt

may bring an action for libel, and put the proprie-
tors of newspapers to an expense of several hundred
pounds in defending it; but if he should happen to
be nonsuited, there is no mode by which the suc-
cessful defendant can reimburse himself for the ex-
pense so unjustly incurred. Now we contend, that
as security is demanded from the proprietors of
newspapers against the commission, or for payment
of the expenses of a successful prosecution, the pro-
secutor ought also to lodge security for the indem-
nification of the defendant, prior to commencing his
action. This would be but fair, and if Sir James
Scarlett means well to the press, he will make it a
point to insert some such clause in the intended Bill.
—Morning Advertiser.

FROM THE GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT.

Commissions signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the County
of Nottingham.

Southern Regiment of Nottinghamshire Yeomanry
Cavalry—Launcelot Rolleston, Esq. to be Major, vice the
Right Hon. Charles Evelyn Pierrepoint, commonly called
Lord Viscount Newark, resigned, dated May I.
Watnall Troop of Nottinghamshire Yeomanry Cavalry.
T. Barber, Esq. to be Captain, vice Rolleston, pro-
moted, dated May 1.
Commission in the Bloxham and Banbury Corps of Ox-
fordshire Yeomanry Cavalry, signed by the Lord Lieu-

tenant of the County of Oxford.
C. R. Cockerall, Gent. to be Cornet, May 8.
Commission in the King's Regiment of Cheshire Yeo-
manry Cavalry, signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the
County Palatine of Chester.
Adlington Troop of Lancers.
J. L. Newnhana, Esq. to be Captain, vice Stanley, re-
signed, May 7.