The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-13 00:00:00

,

ENING, JUNE 13, 1831.

•fajor Dundas. A man of any generosity of feeling would
ave said tohimstlf, here is a girl less able than her equals
I age usually 'are to take care of herself. It would be
isy for ine to take advantage of her simplicity or her
reakness, just as it would he easy for Spring or Cribb, or
my champion of the Pr'ze Rihg, to knock down a beard-
'fiss youth ; but this very weakness is the most poweiful of
it appeals to my honour."
It is not upon this principle that the rich have
)rotected propely—that they have gone on•multiply •
og and aggravating punishments in proportion to
emptation, and facility; but when we come to the
i.e.ttnti of what Shakepeare terms the " pleasant
,ins," in which they trespass in common with the
mor, we find them not only grudging the legal re-
!re,s, but endeavouring to set aside the moral check
tltogether. " Catch who catch can," is the law they
~r•ticli--,escellently convenient' for wolves,--bad for
;:heep. consistent - the aristocracy should
sbroga;e theinthishments for female frailty, which,
:indeed, in their own class, has already the largest
...adulgencgi

1' FIE fAnct OF BEAUFORT AND THE

SPE€TATOR.

(From the Spectator. )
The rule applied for by the Duke has been made
absolute. The case, so far as this preliminary step
is concerned, is now adjudicated: The Curt have
!eclared their opinion, that we have been guilty of
publishing "'a commensich, connecting it with
-he paragraph that went before it, appears to contain
matter of strong imputation upon the Duke and his
family." It remains for a jury to confirm or refute
his view of the case. From all arguments or state-
ments which may be construed as anticipatory of the
jury's verd.ct, we shall carefully abstain. From re-
marks on what is past and irreversible, we do not
consider ourselves precluded ; and the less so, be-
catise, by the form cf procedure, we were precluded
from replying to the learned Knight, whom, with
commendable judgment, his Grace's attorney selected
to conduct the case for the prosecution. We have
heard much of Sir James Scarlett's legal disingenuity,
though we never joined in the cry raised against it.
We have now witnessed it ; yet the evidence of our
experience shall not induce us to treat his conduct
as it might seem to deserve. We shall answer his
remtuks with the respect that is due to our readers
and ourselves.

Sir James Scarlett has acquitted us of being in-
flueneed by " any thing like personal feeling against
the Duke of Beaufort or any of his family ;" we had
already stated that we ft.lt none, and we now repeat
it. That on the Duke as an individual, or his family
as individuals, we did not expand a thought, is
evident from the whole paper. It is not to his
Grace that we now reply, but to his (Trace's coun-
sellor. Sir James Scarlett hinted a " suspicion"
that the affidavit filed by us in explanation of our
remark on the amount of public money received by
the Duke's -family, was meant- not for our justifica-
tion, but that, by pnblishing it in the Spectator, we
might sink deeper in public estimation the character
of the noble Duke and his house. The suspicion is
unfounded. We never intended to publish it. The
Duke's affidavit answered directly and fully our re-
mark on his father's will—it did not answer di-
rectly nor fully our remark respecting the sums his
family had received. We filed the affidavit, for the
purpose of pointing out the defect of his Grace's af-
fidavit on this point; the Court, as we were advised,
Unitiiimly requiring a specific denial by the prosecu-
tor of the statement complained of—a denial "in
express terms."
Sir James Scarlett quoted from an article in the
Spectator of May I4th, the following words :
" History tells us that so great a change of Go-
he went on to argue, as lions our own admission,
effected
elcti is now
eldwithout
lvaerrntd,nisevnatsansevtielart proposedcivil u,
ar. EAnngf-i
that at a period which we described as full of peril,
we ought to have been more than usually circum-
spect in our language. But he emitted to quote,
though called upon to do so, what immediately fol-
lows these words—" that in the present case a cir-
cumstance quite unknown to history must be taken
into account—namely, the Press, free, enlightened,
active, and powerful, beyond all comparison with
forme r times" _by which supplement, we marked the
present period as an exception to all by-gone periods
of similar interest : and so far from admi ting it to be
a period of danger, declared it to be, by the instru-
mentality of the Press, a period of perfect safety.
Sir James first of all asserts, without a shadow of
truth, that our remerks on the Duke of Beaufort
were published at a time of dangerous, excitement,
and then wilfully garbles our pages, in order to
make it be believed that we concurred in opinion
with him ; the assertion and the garbling being
equally meant to convert that into a libel by force
of circumstances which in itself is acknowledged to
have no libellous meaning.
Sir James, adverting to an allusion made to the
Black Book, ventured to insinuate that we might
be convected with that publication. The history of
the Black Book is too notorious to allow us to
give such a man as Sir James Scarlett the credit of
being ignorant of it. Our utmcst offence in regard
to the Duke of Beaufort was, that we stated an in-
d'fferent lac, which we believed to be true, but
which has turned out to be incorrect. Sir James
retorts against us by the insinuation of a malicious
fact, which is not only utterly false, but which he
never for an instant believed to be true.
We have but one remark on the decision to
which the Court has seen fit to come, and we make
it with the perfect respect that is due to such high
authorities. Lord Tenterden said, " following the
usual course on such occasions," there was no alter-
native but to make the rule absolute. It was always
our impression, that in such cases the usual course
was for the Court to be guided by the affidavits before
it. To one portion of the alleged libel the Duke of
Beaufort gave a direct denial; to another and more im-
cmpooeurntcatl.nuitiveprotiiintai portion,
trehu ejl
et gaveltgi judgment
ni
ptrdooepfteitithal
yel
bc thateoummr
tae,dtlevoeaubrssislotoate-
-1 should
conclude nah
te
whether the application be supported by affidavit or
nat. This is not the course laid dom] in the books;
but we note it for
the purpose of record, not of
comment. If the Court and the counsel be right—
if the words complained of by the Duke of Beaufort
he a libel—we can but exclaim, with our respectable
contemporary the Globe, " Of what a host of libels
has the Press been guilty !"

We have been looking pretty closely into the
United Service .Tournal, and have been very much gra•
titled at dissevering the quantity of activity and ability at
work under its livid backs. We perceive that this vest
for the military and naval officers, who are, ex-officio,
greater scribblers than attornies, will turn to admirable
use. Military men are always drawing up papers, repre-
lientalions, and formal memorials, and get into a great ha-
bit of composition : they are very methodical, anti this
serves them instead of Oxonian logic; and they have gene-
rally something to write about, which is more interesting
than Cambridge mathematics. As soon as any journal
is considered and held to be an organized channel of com-
munication of any large and important branch or prefes•
sion, it must necessarily be useful, and to a certain degree
entertaining ; for the great Ft stet of interesting others is
.to be interested yourielf. But what profession or class
can ea:brace such interesting subjects as the United Ser-
vice? The hair-breadth escapes; by land and sea—toe
chivalrous achievements of great-souled men—the deep
researches of an able tactitian—the grand crisis of war ant
Insttle—the ebb and flow of an individual contest—these
and ten thousand other points make the army and navy
service a most admirable material 'and eubj,ct-matter fot a
Specter:or.

PRICE 7D.

SUMMER ASSIZES.

WS TERN .
;lefore the Hon. Mr. Justice TAUNTONCIRCUIT and the Hon. Mr. Justice
;iuthaMPtolll, Saturday, July 9,ALnERSON. at the Castle of 'Winchester.
Thwsday, July 14, at New Sarum.
borset,. Wednesday, July 20, at Dorchester.
Devon, Saturday, July-23, at the Castle of Exeter.
sty of Exeter, same day, at the Guildhall.
'ornwall, Saturday, July 30, at Bodmin.
Somerset, Saturday, Aug. 6, at Bridgewater.
Eristol, Saturday, Aug. 13, at the Guildhall of the City of Bristol.
HOME CIRCUIT.
Before the Right Hon. Lord TENTERDEN and the Hon. Mr.

CC GASELEE. ••
Ifertfordshire, Wednesody, July 13 at Hertford.
EQsex, Monday, July 18, at Chelmsford.
Kent, Monday, July 25, at Maidstone.
SaS3CX, Saturday, July 31, at Lewes.
Surrey, Thursday, Aug. 4, at Croydon.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT.
Before the Right Hon. Sir NICHOLAS COISVNOHAII T`•Nn.st. and
the Hon. Mr._Jitstire LimpriALE.
Northampton, Monday, July 11.
Oakham, Friday, July 15. •
Lincoln and City, Saturday, July 16.
Nottingham and Town, Thursday, July 21.
Derby, Thursday, July 21. •
_Leicester and Borough, Friday, July 29.
Coventry and Warwick, Wednesday, Augt,3.