The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-24 00:00:00

SPIRIT I'a3LIC JO UIVNALz".

The political shell which has burst so opportunely
among the Liverpool Tory slanderers seems to fill the
Conservatives with alarm, lest, we presume, the confla-
pration should spread and burn out other foul ealum-
niators. The system of libel and personal detraction
has been notoriously the dernier resort of the TOries
for several years past. A " Parson's paper," and a
certain northern monthly periodical, commenced the
system pending the Queen's I real. It has been in-
dustriously continued from that time to the present
year, and now begins to fail the Tories. We recom-
mend the Reformers in all the provincial. districts,
where this vile warfare against private reputation has
been carried on, to leave no methods untried to detect
and punish, vi et armis, the slanderers and liars. The
London Standard is indignant that we or any country
paper should give publicity to the Liverpool correspon-
dence superscribed " private and confidential." Verily,
when one party outrages all the rules of civilized con-
test—when foul fighting is resorted to—we thought the
other "rparty was absolved from all conventional rules.
We give credit to the persons in Liverpool; be they
who they may, who effected the explosion of this Tory
conspiracy against private character. The Liverpool
Chronl'ele has always courageously grappled with the
local liars and slanderers, and was fully justified in
routing the gang by the pu acation of the letters,
however procured. Society owes tG none .a greater
debt of gratitude than. to those JoUrnalists or fearless
advocates of the popular cause who wage war with
such assassins as the skulking scoundrels who, under
the mask of the Public Press, calumniate their neigh
bows -unseen and irresponsibly. We make no obser-
vation on the instrument selected by the Liverpool.
Tories for their despicable and cowardly object, having
no wish to rake up the proceedings of the courts of law
and Many unhappy occurrences in Scotland. -We deal
only with the Liverpool Standard. This provincial
joufnal has been distinguished for its most foul aid
unfounded slanders . on. Mr. Shepherd, Mr. William
ltathhone, and other virtuous and liberal politi-
cal leaders of Liverpool. • Shareholders have been
called upon as responsible- for the calumnies, and
have deified their connection with the scandalous per-
petrators on their." Word's of honour." .Is such a vile
system to be toleiated in a, civilized and Christian
country ? No ;we rejoice in the signal exposure of
the conspirators, and despicable must be the cause
which needs such infamous support. Lord Sandon
and the Gladstones, and that " gentleman of the
press," the Marquis of Salisbury, are called upon to
disown all confederacy with the journalist, whatever
political aid they may have derived from his slanders
of their opponents. The gentlemen have committed
themselves, and they. cannot justly complain that those
who have
,been victims of the conspiracy give pub-
licity to their quarrels. We have to apologise for inac-
curacies in our article of yesterday on this subject. We,
find that the Liverpool Standard is not the only news
paper property that the Marquis of Salisbury pos-
sesses, for we are credibly informed that he is, or was,
also, the largest, if not the sole proprietor of another
Tory paper at Hertford, called the County Press;
and we beg also to be allowed to take this opportunity
of correcting another mistake we fell into yesterday,
when we stated, that no one who was acquainted
with his Lordship's talents -would suspect him of
contributing leading articles to any journal. In this,
it appears, we were wrong ; for we find it is noto-
rious to all who reside in Hertfordshire, that much
of the personal abuse of Mr. Duncombe and his
supporters, during the severe contest for the represen-
tation of the borough of Hertford, as well as the lead-
ing articles in defence of gipsies, bludgeon men, four-
teen-days' leases, and electioneering devices, are be-
lieved to emanate from the pen of a most noble speci-
men of hereditary wisdom. But if any one should
doubt the fact, let him only read the cross-examina-
tion of Mr. George Nicholson, Lord Salisbury's con-
fidential solicitor at Hertford, given on the trial of
Riissell Davis for perjury in the King's Bench, in
1834, after the Noble Marquis's nominees, Lords Ma-
hon and Ingistre, had been unseated by a Committee
of the House of Commons for bribery and corruption,
on a petition of Mr. Duncombe.
" [George Nicholson, cross-examined by Clarkson.]
".Q. Are you the proprietor of the Conservative news-
paper at Hertford? A. No, lam not.
" Q. Have you written in that paper ?—A. I may have
done so occasionally.
" Q. Have you not written in it for years ?—A. I may
have added to the leading articles, but I have not seen them.
" Q. Will you swear you never wrote one The
responsibility of the leading article may have fallen upon
myself, but I never wrote the whole of it. •
" Q. Do you mean to say that if there were any libel-
lous parts, you should not be answerable ?—A. No, I was
advised with whether they were libelous or not.
Q. I donot mean whether your professional ingenuity
was applied to, to determine what was or was not libellous,
but have you not been a frequent writer of the leading ar-
ticle in The County Press ?—A. Occasionally I have sent
an article ; many leading articles were sent in My writing,
but they,were not my composition.
" Q. Were they the composition of higher persons in
society than yourself?-- A.. No,' they were the contribu-
tions of different parsons.
Q. Upon your oath were not frequently the leading
articles the composition of persons higher in society than
yourself ?—A. Yes, they maze have been.
" Q. Do you know a place called Hatfield ?—A. Yes.
" Q. Lie you know how many of them came from hence?
—A. I cannot say.
" Q. You do not know that any articles came from
Hatfield?—A. No, I do not say that.
Q. Who are the proprietors of the County Press F
A. I decline answering that question.
Q. Do vou refuse answering ?•
privilege, an'il lam uot entitled to answer."
Who calf marvel, after these discoveries, that such
" nobles" as Salisbury, Lyndhurst, and Abinger (Sir
James Searlett. was- Lord Mahon's counsel aaainst
Russell Davis), should vote against the names of
Newspaper Proprietors being registered ? Publicity
would, indeed, be extremely inconvenient.' We shall
pursue this subject. The Peers partly preserved their
Schedule A boroughs by a pocket and an illicit inter-
course with the. provincial Press. We are informed
of several hitherto unknown facts of lordly "gentle-
men of the Press," which we shall make known.
With regard to the objections. of the London Standard
to the terms used by us in speaking, of the late Mr.
Sadler, we may have used a stronger epithet than, on
reflection, we .1
light choose to apply to a man who,
with many failings,l had, no doubt, some redeeming
qualities. But we quarrel not with the dead, and
therefore have no wish to revive discussion on the
subject of that gentleman. But the Liverpool slan-
derers shall receive no mercy from us ; -and all we shall
add is, that we hopo they will give the Liberals the
benefit of a few moreletteis " pri\ate and confidential."
• —Morning Chronicle.
We have observed with much pleasure that, at the
nominat:on of candidates at Warwick, both Mr. Can-.
ning and his opponent declared themselves strongly
opposed to the Poor Law.A.et. reception their
declarations met from the Constituency t of .Warwick:
demonstrates that, however politics may divide the in-
habitants Of that town, they unite to a man in con-
demning the heartless provisions of that abOminable
statute. This is, however, but one among hundreds
of proofs that are, daily occurring of the fact that the
people are at length roused to a proper sense of the
wanton cruelties the Poor Law Act inflicts upon those
whom sickness or unavoidable reverses may reduce to
poverty. We never doubted for an instant that so soon
as the operation of the Act was seen and felt, every hu-
mane and sane man would speak as we have always
spoken of it from its first appearance until now. It was
only ein consequence of Lord .Althorp and .Lord
13rougham and the other Ministers grossly anisrepre-
seining the nature - and objects of the Act, that it
was suffered to pass into law. We warned the
public that in the prison workhouses of the Coln
Trwsioners, husbands would be separated from their
wires, and parents from their children. Lord

'—A. Yes, it is their

_. . , . ...... ...
isrougrain upon this put himself into a rage, and
deeivred that he did not believe the Commission-
is had even dreamed of perpetrating acts of so
great cruc:ty. Lord Brougham was believed,• and we
were &beloved. Events, however, have proved that
we, not Lora' Brougham, spoke the truth. And this
was the difficulty we had throughout to contend with.
Few could brim,'themselves to believe, especially in the
face of the- bold a ssertions of the Ministers, that a tenth
part of the ertwir,f and injustice we described could be

aimei at under the plausible pretence of reforming the
abuses that had crept into the administration of the
Poor Laws. The deception practised by the promoters
of the measure is now detected. and the result has
been precisely what we anticipated. We are more than
ever 'convinced that it requires only that the system
which the Act provides for the degradation of the mo-
ral, and the deterioration of the physical, condition of
the'peor should be generally understood, in 'order to
insure it universal execration. The very men. who are
now loudest in defending the Act will, by and'hy, be
most clamorous in demanding its repeal, and the time
is not very far distant when the Whigs will receive the
reward they richly merit for the frauds they practised
upon Parliament, in order to insure the passing of one
of the most disgraceful measures that ever emanated
from a Christian Legislature.— Time;.

The denouement of the drama in Spain—the estab-
lishment of a dentoeratic Constitution—is an event of
most cheering presage to the Liberals of Europe, and
will, no doubt, usher in similar exhibitions in the
neighbouring- States. It' seems to bz a happy provi-
sion of Providence that despotism is (loomed to work
out its own destruction, and wherever it attempts to
rear its head we may always expect a more rapid move-
ment towards 'the perfect establishment of public
liberty, than where moderate Governments, allow the
passions of the people to rest undisturbed, and lull into
repose their natural longing after liberty. Of this we
have numerous examples in. history, and the present
attitude of Spain is a well-marked illustration., .Had
the Carlists left the Queen's Government undisturbed,
and had she herself not prematurely exhibited a predi-
liction for tyranny, . under the mask 6f' moderation—
for moderation in any monarchy is seldom more than
a mask—she might gradually have wound round the
,
Spanish people the chains of absolutism ; but for-
tunately for Spain the enemies of her liberty roused
her to a timely sense of the danger which threatened,
and bursting from her trammels, she now stands
free to combat with her foes, and her triumph is cer-
tain. In France we are in daily expectation of simi-
lar demonstration—Louis Philippe, if he escape from
assassination, will survive his.own dynasty, and be cast
out of the land he has betrayed. Like Charles Dix,
Miguel, and Carlos, he will serve as a salutary example
to tyrants, and attract, as to a focus, the execration of
mankind. France is not accustomed to wait the move-
ment of other States before she strike for her own free-
dom. Nations should not only profit by their own
experience, but also by the example of one another.
The failure of the attempt in France to consolidate
republican institutions round a monarchy, should serve
as a caution to Spain to exact the utmost possible se-
curity from the ruling powers before she invest them
with the guardianship of her newly recovered rights.
There is a sympathy between tyrants which causes not
only a similitude of action, but also enlists a mutual
support whenever a people is to be oppressed. Would
nations but follow their example of co=operation, the
liberties of mankind would he speedily consolidated on
a basis which might bid defiance to all assault. It is
gratifying to perceive the progress which all the States
of Europe are making in establishing this bond of bro-
therhood. It is rumoured that in consequence of the
recent occurrences in Spain the Monarchs of Europe
are about to hold a general congress ; but whatever
may be the result of their deliberations, we expect that
each will find sufficient employment in opposing the
movement in.his. own state, to preclude the possibility
of a crusade against the liberties of others.. Well may we
exult that England, in being rescued from Tory domina-
tion, is saved from becoming a party to another unholy
alliance against general liberty. The beneficial effect
of a liberal Government in England is already mani-
fested by the hesitation and embarrassment felt by
Louis Philippe's Ministers, on hearing the declaration
of Lord Palmerston, that England would not interfere
between the Queen and the Juntas. The minions of
the King of the French knew they dared not interfere
to put down the Juntas without the concurrence of
England ; and thus; even by standing neuter, and hold-
ing other Cabinets in check, England may afford the
Spanish people the opportunity of consolidating their
institutions, and thus offer an atonement for the wrong
which, under Tory auspices, she has often committed
on public liberty.—Morning Advertiser.

The Ministerial morning and evening press indulged
themselves yesterday in a very unprofitable display of
meanness and malignity. A difference which arose
between the late editor of the Liverpool Standard
and some of the proprietors of that journal having pro-
duced a correspondence,. strictly private, among the
parties, the Liverpool Chronicle, acting. in the spirit,
although certainly not in the interest, of the present
Administration, obtained surreptitiously a copy of that
correspondence, and, in defiance of an express warning
from the individuals concerned, that the letters were
private, persisted in the base object for which they had
been dishonestly procured, and published them to the
world. At this conduct on- the part of the Liverpool.
Chronicle we are not surprised. The mercenary influ-
ence of the till was predominant, and the opportunity
was not to be lost of proclaiming the existence of a
schism among the proprietors and conductors of so for-
midable-a rival as the Standard. It wasnothonourable
certainly. It was not manly. It was not honest.
But what of that ? There was a chance that it might
turn out to be profitable, and when have Whig-
RadiCal journals, or Whig-Radical statesmen either,,
failed to recognise this as the most, or rather the only,
important considetation ? We willingly, therefore,
leave the Liverpool dealer in stolen goods to whatever
profit he may derive in the commercial community in
which he lives from his dirty traffic. It is with the
Whig-Radical press of London, the metropolitan
imitators of his crime, without the. apology of his
temptation, that we have to do. Why should the
Whig-Radial Chronicle of London, and the Globe,
and the Courier, and The Sun patronise a petty lar-
ceny, the proceeds of which are not likely to 'find the
way into their pockets ? It must he mere instinct in
the case of the latter journals. The thing was mean,
have, and vile. It was a thing which no gentleman,
which no honourable man, which no man even of
common honesty, could have done„ by any possibility ;
and, therefore, such is the miserable and grovelling in-
stinct of Whig-Radicalism, the Whig-Radical journals
were compelled, by the imperNifis law of their political
being; to do it. The correspondence, for sake of which so
many Whig-Radical journals have sacrificed whatever
character they possessed for honour and integrity, re-
lates exclusively •to a pecuniary or proprietary diffe-
rence among certain individuals concerned in a Con-
servative journal. It affords no information upon po-
litical, subjects, unless it be that the Liverpool Stan-
dard,
under the conduct of its late editor, had
advanced considerably in ,eirculation and influence, a
fact, by-tile-bye, already well known to the world.
It affords no ground even of personal attack upon the
political opponents of the present Administration, un-
less there be a ground of attack, as the Liberal organs
of the 'Melbourne Ministry seem indeed to think, in
the disclosure that the Marquis of Salisbury, and the.
of the Gladstones contributed some
respectable family
portion of the funds for the establishment in Liverpool
of a Conservative journal. The fact is one which, we
venture to say, the parties concerned never had the
slightest anxiety to conceal. There could be no motive
for such concealment other than that modesty which
makes some men anxious to be unseen when doing good.
It is a very high honour to the distinguished Noble-
men, and to the respectable Gentlemen named in this
correspondence, to have taken so much interest ill
the Conservative cause as they
evidently have done,
and to have been in part the means of providing for it
" powerful, efficacious, and successful a reinforcement
in Liverpool as that which the Standard has un
tlonably afforded. ques-
We hope this meritorious ex-
ample will be extensively followed. The Whig
cal Peers and Commoners who possess the means are
more attentive, we fear, to this field of party exertion
than their Conservative opponents. We recommend
the latter to be more active and vigorous than they
have yet shown themselves in such enterprizes, where-
ever an opportunity can be found of engaging in them
with the least chance of success. The rancour, ma-
lignity, and unprincipled baseness manifested upon the
present occasion by. the Whig Radical Press must
show to Conservative noblemen and gentlemen who
take the trouble to reflect ever so little on the subject,
how much th Destructivcs dread, and how anxious
they are, to prevent,
all such efforts. This is one of the
best reasons that could be given why such efforts should

be made in increased number, and with renovated
vigour: The anxiety of the Whig-Radical Yress to
deter Conservative noblemen and gentlemen from
assisting by their wealth in the establishment of Con-
servative journals, where they are required, may be es-
timated with tolerable accuracy from the delirium and
self-forgetfulness which that morbid eagerness has pro-
duced in the present instance. The Chronicle insinu-
ates that Lord Salisbury voted for the rejection of the
clause in the Newspaper Stamp Bill which required all
the proprietors of a newspaper to be registered, for the
sake of protecting himself from exposure as one of the
proprietors of the Liverpool Standard. To say that
the Noble Marquis i 3 not, and that he never was, a
proprietor of the Liverpool Standard, would only be
!o convict the Chronicle of falsehood, a very unneces-
sary and useless labour. But it may serve to show
the importance
,which is assigned to this attack on
the Marquis of Salisbury, and the desperate and
reckless spirit in which it is pursued, for no other
purpose than that of deterring other Conservative
Noblemen and Gentlemen from a similar course
in their several districts, if we state that the registra-
tion clause, which would not have affected the Mar-
quis of Salisbury, or any other of the gratuitous con-
tributors to the establishment of the Liverpool
Standard, in the slightest degree, would, in fact, have
exposed more than one proprietor of the Morning
Chronicle to a publicity from which they desire to
shrink. The Ministerial journals ought to look oat
home before they indulge in taunts upon the supposed
desire of a man of rank to conceal a proprietor Ship
which he never held: There may be other and more
disgraceful motives than' the pride of rank and station
to make a newspaper proprietor wish to remain in the
dark. This consideration would certainly have occurred
•to some at least of our Ministerial contemporaries on
the present occasion, had not their too passionate .'pur-
suit of a great party. object produced a temporary self-
forgetfulness.—Morning Post.