The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-19 00:00:00

(From the Standard.)

Our Contemporary, the Times, laments, we arc sure
with sincerity, that an opinion prevails in England that
" there' is oir la* for the rich and another for the
poor," and cttes the case of Lord Waldegrave in proof
that such, isrithe.t4th. We leave the Morning
Chronicle to,":Bo6.*=i, tlya-..Ximp with regard to Lord
Waldbgraire p sitra'"werthink-thait the:reply of our Whig
Contemporary itilt^-1A admitted as conclusive :
" Ind jui.tied to.ttie'Oourt of queen's Bench, it may be
.
observed that.the is universarof allowing defen-
dants to speak with the prosecutor, that is, to buy him off,
and that the sentence is deferred till the result of the con-
ference is known. This practice has grown out of the
strict separation which the English law makes between
civil and criminal matters. In the case of an assault, Lr
instance, the fine or imprisonment of a defendant may be
a satisfaction. to the public, but should the prosecutor have
been disabled, and subjected to heavy loss, the Magistrates
are naturally led to endeavour to obtain something for him."
It is plain that no state of society having both rich
and poor can exist, in which there will not to this ex-
tent prevailet difference of laws ; that the rich must be
better ably to compensate injuries, and the poor more
willing tia'. receive compensation, than to prosecute re-
venge, or than even to assert the austere authority of
the law. Beyond this, we deny that the criminal law
of England allows of any distinction between rich
and poor—nay, more, we deny that any opinion
of such distinction obtains or ought to obtain. The
first man prosecuted for fighting a duel without homi-
cide was—Who? A poor man? No. An Earl ; and
we cannot help thinking prosecuted chiefly because he
was a Nobleman ; for we cannot think so badly
of any of our countrymen as to belie% e that the
prosecution was suggested and encouraged, and
pressed forward because its object was unpo.
pular (perhaps justly unpopular) on other grounds.
We are sure that the Times would not consciously
pander to a feeling so execrable, as the desire to
sacrifice a man nominally for one offence because he
was guilty of another. Then there is the prosecution
of Lord Waldegrave, whom we know to be guilty
of a very grave offence—of an offence meriting the
severest punishment. But is not the publication of the
young man's scandalous misconduct a serious aggrava-
tion of his punishment, whatever that may be—and
would a young tradesman or an humble young
gentleman committing such an offence, as hundreds
do every week in the year, be subjected to that
aggravation ? No ;we say that the criminal laws
bear more heavily upon offenders of exalted rank
than upon any others : the country knows that they
do—the aristocracy themselves know that they do--
and, all rejoice at it. We belong to the democracy,
and we stand or fall by our own order ; but we can-
not as Englishmen divest ourselves of pride in the
moral superiority of the present British aris-
tocracy to any aristocracy existing, or that ever did
exist. The aristocracy of England are not merely
the first class in rank they are in intelligence
and moral worth certainly inferior to no other
class of the community. The very circumstances, un-
pleasant and disgraceful as they are, brought forward
to asperse their order, prove this. A stupid and crimi-
nal escapade is charged—sometimes truly, and much
more frequently falsely (for offenders of lower rank have
no objection to affiliate their misconduct upon their
betters)—against an anonymous "scion of aristocracy."
Is not the cry immediately, " Oh, it must be the one
" Lord W. or the other Lord W. ?" Now there are,
between Peers and sons of Peers of the age of man-
hood, probably from 1,500 to 2,000 commonly resident
in England : of these there are but two in the whole
upon whom conjecture can fix any disgraceful or un-
gentlemanlike violation of the law. Is there any other
class that would bear this test ? And can it be sup-
posed that a class so generally, or rather so univer-
sally (for what is two• out of 1,500) exemplary, is a
class enjoying peculiar impunity for misconduct? We
wish this fact to be sincerely reflected on, and there-
fore we will close with it.
(From the Courier.)
A new Coates will shortly reassemble at Madrid, as
the elections of the Deputies throughout Spain were
rapidly proceeding. The Correspondent of the 71inies,
writing from that capital, enunciates the following rather
unaccountable opinion regarding these elections. "It
must be said, for the credit of the Regency, that the elec-
tions were never freer than on this occasion. The Go-
vernment, so far from wishing to influence the votes, had
directed its subordinates to abstain from all interfe-
rence, and its orders were so strictly obeyed that only
one provincial intend Ant was mentioned as having
infringed them, who was to be removed for his con-
duct." Ate! : how E.1111i:
that a large mil wry iurce was collecting and concen-
trating, by the ordeis of the Duke of Victoria, about
Madrid, which by the end of the present month would