The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-20 00:00:00

•ojverw
1,-nlmi
4

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 20, 1848.

Say whatever they may, the Conservative quid-
In'neS will find it somewhat difficult to prove that the
simultaneous movements for political innovation and
social improvement are incompatible. As an in-
sinuation calculated to bring the cause of the Radical
Reformers into disrepute, this assertion is as insidi-
ous as it is disgraceful. It is nothing more than the
institution of a comparison between a patriot under
the name of a demagogue, and a Christian under
the name of a philanthropist—the result of the com-
ps, rison being distorted by means of the most specious
sophisms into the reprehension of the former
and the panegyric of the latter. Against any
such comparison we protest ab initio as unfair
in principle, and as false in rhetoric. It is
as unjustifiable to contrast a political reformer and a
social, reformer, as it would be for a modern Plutarch
to contrast a Marlborough with a man of Ross,
a Whitbread with a Howard, or a Boadicea with
a Mrs. Fry. No analogy exists between the two—
sympathy there unquestionably is in the abstract,
but not one particle of analogy; and between things
altogether unanalogous no just comparison can by
possibility be drawn. No. It were as idle to
maintain the incompatibility of social improvement
and of political innovation, as to deny that
BeelaetariN CONSTINT and the Abbe DE L'EPPE
Were fellow-countrymen ; it were as frivolous
as to maintain that sanitary measures and
educational measures were, either the one or
the ether of them, beyond the adjudication of
Parliament. What we would assert in the teeth of
all Opposition is this—that the excellence of the pro-
ject advocated on
Thursday
forenoon in the Free-
naasone' Tavern, Great gieen-street, does not demon-
strate the injurious character,\\ of the meeting con-
vened on the Preceding ednesday, at the Riding
Academy, Albany-street. Bcccuse it is laudable to
ameliorate the condition of the labouring classes by
driblets, it is not reprehensible to •
aspire to assuage
their sufferings, or to promote their •
interests whole-
sale. Because the Illustrious Consort of
Queen VICTOaIA could advocate with the
impressement of genuine feeling the l •
c alms
of the artizan, and of those dependent
upon his exertion!, we cannot see why it should fol-
low as a necessary inference, that the honourable
Representative of Montrose should: be deemed inca-
pable of feeling for the privations of the multitude, or
that his aspirations for securing to that multitude
some direct participation in the legislation of the
land should be only regarded as a yearning for anarchy
and spoliation.
Derided, despised, traduced, covered with obloquy,

scouted as treasonable, hated for its democratic ten.
dency, the Anti-Corn-law League rose, expanded,
and ultimately became triumphant. So must it
ultimately be with the League which is just
consolidating itself for the furtherance of the
Reform movement. Mr. COBDEN will have to
pass through another ordeal before he can achieve a
new victory as stupendous as the one obtained by him
against the legions of monopoly. There are many
amongst the little decimated squad of Protectionists
who flatter themselves with the idea that RICHARD
COBDEN has been lucky rather than great, that his
orations were meretricious claptrap rather than un-
adorned and irresistible eloquence, and that now that
the question of free trade is settled, and that the
agitation of the League has subsided, he, the Oracle
of Free Trade, and the Leader of the League, is no
longer formidable. They flatter themselves, these men,
that COBDEN is only a second ICARUS, that he
has been carried by favourable circumstances
to an unsuitable altitude, that his waxen wings have
melted, and that he is now falling into the abyss of
a congenial obscurity. Those who remember the
career of RICIIAr:O COBDEN during the years 1841,
1842, 1843, 1844, and 1845, those who preserve a
recollection of his masterly speeches in the provinces
and in the metropolis, in the hail at Manchester and
in Covent garden Theatre, on the platform and on
the stage, from the hustings and from the floor of
the House of Commons, will know how such mis-
representations should be received, and how the
character of this distinguished Reform
should
be vindicated from slander e
by his compatriots. Here, however, is an op-
portunity afforded to the Honourable 'Member for
the West Riding of Yorkshire for testifying himself
the falsity of these aspersions and inuendoes. JOSEPH
IlumE has already appeared upon the platform before
the unrepresented and the represented citizens, and
has boldly staked his reputation in advocating the
cause of the million. Under the guidance of such
men, and aided by the fact of a rational amalgamation
between Chartists and Radical Reformers, the move-
ment cannot but be brought in the end to a successful
conclusion. How essential this conclusion is to the
security of our institutions and the perpetua-
tion of our national happiness, is visible in
the circumstance that out of tLe 658
330 is by boroughs with a
represen-
tatives who constitute the House of Commons, a
majoritypopulation
f 3,12
oof
while the minority of 328
represents the remaining population of 23,870)000—
giving in one instance a Member for every 9,400,
and in another for every 73,000 persons. Surely
those
statistics alone should be sufficient to rouse the
Indignation of the country, and to afford the requi-
site impulse to the grand movement of reform now
on the eve of its commencement. While the whole
European Continent is convulsed with the progress
of democracy, assuredly England should not alone
remain impassive to the demands of the age; isolated
in the fraternization of nations, or stubborn in the
maintenance of abuse.

'We have repeatedly directed the public attention to
the evils resulting from the manner in which prose-
cutions are carried on in this country, and recom-
mended that the practice should be assimilated to
that which has been carried on with so much benefit
to all parties in Scotland. The necessity of a public
prosecutor has long been fully recognised. In many
instances there has been a complete failure of justice,
and criminals have escaped in consequence of the in-
dividuals who have been aggrieved by their conduct
being unable or unwilling to advance the funds ne-
cessary for carrying on the case effectively' against
them. There is at least the possibility of such a result
in every case entrusted to the care and ittention of
private parties. A session scarcely passes at the
Central Criminal Court, or an assizes in any county
town, in which the presiding Judges have not to
deplore delays and difficulties interposed in conse-
quence of some of the cases not being ready for in-
vestigation when brought before the Court, and in
others, that they themselves are compelled to depart
from their legitimate functions to ascertain the facts
from the several depositions that have been
returned, and not only to judge with impar-
tiality between the Crown and the prisoner,
but to examine the several witnesses on behalf
of the prosecution, and to extract from their lips the
evidence necessary to sustain the charge. The
greatest inconvenience is sustained by the Court, the
juries, the parties who are called on to act
as prosecutors, and even by the very pri-
soners themselves, in consequence of the sys-
tem ; for although in some cases guilty men
may escape the punishment due to their crimes, in
others innocent men may be, and too often are con-
victed, because the arbitrators of their guilt or inno-
cence—the juries, on whose decision their future fate
depends—are disposed to make allowances for defi-
ciencies of evidence, which might otherwise lead to
acquittal, because there was no properly instructed
counsel to bring the case before them in a complete
and perfect manner.
But there is another point of view in which the
system must be regarded, in which its consequences
are still more injurious. We repeatedly find cases in
which the power thus allowed to private parties, of
preparing any prosecutions they may think proper
without any test or check being applied, is grievously
abused, and made subservient to the gratification of
their vindictive or malevolent passions. Few persons
have been so fortunate as to pass through life with-
out being placed at some period in a position in
which an enemy could make a charge. If a person
appears as witness in any court of justice, or
is required to make an affidavit, a charge
of perjury may be preferred, in fact,
the instances are innumerable in which prosecutions
may be instituted without the slightest possibility of
a conviction, and however triumphant may be the
vindication of the accused, he will still be eubjected
to a certain stigma and reproach for having been
placed as a criminal in the dock ; he will in addition
thereto have to submit to the expense and annoyance
of preparing his defence, bringing up his witnesses,
Peeing counsel and attorney, &c., &c., all of which he
must defray out of his own pocket, for whatever may
be the result, as it is beneath the dignity of the Crown
to pay costs, and the proceedings, although really the
work of some malicious scoundrel, are carried on in the
name of the Crown, he is left wholly without remedy,
unless the very problematical advantage of being
permitted to bring a civil action for damages for the
malicious prosecution may be considered as such.
last,cwe which occurred at the Old Bailey on Wed-
nesdayand which was reported in The Sun of
the same day, affords a strong illustration of this de-
scription of grievance. Three gentlemen of respecta-
bility were placed in the dock, charged with feloni•
ously forging and uttering a will. When the case
was called on, the Learned Counsel who appeared for
the prosecution, stated that although he had caused
inquiries to be made for the prosecutrix, and
her witnesses, he was informed that none of them
were present. Under these circumstances the case
was allowed to stand over for half an hour, during
which time these gentlemen were detained in the
dock, exposed amongst the felons and criminals by
whom they were surrounded, to every person who
chanced to visit the court. At the expiration of that
period they were again brought forward, and there
being no appearance against them,..they were ac-
quitted. Then, indeed, their talented counsel made a
startling statement, clearly showing the real causes to
which their appearance as criminals might be as-
cribed, and pointing out a strange instance of neglect
on the part of the grand jury, who found a true
bill. Of the three gentlemen at the bar, two
were sons of the testator, whose will it was
alleged they had forged, and the third was a highly
respectable solicitor, who had married the sister of
the other defendants. The chief originator of the
charge was a person who had married a niece who
formerly lived in the service of the testator, and, it
was stated, "that the result of that marriage had
been the constant ill-usage of the unfortunate woman
by her husband. The parties who had preferred the:
charge had never gone before the grand jury.
Theprim awiillahciaed
enaerer been produced or brought from
to
be sufficient
Doctors'
summoned, Commons—theconi
convict
tntehseses
parties of it vic-ehraergnedo t
.
and yet the grand jury hadfound a true
bill,—showing that they conceived there was a
, which, if not rebutted, would
' Well, indeed, might the Learned Judge who
Presided at the trial express his astonishment
• at so strange a proceeding, and well, indeed,

4 &Lk. A:4_ 44

migh ft that grand jury make a presentment of the
utter uselessness of inquiries before grand juries, and
state their opinions that such bodies ought to be
aboli shed. If all others were to act in a similar
manr er to themselves, the sooner the system is
abrog ittcd the better. Grand juries were intended to
protect innocent persons from being exposed to ex-
pense to id inconvenience, and from having their fair
fame a, 3 d reputation injured by appearing publicly in
court an criminal charges. Had the jury in question
inter., led to provide an unequivocal testimony of the
inuti' Lity of the institution, they could not have
affor. 3ed a stronger one. Every grand jury, how-
ever, -will not neglect their duty in so glaring a
mans per, and so long 33 public prosecutions may be
instit ;sited by private individuals, their existence is
absolutely necessary, as some protection, although, as
it api 3oars, an inadequate one, against such frivolous
and uas founded charges. When, indeed, a public prose-
cutor i s established, by whom (or by his deputies),
every
Cf ;barge must be investigated before it is brought
into ourt, and who will be responsible that there is
at lea: t a prima facie; case against the party ac-
cused, then the necessity for a grand jury will
becom e very questionable, and it may very possibly
be sai ely dispensed with.