The Sun.
London, England, 1833-12-09 00:00:00

liberty of the press " seems indeed somewhat
like the liberty of the press that felons have by
the common law of England before conviction,
that is to be pressed to death or hanged. If by
the liberty of the press were understood merely
the liberty of discussing the propriety of public
measures and political opinions, let us have as
much of it as you please ; but if it means the
liberty of affronting, calumniating, and defaming
one another, I, for my part, own myself willing
to part with my share of it whenever our legis-
lators shall please to alter the law, and shall
cheerfully consent to exchange my liberty of
abusing others for the privilege of not being
abused myself." In his " Account of
the Supremest Court of Judicature in Penn-
sylvania—viz., the Court of the Press"--
he says, that the Supreme Executive Council of
Libellers held in their exclusive keeping the
characters and good fame of the citizens, and
accused, judged, and condemned at pleasure,
with no appeal from their tribunal. The follow-
ing witty and caustic passage, in the same paper,
strongly characterises certain parties who have
'lately been actively supplying libels, suppressing_
their refutation, catching at contradiction of
calumny as another lucky opportunity of circu-
lating the original poison with a fresh dose, and
finally, raising " a hue and cry" about the itn-
portance of a " Free Press"—which is, in their
view and estimation, the unlicensed liberty of
lying and slandering. Franklin writes that this
Court of the Press is thus constituted—" It is
not hereditary, as in the Court of dernier resort,
in the Peerage of England ; but any man who
can procure pen, inks, and paper, with a press,
a few types, and a huge pair of blacking balls,
may commissionate himself; and his Court is
immediately established in the plenary possession
and exercise of its rights ; for if you make the
least complaint of the Judge's conduct, he daubs
his blacking-balls in your face wherever he meets
you ; and besides tearing your private character
to Hitters, marks you out for the odium of the
public, as an enemy to the liberty of the
press." This is the very exact description of some
part of the English press which has assumed the
right of foully libelling Lord Durham, and then
denying to him the legal right of redress for
scandalous injuries, such as that of exciting all the
lowerclasses around him by calumnious falsehoods
attributing to him the wanton destruction of a
village on his estate. The Liverpool Albion, in an
excellent article, has ably discriminated between
the real and falsely claimed liberty of the press ;
and disproves the right of the libellers and slan-
derers to the freedom of lying with impunity—
" The grand advocates of the unlimited publi-
cation of opinion, that prosecutions for libel
ought to be discouraged because they have a
tendency to restrain the liberty of the press, has
been brought forward on this occasion. But it
can have no weight on the minds of thinking
men. For as well might a pickpocket argue,
that the prosecution of thieves has a tendency
to destroy personal freedom, as the slanderer
that the prosecution of the libeller will shake
the palladium of liberty.' " The press must be
protected against unjust prosecutions, and pri-
vate and public reputation must be better secured
against the wanton injuries of the libellers.
This is the distinction in the controversy,
which we wish the public to mark. We again
repeat that the growing system of personal
calumny and abuse, especially of the country press,
and the vulgar provincial publications, is disgust-
ing, and without precedent. We know that it is
despised and detesten by all the intelligent and vir-
tuous classes of socisty ; but it nevertheless begets
an odious and vulgar tove of slander in the younger
persons, and accustoms the public mind to the
toleration of falsehood. Franklin sensibly ob-
serves on this subject—" Whoever feels pain in
hearing a good character of his neighbour will
feel a pleasure in the reverse. And of those
who, despairing to rise into distinction by their
virtues, and are happy if others can be de-
pressed to a level with themselves, there are a
number sufficient in every great town to maintain
one of these Courts (of Libel) by their sub-
scriptions." In the rude state of society, prior
the existence of legal institutions, the slan-
dered person cudgelled his calumniator. Now
the law has certainly taken away this ancient
right without affording any substitute ; and yet,
nevertheless, we find that the country gentlemen
libelled are reviving or claiming the cudgel right
again, on the principle that if the Legislature
will not protect by good laws their private repu-
tation, they will resume their original physical
power of self-defence. Franklin boldly advo-
cated, under similar circumstances of defective
law in America, the restoration of the ancient
custom of an oak staff. He says, "My pro-
posal is, to leave the liberty of the Press un-
touched, to be exercised in its full extent, force,
and vigour; but to permit the liberty of the cudgel
to go with itpari passu." But this common sense
philosopher closes his dissertation on the subject
by gravely advising the State Legislature, if they
deemed his offensive proposal detrimental to the
public peace, " to take up the consideration of
both liberties—that of the press, and that of the
cudgel—and by an explicit law to mark their
extent and limits; and at the same time that
they secure the person of a citizen from assaults,
that they would likewise provide for the security
of his reputation." The same advice we strongly
impress upon the present Government. The
state of the Law of Libel is a national and ori-
ginally a Whig question. The proper course will
be for Lord Althorp to refer the subject to a
competent Committee of the House of Com-
mons, to whom the opinions of all parties on
the defects of the existing statute and common
law may be referred, and that a matured and
adequate remedy may be provided. Mr. O'Con-
neh threatens to " take up the question in Par-
liament." Mr. O'Connell can defend libellers
better than he can individually amend the law,
and he is more practied as an agitator than a
legislator. As he is now fond of citing the
United States as an example of civil freedom
to this country, and as we have thus quoted at
length from Franklin, we will to-morrow state
the improvement of the law of libel in
America, where by an amended jurisprudence
the cudgel, has been superseded by the supre-
macy of the law. This question is one of such
present and future importance that we need not
apologise for such repeated discussions of its
merits. We were anxious also to prove, that
however we
sympathise with persons really per-
secuted and oppressed by the law of libel, yet
we feel most for the calumniated persons de-
prived of the protection of the law, and that no
esprit du corps lead us or our readers astray to
do injustice to the moral courage of Lord bur-
ham who has entered the hornet's nest, and
boldly called public attention to an abominable
nuisance. Our declared opinion has been that
Lord Durham stands so high above his detrac-
tors, that he may safely despise them ; but that
he is_ justified in appealing to the laws of his
codntry to punish them, though we would wish,'