The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

The internal proceedings of the Committee
of Privileges have been impenetrably secret, nor
do we think that those proceedings which
they have thought proper to make known admit
of very easy explanation. It is clear that now
these twenty gentlemen have been appointed to
carry into effect a purpose enjoined to them
by the house, they have no right to exercise a
discretion in any manner inconsistent with that
specific object. or unfavourable to its perfect
attainment. Their duty is to inquire fully.

fairly, impartially,—to reject no evidence that
can tend to throw light upon the question which
it is their task, if possibly, to solce,—not to
take pains to compass a condemnation, nor ar
acquittal, of the party or parties whose conduct
they are bound to investigate, hut to receive arci
report the whole and entire truth. Mr.

Grote proposed yesterday that Mr. O'Connell's
name should be added to the list of the Com-
mittee, as the Learned Member was a supposed
friend of Mr. Sheil ; and another Member sug-
ge-ted that a friend of Mr. Hill should also be
placed upon it. This appears to us to be ex-
tremely unjust on both sides, and inconsistent
with all the analogies deducible from the com-
position and practice of other courts. The
Committee are judges, and their first qualifica-
tion ought to be an absence of all bias in favour
of, or adverse to, any of the parties implicated.
Yet Mr. O'Connell has been arpointed one cat
these judges, for the avowed and specific ream
that he i. not unbiassed, but that he is a confi-
dential friend of Mr. Sheil. So with regard to

Mr. Hill, who unquestionably has just the sam,
rights as Mr. Sheil, viz., to a fair tribunal
and ought to he subject to just the same
rules, some f,iend of his will, we presume,
be annexed this day to the Committee, as
Mr. O'Connell was last night. Then whar
sort of votes are to be expected from
these two persons, each trying to vindicate
or support his friend, and each of course being
the advocate instead of the judge. The common
sense of the thing seems to us to be, that both
Mr Sheil and Mr. Hill should attend the Com-
mittee as parties, and that no declared partisan
of either should be permitted to act otherwise
than as an advising and confidential friend, but
certainly not a member of the Committee. If,
as there are those who already begin to conjec-
ture, any attempt shall be made in any quarter
to stifle evidence in order to procure a neutral-
tint report, depend upon it that neither the
House of Commons itself, nor the people of

either country, will be satisfied. There is no
loophole left for compromise : there must, as it
strikes us, be a report decidedly favourable to
one or other person implicated, or as decidedls
discreditable to the Committee, and subversive
of the authority of the House from which it
emanates. We say this with the most unfeigned
respect for the gentlemen composing the Com-
mittee, some of whom are among the most able
and estimable that the whole kingdom can boas..
—Times.

We have seldom perused any observations
betraying greater want of reflection, or more
replete with political ignorance, than those as-
cribed to a noble ex-Diplomatist, in regard to
our prospective commercial relations with France,
in a conversation which took place in the House
of Peers on Tuesday. His Lordship is re-
presented as erecting it nearly into an offence,
or at least as making it an extraordinary anomaly,
that we should maintain friendly relations with
the French Govrrnment, while France was still
unwilling to gratify us by entering into an ad-
vantageous commercial treaty. In what stage of
his diplomatic education, from what treatise
on the law of nations, or at what Court,
Christian or Nlahometan, did the Noble Lord
learn this necessary • connexior between ail
intimate political friendship and an unlimited
commercial intercourse ? Was it from the
relations between Prussia and this country,
where even Tory landlords and Tory sup-
porters of our colonial interest, though zea-
lous friends of Prussian despotism, refuse to
receive Prussian corn or Prussian timber, except
at exorbitant protecting duties? Or was it
from the intimate alliance between the old Bour-
bon dynasty after the restoration, and the Tory
Government of the Sidmouths and the Castle-
reaghs, when new discriminating duties were
imposed upon English iron and English coal,
while the French ports were nearly hermetically
sealed against the introduction of every other
article of our national produce ? The fact is
(and an ex.diplomatist should have known it)
that political friendship almost never can be
made, and never ought to be made, the price
or purcha,e-money of a favourable change in
the commercial policy of a nation. The in,
timacy and confidence of such an alliance
may, indeed, afford opportunities to the
two Governments of mutually examining
their respective systems, without preju-
dice to each other; and discussion, condu.::ted
in such a friendly spirit, is always sure to • end
in the adoption of a more liberal and less restric-
tive policy in commercial matters. To that ex-
tent we have gone hand in hand with the Go-
vernment of France. We have sent commissioners
to examine her custom-house regulations, the
effect of her tariff on her own trade and on
ours, and to propose charges advantageous to
both. She has reciprocated this example of
liberality and wisdom, and has laid belore her
lr-gislative Chambers the result of the inqui-
ries of her own agents and ours. Nay, more,
during the stay of our commissioners in France.
every facility was afforded them of survey-
ing the state of the country, and even of in-
fluencing the feelings of the people—fcilities
which were zealously employed to preach
the doctrines of commercial freedom ; while,
on our part, every information was afforded
that could be demanded. When this has been
done by a Government, public opinion, and the
gradual though reluctant consent of the great
interests implicated in the change, must do the
rest. A commercial treaty a wise Government
would not desire, as on equal terms it would be
unnecessary, and on unequal it could not be
permanent, and therefore the communications
between the two Governments, by means of
their commissioners, could scarcely be said to
assume the character of a negotiation. But we
have shown to France the benefits certain
to result to both countries from a more
liberal exchange of commodities, and must
leave the French Government to deal with the
French people the best way it can, to persuade
them to realize them. In the meantime we
reap the advantages of the change in our ow n
system, though not to such an extent as we
might do were France to be as wise as ourselves,
and to accept for her inhabitants a similar ex-
tension of her trade.—Times.
A notice of motion for this evening in the
House of Commons has been given by Mr.
O'Connell, to call the attention of the House to

the conduct of Mr. Baron Smith, with a view
to his removal from the Bench. A motion in
Parliament, with a view to the removal of a
Judge, is a strong measure, and should only be
resorted to upon such evidence of delinquency

in the judgment-seat as would support an im-
peachment. If Mr. O'Connell has any charge
to make against the Learned Baron which im
ptigns the integrity or impartiality of his con-
duct on the Bench, we presume he will impeaCh
him, and if he does, we know enough of the
iudicial character of Baron Smith to feel con-
vinced that unless the sense of justice in the
British Parliament should be no stronger than
the Learned Agitator's gratitude for favours
received, the venerable Baron will not only
pass unhurt through the fiery ordeal, but
that his character, as a pure and upright
Judge, will derive additional lustre frOm the
attempt to cover with obloquy a name so long
'Associated with whatever is most distinguished
in learning, independence, and moral worth on
the Bench of the sister kingdom. But from
the manner in which Mr. O'Connell has worded
his motion, we cannot suppose that his intention
is to move an impeachment; still less can we
helieve that, in whatever way he shapes his ac-
cusation, it is intended to be levelled against the
judicial integrity of the learned Baron. If we
are not mistaken, he has occupied his present
station for a longer term than a quarter of a
century, during which period he has always sus-
tained a reputation for ability, diligence, and
fearless uncompromising virtue, which has made
him be regarded as one of the chief ornaments
t,f the Irish bench. If we recollect right, Mr.
O'Connell himself was not many years ago one
of the foremost in the ranks of his admirers. It
is well known that Baron Smith was a friend—
an avowed and unflinching friend, on principle
—to the emancipation of the Roman Catho-
lics, when that was not the road to preferment.
Had he then consulted ambition, more than
the dictates of his conscience, there is little
doubt that he would be, at this moment,

in a more exalted—though he could not
he in a more honoured, station on the Bench.
He is one of those I beral Protes►ants who now
reap the reward of his generous sympathies
towards his Roman Catholic fellow. countrymen,
in the ingratitude of those to whom in their '
adversity he extended the right hand of deliver.
ante. He is one of those liberal Protestants
who assisted in opening the doors of Parlia-
ment to Mr. O'Connell and his party, who are
now eager to drag him as a culprit before that
tribunal, and to immolate the splendid victim
on the altar of that " religious liberty" of which
he was one of the founders. What the precise
ground of accusation is, we cannot tell ; but we
presume the Learned Baron has incurred the
displeasure of his accuser by severely animad-
verting, in some recent charges to grand juries,
upon the lamentable effects which the conti-
nuance of violent political agitation in Ireland,
more especially the agitation of the repeal of
the Union, had upon the peace, the order, and
the morals of society. We are not favourable to
the introduction of political topics upon the
Bench, yet during the special commissions
which followed immediately the accession
of the present Ministers to power, more
than one English judge in charging the grand
juries, entered into what might be called the
political causes, or what they conceived to be
the political causes, of the machine-breaking
riots. It certainly does not appear to be either
improper or unconstitutional, at periods of great
popular excitement, for those who administer
the laws to point out in their addresses to the
Grand Inquest what they may consider to be the
cause of the excitement which leads to disorder,
and to put the people on their guard if they see
advantage taken of their ignorance, and delu
sions practised upon them, by which they are or
may be ensnared into crime. On such occasions
the addresses of Judges to Grand Juries are
not unfrequently published in this country, and
widely disseminated among the people. It
usually happens, in times of great excitement
and disturbance, that the poor and ignorant are
the victims of the violent doctrines taught by
more artful instigators, who leave them to their
fate. Whether Baron Smith went beyond the
allowable license of a Judge, in observing upon
such a stare of things in Ireland, remains to be
shown. Certain it is, that the quantity of crime
and suffering which has been brought upon the
heads of an excitable populace in that country,
by inordinate and unceasing agitation ever since
the passing of that great measure, which the
agitators promised should tranquillise the country
for ever, is enough to call forth the indignant
feelings of every honest, humane, and patriotic
heart—even though that heart should beat beneath

the spotless purity of the judicial ermine. We
impute no motives to Mr. O'Connell ; we only
say that his recollection of past services is not
so strong, apparently, as that of recent offence.
The fame of the venerable Judge, whom he
now assails, ought to be peculiarly sacred in his
eyes. He ought to be the foremost to stand
forward to protect in the evening of his life the
distinguished man who gave to the cause of his
Roman Catholic countrymen the generous sym-
pathies of his youth and the splendid support of
his matured talents ; but Mr. O'Connell is as free
to take his own course in this matter as an en-
lightened public are to form their own opinion of
his conduct.—Morning Herald.
The charge of Mr. Baron Bolland, in the case
of Dicas v. Onwhyn, according to which, not
merely newsvenders, but keepers of coffee-
houses, and all others connected with the pub-
lication of a newspaper, are answerable for its
contents, is no doubt a correct exposition of the
ex:sting law. It must strike every one that it
is exceedingly hard to subject persons to a
responsibility of this kind, who cannot possibly
know the contents of the papers, and who are
mere instruments of circulation. It has been
said that a newsman ought to know something
of .the character of the newspaper he circulates,
though he may not know the contents of any
particular number of it ; and that without
making the newsman responsible, opportunity
would be given for the commission of many
wrongs for which no remedy could be obtained.
A crise was put by Mr. Sergeant Bompas, of a
newspaper established for the purpose of li-
belling, with a man of straw for publisher, hired
for the occasion, the impression being con-
veyed in the night-time from a printing-oilie
not connected with the paper, and imme-
diately distributed among the newsmen, so that
no property could be taken in execution to
indemnity a plaintiff—to show the necessity
of extending the legal responsibility to news-
men. We are not prepared to say that the
subject is not attended with difficulties. But
it is quite clear that the law cannot be suffered
to remain in its present state. For one thing,
it seems quite useless to lay a case before a Jury,
if the Judge before whom the cause is tried
has the power of giving whatever effects he

pleases to the verdict. It will depend in this
case, for instance, on Mr. Baron I3olland, whe-
ther the plaintiff obtains his costs or not ; and
as all actions of this kind are brought merely
for the costs, and a Jury will never consent to
give more than nominal damages, the determi-
nation of the Judge to certify or not is every-
thing. The decision of Lord Lyndhurst, in the
Fudge case of Mr. Hunt and the True Sun,
caused universal astonishment, and led to the
belief that his Lordship, in all cases of nominal
damages, would throw the plaintiff's costs on
the defendant. A pettifogging attorney, once
aware of a determination of this kind, might
levy large contributions on newspapers and
newsmen ; for what is there which may not be
construed into a libel by the present law ? It
is quite essential that the law he altered. But
care must be taken, at the same time, to protect
the public against aggression from newspapers.
At present we should say, that while the ag-
grieved by the press are often left without re-
dress, the press is also left a prey to unprincipled
pettifoggers. The subject must be carefully
considered in all its bearings, by those who
undertake to give us a new law of libel.—
Morning Chronicle.
We learn that Alexander Bannerman, Esq.,
M.P. for Aberdeen, is the gentleman who, of
all the supporters of Earl Grey's Government,
is the least afraid to state to his constituents his
reason for supporting it ; and we learn further
that Alexander Bannerman, Esq., M.P. for
Aberdeen, is to take the seat of Mr. Kennedy
at the Treasury. There is only one inconveni-
ence in this satisfactory arrangement. Mr.
Bannerman, in his canvass of his intelligent and
independent constituents, thought it proper, or
fbund it necessary, to express his determined
hostility to the continuance of any restrictions
on the importation of foreign corn, and pledged
himself to exert every energy of mind and body
to procure the total abolition of the present
odious, absurd, and unjust corn laws. The Go-
vernment, in its recent explanations to the
honest and enlightened House of Commons,
thought it right, or found it expedient to express
its decided approbation of the continuance of re-
strictions on the importation of foreign corn,and
pledged itself not to introduce, and to oppose
if any Member should•introduce, any Bill for
the alteration of the present popular, reasonable,
and equitable corn laws. This is a difficulty.
But it is not insurmountable. Mr. Bannerman
must talk as he has heretofore talked to his con-
stituents ; he must eulogize, as he has hereto-
fore eulogized, free trade ;—lie must scold, as
he has heretofore scolded, the Government. To
all these things Lord Althorp must shut his
eyes and stop his ears, as he has been accus-
tomed to shut his eyes and stop his ears when
Mr. Poulett Thomson has acted too plainly or
spoken too loudly. When Mr. Bannerman is
securely Lord of the Treasury, and not less se-
curely Member for Aberdeen, we recommend to
him the example of the warrior Queen in the

lEneid:—
" 11 a v.-I intacto sezetis per summa volaret
Gramina ; nee teneras cursu lcesisset arislas."
Which lines we venture to translate for the be
nefit of Mr. Bannerman :
" He touches not the grain ; ~nd, onward borne,
Ne'er makes a motion on the tender corn,"
—Morning Post.