The Sun.
London, England, 1834-12-08 00:00:00

LORD BROUGHAM'S LETTER, TU E, L,
BULWER, ESQ..

This letter, which is subjoined to a new edition of
Mr. Bulwer's " Letter to a Cabinet Minister on the present
Crisis," ptiblished to-day, Will he fold •Mth iTiii It ititerest.
It is a reply to the remarks contained in that pamphlet on
some parts of the learned Lord's political conduct, which
have lately been made the sul4ect of animadversion. Had
out lithits permitted, we should have transferred the whole
of this letter to our columns. As it is, we must content
ourselves with extracting the following, which are amongst
the most important passages :
" When you would represent me as a partial or doubtful
reformer, you surely Piave Veen listening to one or two of the
hostile newspapers, and not reflecting on what you must im-
mediately call to mind.
" I think no one need fear being considered a timid Re-
former who carried through (without any other persoil OVer
taking any part whatever in its defence) the Scotch Borough
Reform Bill—the first attempt at municipal reform ever yet
made in-England—and which iva§ the tiEeeg:Hy lint§ Of the
grand measure of corporation reform in preparation by the
late Government. I should be only fatiguing .you were Ito
name the other measures of large and uncompromising re-
form with which my name is connected, and I will
ask any one to point out any ony instance in Me- whole
course of mg petite 41e in Which I hare oppaal,
in any manuer of way, any practical measure of reform—be it
in Church or in State--in the judicial, or in the financial, or
in the political department ' might almost say any mea
sure at alI, .for—except that I was against Annual Parlia-
ments, Universal Suffrage, and Voting by Ballot—f really
recollect no Cast in to/tic,: 'I, anti Wirt Mg Bii3idfli and tifti§t Ott-
spacing IttroemPs ever have been found to differ. My whole
life has been devoted to introducing 'changes of a useful
and practical nature, and never at all. of a timid or paltry
extent, into our .establishments and our laws; and when
I rely on the good sense and justice of my countrymen,
and on their capacity to judge tot themselves, and. not
allow their confidence in heiloWed upon a uniform
experience of tiliON't a quarter of a century, to be shaken by
a fe* ritragraphs in newspapers—the motives of which all
the world plainly sees—l know that Ido not indulge a vain
hope that I shall continue to enjoy what has always been to me
the chief reward of my exertions, next to the approval of my
own mind. That my eirottt lige been akvayi very much less
than I 'could have desired, and that they have often seen unsuc-
cessful, I.am most ready to grant ;. but even where I have not
been able to do all I would, I have done what I could to prepare a
triumph in better tirr.ea for -the printipltt ith!ch het?, oniformly,
and *AMA one single exception, guided my public life. The
last occasion on which I took this course, none other being
open to me, were the ebrts which I lately made to abolish the
taxes on newspapers (so hateful to those who would at once
instruct the people, Slid putty_ tile pite§§—hiit ,§0 dear to all
who profs, or fancy they profit by them), and to amend the
law of libel ; and I remind you of this matter, that you may
be able the better to account for the attacks to which in cer-
tain quarters I have been exposed, and also to show you that
my attempts et teibfin Weed fiat LO *Lie *a.l fidild in
Parliament.

" No man who knows any thing of our history for the
last four years, dares reproach me with being a lukewarm
Reformer, or very infirm of purpose in the Government,
or very sparing in the illeglirei with ialch dal out pb-
litical improvement.. I say nothing now of law reform.
All have allowed that there I have done enough for the
time I had the power ; and all know, though I dare say
when it suits them they can forget it, that others pre-
vented me intthdtididgt d fat' illoie fz.ldffil than
any yet attempted in our judicial system— I mean the
Local Courts. All have, likewise, seen that even when I
quitted office, I was so anxious to have the finishing hand put
to my Chancery reform, that I offered to work for nothing,
instead of leading a life of absolute idleness;
,and this saetifiee
I wastu Diake (a great one, all who know my private
pursuits are aware it w.ould.have proved), not only for the
sake of saving the public above 12,000 L a year, but (what is
far more important) to enable the suitors in Chancery to avoid
all the evil of a double appeal That I have been rewarded
for such an offer, as I believe Ins nut often heer; made 'zo the
country; •by nuts iug but abuse, is only a proof, that at a mo-
ment of excitement, no party-man ever can expect even the
semblance of justice.

" But though my efforts for law reform are not denied
(at least as far as j know, for tar lac it from me to doubt
that I May iiitewise be represented as hostile to that),4yet
you and others, who. do not sufficiently reflect on the facts,
and do net at all eorisitler how misehletqus !mph state-
hiolda tire to th pieeied to giicsildn
my being friendly to other reforms. Subsequent events
may perhaps • have taught those who complained •of our
scanty doings •in reform, that our position was not without
its diffieultlet, But this .1 will nv4erl, that had we met the
Patikthietit, tti °Ace, no aietit would kart sold the lineation
had been. passed -without abundant attempts to prepare mea-
sures of public us(fulness—lN A WORD, IMPORTANT REFORMS
—and I will add, that if any man shall suppose I was behind
ANY ONE of my colleagues in the zealous and active support,
and in Mt dnidttonit prepdration of thon—that man, be he
440 he may, willfall into the greatest mistake ever man com-
mitted.

" In conclusion, let me ask what right any one has to
suspect my motives, when I happen to differ with him?
My life, excepting four years, was a continued sacrifice
of interest to my principles as a Reformer and friend of
liberty ; and even in taking office four years ago, I made
a sacrifice both of feeling and of interests which some
alive, and some, alas 1 no more,,well know the cost of.
But all the time I was in opposition, did I ever show the
least slackness to do my duty in the cause of free opinion,
and of opposition to the Court? What abuse did I ever
spare? What bad measure did I ever leave alone? What
Minister did I ever suffer to rest while the country was to hi
served by opposing him ? With whom did I ever compromise,
or treat, or' do otherwise than absolutely refuse all parley?
SURELY, EVEN WIIERE REFORMERS DIFFER, THESE ARE FACTS
WHICH, AS THEY GIVE THE LAST PLEDGE OF SINCERITY ON
THE ONE PART, OUGHT TO RECEIVE THE MOST FAVOURABLE
CONSTRUCTION AS TO MOTIVE FROM THE OTHER.

" Yours truly,
" H. BROUGHAM."

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

MORIARTY V. BROOKES.

This action was brought to recover compensation in damages
for on assault committed on the plaintiff, a salesman in Covent-
garden, by the defendant, a publican.
Mr. THESSIOER (with whom was Mr. MANSEL) having
stated the case to the Jury, called several witnesses, who
showed that on the evening of the 13th of September, the
plaintiff went into defendant's house in Russell street, and
called for a pot of half-and-half ; it happened that he was
a half-penny short of the full price of it ; the defendant
said he was drunk, and took him by the collar, and then most
violently assaulted him, by which he suffered severely. He
also called Mr. Charles Walters, the plaintiff's attorney, who
said he served the summons on defendant, on which occasion
he said he would not deny that he had given it to the plaintiff
right and left. That he and another had come into his houSe
and palled. for beer, which they could not pay for, after they
had been getting drunk in other houses. That the plaintiff
attempted to strike him (defendant) when he was taking back
the pot, and then lie put him out of the house.
Mr. Seargeant BOMPAS addressed the Jury for the defendant,
and called

Wrn. Dix, pot-boy to the defendant.—He saw the plaintiff
with a pot of half-and-half, for which he asked the money.
He took out 2d., and would not give him any more. He
(witness) called his master, who asked the plaintiff to go out
of his house, for he knew he was at that time using very bad
language, which he continued for some time. His master then
went round the counter, and caught the plaintiff by the
collar. Plaintiff then struck at him, and he could
see no more for both were struggling. The plaintiff struck
the first blow. His master only took him by the collar, in
order to put him out.
The LEARNED JUDGE told the Jury that they had to decide
whether the defendant fully intended to turn the plaintiff out
of the house when he caught him by th 3 collar; that
was the first assault, but if it was with that intention, then
he would be justified ; however, the evidence was that he
had not put him out, but after he had received the assault the
plaintiff was in the house a considerable time. On the other
hand, if they were of opinion the defendant merely intended
to punish the plaintiff, and teach him to act better in future,
he would not be justified, and then their verdict would be
for the plaintiff.
The Jury asked what damages would carry costs.
His LORDSHIP said they had better settle the question with-
out reference to them. _ _

After a short consultation, they returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, with damages one shilling.
Mr. Serjeant BOMPASS asked his Lordship to certify, which
the Learned Judge refused to do.
Lord Lyndhurst then retired, and was succedcd on the
bench by Mr. Baron Gurney.