The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-07 00:00:00

eiTtllilld Sitlt

LONDON, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1851.

" The pitcher that goes often to the well comes
home broken at last." The Duke of BRUNSWICK is
now in a position to speak feelingly as to the truth of
the ancient adage. His great experiment against the
freedom of the press has turned out a total failure.
He has, we trust, at length learned that the attempt
to gag public journalism, in a free country, is little
better than " kicking against the pricks." The Duke
we believe to be possessed of considerable wealth, but
were his pecuniary resources as boundless as those of
the fabled possessor of the philosopher's stone, he
could not succeed in crushing the humblest member
of the fourth estate, who discharged his onerous
duties in a fair and straightforward manner.
To do so he should secure the co-operation of a
British judge and a British jury, and we believe we
but enunciate the general opinion of the entire com-
munity in asserting that no improper or unworthy
motive could influence such parties. Mistakes may,
and occasionally do occur, errors of judgment may be
committed—for no merely human institution can aspire
to perfection or claim infallibility—but there are
means for correcting these mistakes, for rectifying
these errors, that seldom indeed prove unavail-
ing or ineffectual. New trials can be ob-
tained in most cases where it appears to
the learned and distinguished men who preside in
our superior Courts that a further investigation is
desirable, or calculated to promote the ends of justice.
The constitutional judges of England will not tolerate
a verdict snatched by surprise on doubtful or suspi-
cious testimony. Each party must know what it is
he must be prepared to establish, and what he will
be required to rebut—what to prove and what to
disprove; and if it can be shown that this salutary
rule is violated, that evidence has been brought
forward which could not have been anticipated by a
person of ordinary prudence, and which there is good
reason to believe to be tainted with falsehood, a
venire de novo will be awarded almost as a matter of

course.

The case of the Duke of Butniswicu against
HairstEß, tried yesterday in the Court of Queen's
Bench, at Westminster, strongly illustrates these
points. It was the second—we had almost written
the fourth—inquiry into the same subject- matter.
Before instituting proceedings, the plaintiff had ac-
quired considerable personal experience of the exist •
ing law of libel in this country. He had been most
unwarrantably and scurriously attacked in the
columns of a periodical of a very different cha-
racter from the Weekly Dispatch. He had brought
actions against several persons connected with
that journal—indeed, we believe, against every person
to whom the publication could be in any manner
traced, and verdicts for large, almost vindictive da-
mages, were in every instance returned by the juries,
who not only testified their sympathy with the exiled
Duke, from whom it was endeavoured to extort
money by the most infamous threats, but also took
that means of exhibiting their unqualified abhorrence
of such nefarious conduct, of so gross an abuse of the
power lodged in the hands of public journalists.
The Duke himself boasted on a former occasion
that he had distributed the proceeds of these
verdicts in acts of charity and beneficence ; but
as he remained silent when we expressed an
anxious desire to discover " which were the fortunate
institutions or charities that benefited to so large
an extent by his Highness's exceeding generosity"
—and as, notwithstanding a searching scrutiny, we
were unable to discover any of these favoured estab-
lishments, but, on the contrary, found that the Duke's
name was returned in several schedules filed in the
Insolvent Court as creditor for damages obtained in
such actions, we must be permitted to suspend our
opinions on these points until our requisition be com-
plied with, and we are enabled to obtain a distinct
specification of the sums thus applied.
The Duke, however, having thus fleshed his
maiden sword on such small fry, and discover-
ing how very profitable it might be to be libelled,
if the defendants were only solvent and capable of
liquidating the damages assessed, resolved to fly at
higher game, where, if successful, he would have a
certainty of satisfaction. The respected proprietor of
the Dispatch was accordingly selected. Some arti-
cles that appeared in that paper had jarred on the
sensitive feelings of the illustrious stranger. But,
unfortunately, it could scarcely be considered that
these exceeded the limits allowed to the " fourth
estate" of commenting fairly and without malice
on the public acts of public men. Something should
be taken in connexion therewith to satisfy the jury
of the animus with which the more recent articles
were written—a strict search over the files of the
delinquent journal was instituted, and something
that it was thought would answer was at length dis-
covered ; but, unfortunately, it was out of date—it had
reached the ripe and mature age of 19 years, having
originally appeared in the month of September, 1830.
The hand that penned it was for ever stilled—the mind
that conceived it was no longer the tenant of an earthly
habitation. To be effectual, there should be a repub-
lication, and how was that to be obtained? That
was the question. .But rich men seldom form futile
wishes. A person named CASIMIR REINHOLD under-
took to perform the difficult task, and to gratify the
aspirations of the discontented Duke. He re-
turned triumphantly, stating that he had succeeded
in obtaining the necessary act on the part of
the . defendant, and as, quod volumes facile
credimus, the Noble Duke yielded an easy credence
to the toofiatteringtale. Theltrial came on—the trust-
worthy witness was uncontradicted, becase no one en-
gaged for the defence had the slightest conception that
any person:would have,the,hardihoodlto make so strange
an assertion as that a new publication had taken place
by a sale of a copy of the Dispatch, containing the
objectionable article of September, 1830. The Noble
and Learned Lord who presided at the trial held, in
the absence of all contradiction, that the republication
was proved, and that being the case, the jury
returned a verdict with 5001. damages !! The
announcement took the public by surprise, and ex-
cited a momentary consternation among journalists—
" a momentary consternation," we say, for it was
speedily ascertained that the most convincing evidence
could be given that the witness CASIMIR REINHOLD
had stated what was wholly:unfounded in fact, in
alleging that he had obtained a copy of the Dispatch
of September, 1830, at the office of the
journal. We do not say that the Duke
was cognizant of the gross and unblushing fraud
that was perpetrated. His production of such testi- ,
mony was probably owing to his being his own
counsel. We do not imagine that if he had been so
fortunate as to have obtained the assistance of a bar-
rister in respectable practice he would have al-
lowed that amiable gentleman to have figured as a
witness on his behalf. Proceedings were forthwith