The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-10 00:00:00

SPLitIT OF TEE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We are glad to find that the opinions we yesterday
expressed with regard to the consequences which might
be expected to follow the repeal of the Stamp Duty
on Newspapers, are shared by our sensible contem-
porary, the Scotsman. We quite agree with Lord
Brougham and the Scotsman, that the lower classes
care nothing about the private history of a public
man, the lapses of his ancestors, or the peccadillos of
his wife and sisters ; that, on the other hand, among
the upper and middle classes, there are always a num-
ber, who, from malice, envy, or a depraved disposition,
delight in traducing cil.:.racter and disturbing the peace
of families, and. inat " the slander and obscenity,
the worst nitli of which the press is the .vehicle,
is derved up for the drawing-rooms of the wealthy. "
While the Conservatives have nearly the mo-
nopoly of private libels and obscenity,—" a
fact the more striking, from the contrast
it offers to their professions, since virtue and religion
are ever in their mouths,"—the lower classes, " find
ing their lot comparatively hard, are strongly inclined
to discover the evils they complain of in the frame-
work of the social system," and are generally disposed
to lend a willing ear to wholesale abuse of the state
of things under which they are condemned to toil, and
scanty fare, while others are feasting, and driven
about in splendid coaches. It is not easy to convince
a man who has difficulty in maintaining a large fa-
mily by his toil, that he is benefitted by a state of
things in which another man expends on horses, and
dogs, and menials, five hundred times more than his
earnings ; and yet nothing is more true than that,
if the utmost protection were not given to property,
and the utmost latitude to the mode of enjoying it
(compatible with the rights of others), the poor would
be worse off than they are at present. The poor do
not err in want of kindness towards each other ; on
the contrary, the experience of suffering and want
disposes them greatly to commisseration ; and a tale
of misery may fail to reach the heart of a rich
man, who never expects- to be in want, but almost
always succeeds with the poor. But the poor, espe-
cially the labouring poor, who are not corrupted by the
largesses of the rich, are generally what the French
call " Frondeurs." The Scotch are in this respect fully
more intolerant than the English, because they depend
more on their own resources. The cheapening news-
papers would certainly have the effect of extending
somewhat the range of the opinions most palatable to
the labouring classes. But we are quite satisfied that
so far from the repeal giving increased currency to li-
centious productions, or to publications advocating
atrocious crimes, the effect of it would be to render
papers more austere in point of principle than they are.
The papers of the United States are full of abuse, and
the most respectable statesmen are assailed in the
coarsest style ; but there is no obscenity, no irreligion
in them, no incitements to crime. Were a newspaper
supported like some of those by the higher classes
here, especially dignified clergymen, to appear in
a town of the United States, the publisher would
at the least be tarred and feathered. The reason
why unstamped newspapers in this country offend
at present, in stimulating to crime, was stated by
us yesterday ; and the Scotsman shares our views.
" While the law remains on its present footing
(says our contemporary), the publishers of unstamped
papers, like other illicit traders, must generally be
men of broken fortunes and desperate character. Their
interest induces them to pander to the prejudices and
depraved appetites of the class to whom they address
themselves, and their own taste and propensities lead
them to assail every thing sacred and honourable.
They are, moreover, almost necessarily ignorant and
vulgar-minded, and if disposed to seek the favour of a
better class of persons, do not know to accomplish
their purpose. We maintain, however, that their
writings are baneful, not because they are unstamped,
but because they are illegal, and proceed from men
who would not resort to such an occupation if they
had not previously thrown off the restraints of law and
morality. Abolish the stamp—that is to say, legalize
cheap newspapers—and you will have intelligence,
character, and capital, with all the guarantees attaching
to them, embarked in this department of literature.
Look at the journal of our neighbours, the Messrs.
Chambers., a private speculation, of course con-
ducted chiefly with a view to profit, and circulating to
a vast extent among the humblest classes. Is it less
pure in morals, less the friend of religion and order,
than the generality of well-taxed newspapers ? Quite
the reverse, we apprehend." The time is not remote
when newspapers were chiefly read by the opulent.
Rich men hate what is serious, and newspapers were
then light and amusing, but by no means instructive.
As the circle of readers widened, the taste of the higher
classes merged in the taste of a more sober and serious
class; and newspapers in the present day are distin-
guished by great earnestness. If we still extend the
range by embracing a still lower class of readers, we
may expect that there will be no falling off in the way
seriousness. Where there is an honest desire to know
the truth, the result, in the long run, must be the im-
provement of both readers and writers. On this point
it is happily observed by the Scotsman that—" Were
the stamp-duty abolished, the first effect of it would be
to create a shoal of journals, in which the bad would
predominate, as three to one, over the good. We have
unbounded confidence, however, in the supremacy of
moral principle, and the ultimate ascendancy of truth.
The first outpourings of radicalism would no doubt be
hot and deleterious ; but sounder doctrines would gra-
dually prevail. It sould be remembered, that subser-
vience to the prejudices of readers, is indeed one, but
not the only means of promoting the success of a jour-
nal. How much depends on the capital which com-
mands superior sources of information ; on the talent
and science which combine, illuminate, and apply it ;
and on the good faith which builds up consistency of
character, and gains an influence even over the minds
of the ignorant and prejudiced. There are errors in-
spired by the social position of certain classes, witness
the doctrines of the agriculturists on the corn trade, and
interwoven with mistaken views of interest : these are
no doubt difficult to eradicate ; but still they will yield
to experience and reason. As for those who assert
that the human mind is instinctively disposed to em-
brace error rather than truth, the wrong rather than the
right—we consider the whole frame of civilized society
a confutation of their opinion. Is it not, with all its
faults, a proof of the ascendancy of justice over force ?
And do not the minds of nineteen men out of twenty
acquiesce in this as the natural order of things ? . . .
With how much more plausibility might it have been
maintained, that the Reformation, which destroyed sla-
very in matters of faith, and left a man free to attach
himself to any creed, or to none, would ruin religion
and morals ? But does any Protestant say that this
has been the case?"—Morning Chronicle.

Any one who has read Lord Brougham's evidence,
or rather his opinions, before the Libel Committee, re-
lative to the abolition of the stamp duties on news-
papers, might be disposed to give the Learned Lord
credit for a very generous desire to accommodate all
classes of his Majesty's subjects with newspapers to
their taste, if it were not that the prospectus of his
Lordship's own penny speculation to enlighten the
public mind upon political matters, according to his
own peculiar notions, came out about the same time,
and spoiled his claim to disinterestedness. The coin-
cidence affords pretty strong presumptive evidence that
" the schoolmaster, to whom this country owes, in a
great measure, the Malthusian Poor Law Bill—the
discovery, that the most noble monuments of Chris-
tian charity that adorn this land are in opposition to
the genuine principles of political science--and the no
less startling novelty, that truth may be an aggravation
in cases of libel, is much less anxious for the general
diffusion of knowledge than he is that every person
who reads should read out of his political " primer."
Then, indeed, will there be a flood of light upon Eng-
England, and the learned leader of the Society for
the Diffusion of Political Knowledge will become
the sun of the new intellectual system, of which
we suppose Miss Martineau is to be the " chaste cold
moon- The one the Magnus Apollo—the other the
Diana, of the philosophic Olympus. If excellence in
quackery be a proof of mental power, this is certainly
the age of intellect. Nor would it be easy to find in
England greater quacks than the select band of Mal-
thusians and political economists, who modestly come
mward to relieve England from the gross delusion and

ignorance under which it labours at the present dal
touching the ti vine principles of political science. '
The manner in which they talk of their own nostrums
for curing the epidemic of ignorance, and the mental
malady of error by which the general mind of England
has been so long afflicted, has all that easy assurance,
that cool effrontery of self-recommendation which dis-
tinguishes those eminently gifted and profoundly
learned personages who placard the walls of the metro-
polis with invitations to the sick and suffering public
to come and be healed of their infirmities by infallible
specifics—the virtues of which leave us nothing to
wonder at in the fabled miracles of Xsculapius. Thus
it is that, until the " Society for the Diffusion of Poli-
tical Knowledge" arose under the auspices of the Lord
Chancellor, the English intellect groped its way blindly
through the dense darkness in which that very news-
paper press involved it, on which that very Lord
Chancellor had formerly poured forth so much of
the language of panegyric, when he courted its assist-
ance to promote his ambitious views, and raise him to
his present elevation. When we see many of the
trashy compilations that have been pompously sent
forth to the world by the " Society for the Diffusion
of Useful Knowledge," which numbers in its ranks
the same luminaries that so kindly volunteer to en-
lighten the political world, we may well ask by what
authority those egotistical persons assume to be the in-
fallible instructors of the public mind ? If they are
to be judged of by their works of paste-and-scissors
composition, they must take a very low degree in the
world of literature even as compilers, who prey upon
the intellectual labours of others ; but whatever they
want in talent and learning, is compensated for by
their art of puffing, through the medium of 'evidence
before Parliamentary Committees, and in other ways,
which show how well they understand the advantages
of calculating with a bold confidence upon the credu-
lity of mankind. As to the benefit the public would
derive from the abolition of the stamp-duties on news-
papers, we would be content to have it practically as-
certained by Lord Brougham's own test. He has re-
ferred to the Newspaper Press of the United States of
America, and we ask if his own example does not re-
fute his own argument ? The infinite superiority in
talent, intelligence, and in every thing that gives re-
spectability to a Newspaper in the Press of England,
compared with that of America, must satisfy every
reasonable person that the degradation of the Press to
the penny-trumpery standard is not the way to im-
prove the knowlege or the morals of the people.—
Morning Herald.

We insert elsewhere a report of the proceedings of
a meeting that was held yesterday at the Mechanics'
Institution, respecting the dispute which unhappily
still exists between a portion of the master builders
and their workmen. It will be read with interest ;
for, however mistaken the views of the speakers may
have been, and we hold them to be replete with the
most suicidal errors, still they were marked by lan-
guage of a temperate character, which is no small
praise to men who—whether rightly or wrongly no
matter—believe themselves to have been unjustly and
injuriously dealt with. But we decline arguing the
subjects in dispute. Reasoning on the points they
involve has been exhausted in the progress of the
long-protracted strife, and we have observed that
every such endeavour to convince has invariably failed.
Nor have these attempts been productive of that
negative evil only—they have in each case tended to
re-open the wounds which they were meant to heal,
and irritated where their object was to calm. Once
more, then, we recommended both parties to resume
their original position. Why should either be ashamed
of doing that which both do in such a case ? What
can either party lose by it ? They have the authority
and the example of higher contending parties for the
course we counsel. Almost all great wars have ended
thus, after years of slaughter and devastation ; and
such as have not had that result have for the most
part terminated only in the destruction or the despoil-
ing of the weaker party. But while it is admitted that
neither side can possibly lose anything if both adopt
the proceeding we advise, the question is asked what
gain is to be expectod from it ? We answer once
more, much in all probability, and this certainly—
namely, the benefit of the experience of warfare, with-
out any of the injurious or the humiliating conse-
quences of subjection or retreat, neither of which occur
when both parties withdraw simultaneously from the
field.—Times.

OLD BAILEY.--SErT. 9.

OLD COURT.

Henry Frampton and Walter Gilchrist Wickers were in-
dicted, the former for stealing 300 books, the property of
Messrs. Baldwin and Co., booksellers, and Gilchrist Wickers
with receiving the same, well knowing them to have been
stolen. In this case, which was not concluded yesterday
when our reporter left, the Jury returned a verdict of
Guilty against Frampton, acquitting the other prisoner.
Frampton was then called up for judgment, and ordered
to be imprisoned for two years to bard labour in the House
of Correction.

After the dismissal of the Middlesex Jury, whose labours
in the last important case had lasted seven hours, the Clerk
of the Arraigns was proceeding to swear the London Jury,
when Mr. Clarkson, who had that instant entered from the
New Court, interposed.

The Learned Counsel was retained for the prisoner in
the first case, and he should challenge the Jury.
The JUDGE inquired whether he was desirous of chal-
lenging any particular member of the Jury ?
Mr. CLAEKSON challenged the whole of them. After
what had occurred the preceding night he wished a fresh
Jury to be sworn.
The Jurors were all leaving the box full of indignation,
when one of them requested to know whether they had a
right to be treated in that manner, at the caprice of one
Counsel ? The JUDGE replied that the law allowed the
counsel for the prisoner to challenge the Jury, and to have
a fresh one if he thought fit.
The Jury had by this time gained the centre of the
Court, and two or three spoke at once. The exclamations
were, 1" Is this the boasted bulwark of Englishmen ? Is
this the ancient trial by Jury ? Are English Juries who are
returning conscientious verdicts to be treated in this insult-
ing manner ?" accompanied by like observations. One,
more audible than the rest, said, " It is a mockery of trial
by jury."
Mr. Clarkson said (as well as we could distinguish his
voice amidst the confusion that prevailed)—" Yes, it is a
mockery of trial by jury if you allude to what occurred last
night." - - . . . . .

The Gentlemen of the Jury felt their ire increased by
this observation, and they gathered round Mr. Clarkson,
and each manifested his displeasure in words, the only reply
to them from the Learned Gentleman being, " One at a
time, if you please, Gentlemen."
The Judge reverted to the case, and it may be necessary
for us to do the same.

A man was indicted on Monday night for stealing some
wainscoting. In the course of the evidence it appeared
that he was a journeyman employed in a house, and while
so occupied, that he had openly sold some broken-up wood
to the neighbours. The proprietor of the house did
ot relish the loss of his property, and the case came to this
Court to be tried. The Judge in summing up had been
very indulgent to the prisoner, and the jury, contrary to the
opinion entertained by many in the Court, found a verdict
of Guilty. Mr. Clarkson, who had been the prisoner's
counsel, appears to have entertained an opinion that the
circumstances, aided as they were by the summing up, did
not warrant the conclusion of the jury. These are the cir-
cumstances, and the Learned Judge, speaking of the occur-
rence last night, said that he certainly in his summing up
had been favourable to the prisoner, and he had marked for
his sentence as slight a punishment as he could consistently
with his duty. He then dismissed the jury, thanking them
for the attention they had paid to the cases, and it was his
opinion they had given a conscientious verdict.
The individual for whom Mr. Clarkson had been retained
pleaded guilty to several indictments for plundering his mas-
ter, Edmonds, Esq., a Magistrate.
George Brewer and George Smith, two urchins (the
former of whom had been previously in the House of Cor-
rection) were charged with stealing a necklace from the
neck of a child.
A man came to give Brewer a character, when the fol- '
lowing colloquy took place between him and the Common
Sergeant :—_

COMMON SERGEANT—You. give the boy a good charac-
ter. What do you know of him. Witness---I have known
him a long time, and never heard anything wrong of him.
COMMON SERGEANT—Did you never hear that he was
once an inmate of the House of Correction ? Witness—
Never. I must have known it if he had.

COMMON SERGEANT—How should you have known it ?
Witness—Why, I read the newspapers every day.
COMMON SERGEANT—Nonsense. Do you think the
conductors of newspapers insert every paltry case in their
columns Is that your only means of deriving knowledge

of the boy's movements ? Witness—Yes ; I think that
the public papers are always right.—(Loud laughter.)
The evidence being rather inconclusive the prisoners
were acquitted.
John Loveday was indicted for stealing two shifts, and
oilier linen, the property of Lucy Ring.
It appeared by the evidence of the prosecutrix that,
owing to an attack of the cholera, the linen which she
hung out in the morning to dry remained in the garden
all night. The articles produced were part of that property.
The prisoner's counsel said that the prisoner had laboured
under a severe attack of cholera since he had been confined
in Newgate.
CODIMON-SERGEANT—Perhaps he caught the cholera
from the linen he stole. Take it out of Court ! Take it out
of Court !

The prisoner was convicted.
The COMMON-SERGEANT told him he had suffered a
severe punishment, whether it resulted from his indiscre-
tion or not. In order that he might not communicate in-
fection to his fellow prisoners, the Court would only sen-
tence him to six days' imprisonment (a nominal punish-
ment), and he therefore might be immediately discharged.