The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-06 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

In a masterly article which appeared in the Times
of December 14, 1833, defending the Chancellor from
the attacks of certain writers in journals now patronized
by the redacteur, and who are described as writing
" under the influence of the scourge administered by
the practised hand of a veteran whipper-in," the re-
sult is thus powerfully summed up :—" The result is
what might be expected from such a quartette—impo-
tent rage and powerless slander, covering their wretched
utterers with scorn and contempt ; while he whom they
assail,stifc in the pre-eminent excellence of his cha-
racter, and in that universal esteem which always fol-
lows genuine merit, looks down with compassion, not
unmixed with derision, on their petty plots and bust-
ling, bobadilism." Substituting " surprise " for
sg derision," similar, we should suppose, are the feel-
ings of Lord Brougham at the impotent attempts
of the trio, or quartette, assembled in Printing-house-
square ; but, we cannot believe that the redacteur en
chsf" can either be the writer, or that he is a willing,
consenting party to these ebullitions. He is acute
enough to know that the attack will prove, as their
assailment of the Poor Laws Bills did, a total failure;
and will no longer suffer the injudicious and vexatious
control of others. " Where is your boar-spear, man ?
Fear you the boar* ?" Already throughout the coun-
try—" from east to west, from north to south"—the
preys is re-echoing the opinion of the people at large,
and paying tribute to the distinguished character—
whether political, legal, or scientific," or literary—of
Lord Chancellor Brougham. It is no design of ours,
says one, to enter into defence of the Noble Lord, be-
cause he requires none ; but, for curiosity's sake, we
will just inquire into some of the grounds on which
the charges against him are _founded. He is
accused of having betrayed Earl Grey—desig-
nated as a hollow lawyer, seeking profit by de-
teit,—servile and arrogant,—blown about by
every suggestion of selfishness,' &c. But where are
the proofs Has any complaint been made by Lord
Grey ? 'On the contrary, Lord Grey declared him-
self, in his place, that he resigned because he was
anxious to retire from public life. He threw no blame
on a single individual ; and, even the indiscretion of
Mr. Littleton he attributed to good motives. As to
being a , hollow lawyer, we do not hear that a single
judgment pronounced by Lord Brougham has been
called in question and appealed against, and he has
pronounced more than any other Chancellor has
done in the same space of time. As to his personal
aggrandisement, "he cannot rise higher than he is
in the scale of promotion." Even the Times ad-
mits that for fifteen years he distinguished himself
as the friend of the people. In what has he now
deserted them ? The Ministry of which he is a
member is more unequivocally „reforming than any
that has hitherto had the management of the af-
fairs of the country. He has given notice of very
great reforms, both in the Law and Church. He has
established a Society in London for the promotion of
Political Knowledge (pine dice lachrymee)—dimi-
nished his own salary as Chancellor—lessened the
patronage attached to his office. The patronage he
has bestowed on favourites is yet behind the curtain,
as are his intentions of personal aggrandisement. But
the leading journal is in the secret, and, doubtless,
will justify itself at a proper season. Such and simi-
lar are the observations of every liberal journal through-
out the country. With the exception of the Albion,
the Standard, and a few other Conservative jonrnals,
now patronized by the Times, all accord in paying
the just tribtile to one who has been for a quarter of
a century the powerful and successful advocate for
the 'abolition of slavery, the extension of education,
the freedom of the press, legal and parliamentary re-
form, and the removal of the various abuses in Church
and State. We cannot conclude this article without
calling the attention of our readers to the insidious but
abortive attempts, in the Conservative journals and
other coadjutors of the Times, to prove that the Lord
Chancellor had, in the bestowal of the vicarage of
" Otley," endeavoured to evade the promise he had
made to the bishops. However we may regret that
the Chancellor should have committed himself, in ad-
ding to the patronage of those who, it is generally
admitted, never bestow their preferments without a due
regard to nepotism; yet, having so committed him-
self, we leave the refutation of the charge to his quon-
dam—and we believe still (politically at any rate)
—friend . and admirer in Printing-house-square.—
Times, Feb. 27, 1833 :—" In the House of Lords
last night, the Lord Chancellor, replying to the
Observations that fell from Lord King, took occa.
Mon to explain the grounds on which he had solicited
assistance from the Right Rev. Bench in the disposal
of certain church patronage attached to the Great
Seal. Lord B. said, That though it was easy for
the Chancellor, in consequence of the number of appli-
cations, to name proper incumbents for livings of 200/.,
3001., or 4001. per annum and upwards, yet with re.
gard to livings of 301., 401., 501., and 601. per annum
(and many such are in the gift or possession of the
Great Seal), the case is very different. As these are
not sought after like the preferments of greater value,
the Chancellor must, therefore, either himself seek out
persons to be entrusted with the cures (which is obvi-
ously impossible for one so occupied), or he must rely
on the recommendation of others, and this Lord
Brougham had done, choosing to take that of the
Diocesan as the most trustworthy recommendation.' It
is needless for us to add, that ' Otley' did not come
within the second list and description, and that Lord B.
was, therefore, justified when, in answer to the appli-
cation of a nominee of the Bishop of York, he said,
that his promise to the bishops was conditional.' "
Morning Chronicle. .
In another column will be found a letter, addressed
by Mr. Fraser, the publisher and, we believe, the pro-
prietor of Fraser's Magazine, to the Editor of this
Paper, introductory of a letter to Mr. Duncombe, the
Member for Finsbury, in reference to a hostile mes-
sage, which formed the subject of a proceeding at the
Marlborough-street Police-office, on Thursday. Both
letteie should have appeared in our paper of yesterday
bad they not been accidentally overlooked. The sub-
ject itself—that is, the dispute between those two gen-
tlemen and the manner in which it has been conducted
by both parties—is a matter of some importance ; in-
deed, we may say, of much importance to society, in
consequence of the principles which it involves. To
state the case in a sentence. Mr. Duncornbe's private
character was assailed in Fraser's Magazine. Mr.
Duncombe sent a message to the publisher demanding
the name of his assailant, or the satisfaction which, ac-
cording to the laws of honour, one gentleman has a right
to expect from another. The name was refused, and
the satisfaction was refused, and Mr. Duncombe was
bound over to keep the peace. Now, upon one part of the
question, we apprehend, there can be no difference of
opinion. The attack upon Mr. Duncombe's private
character was wrong. It was wrong, if for no other
reason, for its tendency to lead to a breach of the
peace. But it was wrong also for higher considera-
tions, which it is unnecessary here to particularise.
No one will, we believe, contend for the justification
of a public writer, who thinks the traducing of private
character one of the legitimate means of annoying a
Tolitical antagonist, or who acts as if he thought so.
hen comes the question in which society is most
deeply interested. Is the alternative put by Mr. Dun-
combe, is the redress which he claims on being refused
the name of his assailant, a mode of redress which
ought to be countenanced or tolerated? He had a
right to demand the name of the person who attacked

• Vido Hastings—Richard 111.—to " Stanley."
f These are the statements of The Hull Rockingham, and
how-well they are borne out by the "leading Journal :
TIMES, DEC. 27,
1833.—" Lord 8., when he had the seals,
found 103 appeals ; of those many had been set down two
years and a half, from Jan. 31 to Dec 23. He decided two
hundred--and in a corresponding period one hundred and three.
Some of our readers, seeing the nature of the attacks on Lord
8., may feel surprised that any defence should have been made.
Had these consisted merely of some two or three false asser-
tionsor misrepresentations, we should have let them pass ; but
when fifteen out of thirty-one pages of the leading article of
the Ultra-Tories' journal contains, in every tenth line, some
assertion which is untrue, or some insinuation which nothing
but a reference to facts could show to be groundless, we own
we felt it due to Lord 8., nay, indeed, to ourselves who have
on all occasions testified our respect for his high talents and the
beneficial effects of the great changes he is working out to ex-
pose tke sort of warfare to which Ais unflinching determination
to reforx the4laws, and abate all sinecures and corrnpti.on,
ervos,;.; A:.nt" !! Who would believe that thesa are
tow the al'es of The Thies?

him in a manner not authorised by the laws of politi-
cal warfare ; he had a right to proceed legally against
that person, if he could obtain his name ; and in
the event of being refused such satisfaction, he
had a right to proceed against the publisher
that is, against the publication itself in which the
attack was made upon his reputation. But we
deny his right, and any and every man's right,
be his rank, his station, his profession, or his
injuries what they may, to appeal to that bar-
barous, un-Christian-truth-confounding, and blood-
seeking tribunal which professes to adjust the
difficulties and decide the merits of a case by the ar-
bitration of what ?—of murder ! Good God! do we
live in a Christian country and in an age of intellect
—an age which makes no secret of its own superio-
rity, which looks back upon all past time as the re-
pository of a mass of errors above which the reason
and the virtue of the present age lifts it as the eagle
outflies the storm ? and shall we retain amongst our
customs and our fashions this most barbarous and bru-
tal of all the barbarous and brutal relics of antiquity ?
It is the duty of a public journalist, and of every man
who has a common share of brains in his head, and of
flesh and blood in the heart that informs his bosom, to
raise his voice against the judgment and discretion of
murder as an arbitrator between man and man. Mr.
Fraser was not only justified in declining, but bound
to decline and deny the jurisdiction of the pistol ; but
we lament to find that in doing so he abandoned the
high moral ground upon which he might have fixed his
foot as upon a lock, and descended to such an apology
as his letter contains. According to thatletter it was not
because duelling was an irrational, a brutal and conse-
quently an unjustifiable mode of deciding differences,
or avenging wrongs, but because, in his particular
situation, to admit the appeal would expose him to
frequent invitations of the same nature. -HA he re-
mained upon the ground which he ought to have occu-
pid, no man could say that he had done wrong. But
in removing from that ground he has abandoned his
strong position, he has kicked away his defence ; and
the question between him and his antagonist becomes
a question not for society to judge of upon the broad
consideration of what is right and wrong in morals,
but for the learned in the laws of duelling to adjudi-
cate upon tactics, and according to a wisdom of their
own. We regret exceedingly that a respectable publi-
cation, such as Frazer's Magazine, and a respectable
person, such as Mr. Fraser, should have been so com-
mitted. Nor can we justify Mr. Duncombe in the
course he has thought proper to pursue. The law
was open to him if he was injured. However imperfect
that law might be as a means of satisfying his wounded
feelings, and repairing his injured character, it was
still superior to the alternative which he was rash
enough to prefer. He might have vindicated
himself in Court of Justice. He might have
punished his accuser in a Court of Justice, not
merely by imprisonment or pecuniary fine, but by the
shame and disgrace of a verdict of guilty. On the
other hand a hostile meeting, terminate how it might,
could never have justified—could only have avenged
him. Whether he was misled by bad advisers from
without, or by the suggestion of his own. angry pas-
sions from within, he took the worst possible course
for an innocent man to have taken. We do not mean
to insinuate any thing to the disadvantage of his
character in saying so ; but we do mean to imply
every thing to the disadvantage of his prudence and
discretion. Society, as we said before, is interested in
puttinc, down the barbarous practice which he would
fain continue and sanction by his example. Every
man is responsible to society for his acts, but public
men incur, and voluntarily incur, a peculiar responsi-
bility. It will not serve Mr. Duncombe with the
country—it will not serve him with his constituents to
have proved himself willing and anxious to violate the
laws by resorting to a practice which has no justifica-
tion in reason, and no apology even in the weaknesses
that belong to humanity.—Morning Herald.
Mr. Editor—As it is probablitat you will publish the pro-
ceedings at Marlborough-street, in which my name yesterday
appeared, may I request that you will be so good as to accom-
pany your report with the letter which I have addressed toMr.
Duncombe ? I have the honour to be, Sir, with much re-
spect, your obedient servant,

JAMES FRASER.

(copy.)
" 215, Regent-street, Thursday, 2 o'clock, p.m.
" Sir--I am inclined to think that you will, upon reflection,
perceive that the course which I felt it necessary to adopt, in
consequence of your note of yesterday, was the only one
which, as publisher of the Magazine, I could have possibly
pursued. You will at once see that if I were to have replied
to your note after the fashion you desired, I should have set a
precedent which would of necessity subject me hereafter to per-
sonal annoyance from everybody, high and low, who might
fancy himself injured or offended in the publication.
" Having submitted these remarks to your consideration, I
have to inform you that the pages of the magazine shall be
open to you next month for the explanation or denial of those
charges which you have stated to be false and atrocious.' I
have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient and humble servant,
( Signed) " JAMES FRA SER.
" Thomas S. Duncombe, Esq., M. P., Arlington-street.

Our columns of this day present a cheering and
heart-stirring proof of the existence of strong constitu-
tional feelings in the most important manufacturing
district of the United Kingdom. The report of the
annual Meeting of the South Lancashire Conservative
Association at Newton will he perused by our readers
with proud satisfaction, and we indulge in no ordinary
sensations of delight and triumph to find that the ex-
pectation that had been formed of the manner with
which this truly national festival would be received
by our brethren of the North has been more than
realized. The assemblage was as enthusiastic as .it
was numerous, and was distinguished by its respecta-
bility, wealth, and intelligence. Every individual was
actuated by the conviction, that at no period was it
ever more imperative than at the present moment to
evince the most unflinching determination to uphold
the principles which have contributed to raise our
country to the first position in the rank of nations.
The eloquent speech of Lord Wilton, who
.pre-
sided on this occasion, produced a great impression ;
and the outline which is supplied elsewhere will not be
without its effect on those persons who were not pre-
sent to hear the patriotic sentiments which fell from
the lips of-the staunch defender of our institutions ;
his touching language when alluding to what England
once was, and his withering scorn when referring to
the men who have endeavoured to reduce-the country
to the lowest depth of degradation. The addresses of
Lord Skelmersdale, Mr. S. Roby, and Mr. Hulton
were also replete with sound reasoning and impassioned
feeling, and will amply repay the trouble of perusal.
Altogether the affair went off with a spirit worthy of
the cause which the guests met to support, and, as a
sign of the times, the Newton dinner will be of consi-
derable influence. The miserable men who can see
nothing in " the spirit of the age" but the desire of in-
novation, and the anxiety to overturn venerable institu-
tions, would do well to pause and reflect seriously whether
the large masses of people of property who have of late
sought every opportunity of testifying their opinions
will sit down quietly, and tamely submit to the insi-
dious attempts in progress to annihilate the Constitu-
tion. In the emphatic words of the Earl of Wilton, it
is, indeed, a melancholy conviction which forces itself
on the mind that " England—the brave and free En-
gland—the grave of the warrior, the delight of the
Statesman and the philosopher, whose flag has braved
a thousand years the battle and the beeeze ;' it is in-
deed a bitter thought that that England should be sa-
crificed by such means and by such men." We de-
rive, however, every consolation from the fact that
there are still thousands of such men left in the country
as those who assembled at the- Newton Meeting, made
of the same stern stuff in honesty, of similar Inflexi-
bility of purpose, and endowed with all the faculties of
mind as well as the physical qualifications necessary to
fight the battles of loyalty against acritation.—Monung
Post.

A few days since we invited the attention of our
readers to a document we published bearing the title
" Statement of the Master Builders." We gave a
sort of promise to, return to the subject, and-We redeem
our pledge now with the less reluctance, because we
have the consciousness that, uninfluenced by interest,
whether personal or adventitioup, we cannot possibly
be actuated by aught but a sincere desire to promote
an end, of which the good, if any, must be common
and cpial to both parties, and in which there can be
nothing of ill to either. The document in question
;ntors intc a detailed history of the, dispute:s between
the master builders and their worlanen. We shall

dwell upon this paper no further than to say that it
makes out a very strong case against the workmen :
and that the masters, thwarted and inconvenienced at
every turn by an assemblage of their workmen, called
an " Union," felt themselves compelled, in self-de-
fence, to combine together, and at a public meeting to
pass, among other resolutions, the following :—" That
this meeting strongly recommends every master in-
terested in this question publicly and solemnly to de-
clare that from and after the 16th day of August next,
he will not employ any artisan or labourer who refuses to
join a declaration that he is not a member of any trades'
union." The masters have for the most part adopted this
recommendation, and though a very large number of
the workmen have affixed their signatures to the
declaration thus required, yet the workmen gene-
rally have refused to put their hands to any such
engagement. On the other hand, it must not be
forgotten that the workmen allege, on their part,
serious grounds of complaint. The chief of these,
and the only one for which we have been able to
discover the slightest foundation, is, that the masters
have compelled them to deal at certain places and
with certain persons for the purchase of articles
which must enter into the materials of their daily
consumption. No one can deny that one case bore
out this complaint to a large extent ; but we have
looked in vain for any thing like evidence that such
a proceeding on the part of masters is even frequent,
much less general, ill the trade. If, however, it be
(we believe it is not), there can be no doubt that
it should be abandoned as a truck system in effect,
though not in name, of the most indefensible descrip-
tion. These being the grounds of quarrel, we have
been induced to speak of the matter, most assuredly
not with the view of exasperating either party, but
with the intent and desire of putting it shortly and
plainly to both, whether it is not possible to adjust
the difference, or at least whether there may not
exist some way of arriving at a prospect of adjustment?
When soldiers or statesmen, or others who are as
careful and jealous in the grounds of their quarrels as
any master builder or workman can possibly be in any
thing that affects their interests,—when such persons
happen to find among each other a ground of dif-
ference and dispute, and embark in the troubled
sea of diplomacy, it has ever been found that
they never by themselves approximate towards
the point which each party professes (generally with
great sincerity) a desire to attain. That point is of
course always such a settlement as neither party shall
suffer by. Further, not only do they not approximate
to this wished-for end, but in proportion as their cor-
respondence increases, in the same proportion does their
divergency widen, and the contrariness of their courses
become more marked. The coolest heads and the
sharpest wits that, from the beginning of recorded time
till now, have been called in and brought to bear for
the purpose of effecting the settlement which the par-
ties themselves despair of attaining, have invariably
agreed, sooner or later, upon adopting one mode,--the
shortest, as all will admit, and the best, as few will
deny, because it is palpably the only probable, while
it has generally been, found the only effectual, one.
This mode is to make the parties assume their
original position,--the position they occupied be-
fore the strife began,—to withdraw or to con-
sider as non avenue all that has passed between them,
so that the disputants shall be unhampered by
faulty or foolish declarations, uninfluenced by a desire
of triumph, ungalled by a sense of the degradation of
defeat, and unmoved by, because not obnoxious to the
reproach of having yielded. Thus, they have all the
benefit of the experience, without any of the ill or dis-
agreeable effects which the contest they have been en-
gaged
in may be calculated to furnish. By this course
no mischief can possibly result to either party, and all
the many advantages it promises must, if realized at
all, be shared equally by both. Neither party loses
any thing, while both, having time for consideration
and calculation, will be in a better condition to decide
whether it is worth the while of either to renew a
struggle, which cannot, by the remotest chance, benefit
the one or the other, and which may, arid in all pro-
bability will, injure both. Will the master builders
and their workmen try the effect of this orthodox re-
ceipt in the social and political pharmacopceia ? If
the workmen and their masters were simultaneously to
dissolve their unions and withdraw their resolutions,
assume each their former position, and be, in the mili-
tary phrase, " as they were," we have no doubt that
both parties would so see their own interest, and so
pursue it, that no more would be heard of the
" Builders' Strike."—Times.