The Sun.
London, England, 1856-10-31 00:00:00

(Front the Manchester Guardian.)

If thunder in a clear sky was regarded by the ancients
as an omen, we should like to know what is to be thought
of the grave accusation made by the official organ of the
French Government against a portion of the English
press. Certainly, there is nothing within the political
horizon, as we scan it, to acc )unt for this extraordinary
burst of celestial wrath. The accusation runs that for
some time past certain of our newspapers have indulged
in calumnies against the French Government, which, we
are told almost in a tone of threat, are calculated to dis-
unite two nations whose alliance is the best guarantee
for the peace of the world. Not to dispute with this
writer as to what may properly be called calumnies, we
can honestly say that we are at a loss to sur-
mise what manifestations of hostility or ill-will are
alluded to .According to our observation ofcontemporary
journalism, there have been several occasions since
the conclusion of the war on which the complaint might
have been made with more plausibility than at the pre-
sent moment. It is true that the monetary crisis in
France has been discussed in this country with an inte-
rest which its bearing on our own prosperity involves,
and with the freedom which we employ in regard to
questions of our own domestic administration. It is
equally true that the embarrassment and discontent in
which artificial causes have mainly contributed to plunge
the working people of Paris have been occasionally re-
ferred to on the indisputable evidence afforded by the
extraordinary measures of precaution and repression
which the authorities have been seen to take. But i t
appears to us, speaking of our contemporaries generally,
that the manner in which these subjects have been
treated is so far from betraying malignant satisfaction
that it has been marked by friendly respect not only for
the French nation, but for the Government of Louis
Napoleon.

The singular want of judgment evinced in the publi-
cation of this imperial remonstrance is not alleviated by
any propriety or grace in the language in which it is
couched. Nothing can be more groundlessly querulous
than the statement that the "calumnies" which we are
accused of spreading " are the more odious as they are
concealed under an anonymous mask, and can only be
answered by contempt." The sufficient answer to this
absurdity is to ask what more the French Government
could do for its own vindication if it were informed in
large letters that Mr. So-and-So wrote this lead-
ing article or that letter ? The truth is that all
laical comment and dissertation—everything that does
not involve the allegation of unknown and unauthenti-
cated facts—is just as much entitled to respect when
published anonymously as when bearing all the names
and surnames of its author. As for such writing being
only answerable by contempt, it is manifestly not less
subject to be met by proof and argument because it is
given to the world without a personal name. Both in
law and in controversy an aggrieved person has exactly
the same means of redress in dealing with a journal as
an institution, and with its proprietors and printers as
responsible individuals, as when he can fasten on the
actual writer. There is no commoner object of virtuous
indignation than anonymous writing ; but by observation
it will be found that this is, in 99 cases out of 100, the
resource of people who seek a pretext for evading the
refutation of reproaches under which they smart.
Equally improper is the language of the Moniteur, in
warning us that the offence ascribed to the journals is
this country may tend to destroy confidence between the
Cabinets of London and Paris. The French Government
must be perfectly well aware that that of England has not
the slightest power of dictating to, or controlling, the
press, and cannot therefore be made responsible for any
course which it may be seen to pursue. Altogether, this
article is marked by so little of justice, dignity, or truth-
fulness that we gladly fall in with the suggestion of more
than one of our contemporaries that it must have found
its way to light without the knowledge of the remarkable
man who adds often-proved sagacity to an intimate ac-
quaintance with the conduct and sentiments of the E❑g.
lish people. That its publication should have created
intense and injurious excitement in Paris, where the
English journals are only allowed to penetrate, as it
were, tentatively and intermittently, we were bound to
expect. The natural inference from so solemn an accu-
sation would be that a great part, if not the whole, of
the British press was in a flame of animosity against the
Imperial Government. Nothing can be further from
the truth, but this danger is an example of the miserable
impolicy of that system of repression to which the French
Government appears to be increasingly devoted. Such
a phenomenon arises most inappropriately in connexion
with remonstrances against our habit of publicity, and
whoever may imagine that its effect will be to cause
either law or public opinion to be exerted against the
perfectly unfettered action of the English press must
assuredly bo mistaken.

THE BIRKENHEAD DOCKS,—At the usual meeting of
the Liverpool town-council, held yesterday, the Birken-
head Dock Committee recommended that the sum of
1,0001. be given to Mr. J. B. Hartley, son of Mr. Jesse
Hartley, dock-engineer of Liverpool, in consideration of
his services in connexion with the Birkenhead Docks
since they have passed into the hands of the corpora-
tion ; and that Mr. J. B. Hartley be appointed perma.
neat engineer of the Birkenhead Docks, at a salary of
7501. a-year. Mr. Alderman S. Holm., in moving the
confirmation of the proceedings, stated that Mr. Thom-
son, contractor, had commenced the excavation of the
great float (Birkenhead), and that he expected to have a
large body of men at work in a few days, as soon as his
machinery -was completed. The works would then be
prosecuted with vigour. Mr. Robertson Gladstone
seconded the proposition, which was adopted non. Ws.

TM CAP—TP.7IO:v 4011.1.12, Zotllol

(Front f 1 Freemen.)
When we were tittle boys our preceptors often set no
asking this question. It was nut w orth while perhaps
impossible—to name the delinquent, or it suspected, it
might be undesirable to use the birch ; still our Moniteur
wished us to he aware that the delft had come to his
knowledge, are: theueht that the " cap," if invisible to
others, would keep the memory of the offender warm
and wary. We have known what, it was to go about
with the invisible cap on our head, afraid lest M. lc Mo-
niteur should let us know that it was not invisible to
him ; afraid lest our fear should betray itself in a look
or a blush. Io lighter cases we have known the appeal
made to the " feather on the nose " of the culprit, and
seen the laugh excited by the involuntary act of confer-
_ sloe. The MOWiteur on the other side the water seems
to have been trying the cap or feather trick on us de-
linquents on this side the British Channel. It has vent
us over a lecture in the old, as we had hoped, forgotten
style. "Now journalists—you there in the great city
of shopkeep‘re, or you in the manufacturing city of
Lancashire—l know all about it ; I have seen your
celiceel anonymous calumnies against the French Go-
vernment ; I treat them with utter contempt ; the com-
mon sense and good faith of Englishmen prevent their
doing any mischief, though you want to break up the
alliance between the two nations. Let those whom the
cap fits wear it." Forthwith 41. le Moniteur casts his
solemn glance around to see whom be has frightened,
or who unconsciously, feels for the feather. But, alas,
for our worthy Moniteur, first a titter runs round the
the whole saucy circle, and sly looks are exchanged, till
at length the whole break out into a hearty laugh.
"Haven't you got a cap for all of us ?" shouts out at
last some scapegrace. We should all like to be fitted."
It's all over now with poor Mr. Monitor; he has nothing
for it but to pocket his dignity and stalk back to his
principal with his wings clipped, only to be asked,
" Why did you try it on in that fashion ? Those rude
English won t stand it like Leopold and his Belgians."
To be serious, it really must have done Count Walew-
ski's heart good, if it can be bettered by rebuke, to see
how his Moniteur's advice was received in England.
Never was professed contempt met by more real con-
tempt. That is the sting of it. He could not speak in
his Government organ without showing that he winced
inwardly, while professing unconcern at the "calumnies"
of the English press ; but the Euglish press shows still
more plainly that it cares not one farthing what he and
his may think of its doings. The press shares indeed
the common feeling of the country ; it approves, and
would &aerial), the alliance with Frenchmen ; but the
alliance with the heroes of the 2d of December is no
wish, no object, either of the English people or of the
English press. All that the French nation bas done we
show respect to ; we have censured but little their rati-
fication of the military absolutism established by perjury
and bloodshed in 1852 ; we felt that they were the beat
judges whether or not it was for their interest to yield
themselves, bound hand and foot, to the man who had
purchased their army with their own money, and who
could even cannonade the Boulevards to 'show that he
would do anything to be the autocrat of France. • We
also felt that they had good reason not to forget Water-
loo, and that they might think it 'wor-h their while to
place a Napoleon on the throne, to redeem France front
the ignominy of subjection to a family imposed on her
ny conquest. There is a feeling in every English breast
which would doubtless embrace the first opportunity of
restoring a royal family exiled by foreign troops, and of
banishing the one whom they had seated on our throne.
We can readily, therefore, understand what Frenchmen
did in 1852. They did but say, "Submit we must to
the master of half a million of bayonets ; and submit we
aill, for a time at least, even to a subverter by treachery
and violence of the constitution he has sworn to observe ;
we submit, if but to show that we have shaken off the
yoke of the Holy Alliance." Aware of all this, the
press here has carefully avoided annoying Frenchmen,
while it has not shrunk from moderate criticism on their
Government.

Evidently Count Walewski is elated with having suc-
cessfully brow-beaten Belgium and warned Sardinia.
Neither country could afford to displease its great mili-
tary neighbour ; and the representative of England at
the Paris Conferencas by no means repudiated so en-
tirely as he ought to have done the threats of Walewski
against the Belgian press. The Count, therefore, has
ostentatiously paraded his feats against the Belgian
journals in the document in wLich he explained why
France and England withdrew their representatives frem
the Court of Naples. We wonder who authorised tip
Count to include us as one of the parties cordial in forc-
ing on the Belgian'Government more rigorous dealing
with the press ? If Lord Palmerston knew what • would
appear in the Moniteur on Monday week (see last week's
Freeman) he has betrayed England ; but, if not, the
French Government has insulted, us, or, at least, been
guilty of sharp practice. Let not Count Walewski ima-
gine, however, that he can in the least influence either
the press of this country or the Government in relation
to it. No one ought to know better than Louis Napo-
leon that the most powerful minister here would not

- -
dare to suggest restrictive laws on the press. He would
fare worse than for opening letters at the Post-office.
Hence, perhaps, the modest style of " confining him-
self to an appeal to the common-sense and good faith of
the English people." Confine himself ! Yes, forsooth,
and well he may ; for any Government to which he had
ventured to appeal would, in self-defence, have been
compelled to read him such a homily as diplomacy sel-
dom sees.

The pretence for noticing in this vague style—so
vague that whether tales about Cayenne, or about the
Empress, about Spain or are meant, no one
knows—the pretence is that " the alliance" will be, en-
dangered by destroying confidence between the two Go-
vernments. But what in the world has Government to
do with the matter ? The pretex is simply silly. No
English writer, from the penny-a-liner to the thunderer
in the Times, ever thinks of asking the Government's
leave as to what he writes. The public, not the censor,
is the only government which controls our press. What
public opinion will deem libellous, a jury will punish
criminally or with damages ; and what the public dis-
believes, or considers foolish or imprudent, it will soon
soon cease to read. Count Walewski may try, if he
likes, to raise up another Mackintosh to defend another
Peltier; our courts are open to him. Or, if he thinks it
will serve "the alliance," he may fight the battle out in
the pages of the Daily News, or of any English journal.
They will readily reprint his defence against the "calum-
nies"—only, he must be prepared to hear the reasons
for believing them not to be calumnies. We may suggest
to Count Walewski, however, that it is of questionable
prudence to attack our Argus-eyed press. It has the
means, if it choose to use them, of performing for the
English public the function of a Hebrew prophet. Eng-
lish gold could tell us the words (fey: enough perhaps)
that even a taciturn autocrat utters in his bed chamber,
or at least in his council-chamber.

absCloulurtbeeflrief
freedom
thmoa the
FEorgelnischh
press.
r .le
Ifejoic
not, 'we
in the
do.
tyrants
oaf reex
idlei ea.
cussedcan
All
, a.lohneerethoenlmy
jagdree itehgeesepfeeEcheerse peened
Alliance hinder it. The photograpbs of Italian dun-
geons and French penal settlements may well be
annoying to vindictive cruelty ; the exposure of
despotic cunning and perfidy, and especially of sham
liberality, is sufficiently galling ; but it must be sub-
mitted to. England is the despots' picture gallery, and
our press is the artist. Despots are extinct animals
here, though having too many habitats elsewhere. In
their own countries they can only be painted like the
sketchings of the Egyptians, according to a stereotyped
rule ; here we exhibit them as they are, and all the
foreigners who come over look at them as Aneas did
at the Carthaginian paintings—only instead of bursting
into tears, they burst into imprecations ; and surely
there ought to be one country in Europe where tyrants
may be openly cursed. As to the press, our conviction
is that its error has been quite in the opposite direction
to that hinted by Louis Napoleon. The danger has
been that the greatest successful villany since 1849 should be forgotten in its success. Morality half been
almost sacrificed to political prudence. It is this, per'
baps, which has emboldened the tools of despots to
calumniate truth by calling it calumny. Perhaps, how-
ever, the motto about libels is applicable here—that the
greater the truth the greater the calumny.

CONVICTION OF EIBNRY HA.RRISON,
THE LEEDS WIZARD.

We have already reported the particulars of the
charge preferred by Eliza Croft against Henry Harrison,
the wizard of the South-market, Leeds. At the Leeds
Court-house, yesterday, before Darnton Lupton, Esq.,
and a full bench of magistrates, the case was again in-
vestigated. The court was densely crowded in every
part, and the greatest excitement prevailed-in the neigh-
bourhood of the police-effice.
After Harrison had been placed in the dock Mr.
Ferns, the attorney for the defence' replied on the whole
case at great length. He exposed the inaccuracies and
inconsistencies of the girl's statement, and contended
that her evidence was unworthy of credence.
they returned into court Mr
nearly an hour. When t
the n
the written decision of bench. On
The magistrates deliberated on their judgment for
money from the prosecutrir,
Lupton real
theund
preteece
nonf
her destiny, by unlawful
means the bench found the prisoner guilty, and ordered
• •the terms of the Vagrant Act, to be imprisoned
hiromin °obftaiinafii'ngencing
for three months. (The reading of the clause " as a rogue
and vagabond" was cordially approved by the crowd.)
With regard to the graver accusation—that of having
violated the person of Eliza Croft--the prisoner was also
found guilty, and sentenced to be imprisoned in the
r
borough gaol for six months, such sentsnce to com-
mence at the expiration of the former term of punish-
ment.
thesems of imprisonment had ex-
pired find sureties
follow, for his good
Harrisonsno both
behaviour during the six months then to or in
default, accept the alternative of remaining
This judgment was received with
generalia prison.
d hearty
HWa n
was
ordered
satisfaction by the crowded court. an
As the prisoner was alsout to be removed from the
dock, an elderly female stepped forward and said that she
had also a complaint to make against Harrison. When
the confusion arising from this little incident had some-
what subsided, the woman stated that her name was
Jane Harrison, and that she was the wedded wife of the
prisoner, and that she now charged him with having in-
termarried with another woman, viz., Mrs. Brown, who
has acted in the capacity of the prisoner's housekeeper.
When the charge had been stated- the crowd testified
their pleasure in a somewhat noisy manner, and ap-
plauded the woman several times during her subsequent
statements.
On this new charge Mr. J. M. Barret applied for a
remand. _ _

The magistrate granted the application, and the pri-
soner. stands remanded on this serious charge until S&.
turday, Nov. S.