The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-03 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1858.

There is one point on which there is a general
concurrence of opinion—viz., the propriety of a
very decided alteration in the law of libel. It is
on one class of the community, and by no means
an unimportant one, that the existing code presses
with undue .everity. Public journalists fre-
quently are, and may to a far greater extent
become, its victims. And yet journalism has long
been considered an estate—the fourth of the
realm. The liberty of the press is justly regarded
as of paramount importance as one of the great
palladiums of national freedom. Why then is it
still exposed to the greatest persecution and annoy-
ance for acts that have been manifestly committed
without malice or the intention of doing wrong ?
Those who speak most glibly in its favour are fre-
quently ready to avail themselves of any opportu-
nity to resort to vexatious proceedings, whenever
their passions are excited, or they conceive them-
selves to be entitled to put the machinery of the
law into operation to crush or materially injure
an obnoxious publication.

There have unquestionably been great ameliora-
tions of late days, for which journalists are mainly
indebted to Lord CAMPBELL, not only in his legis-
lative, but also in his judicial capacity. The strin-
gency of the code has been materially modified by
direct enactments, and the recent enactments have
received a liberal and enlightened construction.
A farthing damages will no longer carry costs !
and a journalist may plead that the matter com-
plained of was for the public good, and inserted
without malice. Fair legal reports are also pri-
vileged ; but there are many others which in the
discharge of imperative duty must be given,
which may render innocent
parties liable to con-
siderable annoyance,
and very heavy expense.
Lord Camrevaa. is very properly seeking to re
move these difficulties, and is entitled to
the thanks and gratitude of the community
at large for his conduct. But, and we
say it with profound respeet, his Lordship has
hardly gone far enough. We believe that the
only reason is his desire to give a handsome in-
oetialrnent of justice, and not to endanger the fate
cert.: valaable measure by running counter to
aiding prejudices. We should be de-
lighted if the Nola
publish an ordivatibc:leieer:ail: Learned Lord could
and convictione dytibnagt bilis own opinions
that which was just and rigl,t, a would give
But he has been
subjected to difficulties and impediments of I
ordinary character, and to ensure success
has
deemed it prudent to yield
to a certain extent
thereto. . .

On Friday evening, when giving notice of hit
intention to postpone to a future day the second
reading of his bill for the amendment of libel, the
venerable Lord Lnammizsr suggested that be
should take advantage of the postponement, to
make the bill more extensive in its operation, and
the Lord Cite-Justice thanked hie friend for the ,

valuable hint. We may therefore reasonably
anticipate that he will profit thereby, and produce
something that will go far to emancipate " the
Fourth Estate" from the undue restrictions to
which it is still subjected. We do not ask that
any allowance should be made for malicious
publications, or that the freedom which we seek
should be permitted to degenerate into licentious-
ness. But let it be shown that there is express
malice, not merely implied in respect of matters
that come within its legitimate functions. We
would not screen the wilful and deliberate
libeller, or slanderer, from the consequences of
their offences. But we would provide the utmost
possible protection from those who act fairly and
above board in the discharge of their duties.
Lord CAMPBELL has extended, or rather proposes
to extend, the 2Egis of the Law over those who
publish fair reports of the proceedings of Parlia-
ment and of certain other public bodies, re-
specting matters of general or local interest. But
there are other classes of publications thst should
also he sanctioned, so far as journalists are con-
cerned—matters which could not be omitted
without seriously injuring the overcautious
Editor, by whom it was neglected or withheld.
The great cause of the grievance arises from the
unnecessary distinction maintained between oral
defamation and libel. Why should the editor,
or the proprietor, or publisher of any newspaper,
the latter of whom is probably tetally unac-
quainted with the contents of the publication,
be held responsible in person as well as in pocket ?
The malice, if any there be, is with the original
promulgator, but, in consequence of the state
of the law, the really malicious person
will be exculpated, unless he imputes
something that would subject the party to criminal
punishment before a competent tribunal, or sub-
jeet him to special damages, while the innocent
publisher of his falsehoods is liable to the
penalties and annoyance which the slanderer
ought to sustain. It is surely time that these
absurd quibbles should be dispensed with. Assi-
milate the law of libel and defamation. Let the
defamer be enabled to justify, if he can, his
statement, on the ground that it was made without
malice and for the public benefit, and on the other
hand let the journalist, who can also show an
absence of malice, prove that his report
was a fair one, and furnish proof sufficient to
bring it home to the original wrongdoers, and he
exempted from responsibility. This is a reasonable
and moderate demand, and we t 1 ust Lord CAMPBELL
may take it into consideration. There is no reason
why the stump orator who wantonly invades the
sanctity of domestic life should be exonerated and
the innocent journalist punished, because one has
only spoken, while the otherhas printed the charge,
Nor would we shield those who indulge in scanda

and by—
" The whispered hint, the shrug, the hum, or ha,
These petty brands that calumny doth use,"
wilfully injure their fellow. One accusa-
tion may be of the most fearful charac-
ter—may charge a wife with adultery,
a maiden with want of chastity, a man with some-
thing nearly allied to swindling ; but if the charge
does not show that they had incurred the penalty
of a criminal offence, the sufferer could not be
justified ; while in a journal, anything calculated
to bring into contempt or disrepute, although merely
repeated, and its author stated, might be subject
to heavy damages and costs, and, at all events, to
its own expenses. This should be remedied. Let
Lord CAmPisur, undertake it, and he will build
fur himself "a monument more enduring than
brass." A law that will ever be associated with
his name, and render it illustrious when other
honourable acts may be forgotten or disregarded.

The Government of Lord DEnnY, from the
very peculiarity of its position at the present
motHent, appears to us in a manner to demand
at the outset of its existence as a right, almost as
a debt of gratitude, at the hands of the Liberals
—a patient hearing and respectful consideration.
Whatever the circumstances may have been in
consequence of which Lord PALMERSTON'S Admi-
nistration came the other day to an unexpected
and untimely end, they were not of Lord DERBY'S
contriving—neither did they trace their origin to
the ingenious device of any one of the noble earl's
supporters, whether within or without the walls of
Parliament. The majority, not, remember, upon the
second reading of the Conspiracy to Murder Bill,
but simply upon Mr. MILNER GursoN's very adroit
and persuasive amendment—may certainly, with-
out doubt, be again designated " a fortuitous con-
currence of atoms," but it most positively cannot,
with any show of reason, be seriously termed
for one moment a factious combination. The
situation took its rise in the first instance
from a vexatious act of—what we may accu-
rately call—Ministerial reticence. There was
a despatch unanswered—a despatch very sin-
gularly worded, to say the least of it, and
communicated with what our neighbours across
the water call a considerable amount of tmpreme-
ment to her Britannic MAJESTY'S Government—
Lord PALMERSTON's recent administration. This
despatch coming to us from a "faithful ally," was
nevertheless so strangely and so strongly expressed
throughout that a good many of us—{a rather
moderate computation we take that to be, all
things considered]—a good many of us would have
vastly liked to have had that same despatch an-
swered, and that moreover befittingly and be-
times. It was not answered. The mem-
ber for Ashton proposed to the House of
Commons that it should at any rate precede the
vote for the Second Reading of the Conspiracy
Bill with an expression of regret that the despatch
teferred to had not been answered. Thereupon
a clear majority of nineteen decided iu favour of
Mr. GIBSON'S amendment. And thereupon, as a
further consequence, the Noble Viscount the ex-
Premier decided upon tendering his resignation,
and that of his colleagues, to his SOVEREIGN.
Hence, and not by any wily contrivance of the
DERBY-DISRAELI Opposition, the dissolution of the
old and the formation of the new Government.

It is not, however, by reason of their eager-
ness to parteipite with the Hon. Member for
Ashton in bis jealous protest against the Ministe-
rial reticence, just particularised, that we conceive
the new-born Ministry possesses at this moment a
claim upon the consideration of the Liberal part
of the general community. It is rather thus
according to our thinking, because the Earl of
DERBY and his colleagues—not having sought out
the means for ousting their rivals from office—
not having in any way intrigued to this end for
party purposes, and through that for their own
personal advantage and av,grandisement—not
having contrived the present " situation ".—have,
nevertheless, hesitated not one moment in
tameant übpeo,notfhiesoazon
con-
senting to accept, at a very critical juncture, the
weighty responsibilities of Government. The corn-
g.tehe. outgoing Administration
nothing, %aye
oaentary thee),..u.r.133-73r, "Thank you for
sarcasm
Ofu„allipot —with the supple-
But—consider for
the strictest regarda
the In-comin.. miniat How very magnanimous t"
to truth
that it is really with
~etit accession to power ; that it •
truth we remarked that
ers Did Not Seek their pre-
tastiOalln but literally,that they C
is not said fan-
=gent simply

Ito take what is thrust upon their acceptance. And
then, remember how very heavy and how very
solemn indeed are, at this singular crisis, the
responsibilities actually devolving upon the
newly installed Administration. There is, first of
all, an affair of the utmost delicacy, if not of
absolute difficulty to arrange between the British
Cabinet and the French Government, There is
the revolt in India still remaining to be crushed
out, its suppression having only in truth but just
commenced. There is the future Government of
those vast Asiatic possessions still to be organised.
' There is a gigantic war with the Chinese Empire
—an empire consisting in round numbers of some
400,000,000 of human beings—upon which we
may be said to have only yesterday adventured ;
although that war was in fact proclaimed months
ago in direct antagonism to the then DERBY-DIS-
RAELI Opposition the now DERBY-DISRAELI
Government. Besides all this we have a monetary
problem of the most complex character to be solved
by Parliament under the direction of her MAJESTY'S
advisers. And, to crown the w'Role formidable
catalogue, there is the Reform Bill—a difficulty
ultimately not to be shirked or evaded by any con-
trivance, no matter how ingeniously prearranged.
A difficulty with any Minister, but most of all, it
might be feared by some, with a Ministry formed
from the old Conservative Opposition. The
Noble Earl at the head of the new Cabinet has
already, however, given the country more than
one signal guarantee—nay, on Monday night,
in the House of Lords, he gave the country a
distinct assurance that he has no intention at
all to shirk the arch-difficulty among all difficul-
ties, that presented by the inevitable new Parlia-
mentary Reform Bill. Corroborative of this,
there is his preliminary advance to Earl GREY
—and more than that, if possible, as a most
significant evidence of his proposed policy
upon the subject, there is the instalment of
the Noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn
in the Colonial Department of the new
administration. Lord STANLEY, as surely as be
is heir to the Earldom of Derby, is, by his
antecedents among the more advanced of our libe-
ral politicians. Consequently there is a peculiar
significance, to our mind, in his acceptance of
office in his father's Administration. It is be-
eause of all these weighty considerations in
regard to the difficulties of the present crisis
that we conceive the Ministry of Lord DERBY is,
in a manner, entitled to a respectful hearing, to
" a clear stage and no favour," on the part of the
Liberal Opposition both within and without the
walls of the Imperial Parliament.

CONVERSATIONS ON THE PARABLES of the New
Testament, for the use of Children, by EDWARD,
Earl of Derby. (Society for promoting Christian
Knowledge).
Probably most of our readers are as little
aware as we were but a few days ago, that Lord
DERBY was a theological author. Such, however,
is the case. And having obtained his book, and
glanced through its pages, we confess to being
much pleased with it. The little work was first
published, it is trne, just thirty years ago,
and when, therefore, his Lordship was nearly
thirty years of age; but it would be well worthy
the maturer years of any man of cultivated
intellect interested in the religious welfare of
children, and interested specially in the por-
tion of Holy Writ to which it refers. The
Conversations are dedicated to a lady, by whom
the noble author was encouraged to write them,
and whose approval of them ho also records.
We should think they would be found very
useful by mothers and other ladies
who wish to interest the children under
their care in an intelligent study of the parables. I
The I.tDgUag,O is er.ceedin6ly siaiplo and natural,
such as most well-educated children, especially with
a teacher's aid, would comprehend with ease, and
there certainly are no moral or religious lessons
in the world, which if properly understood, equal
in simple beauty and in power the Parables of our
LORD.

But in the spirit of which party are the con-
versations written ? will be the first question of
this controversial age. We reply, not in the
High Church nor in the Low Church, not in the
Evangelical Church or in the Puseytte Church
spirit—but in the spirit of the parables themselves.
Except, indeed, by a few references, it would
hardly be known whether the author was aChurch-
man or a Dissenter. So completely are the par-
ables made their own interpreter, and so strictly
is the endeavour adhered, to to make the whole
intelligible to children, that while many of the
thoughts are weighty and the expDsitions
beautiful, there is a careful avoidance
of those mysteries which to children
must be mere words. We thought, however,
while perusing the little work, that tile very ab-
sence of extreme views either way is an indi-
cation that the writer does not hold them.
Persons who do so can rarely write or speak on
religion without introducing them. They acquire
a perfectly factitious importance in their minds.
A writer who like Lord DERBY sees so much value
in those essential points of the Christia❑ creed
in which all agree, is not likely to be
an enthusiast for the " mint, anise, and cum-
min." This little pleasant and natural volume,
obviously the offspring of the heart as much as
of the head, does, however, but harmonise
with the language of Lord DERBY in the House of
Lords, when he avowed himself equally opposed
to both the extreme parties in the Church. His
little work is, therefore, one which religious
teachers and parents of any party can use with
pleasure. It is as neutral as the New Testament
itself; its merit is that of a most simple exposition
of the mind of the Great Master.