The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-06 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We must once more return to a painful subject ;
one which we would have willingly avoided mention-
ing again, did we hear of any symptoms of repent-
ance in the perpetrators of what we cannot but consi-
der an act of most iniquitous and gratuitous injustice ;
and had not the suffering individuals it concerns every
claim to European sympathy, and to that public pro-
tection and vindication which the present shackled
French press seems not to dare to afford them. We
allude to the arrest of fifteen Polish refugees (the
number is since, as we are told, greatly increased) in
the Rue Batignoles, at Paris ; among whom are three
Members of the late Polish Diet, Zwierkowski, Hlusz-
niewicz, and Zaleski, and M. Nabielak, one of those
who so heroically began the Polish Revolution of No-
vember the 29th, by the attack on the Belvedere Palace.
!The warrant issued against them contains two charges,
fine of conspiracy against the security of the State
it Complot contre la surea de l'Etat) ; the other of in-
fringement of the law against Associations (Contraven-
tion contre la loi sur les Associations.) The particulars
oaf their case, communicated to us by an unquestion-
txble authority, amply prove both these accusations
tto be unfounded. The Code of Instruction Crimi-
melte of France does not allow one accused of high-
ftreason to be set free upon bail. And upon this pre-
text the Procureur-General, M. Martin du Nord,
.declined to comply with several applications made on
-the behalf of their countrymen by the Polish Sena-
-tor, Palatine Ostrowski, and General Dwernicki.
_However, after a horrible imprisonment of three
-weeks, during which the accused have been kept in a
:filthy dungeon teeming with vermin, and upon a regi-
men worse than that allotted to convicted murderers,
:it was resolved on Wednesday, October the 28th, that
.-the prisoners should be set free, upon finding bail to
-the amount of five hundred francs each T. This cir-
cumstance is sufficient proof that the charge of high
treason, notwithstanding the greatest endeavours to the
-contrary, could not be substantiated. With respect to the
infringement of the law against Associations the case
stands thus :—The Polish Society, of which the ac-
cused were members, sent, at the time when the law in
question was under discussion in the French Chamber,
to the then Minister of the Interior, Count d'Argout,
la letter, stating the objects and purposes of the Society,
and containing a list of its members, with a notifica-
tion that, as their purposes were merely national, and
..as, besides, by article 41 of their statutes, every con-
nection with a foreign society was absolutely forbidden,
they presumed they might continue their meetings.
This letter was not answered, but M. Gisquet, the
Prefect of Police, himself told them, that provided they
did not meddle with French affairs, they were at liberty
-to meet and deliberate upon their own cause in any way
they pleased. Now, had the French Government
considered this Society as unlawful or dangerous, they
would—fully aware as they were of its existence and
objects—have dissolved it immediately. Such dissolu-
tion, however, not only did not take place, but about
two months since the Journal des Debats, the organ
of the Ministry, inserted a protest of this very So-
ciety against the loan of 150 millions of florins con-
tracted by Russia in the name of Poland. What
other consequence is to be drawn from these facts, but
that the French Government themselves did not, till
the recent arrival of Count Pahlen, consider the law
against Associations applicable to the Polish society
in question, or if they did consider it so applicable,
blushed to put it in force. The Monarchy of the Bar-
ricades has a curious method of keeping its pledge to
guarantee the nationality of Poland. The Northern
Autocrat, in a fit of affectionate emotion towards his
father-in-law, presented him with fifty Circassians.
The Citizen King bath displayed his affection for the
Autocrat by an offering more analagous by, in honour
of his AmbasSador's arrival, consigning to the loath-
.some dungeons of St. Pelagic men whose only crime
is the having lived anti fought for the liberty of them-
selves and mankind. How long is civilized- Europe to
be scandalized by these courtesies of despotism ?-
-.L1,/lorning Chronicle.

It is difficult to say which ought to be admired
:most in the conduct of Russia towards her European
znd Asiatic neighbours—the insolence with which she
treats them—the robberies and depredations which she
is incessantly committing upon them—or the shameless
..effrontery with which she has the impudence, in the
.:name of peace, of civilization, or of religion, to defend
ttem. Of the two last portions of her conduct it is
unnecessary to present any illustrations. 'Where ver
her eagles have winged their flight, there have they
engraven them in characters of blood, which an ocean
of repentant beneficence would be insufficient to wipe
out—wherever her Ambassadors have been sent, there
have they left the most ample mementoes of the faith-
less character of the Court by which they were
accredited—of the hollowness of its professions—
of the insincerity of its promises—of its intriguing
and deceitful spirit. The King bf the Barricades
bids fair, indeed, to prove an overmatch for the race
of the Northern Autocrats in all those qualities which
debase the man, while they disgrace the people over
-whom he is permitted to have rule and authority ; but
-presuming that his reign is not calculated to be of that
lengthened duration which‘ would enable him to inspire
the Court of France with the same spirit and the same
motives by which he is himself actuated, and
that he is therefore out of the question, we
may say that of all the Courts of Europe, the most
base, the most corrupt in tendency, the most flagitious
in principle, and the most insolent in tone and manner,
is that which is also the most barbarous, and the most
(easily confined within its own unenviable bounds—the
Court of Russia. It. was but the other day, that in
.addition to the -grossest breach of faith that was ever
committed by any one people against another—we mean
the subjugation of Poland and the incorporation of it
with the Russian dominions—she attempted by a secret
treaty to seal the entrances to the Black Sea against
all ships of war, except those which she might give
leave to the Porte to allow to pass—and now flushed
with the impunity attending the disgraceful proceeding,
she has the insolence to insult the Plenipotentiary of
-.the only power of which, single-handed, she has any
mason to entertain fear 1 The Czar insults the King
of ,England in the person of his Ambassador, Lord
Durham, and his minions have the insolence to attempt
a defence of their conduct, as being according to esta-
blished usage I The particulars of this affair have
been already before our readers, and we need not,
therefore, repeat them. Lord Durham resented the
insult as an English nobleman, the representative not
.only of the only constitutional, but of the most power-
fu 1. Sovereign in Europe, ought to have resented
it ; but no satisfactory apology, or an explanation, has
yet been given, and we put it to Lord Pal-
merstco whether he is to permit the matter to
rest here p.—whether the insult is to be pocketed, and
the foreign policy of England to be in future guided by
the smiles acid growls of the Northern Bear ? If such
is to be the cm se, the country ought to know it at
once, in order that it may be prepared for what must
naturally follow--the subjugation of all our interests,
commercial, civil, and political, to the nod and beck
of a power which in six months a man of Lord Chat-
ham's decision and energy would have reduced to the
most humiliating condition—but we hope better things.
Lord Palmerston cannot—will not—permit such auda-
cious. insolence to pass unpunished. Explanations must
not only be given, but an ample apology made, and the
Autocrat informed in deed, if necessary, as well as in
words, .that his conduct is estimated at its real value,
and that, hosvever he may trample on others, there are
those'who will not permit him to touch one hair of
their heads with impunity.—Morning Advertiser.
Reflecting on the atrocious conduct of " the King
of the Barricades," in ridding himself, on the one hand,
of all those liberal friends, whose opinions of state
policy being now out of joint with his own, could not
but prove troublesome and unwelcome monitors, and,
on the other, in persecuting that Press from whose
- -.manly resistance to the despotic decrees of Charles X.
:and his Ministers, spiting the power which he has so
eossly abused,—it is impossible not to think at the
onne time of the infamous pretences which he has set
,in justification of the course which he has pursued
to,w
in ar,ds the latter, and the noble, though indirect.man-
ne. " which its conduct and its utility were vindicated
by . Cauchois Lemaire, in his late defence of him-
self. The pretence set up for the enactment of the
gaggi. 'uf laws, undo: which the Press of France now

drags on a lingering existence, was the assassin attempt
of Fieschi—just as if the Press of France had, on the
one hand, been holding forth on the necessity of assas-
sinating tyrants, or, on the other hand, been in treaty
or league with Fieschi, or any other scoundrel, to in-
duce him to make the attempt ! No attempt, how-
ever, was made, either public or private, to bring proof
in support of any fact of any criminatory nature against
the Press or its conduct ; though, if there had been
any, there cannot exist the slightest doubt that it would
not only have received all due publicity, but the very
shadow of it, however limited, been magnified into a
most extensive, deeply-laid, and bloody conspiracy.
There was not, however, the mere shade of shadow of
truth in the vague and intangible charge that was in-
sinuated with such base and cowardly malignity.
" There was," as has been justly observed by a noble
writer in the Edinburgh Review, "a diabolical plot
to assassinate the King, and there were newspapers
existing at the same time. This, positively, and no-
thing more, is the connexion between the Press and
the plot—the pretext, the flimsy pretext, for chaining
the Press with chains of iron, abolishing Trzatby
Jury, extinguishing all journals published by poor
men ; and, in fact, placing the discussion of all sub-
jects, except perhaps mathematics and antiquities, upon
a more slippery and intolerable footing than they were
in the time of an open, avowed, and candid tyrant."
The pretence, however, was sufficient in the eyes of a
Phillippising and unreformed Chamber, to induce it
to pass laws in direct violation of the Charter, but
which cannot at the same time fail in extending, ma-
turing, and firmly establishing the political rights, not
only of the people of France, but of all Europe.
The progress," adds the noble writer, in the Edin-
burgh Review, " which republican principles have
made in England during the last twelve months, has
been remarked by all accurate observers of the signs of
the times ; and not a foreigner who hears our conver-
sations now, and had left us for a year or two, is in-
sensible of the change. We verily believe that an
Englishman resorting to France next year, will be
struck still more with the like progress, should the
mew laws be continued in force"—and who can
doubt it ? Even the worm turns in helpless revenge
against the foot that heedlessly puts an end to its ex-
istence; and are millions of rational beings when
trampled to the dust in all that men hold most dear—
in all that wounds their pride and comes home to their
bosoms and business—to exhibit a lesser sense of the
injury done to them ? But to return to M. Cauchois
Lemaire. How nobly did he vindicate himself against
the charges specifically brought against him, and the
prejudices entertained against his profession by the
Wakleys and Roebucks of France ? With what dig-
nity did he not brush away the former, as unworthy of
his notice—and with what noble candour dissipate the
other as a filthy exhalation of pride and ignorance
His speech ought to be printed in letters of gold, and
we again reprint it—all that we can do in the columns
of a newspaper—in order that it may sink more deeply
into the minds of our readers—be remembered by them
as it ought to be remembered—and produce those re-
gards towards the traitor King which he so richly
merits at the hands and hearts of all just and upright
persons. " It is not without some surprise," said he,
" not without wonder indeed, that I appear at this
bar. It is so unusual to me. For eight years now
have the Crown lawyers spared me ; and during five
of these eight, which have kept both men and the
press so busy, I have remained ever at that post where
personal responsibility is no fiction, without having
been once cited or prosecuted for a political offence.
After this long truce With a most quarrelsome parquet
(body of Crown lawyers), there comes a menace of
fine and imprisonment, which strangely refreshes and
brings back my memory to a time when I too paid my
share of that tribute, which the King's Treasury and
his gaoler raised from the liberties of the press. Years
but light in number separate me from that time, but
this interval is an age in events, of which one was a
revolution. At its completion I had hoped that my
task of contributing to the emancipation of the press,
by my sufferings and my petits, was over. I may add,
that the very personage who thus, by a strange con-
vulsion of circumstances, has become my accuser, him-
self thought, after the revolution, that the day of peril
was over for the public writer: I preserve in my ar-
chives, as one of my most precious autographs, toge-
ther with other letters from friends since risen to be
Ministers, one in which the present Advocate-General
announced himself as the historian of my humble efforts
for the liberty of the press. The little works which
accompanied the note spoke in favour of this liberty,
and of principles which the Hon. Gentleman now
thinks it more prudent to keep at a distance. Instead
of your former eulogium, M. Advocate-General, I
have now to endure your lessons, elegant mayhap in
the form, but direly rigid, especially if the Jury should
think fit, as the Advocate-General seeks, to transform
his advice into reality by sending me to prison. The
words of my accuser fill me indeed with anxiety.
What ! have I been all at once guilty of what he
pleases to call an attentat, less direly punished under
the old than the present system of law ? Have I lost
sight of my long habits of prudence, and thus come as
an old man under the fangs of the law, which I had ever
the prudence to avoid and escape when young? Have
I been so silly as to confound licence with liberty, and
insurrection with opposition ? The time, you must
own, is ill choen for such a change. But no—l
have not changed. Since 1815 I have remained ever
in the service of the self-same principles. It is not I
who have changed ; and it is wonderful to think that. I,
who professed, and pleaded, and developed these prin-
ciples with so much impunity under the restoration,
should now be called up for what can be no crime, save
in the requisitions of a Crown Lawyer. If I have not
changed, something else mnst have done so. The to-
lerance of Government must have beconie singularly
narrow, and its force militant, its instruments singularly
and increasingly oppressive. If my journal has not
made one step towards revolutionary principles, and it
certainly has not, then the Government which has pro-
secuted it must have retrograded farther back than the
restoration. One need not make use of merely their
eyes and good faith to see this. The Government
lays violent hands on the Constitutional guarantee of
the press, and, of course, seizes us for defending them,
as, nevertheless, the writers of a conciliatory journal.
If I read you some articles of that journal, you would
be amazed at the stupid/zeal which inflames the guar-
dians of the reigning system to prevent a translation
from the English, though side by side with other arti-
cles proving our moderation." M. Cauchois Lemaire
here explained that he way about to quit the place of
editor. " I may abdicate the functions of editor,"
he said, " but not that of a journalist. The word
may hurt, and may prejudice over-loyal ears against
him who bears it, but I am proud of the title. I have
fulfilled its mission with delight and love, whether at
liberty, or in prison, or in exile, whether the press be
free or enslaved. Yes, after a revolution, which
opened to me other paths of ambition, I contented my-
self with the humble profession of a journalist. It is
to me a sacred mission, the more sacred for the perils
which surround it. Like all other human things,
this profession has its ills, its advantages, its false
brethren, and corrupt members. Where is there a trade
in which rogues do not thrive ? where an army without
some cowards I or where, with every respect for
the Court,
.is there a band of judges and lawyers
in which a false and venal conscience does not lurk ?
Yet still it is a noble profession, the instrument cf ci-
vilization, and the protector of all that is most precious
in humanity. Yes, Gentlemen of the Jury, I avow
myself a journalist, a journalist of opposition, not one
from spite, envy, or ambition—one who has refused
the gratifications of one, and the delusive offers of the
other. The Jury, however, may answer me by adopt-
ing the opinion of the Advocate-General, and may de-
cide, as in 1828, that this Court is but the ante-cham-
ber to a dungeon. Be it so. Yet it is no less strange
that I should suffer under Louis Philippe, King of
France, the compliment of the penalty incurred pre-
viously, for having saluted, somewhat prematurely,
Louis Philippe, the Duke of Orleans, as future King.
I dreamed then of what I find realised now ; but,
alas ! how, and in what spirit realised ? Surely my
exclamation of disappointment is no crime. Yet, if ye
should think it so, Gentlemen of the Jury—if ye
should be determined to send me, along with so many
brethren of the Press, to prison, I shall not demur,
but merely ask one fovour : this is—that I may be

shut up in the same old:cell, which I may:thus occupy
twice under two reigns, which I had expected to find
somewhat different from each other. There:l" may at
least meditate with advantage upon what is called poli-
tical justice, and upon revolutions which turn singu-
larly into re-actions."—Morning Advertiser.

VICE CHANCERY-THURSDAY.

TREZEVANT V. FRAZER.

The hearing of Counsel was resumed this morning, after
which, the VICE CHANCELLOR delivered the following
judgment :
I quite agree with one observation of Mr. Jacob, that
this case is important, not so much by reason of the pro-
perty involved in it, as of the principle upon which it is to
be decided.. As I understand the facts; it appears that in
1826, shortly after the death of Mr. Farquhar, there be-
ing a dispute between his next of .kin, in consequence of
some advances he had made to Mr. Mortimer, which
might be held to be gifts, an agreement was made on
the 4th of December, 1826, by which it was arranged
that as to the sum of 20,000/. admitted to be a loan to Mr.
Mortimer, payment of it should be made by certain in-
stalments ; and as to a sum of 18,0001., not in dispute,
part of the purchase-money of an estate, that it also should
be made, and the title to the estate cleared in a certain
manner, at their joint expense. Now, according to the re-
presentation of the petition, this agreement was made in
the most deliberate manner, and there was no misunder-
standing as to its terms. But, it is alleged, as one of the
considerations for entering into it, that Mr. G. Frazer stated
to Mr. Mortimer, in the presence of certain persons, that if
he could consent to pay the 20,0001., no demand should ever
be made on him by any of the next of kin for an account of
any other advances he had received. Of course that was in-
dependent of the purchase money. Now, it appears that
the document in question 'was drawn up without any
such clause as corresponded to this verbal declaration. No-
tice, however, was taken of it at the time, but it was stated
that the verbal agreement was to be as binding as if it had
been introduced. It is then represented that, in conse-
quence of that statement, Mr. Mortimer was induced to
sign the agreement without having any professional advice.
That is the statement which goes to represent that Mr.
Mortimer was induced to sign the paper in the form in
which it was tendered to him, upon the assurance of Mr.
Frazer that the verbal stipulation was binding, and that
he had not proper professional advice to put him on his
guard not to sign a paper which did not contain all the
terms. Now, that representation is utterly inconsistent
with the notion that the paper itself was fraudulent and
void, and also inconsistent with the fact that all the repre-
sentations of Mr. Frazer, by which Mr. Mortimer was
induced to sign, were false and fraudulent. Then the bill
was filed, not by Mr. Frazer, but by Mr. Trezevant, who
was certainly no party to the agreement. An ordinary
answer was put in, and a decree was taken in the common
form, unless it be considered a deviation that that it di-
rected an inquiry as to the property outstanding. In pursu-
ance of the decree a state of facts was carried into the Mas-
ter's office, and a charge, by means of which a very large
sum, exceeding the 20,0001., the subject of the loan, and
the remaining part of the purchase money, was claimed
from Mr. Mortimer, and he put in examination to interro-
gatories in support of the charge. That was in June,
1831. By that examination it appeared that Mr. Mor-
timer, who must of necessity, if the representations in the
petition were true, have known all the circumstances attend-
ing the signing of the instrument in 1826, represents a state
of circumstances regarding the 20,000/. which he consi-
dered as a gift and not as a loan. He says that, shortly
after the death of the intestate, in July, 1826, Mr. Frazer
prevailed on him, when in a weak state of health, labouring
under atrophy, to sign sonic instrument whereby he was
made to admit the 20,0001. to have been advanced as a
loan and not as a gift. And he goes on to say, that in
order to induce him to sign it, Mr. Frazer represented
that Mr. Colvin stated he was informed by the intestate it
was only a loan, and he also represented that it was in
his power to ruin the examinant respecting the 20,000/.
and other advances if he would not give up that sum,
but that there should be no further annoyance if he would
give it up and sign the instrument, and he adds that he
was then in a debilitated state of health ; but that he had
since discovered that Colvin had never made the state-
ment attributed to him, and that all Frazer's statements
were Elsa ; and he submits and insists that under the cir-
cumstances the instrument was fraudulent. It appears
that when this examination was put in, an amended state of
facts was also carried in, taking to pieces the allegations of
Mr. Mortimer in the mode of pretence and charge in a bill,
and so it remained till after the death of Mr. Mortimer.
Now, if there was any good ground for making out the case
now stated in the petition, it was competent for Mr. Mor-
timer then to have made it with as much probability of suc-
cess (not to pledge myself however to its success) as at any
other time. At the same time, on hearing all the facts, I
am inclined to think there is a considerable show of truth in
support of the case represented in the petition. But it does
appear to me as plain as a thing can be, supposing the case
would ever be made available, it might have been made
available then ; and if the case the defendant represented
then were found to be such that the Master could not deal
with it under the decree, that would have been the time
for an application to have put in a more substantial and
available shape the case made by the interrogatories.
But it does appear to me that the very way in which
the case is put in the interrogatories is destructive of
the case represented in the petition, but cannot be
true. The petition represents anything but surprise. It
represents a most deliberate resolution, the document in the
form in which it was executed relying on the honour of Mr.
Frrzer for the execution of the parole agreement. It is true
the examination does glance at the facts stated in the peti-
tion, but it represents a very different case. Now then, after
the death of Mr. Mortimer, when the business has been be-
fore the Master, the result, in fact, being that he has decided
on the agreement of 1826, and has rejected all other claims—
now, in 1835, a petition is presented, praying liberty to
substantiate a' new case contained in it. It does appear to
me a more dangerous and mischievous thing to truth and
justice could not be done than to allow a man, with his own
personal knowledge of the facts, at one time to make a de-
liberate case on oath, and then to turn round and say that
is not the whole case, or the true case, and another is the
true case. The cases as to bills of review are not very ap-
plicable, except as they show the principle upon which the
Court acts in the admission of new evidence. If a party
cannot reasonably account for delay in disc Overing the evi-
dence, and show that the discovery is recent, the Court will
not allow that new evidence to be brought. But the cases
only go to show how relief is given when the party is himself
ignorant of the circumstances which constitute his case ;
but if he knew, or could reasonably know, what the evidence
was, the Court will not assist him. Now that principle
applies ten thousand times more strongly to a case where
the party is depositary of the fact himself. It appears
to me, therefore, that, independently of all other circum-
stances, this petition is not sustainable ; and, in the ge-
neral view I have taken of it, without adverting to the
extreme inconvenience and mischief that would be intro-
duced if I were to allow ..such a case to stand as is
asked, it is my opinion I am bound to dismiss this peti-
tion with costs. ,

KING'S BENCH-THURSDAY.

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1835.

Mr. Mansell had better verify it, and then the articles
should be filed.
This was accordingly done.

COMMON PLEAS.-THURSDAY.