The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-16 00:00:00

BRISTOL, JAN. 15.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

fear the proximate causes of the continuance of
the late outrages, are destined to obscurity from the melan
choly catastrophe which has just taken place. Although
an inhabitant of Bristol, I was absent during the whole of
the riots, but both before and since I have endeavoured to
keep my mind free from the party passion (for it deserv, s
no milder term) which has latterly reigned here. -I have
observed the workings of popular feeling—l have weighed
causes and consequences—and 1 have been amongst all
atsses, collecting evidence for the Committee of Inquiry.
The result of the whole I give you. It cannot be doubted
that the primary cause of the tragedy enacted in this city
was the attempt to force an unpopular political Judge on
the people, at a moment of unparalleled excitement ;
and let all authorities hereby learn that no persons or
measures can with impunity, be compulsorily thrust on
the great majority, whether that majority be classed
with the high or low. The utmost efforts of the Ma-
gistrates here could obtain no voluntary special con-
stables to escort Sir Charles Wetherell, hut there has been
so difficulty in obtaining an army of them front amongst
the most respectable inhabitants of the city, to rally round
the Judge of the Special Commission ; and I have no hesi-
tation in saying that if Sir Charles Wetherell had been in-
clu4ed in it, the peace of the city could not have been pre
served even by all the military which are at present in it,
and that few or none of the inhabitants would, in that
case, have offered their services. To go seriatim through
the late proceedings—We have been told by the Judges that
the law of the land not only permits but compels individuals
to act in suppressing a riot, even without waiting the autho-
rity of the Magistrates. At the moment this charge was deli-
vered, there was a practical commentary on it exhibited in the
person of Captain Lewis, who was then in gaol for thus act-
ing according to law; the consequences to him were, con-
cealment for some time, imprisonment, and a very consi-
derable expense in defending himself, and at last he is ac-
quitted honourably (as he really deserved) for having
unintentionially shot a boy. With this example before our
eyes, I presume that neither Captain Lewis, n-r any one
else, will again venture to act in a similar case, without
the most decisive authority of a Nlagistrate.
With respect to the tnilit try proceedings, they appear to
be most singular and unaccountable. The unfortunate
Colonel Brereton, with the Dragoons, would not act—
Captain Codrington, with his troop of yeomanry, did not
act—and Captain Shute, of another yeomanry corps, could
not act, for a very good reason, because his men in gene-
ral would not join hint. I can scarcely believe that per-
sonal fear had any influence on the parties. Is it possible
that they could have had any political bias, or was it mis-
taken humanity? With respect to the first named, lam
clearly of opinion, from evidence in my possession (how-
ever grating the assertion may be to military eyes and
ears), that Major-General Pearson was perfectly correct
in saying, in a note to Colonel Brereton, " that from the
overpowering nature of the mob the safety of the small
military force employed would have been endangered ;"
and also that the latter had every reason to state, in a let
ter to Lord Fitzroy Somerset, that " if the troops had been
repulsed the rioters would have fired the shipping and
attacked the Bank." I believe the truth to be, that at
one period the small military force had no chance whatever
with the mob—this military men dare not acknowledge ;
and the mob at last was conquered principally by fatigue
and liquor—
"Le combat finit faute de combattants." _

Whether or not the problem proposed by Sir C. Dalbi is
can now be solved, time alone will determine, viz, that this
trial would necessarily bring before the Court the question
as to what co-operation should exist between the civil and
military authorities, when riots of so serious a character
occur ; and he tightly says, that " on the proper under-
standing of this question, all that was valuable to a civi-
lized community in some degree depended."

Front the whole, however, we learn this lesson, which
all in power ought duly to weigh, that unless the public
authorities carry with them confidence and the good will of
their fellow-citiz,ns, they are unable to subdue a riot by
either civil or military means, and that the latter ought
never to be employed but when the magistrates have ample
cause (if such ever exists) to
" Cry havoc ! and let slip the dogs of war."
A soldier should never be called on for exhibition, but for
action.

And is the tragedy yet concluded? An unknown num-
ber have died by the fires themselves created—fi%e are des-
tined to perish in satisfaction of the law, and one has laid
violent hands on himself. Alas ! alas ! is our country
ever to continue thus from century to century at mutual
enmity—is one portion of its citizens always to be opposed
to the other? I will not believe it—
" There is something rotten in the state of Denmark."

A country exists where there are no riotings or burn-
ing—no wars or rumours of wars—a light is shining from
the west, giving us hopes that a sun of splendour will
gradually rise on, and show us the true road to universal
contentment, and your Sun

is pointinz the way.
PHILANTHROPIST.