The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-27 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1851

" General Riego should be considered as representing a
principle, for the support of which his memory still stands
exalted as a warning and frightful monument, raised by the
internal and external enemies of an ill-fated people, traitor-
ously compromised in their struggle for its maintenance.
Alas! alas! no other vestige can now be traced but the
desolations of the last twelve years, too horrid for the mind
to contemplate. I feel convinced that my return now to
Spain would be considered as the sanction of a measure
which I conscientiously believe must have been at variance
with my deceased brother's opinion, as it is at variance with
my own ; therefore I still restrain my anxiety to revisit my
country.
" And here, Madam, allow me in the most respectful
manner to represent to you that all measures which bear
the individual stamp of your Majesty's good intentions,
either affecting public
,or private interest, cannot re-
move the solicitude of a nation which has been blessed with
constitutional laws, unless those measures are the result of
the deliberations of the assembled delegates of the people.
Indeed, Madam, the interests of your august daughter, and
the stability of her throne, the glory and prosperity of your
Majesty's name, and a speedy cessation of a fratricidal war,
imperiously demand the substitution, in place of a painful
surmise, of a positive and clear policy, in harmony with
those institutions, for the maintenance of which our nation
so profusely bled, both in the field and on the scaffold.
The return to that healthy state of legislative certainty
would surpass the most magnificent monument which a
grateful people could raise to the memory of my martyred
brother.
" The eyes of Europe are intently fixed on the issue of
the present struggle in Spain ; humanity claims its speedy
cessation, and this cessation can only be obtained by the
genuine union of all interests. It is, therefore, by the
speedy adoption. of measures on this basis only that the
civil war can be brought to a conclusion. Your Majesty
has, in the most critical period of the present civil war, had
too many proofs of the sincere and ardent wishes of the
Spanish people for the consolidation of the constitutional
throne of your august daughter, as well as for your indivi-
dual glory, to entertain any fear of an illicit use being made
of the power which the constitution has conferred upon
them ; and you cannot, Madam, have forgotten the late
noble burst of universal indignation against the Minister,
who, with a Spanish mind, dared to entertain the detestable
thought of summoning foreigners to assist us in the extinc-
tion of Spanish quarrels. It was at this critical period that
the different provinces simultaneously rose, in the majesty
of their resentment, and putting aside all private cares, and
setting at nought all privations and dangers, appointed
Juntas, consisting of patriotic members, and formed them-
selves into armed bodies, ready to combat the internal
enemies of your august daughter, and to crush treachery in
your Royal Councils.
" It is, therefore, I repeat it, by reconciling the interests
of the different provinces, and blending them into a single
compact principle of national policy, that the constitutional
throne of your beloved daughter, Isabel, can alone be esta-
blished on an imperishable basis, the genuine love of heroic
Spain. • But, alas ! Madam, in an ill-fated hour, your Ma-
jesty's new Counsellors, dazzled by, or subservient to, the
interested views of proffered
:foreign assistance, instead of
cheering and sustaining by cordial co-operation the efforts
of those patriotic Juntas to effect the development of the
almighty national will, and securing them by the meeting of
the restored general Cortes, the stability of your daughter's
throne, and putting down at once a cruel and unchristian
zivil war, have blindly and most presumptuously arrested
their majestic course.
" Allow me, Madam, on so momentous an occasion, on
which I am called, for the first time in my life, by the gra-
cious voice from the throne of my unfortunate country, to
beg your Majesty to cast your Royal eyes upon the two
annexed documents,* to the principles and exalted sen-
The documents consist, Ist, of a letter from General
Riego to the President of the Permanent Deputation of
Cortes, dated at Zaragosa, the 21st of August, 1821, in which
the General expresses his sentiments upon his own position,
and declines, in dignified, but respectful language, accepting
the premium of 80,000 reals, proffered to him by the Cortes.
The second document is the last will and testament of the
amiable and high-minded widow of the General. This ex-
cellent lady died broken-hearted near London, in the month
of June, 1824, in the bloom of years, another victim of the dis-
tractions of Spain, in every way worthy of being associated with
the name of her honoured consort, who had been torn from her
arms by murderous monsters; she could not long survive the
separation, and blessed the decree of Providence, that in its
clemency opened to her a way to him who never could return
to her. Her last act illustrates the Christian spirit, the con-
jugal devotion, the generous patriotism of her nature. Among
other matters of peculiar interest, Madame Riego directs her
`executor, the writer of these lines, to search out the sword
upon which her illustrious husband waved the flag of Spanish
freedom in the year 1820, in the Caberas de San Juan ; which
sword the Cortes declared to be national property, and con-
fided to the General as such, to be borne by him during his
life; and, after that event, to he restored to the nation. The
executor now holds that emblem of national resurrection, ob-
tained, after twelve long years of anxious search, on the 7th of
the present month of November, the anniversary of that bloody
sacrifice, which it is his first duty and desire to vindicate in
the manner most worthy of the victim and of his own calling,
by announcing his readiness instantly to discharge the trust
reposed in him, when Spain shall become Spain again, by the
re-establishment of ,leer national freedom, in the revived Con-
tsitutional Cortes. M. DEL RIEGO.

timents of which I look as my authority in this unexpected
hour for laying mine at the foot of the awful throne on which
your Majesty sits, holding in your moderating hands both
the good and evil destinies of your daughter, of yourself,
and those of still fiiiffering Spain.
" I have spoken, Madam, the firm, but respectful senti-
ments of a Spaniard, and of a minister of God, the brother
of General Riego, who, I have no doubt, would from the
bosom of his grave re-echo them, if mortal interests existed
in the abode of eternity.
" May the Almighty, ever gracious. God, vouchsafe to
enlighten your Royal mind, and to uphold, by his all-power-
ful arm, your Majesty's generous and humane hand, in the
accomplishment of that restoration clue to the noble Spa-
nish people of their despoiled constitutional rights, which
restoration can alone secure to Spain her internal peace.
" MIGUEL DEL RIEGO, Canon of Oviedo.
" London, Nov. 19, 1835."

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

Yesterday the first Court in the new mayoralty was held
at Guildhall. The attendance of members was unusually
great, and the Lord Mayor was received with acclamations.
THE LATE LORD MAYOR.
When the minutes of the preceding Court were read
and confirmed,
Mr. HEPPEL rose to perform, he said, a painful duty.
He had waited in expectation that the Deputy of Alder-
man Winchester's Ward would rise to propose the
.custo•
mary vote of thanks to the late Lord Mayor ; but finding'
that the opportunity was not taken, he considered it ne-
cessary to come forward with a proposition of a very diffe..
rent kind, and to call upon the Court to do an act of
justice in stamping a value upon the votes of approbation
upon the predecessors of Alderman Winchester, by passing
upon that gentleman a vote of censure. He was spared
the pain of stating the particulars of the conduct which
lie called upon the members to reprobate, by the fact that
those whom he addressed had been witnesses to it, and he
was convinced that the resolution he had to propose was
an echo of the sentiments of most of those who were as-
sembled. He could not, in proposing a vote of censure,
be accused of a breach of friendship. He had never shared
the hospitality of the late Lord Mayor ; neither had he
been amongst those who had been particularly active in
their opposition to his Lordship. He came forward merely
from a sense of public duty—(Cheers.) Mr. Heppel
then read the resolution (for which see advertisement.)
Mr. STEVENS said that he felt great pleasure in second-
ing the motion of censure upon the late Lord Mayor.
He had not partaken of the hospitality of Alderman Win-
chester. Indeed he did not like to sit down at table with
a man whose public conduct he had had no occasion or pre-
text for respecting. He stood forward upon this occasion
upon public principle. Of what utility could a vote of
thanks be if every Lord Mayor, whatever might be his
.conduct in the Chair, were to receive in it ?—( Hear, hear.)
The RECORDER said that he felt bound, as law officer of
the Corporation, to state that the matter contained in the
resolution was libellous. He did not mean to say that the
Court had not the right to censure in severe terms ; but he
meant to say that the words of the censure mustbe guarded,
instead of being words expressive of charges, which, if well-
founded, would subject the person accused to a criminal in-
formation. It was his duty to mention his opinion that the
publication of the matter in open Court would be libellous.
Mr. JUPP asked whether, if the allegations .in the reso-
lution were capable of being proved, a criminal information
would lie against the late Lord Mayor?
The RECORDER replied that he bad no lieitation in say-
ing, that if it were proved that the Lord Mayor had done
those acts of which he was accused from a corrupt motive,
his Lordship would be held responsible. The objection to
the resolution was, that those from whom it was supposed
to emanate took it for granted that the allegations were
true, and thus judged between the late Lord Mayor and
themselves.
Mr. CORNEY asked whether the putting of the question
might not involve the Lord Mayor in a difficulty ?—(Laugh-
ter
and cries of " hear.")
The LORD MAYOR declared that he should be glad to
hear an answer to the question put by, the last speaker.
Mr. HALL insisted that the question of Mr. Corney
could not be put without the sanction of the Court:
The LORD MAYOR—WiII Mr. Corney withdraw his
question?
Mr. CORNEY--" No, my Lord—it is on your account'l
put it." -
Mr. GALLOWAY agreed in the view taken by Mr. Hall,
and warmly praised the commencement of the labours of the
present Lord Mayor. He regretted that the Recorder had
volunteered his opinion upon a question on which that
opinion had net been asked. He had a high respect for the
opinion of the Recorder, and for that officer's anxiety to
protect the privileges of the Corporation ; but he (the Re-
corder) had been rather too hasty on the present occasion.
—(Loud cries of " No, no," and . " Yes, yes," and mur-
murs.) Mr. Galloway concluded by declaring that he was
prepared to incur all the responsibility arising from the pub-
lication of the resolution.
Mr. PRITCHARD deprecated the discussion of minor
points, as calculated to
_delay the decision upon the im-
portant matter at issue.
The LORD MAYOR then put the question whether the
Recorder should be called upon to answer Mr Corney's
question, whereupon the Court divided, when there appeared
Ayes
Noes
Majority in the negative —46
Upon re-entering the Court we found
The RECORDER on his legs. He stated that he had, as
the legal adviser of the Lord Mayor, advised that the reso-
lution contained libellous matter, and as in his judicial cha-
racter without the walls of that Court he might be called
upon to preside during the agitation of the question, he na-
turally felt very repugnant to read the resolution of the
Court —(Hear. hear, and loud cries of " No, no.")
Mr. RICHARD TAYLOR had no particular wish that the
Recorder should read the resolution. • Another officer of
the Court might perform that duty It was the practice
elsewhere to prevent the use of the King's name from being
used in debate, in order that the freedom of discussion
should not be restrained. Now, he did not wish that an
officer of the Court should be permitted to overawe its
members. Those who held offices in the law might have
certain political predilections. There were no persons free
from such predilections ; and he hoped that the Recorder
would not give his refusal to read the resolution in such a
manner as would be calculated to influence any of the mem-
bers of the Court. The Lord Mayor did not sit in that
Court as a Magistrate, but as President of a deliberative
assembly, and the Ccurt was to be congratulated upon
that circumstance.
Mr. BROOK—What officer can put the question but the
Recorder ?
Mr. TAYLOR—The Town-clerk.
Mr. JUPP-- We will pledge ourselves that if this ques-
tion comes forward in a Court of Justice it shall not be
tried by the Recorder ; we will remove it into the King's
Bench.
The RECORDER observed' that allusion had been made to
him, that as a legal officer he had political predilections.
Any suggestion of that kind would not, he assured the
Court, have the effect of preventing him from discharging
his duty.—( Hear, hear.) He had adviied the Lord Mayor
not to put the question, because he considered, as the Lord
Mayor's legal adviser, that his Lordship would become by
the act responsible. He was bound to say that the paper
reflected strongly, and in terms Ilot justified by law, upon
the character of the late Lord Mayor ; and the discussion
was not a question of privilege before the Court alone, but
with open doors.
Mr. STACEY—Let the Recorder point out to us where
the resolution is libellous.
Mr. WESTON also urged the necessity of requiring the
Recorder to say where the libellous matter was to be found.
He (Mr. Weston) did not think there was a syllable of libel
in the resolution.
- The LORD MAYOR then stated, after a consultation with
the officers of the Court, that he had no alternative but to
call upon the Recorder to read the resolution to the Court:
—(Loud applause and clapping of hands.)
The RECORDER said that he had a painful duty to per-
form. He was under the direction of the Lord Mayor,
and all lawful commands issued by his Lordship he was
willing to obey ; but he could not use diction in another
place which he had used in that Court ; and believing the
paper to contain libellous matter, be must decline reading
it.—(Cheers and disapprobation.)
The LORD MAYOR—The Court vvish to know from the
Recorder where the libellous matter is to be found in the
Resolution. •
Mr.. R. TAYLOR ridiculed. the idea of being decided by
the opinion of a Judge as to whether matter was libellous
or not. By Fox's Bill it was settled that a Jury was to
decide both as to the fact and as to the law on a question
of libel.
Mr. STEVENS said the Resolution had been drawn up by
men of understanding, some of whom were of the legal pro-
fession ; and the Recorder had been the adviser of the late
Lord Mayor, and could not be considered a very' impart
ial
.adjs.dicator on the present question.
Mr. W. PRITCHARD thought that very little argument
was necessary to sustain a proposition so directly recom-
mending itself to the common sense of the Court. If a
loose general opinion, offered, unasked, by the Learned Re-
corder, that the Resolution contained libellous matter, was
to be received as conclusive upon the question before the
Court, there vas an end at once of the deliberative func-
t ons of the Court ; for the same sort of opinion might be
given upon the phraseology of any resolution moved, and
the effect would be to confer on the Learned Gentleman
the power assumed by Alderman Winchester—that of pre-
venting discussion on all matters not in accordance with his
individual opinions(Hear hear.) For this reason, as
•

well as for the assistance of his own judgment as a mem-
ber, he-(Mr. Pritchard) was very desirous of hearing the
grounds of the Learned Recorder's opinion.- They would,
when stated, have all the influence in the debate which
the talents and station of that gentleman were calculated
to give to them ; but they would at the same time be
open to an answer from those members who, having thought
seriously on the matter, might, in the exercise of their
deliberate judgment, have made a different estimate of the
data upon which they were founded, or have been led to
contrary conclusions. He (Mr. 'Pritchard) considered a
vote on the present resolution as a privileged act ; and as
he was prepared to justify every averment in the latter part
of the resolution, as a legitimate conclusion from the facts
stated in the first part, and to maintain the therein rights
claimed as belonging to this Court, and as having been
violated by the Lord Mayor ; and also to show the truth of
the assertion, that his assumption of a veto on the acts of
this Court, was nothing but a usurpation of unconstitutional
power. He (Mr. Pritchard) claimed to have the benefit of
a candid statement of the antagonist opinion, clothed with
the authority of the Learned Recorder, to assist him in the
exercise of his privilege, and enable him to do justice to his
own view of the case.—(Hear.)
Alderman BROWN said that the Court ought to be satis-
fied with the opinion of a gentleman of high professional re-
putation and honour, when he declared that the paper con-
tained libellous matter. They ought not to be anxious to
see how close to the Wind they could go.
It was then carried in the affirmative, that the Recorder
should point out where the resolution was libellous.
The RECORDER said, that though it appeared upon the
face of the resolution that the Court were, in entertaining
it, acting in accordance with their rights and privileges,
still the words were not warranted in point of law. . The
Learned Gentleman then read some expressions, which, he
said, reflected upon the public and private character of the
late Lord Mayor, and then stated that the general tenor of
the resolution was libellous. Ile repeated, that be consi-
dered it to be his duty to act as he had acted, in mentioning
the objections he_had taken.
The TOWN-CLERK then, by the direction of the Lord
Mayor, read the resolution of censure to the Court.
Mr. CORNEY said that he rose without being influenced
by any political bias, and he begged to call their attention
to the numerous falsehoods contained in the resolution
which had been just read. He disapproved of the terms,
as well as disavowed the.truth, of the allegations. If, in-
deed, it said that • certain individuals of that Court had
conducted themselves so ill as to deserve the public reproof,
there would be some ground for trusting to its veracity.
(A laugh.) It was well known that members cried out
Shame, shame !" when the late Lord Mayor was engaged
in the performance of his duties ; and if a vote of censure
:were moved against those who so offended, lie should ac-
quiesce in it with all his heart. There were a great many
points in the allegations which could not be proved.—(Loud
cries of " Name, name.") He did. not choose to particu-
larise, but he would say that those points were numerous.
His Lordship had been accused of having forfeited his
word. That was not true. His Lordship denied that he
had ever pledged himself, and, of course, lie had violated
no promise ; and as to the denial of the legality of the
Committee of the whole Court, about which so much noise
had been made, that was a point on which it would appear
that Alderman Winchester had exercised a sound judg-
ment. He contended that the Lord Mayor had peformed
his judicial functions to admiration.—(Cries of `° No, nol
and " Yes, yes.")- He would insist that such was the case ;
but he saw the vindictive feeling that would set down his
Lordship's evil acts in brass, and his good acts in water.—
(Laughter.) This mode of objecting; showed the strength
of the party feeling which existed. He did hope that the
present mayoralty would be one of peace and quietness, in-
stead of commencing as if it were to be involved in legal
litigation. Mr. Corney concluded, by moving the previous
question.
Mr. SAUNDERS seconded tne amendment.
Mr. FRENCH-said that he was present when the late Lord
Mayor pledged himself to the deputation ; and he witnessed
the utter violation of the pledges, and cordially advocated
the resolution of censure.
Mr. HUNTER., said that the Court of Aldermen having
voted thanks to the late Lord Mayor, it would appear, if
the Court of Common Council voted a censure, as if the
Corporation were divided against itself.
After some observations from Mr. Williams (of Cord-
wainers' Ward) Sir Peter Laurie, and Mr. Selson,
Mr. W. PRITCIIARD begged to express his acknowledg-
ments to the Hon. Mover for the sentiments with which
he bad submitted the question to the Court--sentiments
which echoed so completely the spirit of the first branch of
the resolution, and were clothed so appropriately with the
sobriety of language suited to proceedings partaking in sonic
degree of a judicial character. He was happy to see the
proper grounds on which resolutions of this description were
to be considered so fairly recognized. It was certainly most
gratifying to the more amiable feelings of our nature—a
gratification which, he trusted, none entered into with a
higher zest than he did—to be able to accord to a public
functionary unmixed eulogium for the manner in which he
had discharged his public duty. ' To be able so to act was
like the practi.!e of the virtue of charity, blessing both him
that gives and him that receives ; but this feeling must not
be 3ielded to the extent of forgetting the sterner obligations
of public duty, when they required the expression of a con-
trary opinion.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He had no doubt that
in such an event every gentleman present would be pre-
pared to discharge that duty with firmness, and at the ex-
pense of any private feelings he might entertain.—(Hear.)
Mr. Pritchard then proceeded to examine the truth of the
series of facts set out in the second part of the resolution.
He felt, he said, much relieved on this point by the ad-
mission made by every Gentleman who had spoken against
the resolution. One took credit for not having moved a
vote of thanks, thereby implying at least some degree of
demerit in Alderman Winchester. Another (Sir Claudius
Hunter) admitted candidly that he could not defend his
conduct altogether—an admission carrying with it a stronger
conclusion of the same kind, morn especially as coming
from a Gentleman who, only two days since, had in the
Court of Aldermen moved a resolution expressive of his
unmixed eulogium on the individual whose conduct he here
acknowledged to be indefensible. It was hardly necessary
to prove at length the truth of the accusations that Alder-
man Winchester had refused, contrary to his pledge, to
perform his duty of 'calling Common Halls and Courts of
Common Council when requested, or to put motions to the
Court, or that he broke up Courts because they would
not yield to his dictation. " Compassed about by such a
cloud of witnesses" on these matters as he (Mr. Pritchard)
now was, he need add nothing to the direct testimony of
their own observations, except, perhaps, on the point of
the violated pledge. On that subject not only had the
Court received evidence, given by himself and other Gen-
tlemen present, but they had adjudicated upon that evi-
dence by voting Alderman Winchester's exclusion from a
Committee, upon the ground of his violation of his
word. In confirmation, Mr. Pritchard now read the writ-
ten statement subscribed by the twelve gentlemen at an
interview with whom the pledge was given. The next
question was the series of conclusions stated in this state.-
ment as flowing from the facts established. Was any gen-
tleman present, holding an opinion in favour of the inde-
pendence of this Court as a deliberative and legislative
body, prepared to deny the accuracy of any one of these con-
clusions ? The only ground upon which he could antici-
pate such a denial, was the notion that had been whispered
about, but which had never yet been brought to the test of
argument, of a separate authority in the Lord Mayor,
enabling him virtute officii, to control the decisions of the
Common Council, of which he was an individual member,
only having, like other members, but a single vote, except:
the usual casting'vote belonging to the president of a meet-
ing, in case of an equality of votes. Such being in prac-
tice the constitution of the Common Council, it was in-
cumbent on the adyocates-of the Lord Mayor's right to a
veto on their proceedings, to prove the affirmation of their
proposition, which could only be done by showing that
such a right was conferred by charter, statute, or pre-
scription. He (Mr.
.Pritchard) would not detain the
meeting by entering at large into the numerous authorities
on this point. He contended, how ever, upon a rapid
review of them, that the charters recognized no such
separate right of the Lord Mayor as that contended for,
but, on the contrary, in conferring powers, always vested
them in " the Lord. Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons, in
Common Council assembled." The statutes confirming the
charters and other rights of the citizens (of which there
were twenty-one in existence in. Lord Coke's time, and
several others had passed since) recognised the powers of
the Common Council as belonging to the general body, to
-the sort -of political Trinity in Unity, particularly the
Statute of the 2d William and Mary, which reversed the
ro warranto proceedings of Charles 11., restored the City
rights, and might- be' considered as the London Bill of
• Rights, for it was contemporary with that which secured
the general rights of the people, and the- succession of our
present line of kings, at the much-lauded Revolution of 1688.
The only exception was the Election Act of 11 Geo. 1.,
for the repeal of which this Court bad resolved on applying
to Parliament. Mr. Pritchard gave a short history of the
passing of that Act, showing that the veto on the proceed-
ings of the Common Council in that Act, recognised as be-
longing to the Court of Aldermen (not to the Lord Mayor
alone), was. protested against at the time by the citizens,
but. the question for referring their rights to the judges for
their opinion was negatived ; and after the passing, of the Act,
so grievous were the evils resulting from the exercise of the
veto, that all parties joined in petitioning Parliament for its
repeal, which accordingly was enacted by the 20th Geo. 11.,
and the uncontrolled exercise of the whole of their powers
by this Court thereby confirmed. Mr. Pritchard then ad-
, verted to a series of authorities in Blackstone, Kyd on-Cor-
porations, and other writers, and to a succession of entries
in the Corporatien reg rds from 1724 to the present time,

6:

Arlll.l.cti,:t

Iw/►'~~NCy'