The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
TIMES.—The Post-office debate, vivacious enough in it-
self, has been further enlivened by a spirited episode on the com-
parative elaitns ~f independence and party, the paramount lord-
ship of Premiers, and the concientious, or quasi conscientious,
reserves of supporters. The title of this episode was " The
Candid Friend"—a character which it was the object of the
various dramatis persona to shift from their own shoulders,
and assign to some one whom they had reason to think not
so friendly as candid. We will freely confess our deep re-
grets that either friendship should be suspected, or candour
depreciated. The experience of all ages, at least of the pre-
sent, shows that both are necessary. Without friendship
there could not be party ; without candour there could be
no improvement. Party stickS to a cry, to a name, to an
arithmetical figure, to any sort of fixity and finality, how-
ever superficial or trivial. Candour meanwhile developes
such private wisdom as the Individual partisan may happen
to possess, and brings it to bear on the mass. In eliciting
variety of opinions, it also elicits variety of resources. Vio-
lence of faction and tyranny of leadership are equally
apt to cramp and stiffen party till it becomes aged
and incapable, fit only for entire and sudden extinction.
A friendly candour, that is political attachment combined
with personal independence, proceeding necessarily to the oc-
casional length of strenuous remonstrance and firm opposi-

tion, gives growth, development, and extended basis to the
party. A judicious Premier will remember that he is not
his party ; he will consider how much his supporters have
sacrificed to support him, and will gratefully sacrifice some-
thing to leave them at least the name, if not the reality, of
freedom. He will recognise both agreement and difference,
and by a system of timely concession orindulgent respect ao-
complish that the differences of partisans shall be the re-
newal of party. Candour is much too useful an element In
politics to be rashly disparaged. But for the wise operation
of a friendly candour the whole nation might by this time
have been bailing in the froth and scum of an irretrievable
anarchy. The future historian will contemplate with wonder
the greatness of the changes which have been so silently
and safely effected. He will ask how it was that the
mightiest interests and opinions were consigned to O.
tomb of their fathers with as decent a solemnity
as loved and aged monarchs, and how new sys-
tems were proclaimed in their stead with all the mild and
genial auspices that wroth the cares of a youthful throne.
He will then find that candour was the secret of judicious
reformation. Candour paved the way, and dissolved the
obstacle. Candour, working above and below, in the front,
the rear, and even in the flank, was the master spirit of the
only effectual warfare. Candour averted fatal collisions, and
facilitated necessary downfalls. Parties were candid to their

leaders, and leade-rs to their parties ; principals to their
seconds, and seconds to their principals; masters to their
pupils, and pupils to their masters. The impregnable rock
of bigotry crumbled to pieces by the stealthy process of a
universal candour. Sagacious men relinquished impracticable
opinion, and contended for the prize of candour; till, at last,
the chosen band of patriots which consummated the happy
transition was pre-eminently a Cabinet of candid men. Yet
the Premier is at a loss to understand how he
can he occasionally opposed in "a friendly spirit."
The bare idea of such an incongruity affects him with
"shudders" and " laughs," and such indescribable
sensations; but are not unpalatable acts of friendship, after
all, the commonest things in the world, and, in fact, the very
staple ingredients in that game of cross-purposes now called
politics? for exampie, Sir Robert's friendship for his party
is undeniable. • Has he not occasionally opposed it? It will
be said, volenti non fit injuria. If the party choose to suc-
cumb to his opposition, and help him to their own discom-
fiture, he has not injured, he has merely seduced them, and
they cannot complain. But what substantial difference is
there between a successful and an unsuccessful opposition?
"'The friendly spirit" of one man who overcomes his friends
by the aid of his foes is as much open to the charge of in-
sincerity
as that of another who stands almost alone in the
warfare, and if he opposes, does so with very little pros-
pect of success. Again, we have no doubt that Sir Robert is
animated by " a friendly spirit" to the clergy ; and we are
also disposed to think—though that is beside the present
purpose—that he legislates for them on the whole better than
they would for themselves and the Church. Yet it must be
confessed that he has opposed them ; at least if we could poll
the 15,000, the great majority would confess that they have
" shuddered" and "laughed" not a little at his professions of
"a friendly spirit." Ask again the million and a half of
poor. We doubt not the friendliness of- his spirit towards
them also ; but certainly it has assumed a rather hostile
form, as the shudders and laughs of the unhappy multitude
would sufficiently testify on the smallest hint of Sir Robert's
benevolence. The agriculturists also—poor souls—have ex-
perienced a few' mouvemens divers. Indeed, what class has
not its its turn been affected with those sardonic emotions?
Yet'the result will establish that our candid friend has been
as successful in his friendship as he certainly has in his can-
dour. He has practised on all in turn sharply and severely.
but for his own eventual good. Strange that he could fail
to apply the lesson he has himself so forcibly taught and
illustrated!

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME CIRCUIT—March 3.

The judges have arranged that the business for Essex
is to commence on Wednesday (the commission day) at
one o'clock, in both courts.
Hertford, March 3.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
William Sheffield, 22, 'farmer' was indicted fur felo-
niously setting tire to a barn and other farm buildings,
in his own occupation, with intent to defraud Jane
Sheffield and others.

Mr. Hawkins conductei the prosecution, and Mr.
Clarkson appeared for the prisoner.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel it ap-
peared that the circumstances under which the charge
was brought against the prisoner, were of rather a sin-
gularcharacter. The charge was supported by the de-
cla.rations made by him at the time of the fire, and it was
suggested that he was induced to commit the act out of
revenge at his father, to whom the farm he occupied be-
longed, not having left it to him at his death, which, it
appeared, the prisoner anticipated he would have done.
Frc m the evidence of the witnesses who were examined,
appeared that the fire took place on the night of the
31,t October, and when it was discoverei the prisoner
appeared to be in a very excited state from drink, and,
on his being questioned, he sail be knew who had done
it ; and, in reference to the prosecutrix, who is his
mother, and another brother, he paid, " --- their hearts,
they shall never have it." He likewise said that the
farm•buildings were gone, and the - house should go
next.

In cross. examination by Mr. CLARKSON, the witnesses
admitted that the prisoner was a man of most intempe-
rate habits, and that he was continually intoxicated, and
after he was in custody he was attacked with delirium
tremens. His conduct during the period the.fire %as
burning, seemed to be more like that of a madman than
a rational being, as he got some bread and toasted it,
and then did the same with a herring, at the burning
ruins, and then sent for beer, which he drank with the
food. It also appeared that it was all his own property
on the farm, and uninsured, the whole of which was
consumed.

One of the witnesses caused a good deal of amusement
in the Court by his definition of drunkenness. He said,
in answer to a question put to him by Mr. Clarkson, that
he had often seen the prisoner tipsy, but had not often
seen him drunk.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON asked him what difference he
considered there was between being tipsy and drunk ?
He replied that he only considered a man to be drunk
when he could not walk.

Mr. Baron ALDERSON—Then, so long as a man can
roll about, or walk at all, you think he is only tipsy ?
The witness said that was what he meant.
The Learned RIDGE, amid much 'laughter, remarked
that he thought it was drawing rather a fine distinction.
The inspector of police, in whose custody the prisoner
was placed, proved that he was in such a state of excite-
ment, that he appeared like a madman ; and he was in
cons quence induced to send for a surgeon to attend
upon him.
Mr. HAwxtra, having intimated that he could not
carry the case any farther,
Mr. Baron AIXERSON said it appeared to him there
was nothing to support the charge, except the conversa-
tions and halluc.nations of a man drunk and almost in-
sane, and he put it to the jury whether they would thin::
it safe to convict under such circumstances ?
Mr. CLARxsox observed that everything that was de-
stroyed appeared to be the property of the unfortunate
man himself, none of which was insured, while the build-
ing, which belo ged tai others, was insured.
The jury expressed themselves satisfied, and at once
returned a verdict of Not guilty.

CIVIL SIDE.
(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN and a Special Jury,

DYSON V. GRISSELL.

This action was br.ught by the plaintiff, the well-
known horse-dealer of Waltham-cross, to recover from
the defendant the sum of 701. upon the warranty of a
horse.

Mr. E. James and Mr. Bramwell were for the plaintiff;
and Mr. Sergeant Channeil and Mr. Peacock for the
defendant.

It appeared that the defendant, who is a gentleman re-
siding at Clapham, had had several dealings for horses
with the plaintiff, and among others he purchased the
bay horse in question and used him for some time in his
carriage. He subsequently took a fancy for another
horse which the plaintiff valued at 130 L, and an arrange.
ment was eventually made that 701. should be allowed
for the bay horse, upon the condition that he was in as
sound a state as when the plaintiff originally sold him,
and the remainder was paid by a check. The exchange
accordingly took place, but the plaintiff discovered
almost immediately that be was lame from a sprain.
The jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 701.