The Sun.
London, England, 1821-07-25 00:00:00

[NEW TIMES.]

We are sorry to see the SVhigs so sensitive
under the lash of The Times. It looks as if
there were really some grounds for the insolent
tone of superiority assumed by the latter. The
Times declares, that the Whigs, in declining to
countenance the Queen's resistance to her Sove-
reign's commands, were actuated by " selfish-
ness ;" and that in attending the Coronation
of the King they exhibited a " sneakery" to-
ward Ministers. The Morning Chronicle, in-
stead of treating this scurrilous impertinence
with the contempt which it deserves, pleads to
the indictment before the Radical tribunal, and
seriously labours to conciliate the good opinion
of the Universal Suffrage gentry. The substance
of i!s plea is that loyalty is pardonable, on this
particular occasion, and that a personal attend-
ance on the King at his Coronation is not to be
construed into a defection from that great- cause
of which Wood and Ilobhouse, llume and Bur-
dett, are the leaders. This may surely be -called
4‘ sneakery" of a different kind. It is The Chro-
nicle ". taking up a position in the rear" Of The
Times.

It will be seen by our Law Report that three
prosecutions`for blasphemy and seditious Libels
were tried yesterday against the Shopman and
Sister •of Carlisle. On the last of the three,
which was instituted by the Constitutional As-
sociation, we shall not at present make any re-
mark.' The first was/an information by the At-
torney-General, and the second an indictment by
the Society: for the Suppression of Vice. The
perseverance of the, offenders in carrying on the
nefarious traffic, for which both Carlile and his
Wife were suffering imprisonment in Dorchester
Gaol, Was certainly a daring defiance of the law :
and the Prosecutors, who interfered to stop so
pernicious as evil, undoubtedly deserved well of
their country and of mankind. To say that the
Liberty of the Press requires impunity to
such offences is to be wickedly blind to the moral
interests of the whole community, but especially
of the rising generation : and to say that any in-
dividual is not personally aggrieved by a general
corruption of morals, and therefore has not a
right to arrest its progress by instituting a prose-
cution, is to evince au equal ignorance of moral
duty and of legal right.—And yet it is for ren-
dering this great and invaluable service to the
country at large, that the most senseless clamour
was some years ago raised against The Society
for the Suppression of Vice, and is nqw raised
against the Constitutional Association.. Nay, the
latter has even been made the object of pro-
secution! The MordingXhronicle denies that the
Prosecutor of the Constitutional Association is
Mr. Ex-Sheriff Parkins. We have before
us a letter in the hand-writing of that individual,
in which he says, " the Bills have been found by
a London Grand Jury on the examination of not
more than one-hall of the witnesses which I ad-
duced ;" and he publit•hed.asimilar Letter in one
of the Weekly, Newspapers. Now, it is not for
us. to decide on the comparative veracity of Mr.
Parkins, and the Editor of The Morning Chro-
nicle; but such are the facts, and we leave the
worthy Ex-Sheriff to settle the,matter as he pleases
with our cotemporary.—(/bid.)

The STAFFORDSHIRE BOWMEN , held their
Fourth Meeting last week, at Sandon, at which
an elegant Gold Arrow for the .Gentlemen, and
a. beautiful. Silver one for the Ladies, were pre-
sented to the company by Mrs. GOLDSMID, to be
shot for. .

F'OR THE SUN.

CRITICISM.

EDITOR—I troubled you a short • time
ago with' some observations upon the Architec-
tural Criticisms contained in a Sunday Paper
called " The Guardian," but had no intention to
renew or continue my obseNations, as that pre-
tended Critic's writings always appeared to me
contemptible, and had it not been for the indig-
nation excited by their abusiveness and perso-
nality, I should not, at any time, have noticed
them.

The third Number of " The Magazine of the
Fine Arts'," however, having in its leading Ar-
ticle of " Remarks on Cotemporary Criticism"
referred to the Criticisms in The Guardian, I am
induced again to take up the pen, as those re-
marks appear to to furnish conclusive evidence of
the trumpery which is passed upon the Public as
criticism, and which in this book-manufacturing
day abounds upon all works and subjects as a
matter of trade and business, and as merely such
as the vending of gingerbread, which, like Criti-
cism, is sometimes highly ornamented and served
up 66 gilt and lettered" to increase its attractive-
ness to the untaught children who covet. it, and
whom it persuades and pacifies.
The remarks set out with informing us that
6‘ A Critic is defined to be a person who takes
" upon himself to censure others works or writ-
" ings, whence it may reasonably be inferred
" that a Critic ought to be a judge of that which
"he takes upon him to censure." Now this is
a large admission for a Critic by profession, for
such is the writer of the remarks, whom I ask, by
what means the Public are to .guess at the due
qualif►cxttion of those who take upon themselves
64 to censure the,works of others," and who pass
their judgments upon works of Art and of the
most abstruse Learning and Science, as though
their mighty minds were intuitively gifted with
every science and every art, and acquainted with
all those multitudinous circumstances which se-
cretly obstruct their perfection, and that the stores
also of the most comprehensive knowledge were
within their acquirement and grasp, they being
all the while, in the mass, nameless, and un-
known persons.

The writer of the remarks upon cotemporary
criticism has • furnished no positive clue to guide
our judgment in this respect, but he affords us a
glimmering light, for he tells his readers that his
remarks " originated in reflecting upon the varie-
" ties of criticism that occasionally appear in the
" daily Journals, and other periodical works,
" many of then, evidently the hasty and undi-
" gested effusions of writers who are either pro-
" fessionally engaged to contribute a certain
" quantity of literary matter to occupy certain
" spaces, or the voluntary lucubrations of others,
" is he, in spite of nature and their stars, needs
"must write ;" and he proceeds to say, and it Is
well worth, remembering by all who rely upon
criticisms to form their own judgment and opi-
nions, and by those whose feelings criticisms
wound and lacerate, that " if the motives and
" objects of these writers were well known and
" admitted, there would be little to fear from
" their sophistry or false criticism ; but it too
" frequently happens that the malignant is art-
" fill and delusive, and the envious insidious and
" deceptive. These are the harpies that. prey
" upon reputation, batten on the victim of their
" calumny, and gloat over the miseries of those
" who, having panted for honours, have been
" rendered miserable by illiberal criticism."
You hay e thus, Mr. Editor, a Critic's account
of the manner in which criticisms originate and
are got up to guide the public taste and judg-
ment, and comtroul that of individuals, and of
the possible motives with which they may be
written. And you, no doubt, now expect to read
the strongest and most unqualified reprobation of
those of The Guardian, whose authors, if not the
most ignorant, are the most impudent and male-
volenC" ready-made" critics that ever attempted
to live upon the proceeds of obloquy and detrac-
tion. • You will, therefore, probably be as much
surprised as I was, when you read the following
approbation—yes, approbation !—of the venom-
ous criticisms of The Guardian by this writer
" on Cotemporary Criticism," who proceeds to
state, that cc The Guardian Sunday Paper has
" lately taken up the subject of the Arts (a new
"trade it seems), and in this department, as in
its literary criticisms, has generally manifested
" talents and integrity ; its comments on A rchi-
" tectural subjects in particular have- been re-
cc plete with sound sense and good taste."
This is no slight approbation, Mr. Editor, it is
full measure and running over ; is The writer of
the remarks afraid of his newspaper cotemporary ?
has he any blots of 1113 own that might furnish
this desperate weekly critic with subjects, or
having a decent untarnished coat on, is he de-
sirous of propitiating this critical chimney sweeper,
who walks the same path, and may run against
and begrime the unsullied garment of the remark
writer, should he think proper. What other mo-
tives have led him to bestow these praises it is
not easy to guess, especially as after his depre-
catory panegyrick he proceeds to gise the follow'-
ing account of The Guardian's criticisms upon Mr.
Gandy :—" Mr. Candy complains of The Guar-
dian as having misrepresented his professional
CC character in saying, we have long ceased to
consider Mr. Gandy as an Architect, a state-
" meta subsequently explained as meaning that he
" had been chiefly- distinguished for drawings of
" imaginative subjects. Mr. Gandy, however,
" takes up the gauntlet and enters the lists against
" these antagonists," (for there is a whole alpha-
bet of them, Mr. Editor, and when they rhyme
two assistant et ceteras) " and even ventures -with-
" in the inclosures of their own arena. Though
" this may be valiant it is not very prudent or
" very skilful, for the experienced Critic, like
" the Prize fighter, is wary, circumspect, and ex-
" pert, in the ayt of assault and defence. The
" Critic in The-Guardian has thus an apparent
" advantage, for he has made a forcible and des-
" perate hit, and having roused the anger of his
" antagonist has put him off his guard. As by-
standers" (would not bottle holders better suit
the slang of this description) " we must remark
" that the Critic has given a foul blow i, c. has
" made an assertion not warranted by facts, for

CC whatever may be his opinion or consideration
"'of Mr. Gandy, Ipowthat Gentleman to be
"'professionally and truly air Architect ; he not
" only designs edifices, but really superintends
" and directs their execution,. If the bent and
" enthnsiasm of his mind tempts him to compose
" Architectural Pictures, and to produce corn-
" position's superior to those of Pannini and Pi-
" ranesi we cannot conceive that he thereby
" lowers his professional reputation."
By this representation, you must perceive,
Mr. Editor, that the talents of The Guardian
Critic, as respects Mr. Gandy, are manifested
by his want of ability to distinguish that gentle-
man's merits, and his integrity, by making an as-
sertion respecting him, not warranted by facts,
and this is a species of talent and integrity not
confine'd to one individual, when it suits the
motives for criticism upon others.

• I should have concluded that such a critic had
neither talents or integrity, but, on the contrary,
that he was one of those " Harpies that prey
" upon reputation ; who batten on the victims of
44 their calumny, and gloat over the miseries of
" those who, having panted for honour, have been
" rendered miserable by illiberal criticism." Of
his malevolence I have no doubt, and am willing
to admit his superior prize-fighting qualifications,
which indeed I should something fear if I had
accuird him of making "an assertion not war-
" ranted by facts ;" but critics perhaps settle
these contradictions in the manner described by,
one of Shakespeare's inimitable clowns, and as
the Magazine and The Guardian had proceeded
no further in their difference than to " the re-
" proof valiant ;" or at most to 44 the lie with
circumstance," they may shake hands and swear
themselves brothers, without an " if," in which, as
a last resource, we are told " there is much virtue"
to make up a quarrel. -
" Ours are the plans of pece :
" To live like brothers, and conjunctive all,
" Embellish life ! ! !"
I had well nigh written embitter for embellish,
but let it pass—though I fear the brotherhood is
of the critics only, and I forget.myself in attempt-
ing to explain, by reference to wit, even of our
great Poet, for the writer on cotemporary criti-
cism states in his remarks that he has a decided
objection to wit and ridicule, even as a defensive
weapon. I will not suppose that the objection
arises from his not being as witty as Sanclicri.,but
he may recollect that ridicule has been said by
no mean authority to be 44 the test of truth," a
test, Mr. Editor, that a critic IS very desirous
of avoiding, as it would infallibly extinguish nine
tenths of critics and criticisms. I must however
ask the writer of the remarks seriously, how he
can justify, consistently with his own reputation
and with his own account of The Guardian Critic's',
attack upon Mr. Gandy, as well as other artists
with whose superior merit he must have been in-
timately acquainted, those praises he has bestow-
ed upon The Guardian criticisms ? and feeling, as
he must, the general vulgar abusive personality
of the language in which they are conveyed.
Although I have, as I fear, exhausted your
patience, Mr. Editor, I cannot sonclude without
reference to the literary work of a distinguished
French Architect and Sculptor; recently trans-
lated by one of our Royal Academicians, which
states, amongst much highly interestin!, matter,
the author's opinions upon the uses and probable
effects of criticism upon Artists and their works;
and his opinions appear to me to be so correct
and enlightened, especially. if applied to such
criticisms as our English Artists are now subject to,
that you will, I trust, consider them as the most
important part of what I now send you. He says,
" The steril chilling spirit of criticism, if it prevail
44 too-extensively, becomes the destruction of
" taste. The spirit of criticism, of which
" I speak, proceeds from the faculty called
" reasoning, united in a due proportion with
" another faculty, called sentiment, (organ
" more adapted for production than examination).
44 Reasoning rectifies and corrects the operations
" of the mind, but is incapable of imparting to it
44 either action or a creative virtue ; the reason-
" ing faculty is in its nature unproductive, ap-
" plied exclusively or without limitation to the
" direction of art ; reasoning destroys, but does
" not rebuild; invents systems without regard to
consequences; discovers faults, but does not
" point out beauties ;—it is the torch which il-
luminates, not the flame wlcl► vivifies."

Ile proceeds, speaking of Critics :—" Some, I
46 admit, may lcarn to argue upon certain techni-
" cal qualities, on particular theoretical points,
" and on• what constitutes in a work its defects
"or its beauties. But for a few such accom-
" plished judges, how many unqualified' critics
" are there who are in the habit of measuring
" feeling by the rules of logic, and dishearten
" Artists by instilling into them the dread of
".committing faults, instead of inspiring them
" with a courage which would become their
44 apology. All things considered .Artists are
" less in need of enlightened judges than of
" passionate admirers. The public for whom
"'they work must he the feeling, not the
44 critical public. If any thing be likely to ex:
" tinguish in, the public as well as the Artist the
44 prolific principle which is the parent of works
" of genius, it is the spirit of criticism, analysis,
" and method. After having exercised itself on
" works completed, it extends its authority over
" works in progress, and over things not yet be-
" gun. No doubt if it were fairly employed
" both by the Artist and the Amateur, the arts
" would derive some benefit from it ; but we
c 4 must not deceive ourselves, the axe is an in-
" strument very different in its nature from that
employed in planting, or in irrigation." I am,
Sir, your most humble servant,
July 23. P. 0.

WALKING ON THE WATER.—Yesterday atter-
noon another experiment to prove the utility of
the Air Jacket, in cases of accident on the water
or in bathing, took place near Waterloo Bridge,
in the presence of an immense concourse of spec-
tators, when several person's (one we under-
stand a female in men's clothes) plunged into the
Thames from the barge which was engaged for
the purpose, and floated down the River some
distance..

OLD BAILEY.

THE LATE FATAL RIOT IN WESTMINSTER.

The fullowin.- trial, which excited.considerable
interest, came on yesterday morning at haft-past
ten. o'clock, before Mr. Justice :11-oLitoYD. The
. .
Court was crowded :
James APCartev, aged 22, James Jones, aged 27, Thomas
Lee, aged 22, 'Richard Roebottein, :aged' '22, and William
Hardy, aged 27, were indicted fortie valeta murder of William
Cogle, at Westminster, on Monday, the 16th of June last. In
another count they were indicted for unlawfully-and riotously
assembling with divers persons unknovin, and assaulting and
beating several of his Majesty's subjects: All the prisoners
are soldiers.

Mr. ALLEY and Mr. ANDREWS conducted the prosecution.;
and Messrs. LAw, ADOILPHUS, and BuoDulcic,,the defence.
his. Coyle, the wife of the deceased, Mary Hinton, and
other witnesses, then gave their evidence, which was merely
a repetition of that adduced op the Coroner's Inquest, already
detailed.

Thomas Ashton deposed that he lodged'at-the house of the
deceased Mr. Cogle. On the evening of the 18th June, theiv
was a disturbance, and several Soldiers entered- the-house. A
man, in the dress of a drummer, made a cut at him with his
sword, which missed him, but struck the deceased, and felled
him to the ground. :Witness-escaped through the back way,
over some gardens. He could not swear. to the persons of the
prisoners; the drummer, - M'Cartey? was -in the house. The
witness, on being questioned as to Ins, calling the drummer by
name, said lie was called 1114Cartey at the time. Witness could
not swear it was the same drummer that struck at him. He did
not see any persons in the crowd., except soldiers.
Thomas Chapman, a private in the West 3liddlesex militia,
stated that he-lodged at the house of the deceased ; .and, on the
evening in question,was standing at the dour, and saw a great
come up the street (Orchard-street). froM the new wakv.. Roe-
bottomand .111‘Cartey were in the mob.' He could not speakposi-
tively to the other three prisoners. Nl‘Citrtey.entered the house
with his naked sword, and stood in the passage ; he made a cuc.
at Ashton, the last witness, but Missed him, and cut togle's-
head. Alton escaped- • Ili,Cartey made another cut at Cogle7
but he could not tell whetheri it cut him. The first blow felled
the deceased to the ground,- and the blood issued from die,
wound. Other soldiers rushed in ; witness. tan up- Stairs and
fainted on the bed from the effects or the .beating lie ht.t.d re-
ceived on his head, and saw nothing more.
Cross-eXamined—Witness had not been out after ti:".; that
evening. He did not state every particular-to the .111agistrate,;•
Roebottom had a black eye and scratched face

Elizabeth. In4ng was the next witness, but her evidenet' v.l'4
the same as that adduced on the Inquest.
Jenkins deposed, that on,the evening of the 18th he
,5
the soldierS fighting in the Almonry; they. afterwards carrl uv
the New-way into Orchard-street W.itness told :Mrs. C(4lei!')
shut the door, as the 'soldiers were- rioting. By this time the
soldiers came up, and followed a man into Mr. Cogle's house,
hitting him about the head. The prisoner, Thomas Lee, v(I15
there, and in the act of throwing a stone at witness, who saw.,
" don't knock my brains out," on which the prisoner dreaTeu
the stone. Mrs. Cogle -attempted to-prevent their entrance-IN°
her house, and held up her hands in an imploring attitude, ob-
serving, " there's nobody will hurt you here." Lee,
pushed her.down, using bad expressions.' - bet
The witness was' cross-examined by Mr. /3Atoi R
nothing material elicited. •,t
• -
Mary Ashton, a lodger at Mr. Cogle's spoke to the eo-t'
entering the house and the room in which she lived, when ~
Cogle came in and asked what was the Matter ? rias
Cooper, a Queen-square. Police Officer, stated that n!e
sent for in consequence of a disturbance, accompanied by
another Officer, and saw the soldiers; anning. They pustee
e
into St. Anne's-street, where he saw the prisoner Hardy. et c,
ing over a man in the act of striking him. Pople took urns I",
custody, and witness secured the prisoner Jones. ;el,
Mr. Stevenson, House Surgeon, to Westminster 1:0?",1,,
stated, that the deceased was brought in about Line (fo9`.llt
when witness examined him and found a wound- °Net-
eye-heow, two inches and athall in length, andabout
in breadth. The wound or fracture was the cause oi his i!,350,
Mr. Anthony White, Surgeon of Westminster flospit"" he
the deceased the morning' after h htl
e had received-the ,::r
was then alive, but died- on the Friday following. The „o
hereeeived on the forehead was the cause of his death.
Mr. A L E Y—" This is the case for the prosecution.
The prisoners were then c*4tl on for their
_delenee- •
M'Cartey declared his innocence and put in a lotto'
-in-
in which he stated that the affray originatedahrough tilt who
toxicated soldiers treading on the marbles of some hoS-',relc.
were playing, one of whom abused the soldiers feed's:leo
them; that in consequence a tight took place, and the byen,e)
fell upon the soldiers and beat them. Seeing this, lee (.'',l s`
took their part, and drew his sword, threatenin, ,his
first one that attacked him. lie was obliged to do the:
own defence—but he never used his sword.
Roebottom declared his innocence, and. handed in a. Writt°,
paper. in which he stated the mob -were the aggressors. - bow
Hardy put in a written defence, in which he stated, that age
ing a disturbance he left the Marquess of Granby public-li° eie
but had not proceeded far before he was knockeadown
mob
The defence of the other two prisoners was of a similar
N. Dolbin, a private in the Grenadier Guards,. statt%e4'„ct
he was in company - with Roeboftom, at the Marl:gatol,
Granby.— Several persons were playing at marbles, an 0010
20 persons round. Roebottom was tipsy, and kicked Pve,"o be'
marbles ; the boys called him a lobster, and one of theti,kr
g,an to strike him ; others then came up, and attackedhti;el I'e
witness, who was knocked down several times ; in eo/Ilafter•
of the• beating be received winiess fainted away, arta
wards taken to the watch-houie by sonic military men:,
Sarah Taylor, residing` near the Almonry, cor.f rutta
i,
titeal
-
deuce of the last witness as to the origin of the affr a ay, it
treatment of the soldiery ; she took Roebottorn into rr he
he was so -very much hurt, that his life was in aange', t.'o •
witness further stated, that Roebottona was in her lunr.—

minutes
wits eight o'clock. • - • t Pes
The ess was cross-examined by Mr. ALL.r.i", I'll vtcs
tively swore that Roebottom was in her house up tot 3011"ri.
past eight o'clock. n ru°'
Thomas Stevens, Lance Corporal of the Coldstream la)
—On the evening of the 18th of June, he, in carar3zi;that ;'•
Serjeant Child, was passing by the Alit-lot-try, t/
disturbanCe was there • among the-soldiers, anlFOt"w,;fltz-an,°9s
persons collected; one soldier hadbis ia,cket off, fig'ji`,::.
11 ob-
them; he endeavoured to take the soldier away 11111"
Serjeant Child fully corroborated the last witness' ,"
S. Church, a corporal in the Coldstream Ga3r"s' Nave'
Tothill-street, at 7 o'clock in the evening of the 1801° ,1 wish
and saw about 100 persons, mostly inhabitants, arTne`.3 sal"
sticks, palings, and weapons of various descriptions ; safe °incl.
dier down, anti several people kicking him. There 1;c Se:*
soldiers also down ; he went and gave information t,etti t
jeant Major ;he was not in Orchard-street at all. .
A number of witnesses, soldiers and others, cont'llt'ai col;-
testimony.for the defence, and attributed-the whale
sequences to the violentassault•on tile soltliers,l.ry the On WI"
were described to be arnied with various' weapons. cog le
ness swore that M‘Cartey was not near 'the house of tacm4
that evening, and that a man armed a pitcl&rk at
the soldiers. ,
The Drum-major of the Regiment to which WC3rtecie" ,•
longed, stated that he was at his quarters by ,nine'°oll.,.::
MtCartey has a brother, who is also-a drummer, and nu'. -:F•
him in .size and appearance. ea tj"
At eight o'clock Mr. Justice Ili/Lnosrp recaP•; talata
whole of the evidence in an extremely Pers.p icuous
eOJ
manner. At ten the Learned Judge finished, and the yfE _rt
tired ; and at half past ten the Jury returned into Cc'u.,oll/..4
brought in a verdict of-Guilty of .31-ANSLAUGrrTVA;,;
James 11P.Cartey, the drummer, and Richard RoebotO :.• --
ACQUIT TED the other three. •
a

It'

Notice is given in last night's Gazelle, Li;aioterf
Court of Claims will re-assemble in the s.'t
Chamber at Westminster MOIR] aY of
two o'clock in the afternoon, to consider ,vitl
services performed at the Coronado"' liar,
fees to be taken in --respect thereof,
persons having performed services, •an oleic
fees for the same, are requested to give
tendauce. _

iv
BIRTH. lit for,
.At Fb2renee, on Sunday the Bth inst. the
Rendlesham, of a son and heir.

ts of
M Or. nE Sduwn. dGa yr
elgaosrty, ino thef G st2y4Dt hI,Ey epa of. her sal's lAYt,if•,;,, 1:;:i
On Saturday the 21st instrinags-buildings
j°l)°
;Ible 4.2
A. M. Curate of Plaxtol, Keen
'Air. Wm. Pether, formerly an artist of c°ls7,.e.elti
last week, at his residence in Bristol, at tilt
aft, ar—:
. LONDON : Printed by .T. It CA STA IRS, oil, • :11".
Ormond-street, Queen-square and publis4o9 '4loi
SCRIPPS. 'of No. 7, South .31(&,en-strety, at
i,v,T:4l"'
OVFICE, N. 112, Strand; where. Anv--I:it.r d'ar'4l.
ORDEItS, LET TFRS, (post.irdid)lll, ,'.sttl2, ' ;