The Sun.
London, England, 1826-12-26 00:00:00

is introduced by a good deal of editorial comment; the Jury, by
their verdict, endeavoured distinctly to mark their sense of the
difference between these comments and a report, of what passed
before the Magistrate ; the verdict being returned specially, "Da-
mages 1001. upon the second libel, that of the 11th of August."
As in several reports this important fact is wholly omitted, •I trust
this explanation will remove the impression that the verdict was
directed against the publication of police reports, and the unusual
course adopted by the New Times, of publishing the names of
the Jury, and the threat held out by the Chronicle, of its inten-
tion to continue that practice in all important cases, will not, I
feel assured, deter Juries from acting consistently with the oath
administered to them.
The insertion of this in your first publication will oblige, Sir,
your most obedient servant,

London, Des. 23. ONE OF THE JURY.
The writer of the above letter says, that " on the
11th, when the case is again alluded to, it is intro-
duced by a good deal of Editorial comment." On
looking into the second libel, we find the following is
what the Juryman calls a good deal of Editorial com-
ment :

" PEACHUM AND LOCKIL our paper of Friday last, under
the head Bow-street, we gave particulars of the robbery of a
Scotchman, named Frazer, whose watch was snatched from his
hand, run away with, and pawned at the shop of a man named
"Luria, in the Strand, who refused to give it up, though aware of
the robbery."

With the exception of the heading, of which we cer-
tainly disapproVe, the rest of the comment is merely such
an introduction as is usually given in cases which have been
partially heard before, in order to render, the subsequent
statement intelligible. Why should the Juryman consider
our announcement of an intention to publish hereafter the
names and additions of -Jurymen, " as a threat to deter
Juries from acting consistently with the oath administered
to them ?" The object we had in view, we distinctly
stated, was the very reverse; namely, by adding to the
responsibility of Jurymen, to strengthen their inducements
to act consistently with the oath administered to them.
Men who act under the consciousness that the attention of
the country is directed to them, will be more likely to attend
scrupulously to their oaths than if they knew that they
were to be shrouded in obscurity. If this is not a sound
doctrine, why do we deem publicity a guarantee for the
purity of Judges? Why did Mr. Peel propose to let in
light. on Committees of the House of Commons, as a
means of correcting their habit of acting iniquitously ?
Some people may probably think that the heavy punish-
ment of 100/. and costs,i amounting in all, we suppose, to
between 300/. and 4001. is rather a severe punishment for
the three words, " Peachum and Lockit," and that in catch-
ing at this ground the old adage was exemplified, "Any
stick will do to beat a dog ;" but we are far from express-
ing this as our opinion. We do not say that the Jury
have not done their duty; but merely, that whatever they
have done, they shall take the responsibility of it. The
following two names have been furnished to us, with the
additions :—Josias Stansfdd, Esq., of Camberwell-grove,
and the Old
,Trinity House, Water-lane, Tower-street ;
John Robertson, Esq., Agent and Under-writer, 29,
Abchurch-lane.-21forning 'Chronicle.
Arrivals from' the Continent have been very nume-
rous in the course of to-day. From Holland the pri-
vate letters are of Friday last. The whole attention of
the Dutch people were directed towards England and
France ; the tranquillity of Europe depending on the
unanimity of those powers in regard to the Affairs of
the Peninsula. At Amsterdam, and throughout Hol-
land generally, implicit reliance was by no means
placed on the protestations of the French King and
his Ministers ; and a report was even current that
French troops were actually moving gradually So-
wards the Pyrenees in several columns. This does
not appear to be the case by advices obtained from the
most authentic sources in Paris itself; not that such a
movement would be considered, even in that capital, at
all improbable,but not iMmediately, otberWitie the whole
weight of the speeches of the Duke de Dames, M.
Villele, and the other French,Ministers, would be lost.
According also to the Paris intelligence obtained to-day,
the French Government could, without any difficulty,
march an army of 40,000 or 50,000 men-to the Spanish
frontiers, in the course of only a. few days. Should such
a step be really contemplated, it could not be concealed,
as the merchants of London have frequent intercourse with
those houses in the habit of supplying the Frel:cl troops
with provisions, &c. The banking interest of France is
certainly quieting as much as possible the fears of the pub-
lic of a rupture with Great Britain, in order to avoid any
increased demand for'capital, the necessary consequence
of a war. Not only would the Minister of Finance be
thwarted in his plan for reducing the interest 'on the
French Three per Cents, but he would be compelled to
raise a new loan of several millions sterling.—lbid.-
The profound ignorance of every thing connected
with the administration of justice, which distinguishes
the most eager of our. advocates for innovation, is
almost incredible. A Morning Paper lately re-
marked

" A Report which has been printed by order of the House of Com-
mons, on the subject of Commitments for Contempt' of Court,
is, we trust, the forerunner only of some attempts on the part of
the Legislature to cut away or restrain a branch of the equity pro-
cess, which is, in its origin and principle,- no less odious than
in its practice. It seems liable to operate upon individuals with
a severity often proportioned to their ignorance and incapacity of
self-defence."

In order to make out this grave accusation, it as-
sures its readers, that—

" Imprisonment for contempt is not so often for the eatiolaction
of ,a debt, as for the conipultion of testimony, or under pretext of
compelling it. It is known to be a continuation of the old pro-
em of the Star Chamber, and a worthy substitute for the Heine
forte et there, had recourse to for the extortion of evidence, which
could in no other way he obtained; but long since, in every form
except the present, rejected with abhorrence by the humanity of
the Law of England."

This is, from the beginning to the end, sheer mis-
take and ignorance. The process of contempt is
issued by Courts of Common Law as well as of
Equity : it has no more connection with the Star
Chamber than any other branch of our law has.; it
has nothing to do, either in its origin or in its prin-
ciple, with the peine forte et there, which, never hav-
ing been known in Courts of Equity, is introduced,
we suppose, only to dazzle the vulgar with a show of
knowledge ; and it neither is nor can be used for the
extortion or compulsion of evidence. One subject
has a ground of complaint against another, which is
of such a nature that a remedy can be obtained only
in a Court of Equity. He prefers his complaint to
the proper tribunal; an order is made in his favour ;
the defendant refuses to obey this order ; and for
this disobedience he is, at the demand of the plain-
tiff, and not otherwise, committed to prison. Im-
prisonment is the means, by which, through the
medium of Courts of Justice, one man compels
another to do him justice ; and lie who is corn.
mitted to the Fleet, for disobeying the order of
a Court of Equity, is neither more unfortunate,
nor more harshly, treated, than the debtor who is taken
in execution, in consequence of his not having satis-
fied a judgment of the King's Bench or Common
Pleas. It is not long since the Lord Chancellor re-
marked, that persons committed by him for contempt
were no more his prisoners than debtors, charged on
execution for money owing by them, were the prisoners
of the Judges of the Kings Bench or Common Pleas.
The origin and principle of the process of contempt is
so far from being
odious, that it.is simply this—every
Court of Justice must have the power of compelling
the parties to a suit to obey its orders. Were it de-
prived of this authority, it would be in vain for tho
injured to apply for its aid. If the Courts of Equity