The Sun.
London, England, 1829-12-25 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF TFIli PUBLIO JOURNALS.

We stated yesterday our opinion without dis-
guise, that the first in this train of prosecutions
for libel against a member of the London Press,
was fully provoked and fairly instituted, and
that the verdict was on the part of the jury un-
avoidable. Not so of any of those alarming
Mininisterial prosecutions which have followed.
The business of Wednesday commenced with
the trial of an information against the Morning
Journal, for a libel on his Majesty. And what
was the nature of this libel? The writer stated
first, that the King had " treated the Duke of
Wellington with more than marked coolness."
Well, what of that ? Was it never said or
written but by the editor of the Morning Jour-
nal ? If true, was it a crime in George IV. ?
If false, was it worth while to rake up, six months
afterwards, a piece of gossip discredited from
the first by all who were acquainted with the
fact, and long since forgotten by the general
mass of the community ? The rest of the
" libel" was in substance, that the King com-
plained of his imperious Minister having made
him too unpopular to admit of his exhibiting his
Royal person to his people ;--that the Duke of
Wellington, besides being an imperious, was also
a most ambitious and dangerous Minister ; —and
that the Sovereign, being subdued by the ascen-
dancy of this imperious, ambitious, and danger-
ous Minister, and being kindly and fondly at-
tached to his subjects, and anxious to see them
all prosperous and happy, must be a great ob-
ject of pity to them, the people, because he could
not mingle with their public entertainments,—that
is, we presume, because he could not go to the
play. Now here is a pretty piece of nonsense,
to make the ground of a state prosecution !
The simple person who wrote it began without
knowing how he was to end, and finished with-
out remembering_ how he had prefaced his lamen-
tation. He tells us first, that the King had
treated the Duke of Wellington with " more
than marked coolness ;" and yet that so de-
cided was the ascendancy of the imperious Mi-
nister, to whom his Majesty had afforded such
proof of his scornful displeasure, as to entitle his
Majesty to the commiseration of his subjects!
We did not know, until the Jury of Wednesday
informed us, that it was a libel to affirm. the
unpopularity of the King,. or his want of spirit
to act independently of his Ministers. To us
it would be a topic of sincere congratulation that
the King of England, having once chosen his
Ministers, inasmuch as he does not share the re-
sponsibility of his advisers, should. not attempt
to controul their power in any other mode but
by dismissing them, and that from affairs of the
highest importance to the meanest—from the
demolition of a penal code to the erection of a
palace, he should leave all to his official coun-
sellors, acting under that peril to which the con-
stitution has subjected them, of being punished
when they act amiss, whether in the treatment
of a vast political question, or in a contract for
brick and mortar. To assume that the Kitig
must be conscious of a sudden access of unpopu-
larity because he does not show himself at public
places, betrays the most deplorable ignorance of
his royal habits, or else artfully insinuates that
he must for many years have felt himself an object
of public odium—because, with very few exceps
Lions, it is years since his Majesty has " mingled
with the entertainments bf his people," or ex-
hibited his Royal person in the metropolis, even
when resident therein. This signification, how-
ever, of the silly paragraph alluded to, the libel-
hunters have not ferretted out, though the real
satire contained in the play-going apostrophe
was, if it had any meaning, less a libel against .his
Majesty than against the nation itself, inasmuch
as it inferred that the people of England had the
ill luck to be unpopular with his Majesty ! It
was at best a sorry theme for a prosecution.
The next trial was for an alleged endeavour, on
the part of the same Morning Journal, to bring
the King's Government generally, together with
the Houses of Lords and Commons, into con-
tempt. We do not hesitate to affirm, that if
prosecutions on such charges as this be multi-
plied, and juries be found weak enough, or so
unmindful of the public interest as to encou-
rage them, there is an end of all free dis-
cussion in this country, and, with it, of the
sole security for the enjoyment of every
other privilege. It has been admitted by the
Attorney-General, that the British Govern-
ment stands " upon opinion ;" and what does
tins; able advocate and lawyer mean by such a
position ? is is • of
.opinion which
Sir James Scarlett assigns as the bulwark or
foundation of this Government? If he dis-
avows, as of course he will, this absurd and un-
attainable requisite of a unanimous opinion in
favour of the Government, or, in other words,
the Administration of the day, then what means
the punishment of an effort, through the medium
of discussion, to attach blame, even the highest
degree of blame; to such a Government ; and
does it not call upon the promulgator of such an
opinion to correct his language, by contending
that the British Government stands on the
"suppression of all opinions but one ?" As for
any vehemence of declamatory phrase, which a
writer at a hot political crisis may be led by his
temper to indulge in, we conceive that the Go-
vernment acts ill its part when it metes out, and
strains with too niggardly a hand, the length of
tether which a political partisan solicits. One
of the reproaches cast upon the accused in the
libel prosecution now referred to, is that they
brought no specific charge against the Govern-
ment, but dealt only in vague abuse. Is it not
strange that such a topic should be insisted on
for such a purpose ? If the charge was vague,
and the language violent, would not the mischief
occasioned by it be proportionately s mall, and
the remedy more appropriately sought for in
the • superior influence • of a 'reasonable and
loyal press, and in the contempt of all 'wise men
for such boyish intemperance than in a prosecu-
tion for libel ? Lord Lyndhurst prosecuted be-
cause he was made the subject of a direct,
telligible, and tangible accusation, . The Mittis
..s'—
sters, as a body, prosecute because' there
.19
direct or tangible charge. Is this ef no
people hold in reve-
l'
But it is asked,—can the_
.eistent ?
rence any Goyesmiien. which is daily attacked
and scandalized, in.
the newspapers? Yes, if
the sally: Government be upheld and vindicated,
intelligence, evli
gaepnecr and they
intellectoil beyond all al
acnodmpll
numbers
the
preponderant body of the press, in numbers and
of
49 the present one has uniformly. been, by other
tihneythbee
those who read them, and whose opinions they
principally form. Besides, shall we be told that
it is a matter of right for a Ministry to be " held
in reverence" by the people ? If in uniform and
unvarying reverence, then must their policy be
perfeet, and their wisdom infallible, for other-
wise no newspaper forbearance, however das-
tardly, .or applause however eloquent, will pro-
cure them the reverence demanded. On the
other hand, if this odious pretext of " tendency"
to bring a Government into disgrace, unaccom-

parried by any facts or other demonstrations of a
seditious character, be once admitted by juries,
and familiarized to the public mind, as a proper
ground whereon to convict our fellow-citizens,
the construction of what it is which constitutes
or implies such tendency will assuredly become
wider with each successive trial. Contemptuous
and fierce expressions, like those employed in
the present instance, may be regarded as the
Apology for a verdict of guilty in December,
1829 ; but juries of 1840 will be told that the
mildest terms of disapprobation are sufficient to
generate in the King's subjects a want of due re-
verence for his Majesty's official servants. The fact
is, however, and we exult in saying so, that the
re-action has begun. The impolicy of these pro-
secutions has, we doubt not, already impressed
itself on the minds of Ministers, with the con-
sciousness which they cannot avoid admit-
ting, that they but work up the Morning
Journal into a political martyr. The Attorney-
General could hardly not be serious in preferring
the commencement or course of the eighteenth
century, at least on the score of sobriety and
temper in its public writers, to the period at
which we live. Why, the age of' Addison, and
for fifty years later, was one of irrepressible
licentiousness in the Press. Hardly a writer
took up his pen on politics without uttering the
most outrageous libels. Has Sir James Scar-
lett never heard of the Draper's letters? or
the political effusions of Steele, whom he alludes
to ? or of Pope? or Gay ? or Defoe ? or
Dennis ? Why from Bolingbroke to Junius
the country was overrun with libels ; the wisest
Ministers " stood upon opinion," and despised
them. Some took another course, and were
despised. The present Ministry have less to
to fear from opinion (we conscientiously believe)
than almost any of their predecessors for the last
thirty years. Why do they discard this natural
and most powerful ally ? Why resort to the
official prosecutor, who never yet in any age
saved a feeble Ministry from contempt, er added
authority to a strong one ? Two more prose-
cutions of the same parties were b, ought on
yesterday, and verdicts of guilty found. The
first was quite unworthy of him on whose behalf
it was instituted. It is painful to see the Duke
of Wellington less alive to his own real dignity
than others would be for him. The last trial
was for a personal charge of specific corruption,
and rests, as we stated before, on totally dis-
similar grounds.--Times.
We have two more trials, and two more con-
victions to announce ; one in the case of the
Morning Journal, the other in that of the
Atlas. The subject of the first trial wss a let-
ter in the Morning Journal to the Duke of
Wellington, purporting to have been written by
John Litton Crosby, A.M., Minister of Syden-
ham, Kent, and Domestic Chaplain to the
Duke of Curnbeiland. The language of this
letter is offeAsive in its terms certai.dy, inas-
much as the writer arraigns the Duke of Wel-
lington " of the grossest treachery to his coun-
try, or else the most arrant cowardice—or, if
you please, treachery, cowardice, and artifice
united ;" and he charges him, moreover, with
entertaining the design of obtaining the Sove-
reignty of theSe realms for his own house, by
effecting a marriage between his son and
the Princess destined apparently to suc-
ceed to the Throne. This letter, it
seems, gave great offence to his Grace,
who went himself before a Grand Jury. Sir
James Searlett appears to have been sensible
that this part of his Grace's conduct stood in
need of some justification ; and by way of' an
argumentum ad hominem to any writer in a
Newspaper who should be of opinion that his
Grace would have lost no laurels by displaying a
little less sensitiveness on this occasion, lie ob-
serves, " it has happened to me more than once,
I may say more than twenty times, in the course
of my professional duties, to have had the great
honour of being consulted by Gentlemen con-
cerned in publishing newspapers ; and I have
found that even they, who of all others are the
most liberal in their opinions, and most averse
to prosecution for libel, when they have 'oeen
the subject of attack have felt in the ir.ost deli-
cate manner possible on the subject," This
may be true, without saying much Por the Duke
of Wellington ; because no person ever thought
of maintaining that any man, whatever his sta-
tion in society, should sit quietly down under
imputations seriously affecting his character. So
far from this, a sensibility to. the op;:,iion of
others is the best security ove
ml have
difference the good eontl'a,b z...,);eid,.„)4%, sovce for
iety.
beingßut
alivethere is
to a
whatat eris dierence between
seriously affects cha-
racter, and being h
-tin by trifles. There is
not a greater nuisance in society than a person
who is always on the look-out for affronts, and
who is so thin-skinned as to take fire at
provocation, however absurd, We remember, in
our schoolboy days, a man who had—what he
deemed a —4-fortune—a note exceedinn- the
usual magnitude, film _4
g never observed boys
sketching a nose with chalk
••-pit but, he
flew into a passion, conceiving himsett tn.
ject of attack. The Duke of Wellington is the
Prime Minister of this great empire ; ad, a
such, ought to possess more than tk4 oxdinv r
share of judgment. Now how arc wo to, re
cile with the judgment his Graezoughtto - con-
possess
the extraordinary sensitive.ness he has she., vrn th
'occasion of It letter, no one imputar: • r e
on in w uch
could possibly lower him in the or., •mon of any him-,
man being possessed of ordinal-
sense ? To talk of
the cowardice of his Grace ';s as
absurdit will
be hereafter to talk of k•,*(s comm
and of temper.
Language is full ambiguity,
We say the
.fear of the 1.40 P., when we wish
to denote the
der to live righteously. When his Grace said
he dreaded ni ;,ling so much as civil war, the
fear in that case could not be
imputed tc!.
'aim as
a matter of reproach. A fear or cowardice, in
that respect, is very differes‘
from that degree of
Approhenaion for nP
ona safety which induces a
to C-
man from to shri,o- •
om the uanger which it is his duty
. The language of the letter is bad taste ; it
is turgid and blustering; but it can injure no one
in public estimation but the writer. Of all men
in the world, the last surely who can be affected
by the term cowardice is the Duke of Wellington
—a man who must have had nerves of iron, to
display an intrepidity almost unexampled in the
critical circumstances' in which he was placed on
several occasions. The only expressions with
respect to which there can be any difficulty, are
—" Who ever suspected, or who ever presumed
to accuse your Highness of mercy—of compas-
sion—of moderation, or of any of those
more kindly or tender sympathies which dis-
tinguish the heart of a man from that of a
proud dictator and a tyrant ?" Without wish.
ing to say that his Grace is not merciful, eo„,_
passionate, and moderate in the extreme, and
distinguished for his -kindly and tein:er - s)inpi-
thies, we should wish to have better authority
than that of Sir James Searlett, hehire assent-
ing to the proposition that " wherever there

are great courage and skill, humanity and
kindness are ever an accompaniment to the .char
racter." Frederick of Prussia, for instance,
possessed both skill and courage in no ordinary
degree, as well as the magnanimity and com-
mand of temper which his Grace seems to be
without ; but Frederick was neither humane
nor kind, but harsh,. and sometimes cruel ; so
much so, that the contrast between his dis-
position and his shedding tears when reading
a funeral oration composed by himself; furnished
matter for some biting epigrams. But his Grace,
as we have said, may be tender-hearted for all
that, only we take the historical as well as lite-
rary knowledge of Sir James to be by no
means cqnsl to his confidence. Every one knows
th a his Grace's great opponent was also• exces-
sively sensitive with regard to the Press; and in a
well-written article in the last number of the Fo-
reign Quarterly Review on Bourrienne's Me-
moirs, this weakness is imputed to what we arc
sue it ought not to be imputed to in the ease
of his Grace, namely, Charlatanism. " True
greatness (it is said) can afford to be wrong ;
but there was a dash of Charlatanism in all the
success of Napoleon that dreaded the liaht.
Hence, perhaps, his extraordinary sensitiveness
on the subject of publication, and his wrath
egsinet the slighteat sallies of ridicule. He
could not tolerate public discussion-6'e news-
papers of Paris were his mere slaves. . . . .
His dislike of discussion affected even the Tata
mite ; it was a part of the Consular Constitution
which he bore with impatience, and quickly sup-
pressed." It has been sometimes thought that
this impatience of strictures is inseparable from
the inilitwy character, and is formed by the habits
passive obedience necessary to the discipline of
an army. But this ais point the discussion of
which would lead us a great way. To sum up :
if the letter is so foolish that it is undeserving or
attention, and conveys no imputation which can
injure the Duke, the apology of Sir J. Scarlett,
founded on the alleged weakness of Newspaper
Editors, will go but a very short way to dimi-
Nish the injury he has done to his reputation for
judgment by noticing it. No other Minister of
his rank, for the last half century, would have
noticed such nonsense. Sir Robert Walpole
and Lord North would have made themselves
merry with the mock heroics of the writer. Mr.
Pitt would have despised the letter. Lord
Liverpool would have pitied the author. As to
Mr. Canning, though of an exceedingly irritable
temr.erament, he had too much tact to call in the
aid of an Attorney-General. Even Lord
Sidmouth would have been ashamed of coun-
tenancing such a prosecution. One objection
stated on the part of the Rev. Mr. Isaacson
was not fairly met by Sir James. Why was
not the author selected for prosecution? Sir James
retorted, that publishers were responsible for all
that they published, and that the guilt of the writer
did not, diminish theirs: but he pledged himself
to prosecute the writer also, if he should give
himself uo. This is little better than quibbling.
It is usual when letters appear with a real name
to them in a Netarspaper, to demand that the
writer lee given up, on an understanding that in
that case the right of prosecuting the paper be
fore gone. There can in general be no breach
of honour in giving up a writer who, by affixing
his name, points himself out as willing to take
on himself the responsibility of the publication.
What satisfaction would it afford to the pro-
prietors of the Newspaper to enable Sir James
Scarlett to punish another ? Prosecutors gene-
rally prefer punishing the writer to punishing
the publisher ; and it seems singular why this
course was not adopted in the case of this letter.
We cannot part with Sir James Scarlett without
notici a die following threat :—" I know I shall
be accused of great tyranny iu the said prosecu-
tions ; the Press of the country will make com-
mon cause with each other. I knew an instance,
some time bade, where, a day or two after the
trial of,ae Proprietor of a Newspaper for libel, he
thought proper to publish the names of the
Jury ; if I could prove that this was done to
show to the world who the men were that con-
victed him ; or if, in any such case, the names
were published to influence any future Jury in
giving a verdict, I now declare that I will take
my part in bringing the Editor of any Newspaper
that so publishes the names of the Jury, with
such an latent, to condign punishment. Let,
gentlemen, the administration of justice be kept
pure." Why should not the names of a Jury
be jublished if it be wished that justice should
be kept pure ? Does Sir ,James Scarlett sup-
pose tilat, privacy, that Star Chamber work,
affords the Est security for justice? It is not
known and admitted that responsibility a-, rear-
oninleas ie the security we can have for
upright coauct, not only in the case of Juries,
but in the case .of Judges, Senators, and all
other men ? The great defect in Juries is the
insufficient reaponsibility ; for responsibility is
weak, in proportion as the numbers among
whom it is shared is increased. If Juries are to
be fieeei from what is best calculated to ensure
uprightness in all cases, will that improea jus-
o
tire? We shall next have
;, c. posed to =-
lits administration alto-
, ,—.l tie 6, by
viorning Chronicle.
6%. a
The proceedings of the last three days in the
c0u,,1 of King's Bench are not calculated to in-
the popularity of the present Administra-

eTea

•ir State prosecutions against one
,-".o•
ice
wspaper; with a fifth impending over its de-
a measure of Ministerial severity
;:ca head, ig Press which we believe to be
v.! .ealt out to the
_and as it is unexampled,
iioerf,,,e.cetlhyoupneexitamwipilletrte,n:
a
in. upon the records of
without We will not,
British justice non circumstances
hoti ever, make any remarks t.'
and principles which those trials :lave developed,
s
intending, as we do,• to confine oui:elves to a
few observations upon the trial of the I.74ilitor of
a I,Veekly Paper, whose case is distinct from the
others, bit: not less deserving of public attention.
It will be recolleC."4 that the Attorney-General,
4-st rule for a criminal in-
some' time ago, obtainet.
-formation against the Editor o.
the "ill"' for
a libel, imputing to the Lord Chatc:•til or And
his Lady a- venal and simoniacal bartering
ecclesiastical preferments--the libel was given as
a rumour of the day, and not upon the autho-
rity of a newspaper. The facts connected with
the publication it is not necessary to state here,
as they will be seen in our report. Of the libel-
lous nature of the imputation no person could
entertain a doubt ; but we are just as well con-
vinced that it was beneath the high character and
station of the Lord Chancellor to give to the
paltry calumny the importance of a criminal
prosecution. Having, however, thought fit to,
proceed against it, lie was more justified in put-
ting time Attorney-General, with all the ma-
chinery of Criminal Law, in motion to crush
the obnoxious paragraph which contdined such
an imputation on his personal character,
than if it had been the most violent philippic
that ever had been written upon his political
oittlt:ct as a Minister of the Crownt Mr,

Bell, the editor, who bad inserted the para-
graph, which, it appears, he had upon the au-
thority of some friend whose confidence he
would not betray, came upon the floor of the
Court, not to defend or justify the libel, but to
vindicate himself from the charge of having been
nistrinnental in publishing it from any political
or malicious motive. He conducted his defence
with good taste, intelligence, end discretion.
The tone of his address was equally free frOm in-
temperance and servility ; it was that which it
became a man to use who was conscious that he
had inadvertently done a wrong to the character
of another, and was willing to make him every
reparation consistent with the vindication of the
nmocence of his own motives. We shall stand
icquitted of all personal partiality in this matt:;.,
..vhen we state that we had never seen this gen-
. tleman before he appeared in Court to defend
himself on the present occasion. We felt that
he displayed powers and acquirements that re•
fleeted credit upon himself and the Press to
i which he belongs. The Court and the Jury
felt it too. The latter retired to consider their
verdict, and, on their return, the Foreman read
from a written paper their decision to the fol-
lowing effect :—" We find the defendant guilty
of publishing ; but, in consequence of the doubt
which we entertain of malicious motive, we
strongly recommend him to the mercy of the
Court." This we humbly submit to he tanta-
mount to a verdict of acquittal. The Jury hay- 1
ieg found the act of publishing independently of 1
the malicious motive, did not find the criminal
part of the charge, for, in the language of the
law, there can be no crime where there is no
malus animus. From what the Attorney-
General said about representing the case to the
Lord Chancellor, it is not likely the defendant
will ever be brought up for judgment ; and this
will perhaps satisfy Mr. Bell. But, leaving the
individual out of the question, and contending
for a principle only, and one of great ins-
portance, we say that a defendant brought
up for judgment, under such a verdict,
would be entitled to have judgment stayed.
This is a stronger case than that of the
King v. Woodfall, where the defendant,
being prosecuted for publishing one of the letters
of Junius, the verdict of the Jury was, " guilty
of publishing only." This verdict was so re-
corded, and in the ensuing Term a motion was
made on behalf of Mr. Woodfall to stay judg-
mentfrom being entered up. On the part of
the prosecution a cross motion was made, to
enter the verdict according to ils legal import
—that is, as the Crown Lawyers contended, to
enter a general verdict of " guilty." Those
motions were argued before Lord Mansfield—a
Judge never suspected of partiality towards the
liberty of the Press. The Court were against
granting the motion to stay the judgment, on the
ground, as Lord Mansfield said, that the Jury
had found the publication, which was the only
charge they had to try—the doctrine then pre-
vailing, be it remembered, in Westminster-Hall,
that the Jury were Judges of the fact only, and
the Court were the Judges of the law—never-
theless, it is clear Lord Mansfield's mind mis-
gave him respecting his own interpretation of
this verdict, for the Court eventually awarded a
venire de novo—or, in other words, granted a
new trial. Since that time the law of libel has
undergone an important alteration in this coun-
try by the Act of Mr. Fox—the 32d Geo. 111.
—which constitutes the Jury, in all criminal
proceedings for libel, judges of both the law and
the fact. They have not only now to try the
charge ofpublishing only, but to examine into the
motive—to sift and investigate the circumstances
which imply or rebut malice, as in every other
criminal case, and if they negative a malicious
intention, it matters not in what words they
convey their verdict—for it must be a verdict of
acquittal in effect. Such we maintain the ver-
dict in this case to be. The Jury, it is true,
did not negative the malice in direct words of
negation, but they expressed a unanimous and
fixed doubt of malicious intention, and the
benefit of that doubt must be given to time de-
fendant. Had they been silent about the ma-
lice, it might be argued that the law would infer
the malice from the fact of publication, but this
inference cannot be made in the teeth of time
doubt expressed by the Jury, as a , qualifying
part of their verdict. Expressing a doubt of
the malice is equivalent to saying that they can-
not find the publication to be a libel quoad the
defendant. Though it is the abstract rule of
law to presume malice from the fact of publica-
tion in cases of libel, yet it is equally a rule of
law that such legal presumption of m§liee -,call
J,.
.._, ,_ , ..., 0., ~,,,Acn crioenCe of circum-
stances, as was laid down by Mr. Justice Le
Blanc in the case of the King v. Creevy. That
Learned Judge distinctly admitted this doctrine,
and left it to the Jury to say whether the legal
inference of a malicious intention were rebutted
by the facts attending the publication of the
libel, :end, if it were, to acquit the defendant.
In the present case the Jury took the circum-
stances whiCh Ni. Bell detailed as accompany-
ing the act of publishing into consideration,
and, having so done, they entertained a doubt,
which doubt could not be removed from their
minds, of the existence of malice, without which
there can be no guilt, and, by expressing that
doubt, having negatived the charge of crime, it
was superfluous to recommend the defendant to
mercy, for they had in effect acquitted him.—
Morning Herald.
" Another, and another, and another still !
and yet there are more to come !" Verily his
Majesty's Attorney-General is 'earning a repu-
tation which will live after him— he is not eat-
ing the bread of idleness—nor, so far as the
press and public opinion are concerned, is he
likely to drink the waters of forgetfulness. Four
separate prosecutions, not against one news-
paper only, but against one man—all of them
leading to fine and imprisonment—have this
week been commenced and ended by Sir James
Scarlett ; and we will venture to add, that there
is not in-the whole course of British history an '.
instance of such continued prosecution on 're-
_cord, It would seem that it were not now enough
his fortune, and to deprive him
to ru'!:* "a'i-irl
_
• but that it were also ne- '
of his persona-1. libert.Y)
-±he death—to lay hold
ces42ry to hunt him to'
of every foolish expression whicit; !le may have
written, and to fasten tip2n it the fangs of every
tyrannical enactment which wee ;Ter passed on
the-subject of libel ! In the good days of cep-
ning there was nothing of this—the Press en-
joyed unrestricted freedom, and its freedom ex-
alted the character both of the country and of
its Ministry. But the times are'changed. The
Government—no—but his INlejeety'e Attr::iney-
GengrAl has been :banged, and the' free express:,
eion of 1-.l4blic opinion through the medium of
the Press must bo reprefseil. We will make
-
bold to tell him that .he Fe.4y 14 tt, but that be
. ,
.will
.pot- succeed. Englishmen are not vindic-
tive, and however gross the libels may havebeen
for which redress is sought,,we are confident

that there is not one in a thousand who will
not consider such reiterated prosecutions as the
veriest persecution that was ever waged against
one of the most valuable rights which we pos-
sess; and who will not set down to the preju-
dice of the Government what has been, perhaps,
the act only of the Attorney-General. But
hold. We are treading on tender ground, and
if we give free vent to our feelings, we shall, in
all probability, place ourselves in the same pre-
dicament that the unfortunate Editor of the
Morning Journal now is—in the clutches, in.
fact, of the Attorney-General, and liable to all
the tender mercies which it would appear to be
his pleasure to deal out to those who have the
misfortune to be responsible for libels. Let
our readers remember that the trial in this day's
paper is the fourth against an individual, and
that it was brought on by an ex-eicio informa-
tion; and let them reed, at the same time, the
adverse speeches on the occasion, and they will
themselves think all that we could wish to say
on the subject.—Morning Advertiser.
A fourth verdict of Guilty, it will be seen by
cur law report, was yesterday pronounced against
the Morning Journal, for the publication of a
most atrocious libel against the Duke of Wel-
lington. In these several decisions, it is gratify-
ing to consider, that the general character of the
Press has been vindicated in the marked con-
demnation of those unprincipled members of it,
who for the basest purposes, not only dare to
vilify many of the highest and purest characters
in the State, but who, in the prosecution of their
object, do not scruple to invent and propagate
the most infamous falsehoods that a depraved
imagination could conceive. It is asserted in
some quarters that these prosecutions are the
first demonstrations of a deliberate and con•
certed scheme to destroy the liberty of the Press.
We do not hesitate to answer, that if such
gross abuses as these were suffered to pass
with impunity, the boasted freedom of the
Press would be nothing but an empty sound.
It could no longer hope to be looked to with
respect ; with its character it would justly lose
its power, and cease to exercise any influence
upon public opinion. The case of the Atlas,
which was also decided yesterday, we must ob-
serve, is one which admits of much reasonable
extenuation ; and we are happy to find that the
recommendation of the Jury in this respect is
likely to receive all the indulgent consideration
to which it is entitled.—Morning Post.
To call the present proceedings of the Go-
vernment " foolish," " senseless," " absurd," and
" uncalled for," as many of our respectable con-
temporaries do, is scarcely doing justice either
to the persecuted or avenging parties. They
are proceedings of the most partial, vindictive,
and arbitrary nature. They alike evince weak-
ness and tyranny ; for oppressive proceedings on
the part of any Government invariably demon-
strate a state of fear, of conscious guilt, of just
exposure, and hopeless impotence. In what
position does the British Government stand at
this moment in the eyes of all Europe ? Are
our Ministers either respected at home or feared
abroad ? Do they maintain that dignified and
invulnerable attitude which inspires either awe
or respect ? Are they pursuing that wholesome 1
course of policy which is calculated to do them
honour or benefit their country ? Are they
directing their undivided attention to the suf-
fering interests of the nation, or endeavour- I
ing to relieve the unexampled distresses of
the people ? Are they administering charity
to the helpless or ragged pauper—devising
profitable employment for the wretched artisan,
or reducing their extravagant military and
civil salaries to lighten the enormous pressure of
the taxes God save the mark ! they are do-
ing no such thing. They are -actively engaged
in prosecutions against the Press—fighting a
desperate and cruel battle with the newspapers—
dispensing briefs among their legal hirelings in
order to make the Court of King's Bench a
second Waterloo, where all the glory and the
shame are at the cost of the loyal and indepen-
dent subjects of the King. It is a grievous
crime, it would appear, in these mock liberal
days to utter any sentiments derogatory to the
irreproachable reputations of Ministers of State.
It is a high crime and misdemeanour to animad-
vert on the blunders of the Wellington Admi-
nistration, or " lament" the misery which their
measures have produced. It is an unpardonable
offence to laugh at the tricks and shifts of un-
principled men, or recall to our memories their
numerous and slating acts of apostacy and
ioconsistency. The press must, therefore, be
restrained, says the Whig Atttorney-Generai, f.;;.
James Scarlett. It has, for the last ten years,
says this incomparable patriot, been permitted to
ruin riot in its excesses, and he, consequently, is
pleased that it is in his power to administer a
little wholesome correction. In the name of
justice aed decency, who is the man who offers
this insult to public opinion and the privilege of
open discussion ? Sir James Scarlett ! Who
is he ? Is he not, and has he not, during his
whole life been, an avowed Whig ?—a friend of
the people ?—an apostate to public :liberty ?
an advocate of Parliamentary Reform P—a de-
claimer at party meetings, and in the House
of Commons, in favour of the freedom of that
Press which he is now hired to curb and destroy?
Oh, deep, damning shame ! Sir James Scarlett
has been all this, especially while a member of
his " Majesty's opposition ;" and yet we now
see this very man the readiest instrument of a
profligate Ministry in repudiating his former
opinions, in being the assassin of his professed
principles, the libeller of his own acts, and
the greatest enemy of that press to which he
and his party owe ail their ephemeral fame and
all their popular adulation. Disgusting, indeed,
is this conduct. But can we be surprised at
this conduct when we consider that a converted
hypocrite is always the greaten despot ? And
yet the Learned Gentleman plumes himself upon
his:liberality and his extensive information,while
he coolly commits homicide on his declared senti-
ment, and deals around him charges of ignorance
and disloyalty on those to whom, comparatively
speaking, he is a dunce and a carbonaro. Per-
haps,
in no Court of Criminal Judicature in the
world were there ever heard so many illogical
arguments or distorted facts as were made use of
by this learned person within the last three days.
Averments as baseless as the winds, were the
trappings of his shabby and half-cast eloquence.
Figures of speech, as incongruous as sugar
mixed with coal gas, interlarded his orations.
Artifice made ample amends for his deficiency.
of ideas, and a hazardous denial of facts, 'where
no reply could be made, carried a momentarybut
still suspected conviction to the minds of those.
&Ale persons who considered they were legally
bound to believe what they did not understand.
His facts and his reasoning were perfectly in
keeping, ! They were both exclusively and•pe-
cuharly his own, Whet was scarlet to him was
crimson to every honest face in his pre,
sence. Ireland never was so tranquil, said the

candid lawyer, as it has been since the passing of
the late Relief Bill ! He never heard, he said, of
the alleged libels on the Duke of Cumberland !
He ascribed the authorship of a letter, with the
name, designation, and address of its writer, to
another person ! He declared he had never
before seen a person whom he had pointed out
to his audience and aspersed on a former occa-
sion. He condescended to be vituperative
where his arguments were inconclusive, and he
discussed questions of trade with as much ala-
crity as he would bag a brief or pocket a fee.—
His comparisons were alike forensic and mer-
cantile. Poisons and opinions, fire-arms and
ex-eicios, partnership liabilities and the belles
iettres, ancient history and modern liberality,
Henry the Seventh and Arthur the First, mad
dogs and delicate attorneys, were all equally
at his command, and the objects of his censure
or his approbation as it suited his purpose. To
dispute the palm with such a man, on any subject,
would have been little less than sedition and
blasphemy. His ideas. of things beyond the
range of Westminster-hall were quite original.—
Foolish, indeed, must have been the night
who would have dared to dissent from his
doctrines, or call in question his superior
information. On grammar and on politics—on
liberty and auxiliary verbs—on moderation and
the ninth commandment—en decency and per-
sonal slander—he proved himself to be a most
accomplished pedant. But the entire details
are too exquisite to be dwelt upon any longer.
He has rendered himself immortal, and we
therefore leave him to the gods. We cannot
help thinking, however, that he would have
served his employers better had he spared us a
little of his pretension to superior knowledge
upon subjects which are not within his province.
If he be the only hardworking subaltern of the
Government we take leave to think he might
have employed his time better in finding Out
some legal remedy for the defects of the law
instead of availing himself of these defects to
oppress and curtail the liberty of the subject.
If he should contend that he only laboured in
his vocation, then we reply it is matter of
regret that his employers do not labour more
unremittingly in theirs. We have a population
reduced to the last stage of human misery, and yet
no attempts are made to alleviate their sufferings.
The vengeance of a bad law is applied to re-
strain public opinion, while the efforts of the
1 natural guardians of the commonwealth are re-
laxed where the real interests of the country are
concerned. The legal hack toils in his inglo-
rious profession, while the Minister of com-
merce sleep. Ex-officios flow ish while the
shuttle rusts in the loom. The gaol is the
threatened corrective of sentiments inspired by
general distress ; and, while the terrors of the
law thunder round our heads, the march of in-
solvency advances, and universal pauperism is
the echo of our liberal measures. Look at the
corner of every street in this vast metropolis and
see the haggard remains of Evilg beings, whose
only means of existence are dependant upon
alms. Turn ►here we will we hear the loud
wail of distress—of hungry children—of parents
houseless and pennyless. All this is overlooked
while the crusade against the press rages. Agri-
culture languishes, and manufactures are un-
saleable, while the verdicts of juries give con-
solation to the sensitive and delicate minds of
our modern statesmen. 0 tempora ! 0 mores !
—Morning Journal.

CEMETERY OF THE BRITISH OFFICERS

NEAR BA Y ONNE.

On my return from a tour in Spain with a young
friend this last autumn, I passed a week at Bayonne.
On the morning of the 24th of September, the rain,
which had been falling in torrents all night, having
moderated, though not entirely ceased, we were
enabled to walk out and visit the ground which ob-
tained so much unhappy celebrity in 1814. Cros-
sing the long wooden bridge over the river, we came
to what seems a detached portion or suburb of
Bayonne, though it is a separate municipality, called
St. Esprit. This quarter contains a great many
Jews. Ascending the steep road to Bordeaux, we
at length, according to directions we had received,
struck off into a side road along a height to the
right. From this side road we had a most com-
manding prospect, which, in spite of the cloudy,
gloomy, sullen atmosphere, appeared both grand
and beautiful. The valley beneath us, traversed
by the winding Adour, presented the whole town
of B tyonne, with all its old buildings and its im-
mortal recollections. The narrow vale is begirt
with woods and pretty hills ; and beyond, croweed
with labouring clouds, arose the stupendous sum-
mits of the Pyrenees. Advancing, we reached the
;;;;;:ieet :,sf St. n:,eieee. With some
difficulty we found in the church-yard the grave of
General Hay, who was slain on the 14th April,
1814, in the action occasioned by a sortie of the
French from the citadel of Bayonne, which the
British troops then blockaded. It is pretty well
known that the French officer who commanded in
the citadel was extremely averse to this sortie,
which he was compelled to make in obedience to
.the peremptory orders of Thouvenot, his superior
officer, who commanded in the town of Bayonne.
After many brave men had been killed on both
sides, in the sortie, the French were repulsed.
Thoovenot, it afterwards appeared, was previously
aware (though not officially informed) that Napo-
leons's reige had ended; and two days after the
sortie, the white flag of the Bourbon was displayed
from the citadel. Intelligence of the meditated
attack was carried to General Hope, the British
Commander, by a French deserter; but the Ge-
neral, in galloping from his qnarters to the front of
his lines, was intercepted and taken prisoner by a
French party, in a wood, which we afterwards
traverses. He offered his watch and money to a
French sergeat as the price of his release ; but the
sergeant rejected the offer. On his way as a
prisoner to the citadel, Hope and several of his
captors were wounded by the fire of the British
troops. He afterwards sent for the French sergeant,
praised his behaviour, and offered him as a testi-
mony of esteem what he had refused to take as a
bribe; but the sergeant declined to accept anything
from a prisoner.
General Hay was killed in the church-yard of St.
Etienne, and there he was buried. The marble
gravestone expresses that it was erected by his
officers. It is surrounded by grass and nettles.
After earnestly surveying it, and reading the in-
scription again and again, we plucked and have
preserved a weed that overhung the hero's resting
place.
Returning to the Bordeaux road, we had to tra-
verse another cross-road in an opposite direction to
the last, in order to attain the main object of our
peregrination—the cemetery of the other British
officers who fell in the Bayonne sortie—situated, as
we were told, in the grounds of Monsieur Leon,
a wealthy Jew. We engaged an old peasant to guide
us ; and he, though he knew where, or at least
whereabouts, the cemetery was, had some difficulty
to find it. We traversed foul, miry ways, and ad-
vancing much further than I had expected, obtai'ied
a view of the debouchment of the Adour into the
Gulf of Gascony. Striking off from the road into
the grounds of Monsieur Leon, we reach a most ro-
mantic sequestered region, consisting of a multitude
of low furee and heath-clad hills, on the side of one
of which, " with thicket overgrown, grotesque and
wild," we beheld the cemetery. Despite of rain
and mud we pushed on; but it was no easy matter

to approach, for there is no road nor pathway, and
hardly-access through a wilderness of thorns, briars,
and bushes. We went round and round the ceme-
-rery, tearing our clothes and skins, but long unable
to reach or even neatly approach it. It seemed as
if some stern guardian genius " access denied" to
all idle, careless intrusion. However, at length,
after toiling up a steep side, less bristling with re-
sistance than the rest, we gained the exterior wall
of the cemetery, and entered it by a flight of rude
steps. It is a small square space enclosed by a wall,
and surrounded by willows and poplars. A few other
melancholy shrubs are there; and a lovely Italian
cypress ascends in the middle of the little plat of
honour's ground.
" Here sleep the brave, who sunk to rest,
By all their country's wishes blest ;
When Spring, with dewy fingers cold,
Returns to deck their hallowed mould,.
She there shall dress a sweeter sod
Than fancy's feet have ever trod. 7

It is indeed (to pursue the fine strain of Collins)
as " a weeping hermit " that. fancy must repair to
and linger on this spot, which is rather a hermitage
than a temple of glory. But the place is as much
neglected within as without ; and rank grass and
reeds threaten soon to obliterate the memorials of
the brave. On the few tombstones (seven or eight
in number) are engraved only the initial letters of
the names of those who tenant the gory beds below.
All bear the date of April 14, 1814. On °tie I re-
marked these letters—" Sir H. S., Bt., Lt.-Col.
Coldm. Gd." On a second, " Honble. W. G C.,,
Cap. Coldm. Gd." On a third, "G. C , L., Lt.-
Col. Coldm. Gd." On a fourth, "W. 8., Cap.,
Coldm. Gd." On a fifth, which is most beautifully
wreathed with creeping shrubs, " W. P., Ensgn.,
Coldm. Gd." On a sixth, "J. H., Lt. 60th Regt."
There are one or two other stones uninscribed, or
having the inscriptions obliterated.
After a visit which we prolonged in spite of the
rain that now fell heavily upon us, We plucked and
appropriated a small branch of the eypress—" invisos
cupressos "—and bade a reluctant farewell so this
singularly wild, lovely, romantic, and interesting spot.
" Oh ! who shall lightly say that Fame
la nothing but an empty name?" &c.

These well known lines of our illustrious coun-
trywoman, Joanna Baill'e, recurred to my memory,
as I afterwards recalled the strong, deep, mingled
sentiments of tenderness, honour, respect, and na-
tional pride, which every one of the little tomb-
stones in the cemetery had awakened in my heart.
lam sure that there is no mind undebauched by
fashion, and undepraved by meanness or igno-
rance, that would not derive a higher and nobler
gratification from contemplating that silent scene,
that, from gazing on the living pomp and show of
the most splendid Court in Europe.
We were obliged to set off for Bordeaux next
morning. But a little before our departure, I was
informed by a respectable banker of Bayonne, that
the British Consul, who had been absent for some
time, had just returned, and had announced his pur-
pose of repairing and improving the condition of the
cemetery, in conformity with instructions which he
had received from the British Government. I hope
that such instructions have really been given, and
that they will be properly attended to. If I could
have remained a few days longer at Bayonne, I
would have caused the lines above quoted from
Collins to be engraved on a plate of copper, and at-
tached to the wall of the cemetery. It would be
well, I think, in place of the present tomb-stones,
to substitute others of more enduring quality; and
as the idea (once entertained, I believe,) of tran-
sporting the bodies to England, is now of course
abandoned, surely, instead of the initial letters, the
names of the dead heroes shoul►l be recorded at full
length.