The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-11 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF I'Hr4 PUBLIC JOURNALS.

A meeting of ship-owners and their friends was
held at North shields on Thursday last, which ap-
pears to have been but thinly attended. The county
.toembers„,-however, Messrs. Liddell and Bel), were
present, and each took the opportunity to make a
speech, having the common characteristic of deep
lamentation for the decay of the shipping interest.
We had hoped that the memorable speech of Mr.
Iluskisson Would, at least for one generation or so,
have set this class of grumblers at rest,—at rest, we
:mean, in respect to any attempt to assign the late
openings of the navigation laws as a just ground of
censure upon the maritime system of the Govern-
ment. It was demonstrated, as we conceive, by
Huskisson, that the progressive increase of the
kreign shipping had been severely checked by the
wholesome provisions of the new relaxing laws ; that
the positive increase of the British shipping had been
promoted; and that our persisting in the ancient
course against other nations, must have led to their
adoption of the same rigour against British ships, by
which the sum total of our shipping interest would
have been deplorably diminished. But if the Legis-
lature refuse to authorise a measure affecting the mo-
nopoly of any given branch of trade, however ruinous
may be that monopoly to the parties possessing it,
we may as well shut up the doors of Parliament to
all purposes of commercial legislation.—Times.

A ease which we have copied from the Maccles-
field Courier, with the heading given by that paper
" Villainously False Charge," shews the sort of
justice which, a man may expect from those who are
both Judges and Parties. Mr. Ainsworth, describ-
ed as a respectable solicitor of Macclesfield, and
seven 'other individuals (labourers), were charged
on the oath of an informer, named John Hindley,
with pOaching on the estate of Colonel Parker, of
..A.stle, in the night of the 9th of November last. The
informer, it appeared, was a dog-stealer, and more-
over a felon ; and his evidence, which was impro-
bable and contradictory in itself, was contradicted
by respectable witnesses. In short, we hardly ever
recollect of seeing a blacker affair than the whole
case appears to have been. Colonel Parker, the
gentleman on whose grounds the accused were
charged with poaching, sat as a Magistrate on the
Bench, of course without being in the least biassed.
One Magistrate (we wish the name had been given)
displayed his judicial aptitude, by which to prevent
the informer from telling how often he had been
convicted for crimes and offences—probably deeming
it the bounden duty of a Magistrate to allow no evi-
dence to be extracted from a witness but that which
supported the charge. However, the case was too
bad even for the partial feelings of game-preserv-
ing Magistrates. There was not even a shadow of
pretext for even sus-Recting any of the parties ac-
cused, and a conviction was thus rendered impos-
sible. It became. now the duty of Sir John Stan-
ley, the Chairman, to address the parties accused ;
and here the cloven foot displayed itself. Here are
eight individuals, compelled, on the information of a
felon, to bring forward a body of evidence to prove
their innocence, at great trouble and expence, with
transportation suspended over their heads; for Sir
John told them, " yoe who have this day been ac-
cused of poaching, bad conviction followed, would
perhaps have been sentenced to transportation."
With indifferent Judges, the feelings uppermost
would have been indignation at the conduct of the
wretch who had wickedly exposed eight of his
fellow-creatures to the hazard of such a punish-
ment, and sympathy with the men whose peace
of mind had been so wantonly invaded. But
tPe Cheshire Magistrates seem to have felt like
the giants in the story-books, when their vic-
tims, on which they were gloating in imagination,
were torn from them. Sir John Stanley pours out
the vials of his wrath on the heads of the innocent
accused. " You, Mr. Ainsworth," said Sir John
Stanley, " are fully acquitted of the charge; still I
trust you will take the affair into your most serious
consideration. I hope, for the sake of yourself and
of the profession of which you are a member, you
will, to the utmost of your ability—and a man of
your respectability, in such a case, might accom-
plish a great deal—persuade others of the illegality
and danger of such practices. Do let me entreat
you to adopt another line of conduct. You ought to
consider this a fortunate day." Bravo, Sir John !
The glorious Unpaid for ever ! Suppose, Sir John,
a miscreant were to accuse you of picking his pocket
or something worse, and you were to be brought to
trial at the bar of the Old Bailey, and acquitted on
the most unquestionable proof of your innocence,
bow would you feel, if the Judge were to tell you
" that you ought to adopt another line of conduct,
that you ought to consider this a fortunate day ?"-
1s this the language which a Magistrate ought to
address to innocence ? If the men whose innocence
was so fully established had escaped on some infor-
mality, after sufficient evidence of their guilt had
been produced, could you have made use of more
unkind language ? What man, with a particle of
feeling, does not burn with indignation at the lan-
guage addressed to these innocent men ? Mr. Ains-
worth did feel indignant. " Fortunate day ! Sir
John," he exclaimed, " what do you mean ? I repel
with indignation the insinuation. Do you mean to
say, and does this Court mean to say, I ought not to be
acquitted, but that I escape by favour ? The charge,
Sir John, brought against. me by that' villain (point-
ing to Hindley), has been clearly proved to be un-
founded. What, then, is meant by this being a for-
tunate day ? If it is meant to be implied, that I
am connected with poachers, I deny that it is the
fact. It is true, Sir John, that I went to Chester
to defend Middleton against a charge, of which he
was acquitted. His friends employed me as a pro-
fessional man to defend him ; and because I was
thus employed professionally, am I to be branded
as a poacher ? I candidly acknowledge that lam
fond of shooting, and am qualified by law;. but I
defy any man to prove that I ever went out with
poachers. I never did. I have a character at stake
in this proceeding, Sir John, and it is wrong in the
. extreme thus to address me. I have my living to
get by my profession, and why is such an imputa-
tion thrown out ?"—Sir John Stanley : " Mr. Ains-
worth, allow me"—Mr. Ainsworth : " I repeat, Sir
John, that I never was connected with poachers;
why then, in the name of God, is such an imputa-
tion thrown out against me in a Court like this ?"
Aye, why indeed ! Let us listen to Sir John. "If
I have been misinformed,Mr.Ainsworth, Ihave gone
too far : but when these men come to you profession-
ally, do yougive them the advice you ought to do? I
. have been informed that you consider the offence of
poaching in a very. trivial light, and by instilling into
others your opinions,have in arnanner encouraged them
to commit the offence." Admirable illustration of
the justice to be expected at the hands of the glorious
Unpaid. Who does not call to mind the fable of the
Wolf and the Lamb ? A Chairman of a Bench of
Magistrates addresses a respectable gentleman as an
acquitted poacher, on the tittle tattle which some of
his toad-eaters have conveyed to him, as to the light
way in which Mr.- Ainsworth may have spoken of
the dread and mighty offence of poaching. Here
the secret of the animosity oozes out. Any man
within the dominions of the Great Unpaid, who
does not choose to think as they think respecting
the Game Laws and poaching—who ventures to
aid in rescuing a suspected poacher from the de-
struction intended for him, must prepare himself for
all manner of persecution. There is nothing uttered
hy Sir John Stanley which is not perfectly in cha-
racter, and which would not be approved of by the
whole body of Unpaid throughout England. Woe
to the man who, in any manner, comes into collision
with them in their capacity of Administrators of the
Game Levis ! Mr. Ainsworth denied that he had
not warned men of the danger they ran ; but this
would not do; Sir John was not to be baffled by
such an answer. " Did you speak to them in a mo-
ral sense—did you sneak to them of the inamorality
of such proceedingslo, And this is deciding „
evidence I However, let us hear Sir John himself
on the immorality
A keen eye and a strong I,
of **in ch g " For keeping
the Magistracy .
m
ancl.upon the poacher,
were entm
to greater credit