Star.
London, England, 1830-11-25 00:00:00

THE LATE MINISTRY.

The following paragraph is from a threepentry tract, pub-
lished by CA RuLE, entitled "The Prompter." We do not
know how highly the Duke of Wellington may appreciate
judgment from such a quarter, even when eulogistic; but
we give the paragraph as a curiosity, and containing much
truth :--

" The late Ministers were precisely such men u the Aristocracy of
the country had need to keep in office, and their overthrow in the House
of Commons is an evidence that the Aristocracy is losing its power,
amidst the distresses and consequent desperation of the people, the dif-
ficulties of the Government, and the growing force of public opinion,
excited by the late examples] of France and Brussels. The acts of the
late Ministers are now a part of the history of the Aristocracy; and,
considering all things, they were not more obnoxious than any Admi-
nistration that had preceded them. The last did not copy all the
faults of former Administrations, nor did it increase the number. Ex-
cepting the very natural, aristocratically natural, declaration of the
Duke of Wellington against all reform of the House of Commons, his
opponents may be challenged to state a fault in his political character
as a minister of the Aristocracy. The clamour that has been raised
:,gainst him has been an unfair clamour, and should have been directed
against the system which the Duke had inherited, and had been pledged
ir preserve, and not against the minister and the man. The end of
tlisinheriting him, and of shaking the system, would have been equally
obtained, and by more honourable means. In office, the Duke has
been a most industrious, and a most kind and polite man, dying
what no minister ever did before him, in answering kindly, with his own
hand, all the civilly written, though often silly letters, which are
heaped upon a man in such an office. No jack-in-office, of any de.
glee, has laboured in office as the Duke has laboured, and honestly
laboured, in a consistent and open support of that which he had under.
taken to support, Enemies as well as friends have found from him the
same attention. The difference of pledge excepted, it is very doubtful
whether we shall find a better-hearted man filling the office. The next
Minister must take office under.other pledges; sod if the Duke would

have yielded to the necessities of the people, instead of supporting the'
wanton resistance of the Aristocracy to those necessities, his states-
manship at home would have eclipsed his generalship abroad. With
some apology fur Lord Goderich, the Duke is the best-hearted and
bonestest man that has filled that office in England. There is nothing
to be gained but honour, nothing evinced but fair play, in a defence
of a defeated administration, which we should not have defended had
it remained in office. We see too clearly the difficulties that any fu-
ture administration has to contend with. in its efforts to prop the pre-
sent system, and none that shall be formed will exist three months
together with lee unpopularity than that which fell to the lot of the
last. The Duke has beer. a brave man in office, as well uin the field;
his error has been a falling into the circumstance of not sufficiently
knowing the badness of the system he had to defend, and the strength
of the necessity for change that had been formed in the public mind.
The successful soldier has been defeated in the Cabinet. Had the
Duke thrown himself among the people, and could he have found the
King's consent so to do, he would have been the greatest man of the
day or of history."

LdW REPORTS.
COURT OF ICING'SBENCH, Nov. 23.
IN ERROR.
WZLLESLET T. NZ W. DZ CIZSPIOSY.
This man action to recover damages against Mr. Wellesley for the
publication of a libel of and concerning Sir W. de Crespigny, Bath
The declaration contained many counts, and several pleas of justified.,
were alleged. fhe judgment of the Court below was against the de.
fendant on those pleas of justification. The cause then went for der.
mages. A general verdict was found for the plaintiff, Sir W. de Cres.
pigny, and the damages assessed at one thousand pounds. A writ of
error was then brought, and the plaintiff in error alleged there were two
defective counts in the declaration.
Mr. PLATT now contended that the libel which contained a chop
that the father of W. de Cresp4ny bad been guilty of an illicit inter.
course with Miss .—.—. had not pointed out the person of the lady
in a way to constitutes libel. It was, he said, a charge of illicit inter.
course with a Miss Nobody. (A laugh.) The dash after the word
Miss left the reader in the dark as to the person, and consequently it
was not a libel.
The Coons were unanimously of opinion that the charge had been
distinctly made in the declaration, and gave judgment for Sir W. De
Crespigny. They were clearly of opinion there was no ground to reverse
thejudgment of the Common Pleas.