The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-01-20 00:00:00

CONT EMPORARY PRESS.

An unreformed House of Commons, within the me-
mory of many still alive, passed a resolution to theeffect
gig "The power of the Crown had increased, was in-
creasing. and ought to be diminished." Now, without
entering into any discussion as to the correctness or pro-
priety of this resolution at the time it passed, there are,
we should think, few men of ordinary intellect, of com -
mon education, or of common loyalty—few men, for
instance, above the intellectual level of Sir Samuel
Whalleyor Mr. Alderman Wood, persons whom common
courtesy, if not common report, , includes, nevertheless,
Within Aristotle's definition of the human animal—few
men above, and we can fancy none below, the moral
standard of Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey or Mr. Thomas
Duncombe—few men superior in loyalty to Mr. Joseph
Hume or Mr. Roebuck, who would not think that at the
present day the resolution alluded to, would be more con-
formable to truth and fact were the same proposition
affirmed not of the Crown but of the mob—the long-
eared multitude, the turpe pecks--such for instance as
surrounded the hustings at the late Westminster elec-
tion, such as constitutes the appropriate cortege of our
jacobin heroes, and the parties honteuses of the English
nation. There are indeed few things more utterly re-
volting to correct feeling, more, offensive to gdod taste,
more incompatible with common decency or common
sense, more like a jacobin and more unlike a gentleman
Than the tone of atrocious disloyalty and disrespect, re-
dolent of the dunghill and the dastard, in which the jaco-
bin school of political adventurers—a herd of political
dandies and political parasites, of broken-down gamblers
and reputed thieves, at once the froth and the filth of the
de'strnetives—presumes to allude to and to prate of the
royal dignity and the royal person. "One of this respect-
able confraternity, a protege and a parasite of " the Greek
d.-icoy. duck," tells a constituency worthy of himself "that
society has outlived the gothic institution of kingly go-
vernment, and that the kingly office is no longer neces-
sary." Another holds forth on the assumed possibility
of " removing" the monarch. In public journals and at
public meetings we meet with rebellious and regicide
allusions, with implied menaces, which are an outrage on
the feelings of every loyal subject. Who can read the
little-read columns of the Morning Chronicle, or the
but too-much-read columns of the Examiner, who can
read the late pamphlet of Mr. Edward Lytton Bulwer,
without a feeling made up of indignation and disgust—
without a conviction that the grand desideratum of the
t•
party is to tiring into contempt the authority and the
person of the Sovereign ? The object of those endea-.
yours, gradually? to pollute the public mind by assertions
or insinuations inimical or derogatory to the royal cha-
racter and dignity, is as obvious as it is odious.
. The nature and the tendency of those systematic viola-
tions of deCorum and of duty were exposed by one of the
-ablest and most eloquent men of the present day, the
Bishop of Exeter,- in a sermon preached before the Uni-
versity of Oxford thirty years ago.
- "True loyalty, like every other virtue, is not a mere deduc-
tion of our reason, but the combined result of reason and of
feeling. To lessen, therefore, the delicacy of this feeling, to hurt
the chastity of loyal principle, by habituating men's minds to
bear the greatest violations of it treated with indifference, is in
itself no trifling mischief, and is erntrary to the wise principles
of mankind in relation to all the liner virtues."

Those systematic writers and speakers of sedition,
thosa habitual traducers of the monarchical and aristo-
cratical principles of the constitution, might perhaps
effect as much mischief as they purpose, were not the:
means which they employ to the immense majority of
Englishmen as offensive as the object which they pursue
is infamous. But, fortunately, as has been well observed
by one of the many gentlemen who have lately inflicted
so Much wholesome chastisement on Mr. Edward Lytton
Bulvver, " there is in the very idea of wickedness a large
proportion of elementary and essential folly. Wicked-
't:iess of opinion is stupidity of opinion, exactly as wicked
ness in action is folly in action. Hence it happens that
bad men are not always so mischievous as they might be,
because their necessary want of sense hinders them from
finding out the best way of accomplishing their ends."
Horne Tooke—who belonged to the same respectable
adhOol of politicians as the Lushingtons, Roebucks, Har
vevs, O'Connells, and the other joints of the radical
tail—who possessed more intellect than all the party from
Lord Durham to Mr Hume, and who was as intimately
acquainted with the habits, manners, and principles of
-the dregs of society, "the swell mob of his day," as Mr.
Bulwer, or " Paul Clifford" of those of the present— and
Probably fcr the same reason—Horne Tooke has said
" that he knew his countrymen well, and would rather be
governed by twenty gentlemen from St. James's than by
one blackguard from St. Giles's." We most cordially
participate in this opinion. The degradation of the con-
stituency necessarily involves the degradation of the re-
presentative,. and from the constituencies created in
the city of London, in the metropolitan boroughs, and
in the great manufacturing towns of the kingdom, by
the operation of the £lO, clause, what could be antici-
pated but a deterioration in the character of public men,
and a corresponding diminution in the moral weight and
influence of the reformed House of Commons ? Take
the worst specimens of the worst or weakest men ever
returned by the Scrums or Gattons, or other effete and
superannuated reliques of the old SyStem, and compare
them with such thing's in mental, moral, or personal es-
timation as the Woods, Duncombes, Harveys, Lushing-
tons, Humes, and a multitude of others whom it would
be an easy but a revolting task to enumerate from the
dissolved and dispised House of Conunons; or, on the
other hand, take the opposite extreme, take the best and
brightest specimens returned under the "rotten" sys-
tem, and the brightest genius that advocated the demora-
lizing £lO clause sinks into comparative obicurity,; or
his proudest boast must be that he bears the same remote
and burlesque resemblance to his rival that a monkey
does to a man. Lord Monboddo would have apologized
to the monkey for the implied,, though imperfect, resem-
blance.—Morning Post.

LIVERPOOL EPIPHANY SESSIONS.-FRIDAY.

LIBEL CASE.

(Before the MAYOR, RECORDER, and Mr. Alderman BerrlNE.)
George Thompson was arraigned for having on the 27th of
December published a scandalous and malicious libel of and
concerning Dr. Mackenzie, the editor of the Liverpool Journal.
The prisoner said that he was "guilty, as the printer, but
without intent to do any harm." The plea of not guilty was
entered.

FRANCIS STACK MURPHY, Esq., barrister at law; then ad-
dressed the jury, for Dr. Mackenzie, to the following effect:—
Gentlemen of the jury, the prisoner has pleaded "not guilty"
to an indictment charging hint with publishing a foul, scan-
dalous, and malicious libel on Robert Shelton MaCkenzie my
client. I am sorry to see that old man in the dock. Mackenzie,
to God we could drag the real slanderer to light, and put him
in that dock, iu the place of this poor old man. 1 beaeve he
has toll suu truly that he had no hand in concocting the libel
with the publication of which he stands charged. I acquit him
of malice; he stands before you instead of another person who
skulks behind in cowardly concealment, and does not choose
to place himself in the prisoner's place, as the author of the
libel. Geutiemen, it may be esked, why did Dr. Mackenzie
resort to this , mode of prosecution, instead of commencing an
action at law, and thereby allowing Thompson an opportunity
of justifying the libel, if he could? I need only refer you, for
an answer, to the condition of the prisoner. The state in
which he stands before you is a substantive answer. Do you
think that a person who could not get bail furnished for him
by his despicable employers—who do not even allow him the
means of being assisted by counsel—do you think that there
was any chance that, from him, Dr. Mackenzie had the slight-
est prospect of damages. He seeks none. lie enters into
this prosecution with no vindictive feelings, but from a natural
desire to vindicate his character. lie does not resort to the
more expensive mode of procedure, when he can obtain his end
by the more summary and less expensive process. Ile allows
the prisoner to justify, if he cati. Gentlemen, You are doubt-
less aware that, in this town, politict ran high pending the
election. When it was in contemplation to put two gentlemen
on the reform interest—to associate another eandidete- with
Mr. Evart, who has since been elected—a circular was sent to
the acknowledged friends of reform, inviting them to attend a
meeting at the Clarendon-rooms. The gentlemen of the liberal
press, in the interest of the reform candidates, were, of course,
invited to attend. As the business to be transacted at that
meeting had reference to future proceedings, secrecy was neces-
sary, and accordingly, in addition to the exclusion of the editor
of the Liverpool Standard—a tory paper—the reporters present
consented to promise that they would not report any portion of
the proceedings. This was a natural precaution, for it would
have been injudicious to disclose to the enemy any part of the
tactics of the reformers. Notwithstanding the care taken, by
some means nr other a report of the proceedings appeared in
the Standard published next after the ineetiug—or rather what
purported to be a report of the proceedings—in which the dif-
ferent speakers were introduced. The first and most natural
conclusion was that some one had betrayed confidence; but, on
reflection, the nature of the report led to a more rational con-
clusion respecting its real origin, as witnessed by the manage-
anent of the Standard. You know, gentlemen, that, at one
speriod, Ur. Johnson, with that ingenuity which distinguished
ohim, was su enabled to -copy the style of different speakers, that
for a considerable period, on merely learning who had spoken
in parliament, he, with a previous knowledge of their senti-
'merits and of their style of speaking, wrote a series of reports
'which were received by the public as the true transcripts of
'What was said, Gentlemen, it is not wonderful that, newspaper
writing and reporting having received so many improvements—
knowing the sentiments of your leading townsineu—kuowing
their accustomed modes of expression—knowing the usual part
-they take in public politics—the editor of the Standard, by the
aid of his ability and ingenuity, (which I believe are eensider-
able,) should have composed a report so plausible as to appear
real. But the best proof that my client did not and could not
furnish the report in question is, that at a subsequent meeting,
which he did not attend, a report; similar in tendency and style,
was published in the Standard, which Dr. Mackeneit: could not,
'by any possibility, have furnished. This fact is damnetory of
the whale charge in the impudent libel before me. I shall read
one lice from that libel': it says, "But the sagacity of the doc-
tor is on a par with his honesty." It says that he should have
bound the enemy to keep his counsel. Do you think, gentle-
men, that Dr. Slackenzie, who, from many years' experience
as an editor, must be well acquainted with the carious ramifi-
cations through which the authorship of newspaper articles and
correspondence is almost certain to creep out into notoriety-
-do you, gentlemen, think him so utterly deficient in sagacity as
to place liiinself in the power o the Liverpool Standard, by the
circumstance with which this slanderer charges him? But
there is another point. You will find it in evidence that when
the prisoner was apprehended, almost the first words Dr. Mac-
kenzie sail, were, "Give up the authors of this slander, and I
will let you go free!" But the prisoner stood the brunt for his
employers. He stands beret, they represent, as a martyr to the
liberty of the press, because they who got him into trouble
would not give bail for his appearance,--they kept him in pri-
zone-eand, boast as they may of his martyrdom, they have
caused it. Gentlemen, I shah now read the libel which, as you

will perceive, is couched in language the most gross, and evi-
dently intended to do Dr. Mackenzie injury in that professional
character, which stands so'high, and which must be all in all to
him. And I would say, under correction by your learned
recorder, that if, instead of words written—which r oustitutes a
libel—those words had been spoken, they are so slanderous that,
even without a plea of special damage, they would be.indictable
as tending to bring him into disrepute with the publishers of the
Liverpool Journal, by whom he earns his bread, and who, I may
say, are satisfied %, ith his talents and his conduct. Gentlemen, the
libel is headed, ‘._' Who is the Traitor?" a question sufficiently
notori,)us from a -late business in the House of Commons, in
which two eminent men were concerned. It then proceeds
thus—[Mr. Murphy proceeded to read the libel, remarking, as
he proceeded, on the grossness of its charges, and the degraded
character of its style. He then resumed.]—l have now read
this filthy libel for you, and as your learned recorder will in-
struct you, the article, taken in its natural and common sense,
and intelligible to the plain sense of the ordinary capacity of
an individual, will leave no doubt on your mind that it does
contain a foul and false libel--intended to stigmatise the cha-
racter of my client. It may be asked, why Dr. Mackenzie,
himself an editor, and, therefore, aware of the length to which
personal attacks may be and are carried, should be so very sen-
sitive as to this attack on himself? It is because, in two re-
spects, it exceeds what I may call the courtesy of newspaper
warfare. It imputes to him what, as a private individual, no
man could commit and ever again hold up his bead in society.
It imputes to him what, in his public capacity, must not be
charged against any man. On both grounds, then, he was
bound to notice it :—as a private gentleman, and also as a pro-
fessional character. The press has taken a noble, and, I may
add, an useful part in the politics of this country—giving health,
and strength, and Purity to whatever is foul in the aspect and
nature of, things. The press is the organ of various communi-
cations, by the authors of which unbounded secrecy is confided
in the editors, and it is necessary that the honour of the con-
ductors of the press be without suspicion—for this is the gua-
rantee which the public and individuals have, that their confi-
dence is not bestowed in vain. Geutlemen, my client demands
compensation at your hands when some cowardly ruffian, who
dares not come forward, attacks him in a base and cowardly
libel. And, gentlemen, independent of the injury to my client,
I put to you, whether you will, by your verdict, uphold a pub-
lication of this scandalous nature, or whethet you will show that,
in circumstances like the present, you will throw the protection
of justice over the individual who may be slandered? You are
fathers—you have wives—you have daughters—for their sakes
let your verdict decide on the existence of this literary nuisance.
Do you wish to have the private transactions of your lives held
tip to ridicule—and that would be to libel you? Are there not
moments when you unbend from the serious avocations of busi-
ness—and do you wish to be 'at the mercy of any servant who
will misrepresent the most innocent words and communicate
his information to any nameless retailer of slander ? I ask who
is safe, if this pest continues? I ask you for a verdict of
" Guilty."

.fames Moore Fisher examined.—l am a clerk in the
shop of Messrs. Rockliff and Duckworth, the proprietors of the
Liverpool Journal. I know that Dr. Mackenzie is editor of that
paper. I know the prisoner, and saw him, on December 27th,
in his own shop, when I went to purchase the copy of Paul Pry
I now produce. His young wan sold it to me, he being also
behind the counter.

The libel was then read by the Town-clerk, and compared
with the indictment by Messrs. Venables and Rushton. It was
to the effect, that to have furnished the report to the Standard
made any man "deserving of having the finger of scorn pointed
at him during the remainder of his life." It added, that the
" most hardened criminal that ever expiated his offences at Ty-
burn was never guilty of anything 'more infamously base and
dishonest." It concluded by charging Dr. Mackenzie with
"this black and damning act of moral turpitude and un-
paralleled infamy," and of having received five guineas for the
same.

Dr. Mackenzie was then examined by Mr. Murphy.—Are you
the editor of the Liverpool Journal'? I am.—Are you the per-
son named in the libel? Yes.—Are the charges false? Wholly.
—lf you knew the author of that article would you be tempted
to commit a breach of the peace on his person ? Unquestion-
ably.—Did you ever contribute to the Standard? I did : I
wrote a letter, calling on the editor's sense of j ustice to disavow
the charges made against rue, and he published a strong denial
that I ever had reported that or anything else for the Stand-
ard.

By the Court.—And the imputations in the libel are false?
Tbey are. Except the letter I have mentioned, I !fever wrote
a line for the Standard.

The prisoner being called on for his defence, said,—l have a
difficulty ia addressing the Court, for I am ignorant of the forms
of the law, and of the practice of the Courts. I place myself in
your hands. I have been in business for thirty years, and never
before was charged with a crime. I have laboured under great
difficulties. We have had to contend with another thing--with
a periodical published in Ireland, and which has stkuck at my
business. It contains libels of the most gross nature. The
counsel has *pealed to you, as fathers, and said that you have
wives and daughters; but I say, that the public receives greater
injury from another work,—from Kelly,—from " Paddy Kelly's
Budget." It has injured me most materially. Gentlemen,
the next consideratiou is, I have been in prison for twenty days,
(To some one who made some remark,—" Sir, I have not been
in college.") I have been locked up thirteen hours a day, after
dark, in an open place, with a stone floor. I have got a com-
plaint in my eyes in conseauence. I have nothing to say
against the persons in authority in gaol. I have been treated
with all the kindness the prison discipline allowed. I throw
myself upon the mercy of the Court.
The Rucon DER then addressed the Jury. They could have
uo doubt that the publication in question was a libel, and a very
gross one. It was a scurrilous and inflammatory libel. As Mr.
Murphy had said, the words, even if spoken, would have been
libellous. The inueudos were proved,—their falsehood was
'fully proved also.
The Jury, after a moment's consultation, gave a verdict of
Guilty.
Mr. MURPHY then said he was requested by Doctor Macken-
zie to say, that as his object was to punish the Triter of the
libel, and as he had no vindictive feeling towards Thompson,'
he was willing that he should be discharged on his own recog-
iiizances.

The RECORDER.—There is no doubt that the tendency of the
libel is such as might lead to a breach of the peace. The hu-
mane offer u hick Doctor Mackenzie has made in your behalf
(addressing the prisoner) is highly creditable to him. Under
the law, you are liable, as publisher, to be imprisoned for a con-
siderable period. The Court, taking Doctor Mackenzie's re-
commendation into consideration, will allow you to enter into
your own recognizances, to appear fur judgment if called upon.
Mr. McaPfir.—lf he repeats the offence, he shall be brought
up.
The COURT--You are indebted much to the rlemefi-ey of the
prosecutor. You must put an end to this publication. You
must enter into recognizances, yourself in £5O, to appear before
the Mayor and-Magistrates, to have such punishment awarded
you as they may think fit.
The prisoner -then bowed to the Court, and to the prosecutor,
and left the dock.