New-York tribune., 1870-02-07
lrpnM orR oYN CoRREsPONpENT. y

JoSDON Jan. 29--Mr. Dcey's final acceptance Oh
the editorshp of The Daily Necs is piece OF good
fortune for the propretors of that and for the
public. We Americans may be glad, for our part
that so important journal passes from the friendly
hands of Mr. Walker into others not less friendly.
Mr. Dicey is well known in America, which he mas
visited and written about, and to which he Is con-
nected by the closest of ties having married
quite recently a lady belonging to a ceie-
brated American family. He wrote about
us in days when most Englishmen Thought
"the States" fair game, and when lll'tem-
per, shallow criticism and ridicule were the staple
of most English books on America. MI Dicey was
not of that school. What he had to say about us
was fair manly, and moderate. That 1t was also
able need not be said to anybody who is familiar
with his other books of travel and with the different
series of letters he has contributed to another
journal during late years. Few men have
travelled more. and few Englishmen know the
Continent as Mr.. Dicey knows it from travel and
from study. In politics he is Liberal; he could not
otherwise be editor of The Daily N6Cs; and OF
Liberalism that is more than merely insular.
should like to say Radical instead OF Liberal, but
suppose the journal he takes charge of could not
bear a too Radical man, and Mr.. Dcey's tempera-
ment is not precisely that which leads him to
believe that his fellow-countrymen like 10
advance too quickly. He is trained Journalist,
deal of hard work, and that other not less
essential capacity of doing it rapidly and WELL Sue
ceeding Mr. Walker he has easy task if ne means
as of course he does mean to make The Daily Necs
stronger paper than ever. But no man eXhausts all
opportunities and it is quite open to Mr Dlcey 10
print better newspaper than at present exists ID
London lie has-presumably, from his long service
asacorrespondent-t appetite for news which
most English journals seem not TO have, and ln1er
from the way in which the place was pressed upon
him that he is to be absolute chief and may 90 as nc
likes with nh departments. He has youth on MS us
side being under 10 and energy, and the good Will
of many friends and every prospect oi the brilliant
success which wish him.
Some months ago commented upon what thought
the unbeconing conduct of the Bridgewater Election
Commissioners. in their dealings with MI. hlnglake
whom they had finally to exculpate and apologize
to-and with witnesses summoned before them IN his
case One OF these witnesses was Mr.. knglakes
agent and solicitor, Mr. Henry Lovibond. The Com
missoners thought it their duty to treat Mr.
Lovibond with peculiar severity; and although
he testified fully as to the election, they
finally refused him the certificate of indemnity and
protection to which he was entitled by the statute
In consequence. criminal proceedings were begun
AGAINST him. and there doubt that the testimony
given by Mr. Loyibond hmselfwas meant to be used
on his trial In these circumstances he applied to
the Court of Queens Bench for a mdnddmas TO COM
pei the Commissioners TO grant him the certificate
they had refused. The case was heard on Thursday
before the Lord Chief Justice and three other judges
with result probably surprising to the Commls-
soners and certainly gratifying to the public The
mGa9anus was granted, and the Commissioners have
no choice but TO issue the certificate.
1t is not from any liking fol- bribery or tenderness
for its agents that this decision is applauded The
pube interest in the suit out of the extraor
dinary circumstances of the Bridgewater investlga
ton. where the demeanor of the Commissioners was
such as TO shock most persons more than the reVel
tons about bribery The investigation was judicial
but the Commissioners assumed the part OF prOSecut
ing officers and treated witnesses with severity that
no counsel would think himself Justified IN adopt
ing toward the most hostile witness. The discus
sion on Thursday did not turn on precisely this
point the essential question being whether Mr.
Lovibond had testified fairly as to entitle him to
the certificate of indemnity. The Court held that he
had. but did not stop there. In fact, the
Commissioners were put on trial large part of the
proceedings aud especially their examination OF Mr.
Lovibond. was offered in evidence and read TO the
Court When the Chief-Justice came to give his de-
cesion he did not conceal his opinion of the methods
adopted by the Commissioners. He declared that
Mr.. Loyibond had been most unfairly and unjustly
dealt WITH and that the injustice TO him reached its
eliminating point in the refusal Of the certif-
cate 81 do not remember" said the Chief-Justice,
lever in the Of my experience to have heard
or heard of--such oross-examnation as that to
which he was exposed They commenced by telling
him to make his own statement; but from first to
last he is never allowed opportunity II might al
most saw of putting two sentences together Seldom
does il happen that question is put which he is al
lowed to answer without interruption from one or
other of the Commissioners
And again: Commenting upon more than one Of
the questions put by Mr.. Anstey, the Chief Justice
observed that they were put upon the assumption
chat the witness had said certain things, when in
fact he had said nothing Of the kind. And referring
20 the last observation of Mr. Anstey that the wit
ness had given his evidence in most disgraceful
manner the Lord Chief Justice said that this was
animadyersion entirely beyond the scope of the Com
nissioners' functions and, lie added with emphasis,
that though he would not say the term disgrace
full was altogether inopporture he did not think it
was to the witness that the remark ought to he ap-
Piled The other judges concured
Now this is a very uncommon incident. II is a
judicial censurc from the highest quarter men of
high character engaged in a duty very grave and
important and upon the right performance OF which
the credit Of the law against bribery may almost
be said to have depended. The effect of their action
at the time was, as / then said, TO impair the au-
thority of the law they were appointed TO execute
and almost TO neutralize the good moral effect of
such an exposure as was made of the practice of
bribery ia BIdgewater. Men felt that they could
bot endure such conduct the Bench as Mr.
Chisholm Anstey and his colleagues had exhibited.
1t needed the extraordinary condemnation OF it by
the high tribunal to which Mr. LOYibsnd was able TO
appeal TO restore, might say. public confidence in
the law that hads been rudey administered. The
IL, ,f -,