New-York tribune., 1870-04-09


stand for right at least valuable and III greater
| peril
| Inxnox March 2G.--The Coercion bill passed
| ,brorgb Committee last night minority, incon-
siderable in numbers but strong in the justice oi their
couse and the Justice which the future Will 90 them,
uravailngly sought TO modify the most op9ection-
able clauses. Mr. Lynau's amendment proposing to
omit from fhc Press clause all mention OF treason ana
! soditop--leaving agrarian crime to he summarily
! dealt with-was rejected by $50 to 10. Among the
| minority were five English Liberals and two Con-
servatyes the Liberals including Mr. Jacob Bright,
| SIR CHARLES Dixie. and Mr. Fawcett This was fol-
| lowed by motion from Mr. Bouverie, who proposed
to retain the treason but strike out sedtion, which
he well said was crime incapable of definition. and
! consisting of whatever the Government OF the day
! did not like. The Government resisted this rs
strenuousy as the other but tho vote showed "a
great increase in the minority, standing SO TO o.
| Mr. Wentworth Beaumont Mr.. jacob bright
| Mr Bouyerie, Mr.. Alderman Carter OF Leeds'
| Mr. Joseph Cowan. the Hon. George Denlnah. OF
| Charles Dixie, Mr.. Fawcett Mr.. L. A. Leathah,
Mr.. Muntz. one of Mr.. Brights colleagues and
! Mr. McCullagh Torrens. all of whom are EhgIISh
Liberals voted for Mr.. Bouveries amendment. oHo
is sorry not to find certain other names, put tne Hi
norty as it stands Is a formidable one The Govern
ment whip was very severe, and English pubic
I
terror on Irish questions, was more severe stili'
! Many men who believe il their hearts diSapproye
the bill. have voted steadily for it. They dare not
! face tbe fury to which the Government Itself mas
Welded The discussion in Committee, although
backed by plain symptoms of uneasiness on the part
of the English Press has modified the Press Clauses
i'm only one important particular. Mr. Magmre ttIeu
70 Obtain for the newspapers that TO be crushed
the Door favor of three warnings. He could find but
! nineteen supporters. The Government finally
/ agreed that ono warning should be syen-one thrd
of the number which even French despotlsm mas
! allowed to French journals. We'll might MI
! McCullagh Torrens say that the night honoIaOle
gentlemen at the head Of the Government had taken
! up the cast-ofT clothes of the French Emperor.
By far the cearest exposition OF the biz and pro-
test against it are to be found in the letter of Mr.
! Alexander NJ Sullivan the editor Of The Dublin Nd
ton. printed in The Times Of Yesterday. But for its
great length would ask yOp 10 reprint in full and
Willingly give up the rest OF my letter to an anal
ysis OF Mr. Sulliyans and to extracts which hope
may present tho substance of his exceedingly able
statement lie begins by pointing out the loosencSs
with which the bill is drawn and the classes OF en-
trely innocent persons who may be embraced within
its mercilcss scope.
According to Clause 81 the entire property found in
or about the premises wherein was published news
paper considered by Tie Crown Off a to nave contained
sc6on ,s "iorfeited 70 Her MAJESTY" The property
may worth many thousands OF pounds ana no pen
worst sedition" during our generation has reached
half Thousand pounds The property may be owned by
a person other than the proprietor OF the paper suspected
of the tendency :" the property may be quite distinct
from any plant really appertaning TO- or even used IN
connection with, the Journal suspected OF tendency
the OF the property may have Aad no Wal,Ig or
notice Of any opinion in ne minds OF tne OI"wm %fa5'
al rdd G 10 er sty and as we shall see by Clause 80
| M refTp II
erty did belong 10, and ncYer had been used IN con-
WITH the journal suspected Here is the clause
27 Where any newspaper printed in ireland contains
sons any indictments 10 the committing OF any felony
or any engraving, matter, or expressions having leu
deucy foster encourage or propagate treason or sed
on or to inclto the committing OF any felony, all
printing presses engines ndchDery types, implements
utensils paper, and other pant and materials used or
employed, intended 10 be used o: employed ir Tor
found IN or or about ahy premises where such neS'apcr
printed published, together with all copies oi snch
81 iId " circniaicd nv Ireland and contains any such
engraving, matter expressions Or indictments as ai0G,
be Ia'fi forfeited lei TO Her Majesty" '''''
The following clause goes even further:
Clause directly and expressly authorizes the Crown
officials TO ruin printing establishment wherein may
sympathzed with and merely on the ground Of susp-
con" by those Crown officials that some coes oi the
paper may have been kept there Tor distribution or
Under this clause, in addition 10 the establishment
g. To- So nay any number ~ printing establishments. at
tire property therein found may absolutely confscatcd
without redress The proprietors may be persons heartily
EeTef have lad copy Of II in their estabihhcnjs they
may ind vduas have been loud in their declarations
that had the alleged tendency" Nevertheoss the
act authorizes the cOuscatOn OF every shilling worth
fonnd on their premises If 1t pleascs Crown officials
merely suspect that SOME copies OF the paper had
been kept III those places no matter by Whonl Tor ais
The "sispicion' may be all mistake blunder de-
ef hS oT %T5 pdea Si aeSy SaTeTRe there be DSo NO
redress for the propretois thus robbed The act au-
officials aud expressly orbids tho procedure for
redress any ground save oncnaney that the matter
in the paper had not the alleged tendency"
MI Sullivan quotes the clause III full but it is long,
and as nobody has ventured to say the cause is not in
the bill OF does not do what he says it does may
omit it here. He proceeds:
Clause 80 lays down the grounds which damages may
be brought against the Crown officials, and expressly
states only ground which damages shall
be obtained -nanely, finding by the Jury that the
alleged. The ruined man must night the-Goyernment
aud the public Treasury and falling n9anlnlty n the
his unsuccessful suits There need be no verdict for
the Crown ia the case to insure his Deggay one juror
! for the Crown will be sufficient.
After quoting the sd clause, Mr.. Sullivan thus de-
! scIibes its effect:
Whatever may pretended the public stage before
aware this offer of redress by trial after execution
the unreal and msy vail ever used to hide ugly
| GCspOtisn. III HOcheIy AL men KNOW WHO
know the manner IN which juries are manipulated In
ca cases here IN Ireland, and the case with which the
Gown have convictions against Irish newspapers.
beeveshere cannot be named In 0years out OF the
prosecutions instituted within that time, even
case In which the Crown failed to obtain verdict against
an Irish newspaper whether for treasonelony or sedi
ton As the law now stands the Crown can select any u
of its bias the panel to try the Journalist ac
cused of sedtiOn that Is TO say The Crown has an u-
limited right absolute challenge while the accused In
snch allowed such right at all Thus, jurors
answer to their names the Crown can II necessary put
of As and keep the II men whom II had picked for s
purposes conviction Such is the law. Yet IN the face
of snch lacts Crown ooals seek for power u nct