The Sun. — 1863-04-27 (London, England)

THE LAW TIMES.—The decision of the Full Court in the case of Campbell against the Saturday Review is of very grave importance. There can be no doubt that it has seriously curtailed the liberty of the press. As defined by the Court of Queen's Bench, the right of free commentary upon the public conduct of public men is practically destroyed. The ruie as now laid down may be thus briefly stated : you may criticise the public acts of public men, but you may not impute motives. This seems as first sight a rule as reasonable as it is simple; but all who have had any experience in writing articles for newspapers on men and things, which must be treated of with a rapid pen and Ino time allowed for deliberation, will know the almost impossibility of observing the distinction between acts and motives, so that it shall not be a question for the caprice or prejudices of a jury. Extreme cases illustrate the insufficiency of rules. Let us see how this alarming one would work when stretched to its limits. According to the new decision, you may say that Palmer killed Cooke, but you must not say that he murdered him, unless you are prepared to prove by positive evidence that it was a murder. You may say that B. broke into a house, but not that he did so with intent to steal. You might say of Sir John Dean Paul that he sold the debentures intrusted to him, but not that he did so wrongfully, because that would be to impute a motive, which is a libel. You may say that a minister gave a good place to an M.P., whoiimmediately thereupon crossed the floor of the House, and from being an opponent became a supporter of the Ministry ; but if you say that the place and the change of party were cause and effect, you impute a corrupt motive, and that would be a libel, unless you can prove the existence of the motive, which is of course impossible. If the law is to be as it is now interpreted, the words " job," " corruption," " bribery," and indeed the entire list of political offences, must be banished from the political dictionary ; no newspaper will dare to risk them, however gross the offence, or great the public interest in the denunciation of it. Not the least of the unhappy consequences of this decision is, that it will restore the detestable practice of criticism by inuendo.  named picture, one of the very few wholly satisfactory works:resulting:from the infinite labours of the Royal Commission of Fine Arts. It will scarcely be believed that this noble painting, upon which the artist has expended several of the best years of his life, has been actually covered up with clothe, in order that its colouring may not mar the effect of the architectural designs! Thus it has been for some weeks, and thus it is proposed to be for some weeks to come. On Saturdays the pubito is admitted to see the paintings in the houses, while now the most important of them is covered up. Good taste and respect for the artist should have prevented this thing. Independent of the slight thus offered to him, a serious annoyance must be inflicted upon Mr. Maclise, if the designs are exhibited as arranged, by bringing crowds of persona and their accompaniments of dust and noise, for weeks together into an apartment which is actually his studio, where he is working for the nation daily and all day long. The authorities ought to remove the designs into Westminster Hall or Burlington House.