Opiniana of tijc

MILITARY FLOGGING.

MonxiNG HrstAuo—Soon after his present Majesty came to the Throne, the public were informed by tome of the Journals that affect to be acquainted. with much of what passes behind the curtains of Cabinets and Courts, that the King had expressed a decided aversion to the cruel and degrading punishment of military flogging, and wished to have it abolished. As to the sentiments of Whig patriots on the subject, they were long ago known to the public by their speeches and their votes ; but unfortunately the sentiments of office are different from those that were cherished in " oppositien." If it were r.-)t- co, we should not, in this the third year of a Whig Administration, see public opinion braved and shocked by the application of the British knout to the back of the British soldier. And then a sentence of five hundred lashes. According to the present military system, it is, of course, quite legal, notwithstanding that the once Ultra-Liberal Sir John Hobhouse was, during the greater part of two Sessions of Parliament, .Secretary at War. The Court-martial who sentenced the unfortunate man to that amount of torture, and the laceration consequent upon it, did no more than what they were authorized to do by the regulations of the service; but our Reforming Ministers stood pledged to the reform of a mode of punishment that disgraces our military system ; and if it does not find the English soldiers brutes, is calculated to make them so. It appears that of the five hundred lashes only two hundred were &Inn- nistered at the one time—and why ? The surgeon felt it his duty to interpose. We have it on the authority of a Ministerial Paper, that " a fresh hand was provured at every twenty lashes, but not a sigh or a groan escaped the unhappy object. After he had received two hundred lashes, without a murmur, Mr. Harrison, the surgeon of the regiment, went up to the man, and, from what he observed, gave orders to stop the punishment." It is added, that he-was ther . taken in a coach to the Military Hospital in Rochester Row, when theproper applications were made to his back, " which was most dreadfully lacerated." We hope there i8. some misrake in the statement -which says a fresh hand was procured at every twenty lashes. But whether there be or not, the interposition of the surgeon at the end of two hundred lashes shows that the man was flogged until there was danger of his life if the punishment were proceeded with. It is the duty of the surgeon to watch the agonies of the writhing wretch, and to take care to stay the uplifted arm of the drummer at that point of suffering when there as peril of the torture breaking in upon the very sources of existence. What a duty for science to perform ! what a spectacle for humanity to witness.

LIBERTY OF THE PRESS;

STANDARD—The press has done much good in this country, no: doubt : but how much of this good would have been lost, were it not for that understood abeyance of the law, which, as Goldsmith remarks, in his" Citizen of the World," constitutes the chief part of an English- man's freedom. The whole of the last century has, n fact, presented a struggle between the manly good sense, and generous hatred of per- secution that used to characterize the people of England on the one side, and this legacy of a barbarous and despotic age, the libel code, on the other ; but we peed say the less upon this point, because the Whigs are now in power—because the Whigs are committed by ten thousand declarations, as well as by their own practice, to an amelioration of the libel code; and because, as we have' we had almost said unfortunately, no censorship to be removed, these declarations of the Whigs must he understood to relate to something more than the removal of a censer- ship. What is that something more to be ? We can say at once what it ought to be—the placing of writers and persons connected with the press, exactly on the same footing as to responsibility for their actions with all other persons. In the phrase, "the liberty of the press," so often used, and which we have employed freely above, there is a gross fallacy. The press is not free, nor ever will.-be free, until acts done by writing and printing are to be judged by the same fair rule of construc- tion as all other acts. While to write and to print upon any but the most indifferent matters were considered substantive crimes, the bare relaxation of a censorship might be hastily acknowledged as a concession to the liberty of the Press; but it is idle to call the Press free now,

when, though free from a censorship, it is encumbered with vicarious responsibility and constructive malice, and' all the other monstrous fic- tions of the libel code, from which every other department of human

conduct is free We, therefore, exhort the public not to content themselves with a mere idle declaration in favour of the liberty of the Press ; but in whatever reform is to be made, to get rid of the whole fraudulent machinery of the libel code, viz., constructive respon- sibility, constructive cognizance, or, which is the same thing, constrec- five malice, and constructive publication.

LORD DURHAM'S PROSECUTIONS.

MORNING POST—A story was told some time ago in a provincial. paper, tbat Lord Durham, driving through a certain village, his property, and being incommoded by some accidental obstructions in his passage,. so far forgot the proverbial temperance which distinguishes his character., as to order the said village, thus detected in flagrant dear, to.be

diately " swept from the face of the t This a 'emote a a; copies into some London papers. It seems that Lord Durham, " in truth and in fact," has not driven through the village—has not been incommoded by any accidental obstructions therein—and has not tittered a syllable of the terrible sentence which has been reported to have fallen from his lips. All this is commonplace enough. An editor is hoaxed into the statement of something vehich is not true; be retracts the statement as soon as he ascertains its untruth ; but the more tragical part of the tale is yet behind. The Whig Solicitor-General, itistructed by the Whig Earl, has applied fora rule to show cause why a criminal informa- tion should not be tiled against the publisher of the provincial paper in which this libel first appeared, and against the publishers of the John Bull

and Standard, who have dared to give it additional circulation. We do not well understand why Lord Durham is so incensed at the imputation of these evil designs against the village of Philadelphia. Philadelphia is Lord Durham's property ; Philadelphia is upon Lord Durham's estate. If it interferes with a desirable improvement, or mars a beautiful pros- pett —if the publican is an experienced poacher, or the curate an obsti- nate Conservative—we do not see why Lord Durham should not forth- with prepare his order of removal. Now, if an intention is imputed to any man of doing that which is not necessarily criminal, we do not say the imputation is not a libel, but we do say it is a libel which the friend of freedom, the patron of the press, the Peer who "goes along with the people," will hardly venture to complain of in Westminster Hall. The fact is, that Lord Durham, in prosecuting those whom he calls the libellers of his private character, is punishing those who have been the fearless assailants of his public conduct. It is not because lie is accused of demolishing a village, but because he is accused of ruining a nation, that he seeks, by aid of the eloquence of Sir John Campbell, the friendly interference of Sir Thomas Denman. We -congratulate our contemporaries upon the testimony which is borne by this angry man to tht ir integrity and independence. Let not Lord Durham flatter himself that by the vengeance he is now preparing to inflict he will succeed in silencing the rep000fs which his guilt and folly have deserved. If our Bench were corrupt, as the Whigs have not yet made it—if our Jury-box were servile, as the Whigs have not yet found it—there would still be Englishmen ready to denounce, through all pains and perils, the demagogue among Lords and the Lord among demagogues, the country's worst citizen' and the King's worst subject. As for Philadelphia, it is much to be congratulated on the discussion of which it is the subject. Instead of being "swept from the face of the earth" it is immortalized. The salvation of Philadelphia will be as eternal as the destruction of Troy. The hero of the one epic, to be sure, will not resemble in all respects the hero of the other ; for, though all men know that Lord Durham is, like Achilles,

Impiger, iraetnalus, inexorabills, acer,

no man will say, who witnesses his exploits in the King's Bench and elsewhere, that Lord Durham, like Achilles,

Jura negat sibi nuts.; rail non arro,gat amis.

TRUE SUN—Lord Durham is the last man in England who has any occasion to adopt extraordinary means of vindicating his name, and protecting his character from aspersion. The extraordinary hatred borne towards him by the Tories, must ever be much more effectual in preserving his honour and reputation unimpaired, than any verdict that he may obtain under the libel-law, can possibly be. He has the best of all guarantees in his favour—the unqualified detestation of the Tories. That ought to be his fame and glory—his best and only answer to all questioners. A Lord who is so cordially bated by the Tories, must have something in him which Liberals ought to love ; and, in exact proportion to the extent of their abhorrence, should be our re- spect and admiration. As their malignity and abuse grow more virulent, our confidence should deepen and become more earnest : and it would, if Lord Durham himself did not take extraordinary pains to render the testimony of his enemies unavailing, and his own acts and words less convincing than they ought to be. By this single step of the prosecu- tion, he mows down many hopes, neutralizes many active evidences of good, and throws over his whole character a Wniggishness that obscures and debases it. What tribute to the fame of the Earl of Durham, as the framer of the Reform Bill, could ever be more satisfactory and complete, than the following, copied from the Morning Post of to-day ! —no compliment ever carried more weight with it. "Let not Lord Durham flatter himself," &c. [as quoted in the preceding extract.1 In fact, the original framer of the Reform Bill! That is the phrase into which every body will at once translate the Post's "worst citizen and Worst subject! "

COURIER.—We have great respect for Lord Durham's political principles; we have quoted the evidence of his private virtues; and we regret to see him have recourse to an unpopular law—not to vindicate his-character, for it needed no vindication, but to punish some presumed libellers. We are very ready to believe, from the testimony of Lord Durham's own lips, that he was not that harsh, and arrogant, and yin- alictite nobleman, which his enemies described. We referred a few -days * with groat pleasure to his allusion to his own family, and to the testimony borne by his brother, as decisive proofs that he deserved to beloved in private as he Was respected in public ; and we, therefore, regret claire than we can express, to see him institute a prosecution whickgives the semblance of a justification to the charges of his ene- Mies. The world will now suppose that they were not so erroneous. Of course, Lord Durham is aware, or ought to be aware, as the libel law to which he has recourse, equally affects all the Press—as what is done to the Standard to-day may be done to the Globe to-morrow- that all the Press, must of necessity, for its own sake, for consistency's sake be against this application of the unjust libel law. He may, as we have before remarked, fail, from some technical defect, in his ob- ject; and then, Without any advantage whatever, he will have all the opprobium of seeking to put into execution a- law which his party have denounced, and which it is made a reproach to them that they have not yet repealed. Instead of enacting and keeping up libel laws against the Press, it is the duty of every Government which is a Government of the people, to allow it the utmost latitude. By its means alone can such a Government hope to learn those senti- ments by which it must regulate its conflate. We know that the lan- guage of the Press is too frequently pitiful to' men in power; but it cannot be otherwise, because it is the censor of their proceedings. ia fur them the only truth-teller ; and every shackle on its liml s is the suppression of some important facts. To direct a law, which is uni- versally odious, against a part of the Press, which is as indispensable to society as merchants or farmers, is as unwise a proceeding in a noble- man, desirous of popularity and of the esteem of his countrymen, as we can well conceive. But while we dissent from Lord Durham's course of proceeding, let us hot be understood as approving of the libel, or of the language used by his opponents. Now that the law falls on the Standard, it can perceive that to enforce the law may be wrong. For weeks—for months.—for years—it has been demanding that laws quite as erroneous in principle as the libel law, should be vindicated and up- held at whatever cost of human life. All its charges against the present Government as to Ireland amounts to this, that the Government did not, by force of arms, compel the Irish to obey the law. It absolutely raved about upholding the dignity of the law. But, surely, if that dignity is to be upheld by enforcing the law as to tithes, it is also to be upheld by

enforcing it as to libel. If it was to be so unsparingly carried into execution in the case of the Assessed Tax Associations, why should it not be equally as unsparingly carried into execution against writers in newspapers ? According to its own principles, the Standard should now kiss the rod which chastises it. It has, however, found out, when its own personal convenience is concerned, that to enforce the libel law is unjust. Nay, it goes so far as to say, that it has been by setting aside the law, letting it fall into abeyance, that much advantage has accrued to the country. •

PRACTICAL CHARACTER ON THE ENGLISH.

MONTHLY REPOSITORY—The extremely practical character of the English people, that which makes them, as men of business and jades- triels excel all the nations of Europe, has also the effect of making them very inattentive to any thing that cannot be carried instantly into practice. The English people have never had their political feelings called out by abstractions. They have fought for political laws, but • never for a principle of legislation. The doctrines of the sovereignty of the people, and the rights of man, never had any root in this country. The cry was always for a particular change in the mode of electing members of the House of Commons ; for making an act of Parlia- ment to meet some immediate exigency, or for taking off some parti- cular tax. The English public think nobody worth listening to, except in so far as he tells them of something to be done, and not only that, but of something which can be done immediattly. What is more, the only reasons they will generally attend to are those founded on the spe- cific good consequences to be expected from the adoption of the specific proposition. Whoever, therefore, wishes to produce much immediate effect upon the English public, must bring forward every idea upon its own independent grounds, and must take pains to conceal that it is connected with any ulterior views. If his readers or his audience suspected that it was a part of a system, they would conclude that his support even of the specific proposition was not founded on any opinion lie had that it was good in itself, but solely on its being connected with Utopian schemes, or at any rate with prin- ciples which they are "not prepared" (a truly English expression) to give their assent to. To those who know that politics are an essentially progressive science, and that none of the great questions of social or- ganization can receive their true answer except by being considered in connexion with views which ascend high into the past, and stretch far into the future, it is scarcely necessary to point out that any person, who thinks as they do on this point, must bare much to say, which cannot with advantage be said just at present to the people of England. In writing to persuade the English, one must tell them only of the next step they have to take, keeping baek all mention of subsequent steps. Whatever we may have to propose, we must contract our reasoning into the most confined limits we must place the expediency of the particular measure upon the narrowest grounds on which it can rest; and endeavour to let out no more of general truth than exactly as much as is absolutely indispensable to make out our particular conclu- sion. Now, as the people of England will be treated in this manner they must ; and those who write for them, must write in the manner best calculated to make an impression upon their minds.