WHITTINGTON'S STONE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING ADVERTISER. SIR,-It is rumoured that the authorities of Islington are about to beat the bounds of that parish. Will you let me call their attention, through your columns, to the removal of a landmark, within their parish, far more interesting to the public than any they will view as they proceed on their perambulation. I allude to the time-honoured "Whittington's Stone." For several centuries this stone has been respected, The road and visited by many a pilgrim from far and near. up to Highgate has always had an open curve left on one side, in order that the traditionary spot, with the stone standing there, might remain undesecrated. Within a few weeks past, unhallowed hands have dug the foundation of a house on this public ground, and removed bodily the stone.

By what professed right this has been done I know not; but I know that a public wrong has been done, and one which I trust the public will insist on having righted. This space must be restored to the public, and the stone itself replaced. The public footpath ran, till lately, round the west side of the stone, so that there can be no pretence that any private person can appropriate the ground.

I am well aware that we live in a superlatively enlightened age; an age of civilisation and improvement, and progress, and all that sort of thing. We are grown so wise that many will I very likely think it the mode to sneer at Whittington and his stone. I confess to viewing the matter in a very different light. The story of Whittington is the most popular legend we have in England; and there is, in no country, one more thoroughly good and sound in its moral. I know cases where that legend has fixed itself in the young imagination, and so affected the whole future life; and there I have taken many are few that do not know similar cases. to the spot-Englishmen from distant parts, and foreigners of the highest intelligence; and I never met with one case where the greatest interest was not felt in visiting the place and the stone identified with this fine old English legend. I call the removal of the stone, and the "improvement" of the slip of waste ground (public property) on which it stood, an act of sacrilege and barbarism; and I hope the public will join in that opinion, aud compel the restoration of both. The churchwardens, vestry clerk, and surveyor of Islington are intelligent men; and have not, I feel sure, sanctioned this outrage. Every Londoner should feel it a personal injury. But it is not a matter of mere local interest. The tradition is known to all England; and the sentiment of it is peculiarly English. Let us maintain, then, the Common Right in all that identifies its reality.

Highgate, June 3, 1845.

TOULMIN SMITH.

THE NEW POLICE BILL. TO THE EDITOR. - Everyone must have read with delight the noble sentiments uttered by the Town Council on the New Police Bill. The petition is also admirable. But allow me to call attention to a point of vast importance. The bill is so atrocious, that every word of it contains an attack on our liberties. One such word is omitted in that petition;-a word which contains the gist of the whole matter. The petition states that the bill empowers the Home-Secretary to make regulations as to the Pay, Clothing, &c., of the constables. Sir, what the bill does is to give the Home-Secretary absolute and irresponsible power to dictate the "DUTIES" of every constable in England; and no one can resist any such order if this bill passes. One word more. Town Councils must not be content with passing resolutions and petitions. They must act. They must have a committee sitting in permanence in London, or the bill will pass. It is action, not words and protest, that is needed, and that instant and energetic. I speak from experience. 21st June, 1854. Yours truly, A. C. D.

Correspondence.

THE ARCHDEACON OF MIDDLESEX AND THE CHURCHWARDEN OF ST. PAUL'S,

KNIGHTSBRIDGE.

66

TO THE EDITOR OF THE JURIST." SIR,-Unusual attention has lately been called to the election of a churchwarden at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge. It has been made a question of Puseyism and Protestantism. But I think that attention should be called to a point of very great practical importance which appears to have been unnoticed; otherwise, while much is said about resistance to one form of ecclesiastical incroachment, another, still more dangerous, is acquiesced in.

The late election is stated to have been held because the archdeacon determined that the former election was invalid. Now, if there is one point clearer and more settled than another, it is, that the archdeacon has no jurisdiction to try or determine the validity of any election of churchwarden; it is simply his duty to swear in. If half-a-dozen present themselves for the purpose, he must swear them all in. The temporal courts alone can try and determine the validity

of the election.

Mr. Westerton's second election is clearly a void election. If he is churchwarden now, it must be on the first election only, not on the second.

To admit for a moment the illegal doctrine and practice of the archdeacon thus interfering is simply to place the office of churchwarden in the hands of the ecclesiastical authorities. If this is submitted to, farewell to the principles which Mr. Westerton's supporters so strenuously assert, but have now practically abandoned. Your obedient servant, Serjeants'-inn, June 21, 1854.

T. S.

CORRECT READINGS OF SHAKESPEARE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'EXAMINER.'

Sir,-You lately reviewed, with becoming praise, Mr Bell's Songs from the Dramatists. I plead guilty to having procured the work in consequence; and do not regret it. But you have always shown a One or two of proper jealousy for the purity of Shakespeare's text. the readings introduced by Mr Bell seem to me faulty. What, for instance, justifies the introduction of the words "Reply, Reply," as a fourth line to the song sung while Bassanio is choosing the casket (Merchant of Venice, A. III, sc. 2)? I take it to be clear that the word Reply" is a mere stage direction. The song is composed of three triplets. It is an instance of Shakespear's subtle art, that, while the choice is agitating the chooser's mind, music and words are heard, first from one side of the Hall, then from the other. The lines

"Tell me where is fancy bred ?

Or in the heart, or in the head?
How begot? how nourished?"

come from unseen voices on one side. The reply comes, in another triplet, from another side. The third triplet is a chorus-still further to distract the chooser-from all sides.

In the common editions of this song, as set to music, the stage direction, "reply," is, undoubtedly, introduced. But that is a mistake to be regretted. It is no critical authority.

Not to occupy your space-I would only further ask, whether the line (Tempest, A. V, sc. 1),

"Where the bee sucks, there suck I,"

can be accepted as correct? In the course of a pretty extensive acquaintance with the Fairy Mythology of our English Poets, I do not recal that these little creatures are introduced to us as ever sucking. There are no end of This is decidedly mundane and unpoetic. instances of their hiding in the bells of flowers; of which characteristic Shakespear himself gives many examples,-for two of which we need go no further than the second and third lines of this very song. I submit that, in the line in question, the remarkable consistency which marks cur English fairy mythology, as well as the spirit of poetry itself, compel us to believe that what Shakespeare wrote was

"Where the bee sucks, there lurk I;

In a cowslip's bell I lie:

There I couch when owls do cry."

How easily the misprint arose is obvious.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

TOULMIN SMITH.

TEXTUAL EXPERIMENTS.—With this title we have another letter from Mr Toulmin Smith, referring to Mr Bell's notice of his former objections; but we can only admit that portion of it which need not suggest further controversy.

Every true lover of Shakespeare must refuse assent to the dogma that "of speculative criticism the public have an ample supply," and to the implication conveyed in the words textual experiments." Your own columns have, even within the last year, testified to the value of what has been thus done. I would be content to quote your own words to show how many passages have been happily cleared from meaningless obscurity by such criticism and experiment, and how much may yet be done. Many passages remained mere puzzles-though reprinted for centuries-till Mr Collier's manuscript showed how the mere alteration of a letter or two, palpable enough when done, made darkness into light. Several phrases have always remained which, grammatically, make sense, but still can not satisfy the intelligent student. When a special collection of the "Songs of the Dramatists" is made, it seems particularly the time to scan narrowly the texts of those songs more exactly. We can, without reprehensible speculation" or 66 experiment," best try the accuracy of any doubtful text by applying to it, in the first place, a familiarity with the turn of expression and thought found in the same and other poets, &c., when playing on the same idea; and, in the second place, such an acquaintance with the minutiae of the orthography and caligraphy of the time as that we may know what errors of the press have been most liable to happen. For instance, the s, c, r, h, &c., of three and two centuries ago were written quite differently to what they now are;-and were so written that the printer's reader was much more likely to make errors of conversion in some of them than now. Such a mode of criticism comes as near to induction, instead of "speculation," as can be reached in such a study.

CORRECT READINGS OF SH

TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'EX.

Sir,-You lately reviewed, with becoming from the Dramatists. I plead guilty to havi consequence; and do not regret it. But y proper jealousy for the purity of Shakespear the readings introduced by Mr Bell seem t instance, justifies the introduction of the w a fourth line to the song sung while Bassan (Merchant of Venice, A. III, sc. 2)? I take it "Reply" is a mere stage direction. The son triplets. It is an instance of Shakespear's s choice is agitating the chooser's mind, music from one side of the Hall, then from the othe

"Tell me where is fancy bre
Or in the heart, or in the h
How begot? how nourishe
The

come from unseen voices on one side.
triplet, from another side. The third triplet
to distract the chooser-from all sides.

In the common editions of this song, as s rection, "reply," is, undoubtedly, introduced to be regretted. It is no critical authority. Not to occupy your space-I would only line (Tempest, A. V, sc. 1),

"Where the bee sucks, there can be accepted as correct? In the course quaintance with the Fairy Mythology of ou recal that these little creatures are introdu This is decidedly mundane and unpoetic. instances of their hiding in the bells of flower Shakespear himself gives many examples,go no further than the second and third lin submit that, in the line in question, the rem marks cur English fairy mythology, as well itself, compel us to believe that what Shake

"Where the bee sucks, there lur,

In a cowslip's bell I lie:
There I couch when owls do cry

How easily the misprint arose is obvious.
I am, Sir, your ol

Highgate, Middlesex,
2nd Oct. 1854.

OUR TROOPS IN THE EAST.-To the Edi Sir, Much indignation has been expressed a for those wounded at the battle of the Ali just; but an impartial observer cannot but r were made of our commissariat department tageous comparison with that of the French of the cholera told a different tale. The f private letter of a highly intelligent officer to be a fair tribute to the English Governm English and French arrangements present Government has spared no expense in sendi efficient army to Turkey; the French, on th endeavoured to send out the greatest num possible cost. The result of the two systems lost twice our proportion of men from chole expedition was determined upon from Varn our small army, to send 26,000 men (includ Crimea, whilst they could only muster 21,00 any cavalry." Should you think this or judge, worth publication, it is at your servant, AN IMPARTIAL OBSERVER.

an

Luey

adjective into a verte! Every

acquainted Kunw

with

one

literatuur met

This "travel, grete" should,

to modem Sellers, to "havails great.

"

THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER AND TRIAL BY
JURY.

SOME Commemorations are general; some specially national. It often happens that the origin of a national commemoration is either forgotten or distorted. It is almost always the case that what should be the most marked point in the commemoration is unheeded. It is thus with the fifth of November in England. The fifth of November is, indeed, a day that Englishmen should remember. But the reason why that day should be now remembered is far higher and more important than anything to do with gunpowder plots and Guy Fawkes. It was on the fifth of November, just sixty years ago, that the Trial by Jury saved the liberties of England from the traitorous attacks of an unscrupulous Government. It was on this day that the verdict of "NOT GUILTY was pronounced by an English jury, notwithstanding all the plots and machinations of an unprincipled prosecution, in the celebrated case of Tooke, Hardy, and others, tried for High Treason.

There may be something to remember in the discovery and quenching of a special murderous plot. There is far more to remember in the defeat of a cold-blooded traitorous attack, made by those in power, on the liberties of a nation. It is something to be thankful for that, on this day, a great crime was stopped, in the committal of which many individuals would have suffered. It is far more to be thankful for, that, on this day, the institutions of England. sufficed to triumph over blows aimed at the very existence of those institutions, and against all that makes freedom dear and lasting.

It is the more important that this day should be now remembered, because the inconvenience of the Trial by Jury to the enemies of free institutions has been so felt, that every attempt has, especially of late years, been made to undermine the institution and to destroy the practice, There is not, in fact, a session of Parliament that now passes without some attempt of this sort,-some direct attack made upon the institution which forms the fundamental corner-stone of the liberties of England. It is all done under smooth phrases, no doubt,-under fine honied pretences of some 66 "reform" or other. But the attack is not the less sure and fatal. It is part of that systematic course of Centralization which is now hurrying on England to the state of Continental peoples.

We shall take another opportunity of calling attention to the sort of experimental legislation which disfigures our time; and under cover of which these attacks are perpetrated. We would now earnestly ask our readers to consider, carefully and thoughtfully, what are the principles which are embodied in that most important of institutions-the Trial by Jury.

There are three distinctly separable, yet closely con- ! nected, principles, which lie at the bottom of the jury system; no one of which can be trifled with without weakening the foundations of all that constitutes a sound and wholesome state of society. These principles are philosophical, political, and social.

The philosophical principle is the same that forms the basis of the inductive system of inquiry;-a system acknowledged as the only sound and safe one in respect

to natural science, but which is wholly ignored, in our times, in the discussion and investigation of all questions of a political or social nature. This principle is, that truth can only be got at by the matter in question being looked upon from every point of view, and under as many shapes and aspects as can be reached. As the minds of no two men are alike; as the process of ratiocination does not proceed alike in any two minds; as no two minds seize with equal readiness and specialty upon the same points of any case; it is self-evident that, when the minds of several are expressly devoted, together, to the work of sifting out the truth, the truth is far more likely to be lighted upon than when the work is left to one mind only, be that mind in itself ever so accomplished. The common law of England has declared it to be essential that the determination of the truth in every case shall be worked out by the former method; and it is only those who are ignorant of the inductive method, or indifferent to the assuredness of truth, that can let themselves be parties to the superseding of this sound and wholesome principle by any empirical devices that may seem to promise the saving of trouble to some, and that yield the ad captandum spectacle of rapidity of decision under the arbitrary course of summary jurisdiction.

The political principle is this:-that, in a true free state, every man owes duties to the whole, as well as himself claiming rights and protection. He is bound to fulfil, personally, the duty of helping to guard against wrongdoing to any other man; and to be ready at any time, as one amongst freemen, to take actual part in the administering of the law between his fellow freemen. In arbitrary countries all men are but the Subjects of the State; and must submit to have the law administered to them by those functionaries whom the State chooses to set over them. In a free state, all men are themselves MEMBERS of the State; and, as such, are bound to help to administer the law themselves; and thus to know and ensure that right and justice are habitually done to every man. Every man is entitled to claim this: every man is bound to answer the claim. This is the most striking of all the distinctions between a free State and a despotic one. Accordingly, the English Constitution has always, until of late years, made it unlawful that any man should be tried, or have any matter adjudged touching him, except by his peers; and has made it the primary obligation that every man owes to the State, that he shall be ready to serve on all juries and inquests. And such service every man ought to consider, and every man of sense and spirit must (when he understands its nature) consider, as his highest prerogative; a function which he should be proud to exercise, instead of seeking to evade.

The social principle is this:-The conditions of men are unequal. Only those familiar with the sort of conditions under which a contract was made or an act done, can really ever know, and so judge of, or bring up the necessary elements to the judging of, the true light in which any such contract or act should be regarded. The setting up of one man,-a lawyer most of all men,-to judge, summarily and arbitrarily, of the character of the contracts and acts of all sorts of men, especially of the humbler classes, is a simple absurdity. It is as impossible that actual right should be done, even by a mind of the strictest integrity, through such a means, as the employment of such means constitutes, in itself, a violation of every canon of the inductive system of philosophy, and of the first elements of politic liberty.