bear to witness his deserted post filled by a more spirited, although, perhaps, a less able writer,-a writer who is willing to risk every thing, where Mr. Hunt would risk nothing for his country. The charge which this gentleman has so atrociously published, without a shadow of foundation, if applied by another to himself, could not, perhaps, be very easily parred, for the Editor has heard sufficient of Mr. Hunt's private character, to believe him capable of any thing. The Editor is a young man under twenty-four years of age; and, therefore, his political honesty can only be known from his future conduct. The charge of Spy may be levelled against any man; it is impossible to instantly repel it, even though the accused were as innocent of crime as the Creator of the world. For one thing, however, the Editor is thankful to Mr. Hunt,-he has given his reasons for forming his opinion; which are, that he has recommended rebellion and assassination, and that our language is just as inflammatory as might be used by Oliver and Co. to answer their diabolical purposes. Perhaps it would be more satisfactory to quote the paragraph altogether, which runs as follows:

"Now if Ministers can send down to a Secret Committee of the House, some really scandalous publications, containing articles recommending assassination and rebellion, we know what will follow,-a vote of the Boroughmongers for new restrictions. They must make some show of necessity, ere public opinion would be wholly outraged. We all recollect the rebellious language employed by Oliver, and we remember, too, that his brother-villain Castles was the man who secretly placed powder and shot in the famed insurrectionary waggon. Would it therefore surprise any one, if similar miscreants had got connected with a portion of the Press, for the like exciting and treacherous objects? We think they have, and we shall therefore speak out. There is a weekly publication now before us, ("The Cap of Liberty," for October 20,) containing language and sentiments of the most foolish and atrocious kind,-just such language and sentiments as we may reasonably suppose would be used by Oliver and Co. to answer their diabolical purposes. We subjoin below a specimen."-The specimen is a quotation from our Seventh Number, of an article under the head of "WHAT IS TREASON?"

Negative evidence is always difficult, and, under such circumstances as this, impossible to be adduced. Mr. Henry Hunt, during his long political career, has often had to combat with similar allegations, and more particularly on

1

the day of the last Smithfield Meeting at which he presided. On that occasion he could only refer them to his conduct in general, for he could not, of course, bring evidence to prove,

that he was not paid for spouting, by Lord Castlereagh." Many, therefore, have and still continue to regard him as a tool of the Administration, although they have no other reason for so doing than that he has been amongst the most strenuous advocates of liberty. The Editor is a young man, and, therefore, he cannot refer them to his public career, which is but just commenced. He can only oppose his private character to the charge; and while he throws down the gauntlet in that particular, he boldly asserts that Mr. Leigh Hunt will not be the man to take it up. Although we have never seen this gentleman, yet we have heard sufficient of his character to know that it can only live unexecrated in obscurity. Let him beware how we drag it thence. The Editor, conscious of his innocence, proclaims to the world that Mr. Leigh Hunt is an unprincipled villain, to dare to impugn the reputation of any man, with no other foundation than that of malignant envy of a spirit his coward heart could never rival. The Editor proclaims him a coward, because he has endeavoured to traduce his character by insinuations which, he believes, cannot legally be taken hold of.

Young and ardent in the cause of Freedom, the Editor might have published opinions which prudence might not sanction-which may have been repugnant to the feelings of many. Such opinions might have warranted Mr. Hunt's caution to the Reformers to beware of being misled by them; but they could not warrant his mean and cowardly attack upon the untarnished character of the Editor, and that Editor defies Mr. Hunt, or the whole world, to bring forward ought that can impeach his reputation as a man of the strictest honour. Had the Editor been connected with Government, he would not have so freely given his name to the world, contrary to the first wish of Mr. Davison, who is too well known to be mistrusted. Mr. Hunt's attack must proceed from a bad heart, if he had no other foundatton for such attack than the sentiments contained in the CAP of LIBERTY:" sentiments which the Editor is not ashamed to own, and which he will defend to the last gasp of his existence. If Mr. Hunt had any other reason for his attack, he ce calls upon him to avow it openly and fearlessly, and the Editor publicly protests that he will take no legal advantage of his words so long as he adheres to truth. He charges the Editor with advocating principles of rebellion and assas

*

Mr.

sination, and from this charge it is that he draws his infa mous conclusions. Why has he not similarly branded Mr, Carlile and Mr. Cobbett? the former has repeatedly written more daring language than the Editor, but which language the Editor does not hesitate to say that he approves, Cobbett has said in his " Register," that the assassination of a Tyrant was justifiable, and yet Mr. Hunt has not calumniated him, because he dreaded retaliation from the able pen of that celebrated individual. The Editor has avowed, openly avowed, his principles to be republican, and on those principles he repeats it to be his firm opinion, that "hereditary right to a Crown is an hereditary wrong to the People; and although the assassination of a Monarch holding a Crown by such a right would, if he was a good man and faithful to his coerced subjects, be most assuredly MURDER, yet could it not be denominated TREASON. The Editor maintains that he never did avow his approbation of assassination; but he now declares (and he is willing to take all the responsibility of such declaration on himself alone) that in his opinion nothing can be fairly rebellion on the part of the English People-no, not even open insurrection, against the present system of plunder and indiscriminate massacre. The Editor most positively asserts, that in his article on "Treason," quoted by the " Examiner," he did not allude to any king particular, much less to the venerable though unfortunate Monarch of these kingdoms. The assertion of Mr. Hunt that he advocated the doctrine of assassination, is therefore unfounded; though it is his belief that in many circumstances Patriotism renders it justifiable and praiseworthy. Who will condemn Brutus and Cassius for ridding the world of a Cæsar? But it is unnecessary to advocate a doctrine that is established in the opinions of the just, the patriotic, and the friends of Freedom. The Editor (although a Republican) does not wish to induce the Reformers to make a Republican form of Government their final object, because he believes that the blood which would be shed to obtain it, would be more than its equivalent, although when once established, it is most indubitably the best. There is, on the part of the Press, a combination against the Radical Reformers; of this the Reformers must be convinced, from the misrepresentations of the Meeting in Finsbury Market Place, in every Paper without exception. The "Examiner," however, has added one more to the heap of falsehood which

* That King cannot be called "chosen by his People," who holds his crown by Hereditary Right.

the Press teemed with upon that occasion. It stated that at the close of the Meeting the speakers were pelted with dirt and mud. Can such a man as this deserve the confidence of the Radical Reformers? Surely not. The "CAP OF LIBERTY" is the only Publication which has risked every thing in their cause. The daringness of the Editor in the cause of Radical Reform, has subjected him to the foregoing calumny; and if they desert him, from an accusation founded on no other evidence than the assertion of a character such as Mr. Leigh Hunt, they will deserve to want an advocating Editor in future. The fear of such charges as this, has driven more talented individuals from the ranks of the Radical Reformers, than all the terrors of despotism could effect in centuries. Many who would not hesitate to ascend the scaffold in the cause of Liberty, are yet afraid to expose themselve to the shafts of calumny. Mr. Leigh Hunt has done more to injure Reform by the propagation of mutual mistrust, than he can efface for the remainder of his life. Mutual distrust it was which caused all the horrors attending the reign of Robespierre in France,-mutual distrust has been, still is, and ever will be, the bane of Reformation in England. The Editor now throws that which is infinitely dearer to him than life itself-his character-beneath the sheltering arm of the Reformers; if they approve of his political sentiments, he will write on, though the Fiend of· Discord should edite, in the person of Mr. Hunt, the future pages of the "Examiner."

N. B. The Editor is sorry that he did not see the "Examiner" time enough to answer his malignant insinuations in last week's number of the CAP OF LIBERTY," but the circulation of that Paper is so very limited, that it did not happen to come before him sooner than Tuesday night, after the" CAP" was gone to Press.

NECESSITY OF GUARDING OUR RIGHTS AND

LIBERTIES.

We see by the daily Papers that Lord Castlereagh is extremely active to collect all his friends against the next meeting of Parliament, for the purpose, no doubt, of giving a final and fatal blow to the liberties of England. That he will succeed in passing any Bill he may propose, we entertain not the smallest doubt-nay, we verily believe, that if he brought before the House of Commons, as at present constituted, a bill authorising him to set fire to the Metropolis, it would be passed three times in the course of the

evening, and put into execution at midnight. Such is the calamitous situation to which the inhabitants of this country are reduced! such the miserable tenure upon which they hold all that should be dear to man-all that Englishmen should perish for, rather than surrender to any despot whatsoever, their Rights, Liberties, and Privileges, as FREEMEN His Lordship is giving a grand Parliamentary dinner previous to the commencement of the Session on the 23d of this month, when we suppose one half of the mis-representatives of the People will sell their birthright for a mess of porridge." Indeed this would be no great loss, but that they will also sell that which does not belong to them-the birthright of the whole People of England.

The first subjects to be brought beneath the consideration of Parliament, report says, will be a Bill of Indemnity for the Manchester Massacre-Good God! Indemnity for Murderers! Also a Tax or Stamp Duty is to be laid upon all Minor Publications, or, in other words, an Act is to be passed prohibiting all but the wealthy from reading any thing but the Bible and New Testament. There is yet another duty which Parliament has to perform, in the wise opinion of the present Ministry; which is, to put a stop to Public Meetings in any part of the Kingdom, unless such Meetings shall be (we suppose) sanctioned by Lord Sidmouth or some other Lord who would as willingly suspend half the Radical Reformers in the Nation, as sign their Lordly titles to a Requisition for a General Meeting of ought but Fund Holders, Bank Directors, Placemen, Sinecurists, and Pensioners. The Ministry are aware of the odium which such measures must necessarily produce in the minds of a British Public, and therefore it is that the military force of the kingdom is to be augmented for the purpose of checking or controuling those ardent spirits who burst their chains and burl destruction on the Tyrants who oppress us. In the entire of the British Cabinet there is not one spark of principle, or if a ray appears, it is as quickly extinguished as would be a train of fire to a magazine of gunpowder, and for the self same reason; the Cabinet would be blown up by any thing appertaining in the slightest degree to virtue or to honour. And yet this is the Cabinet whose slightest wish is so obsequiently bowed to by those whose duty it is to protect the properties, the interests, and the liberties of the People. Corrupt and venal as are the principal part of the Members of the House of Commons as at present constituted, we have some faint (but very faint) hopes that they may possess sufficient Patriotism to prevent their wholly bartering the