"Since writing the former part of this article, I have discovered, that the report of Mr. Hunt's speech in the _Statesman_ was taken, word for word, or nearly so, from the _Chronicle_. The evening papers have, I find, _no reporters_. So that _no true_ account has gone forth; and thus has the misrepresentation circulated without the _possibility_ of defence! There is a gentleman in Wiltshire, whose name is Benett, whose speech, at an agricultural meeting, about the Corn Bill, was published in all the London papers, and which speech, as published, drew down on him the _execrations_ of those same papers, and, indeed, of the public in general. He said, that he never uttered such words; that he bad been very grossly misrepresented. He wrote to some of these same papers a _contradiction_ of the statement; a _defence of himself_. But, in order to get in a short paragraph, he was called upon to pay to one paper _nineteen guineas!_ and, though he has a fortune of, probably, 10,000_l_. a year, he declared that his fortune would have been insufficient to obtain the means of defending himself through the same channels which had attacked him. A hundred such fortunes would not have obtained the means of such defence; for, the moment he had paid for inserting a defence against one calumny, he would have found another to defend himself against. What, then, is a calumniated man to do? The _law!_ The reptiles know how to evade that; and, besides, where is the fortune sufficient for _law?_ Therefore, the calumnies must go and take their course. If men cannot hear up against them, they must hold their peace, and retire from before the public. Whether Mr. Hunt is to be driven off by these means remains to be seen. "WM. COBBETT."