Ever strongest on the strongest side, if ever there was a disengenuous untrustworthy arbiter of Opinion, it is this false Oracle of Printing House Square! Why its leader, 16th May, on “the most extraordinary case ever produced in a Court of Justice,” clearly denotes that I am NOT an unjust Judge, in sentencing the _Times_ to be gibbeted as a wicked, misleading guide. Observe its sudden changes of doctrine, and how rapidly it veers from N.W. to S.E. Now that the balance of opinion has taken a decided turn, and there is a distinct assent to the perjury of Eugenie, and the innocence of her victim, the _Times_ tries to mislead and insult the judgment of the public, by representing the “ingenuous” EUGENIE PLUMMER as “the daughter of RESPECTABLE and wealthy parents!” [Would that such “respectability” were consigned to gaol, until this “wealthy” Mrs. Plummer paid a fine of £1000 to Mr. Hatch, as some atonement for her neglect, and guilty connivance.] Now the case is closed, and the verdict is recorded, the _Times_ is “first at last” in making the discovery that “nemo repente fuit turpissimus,” that no one, especially a clergyman, ever became lost to all sense of decency at once. The “leading” Journal can NOW see clearly enough the obvious improbability, and unreasonableness of the disgusting accusation of two girls of established precocity, against a clergyman of good extraction, education, and behaviour, who for eight years had filled a responsible situation without reproach, and against whose conduct, until this time, not a charge had ever been alleged. Could not this “organised hypocrisy” the _Times_ (as Disraeli would call it) have said all this at the first trial, and not cried “I warn’d you when the event was o’er.” Ah! but this great Ocean of Print, the _Times_, is a “mercantile concern,” and does not keep a conscience, and sneers and laughs at the least earnestness in the Editorial department. Perhaps MR. JOHN WALTER, the Times Manager, and Chief Proprietor, by the competition of an unfettered Press, may find out that in Journalism, as in other pursuits, “Honesty is the best policy.” That maxim is now utterly discredited. Yet even at the eleventh hour there is for such a first class moral delinquent as the _Times_, a _locus penetentiæ_, but as a sine quâ non, the Editor, or literary hireling, must abjure servility, and disdain to become “A constant critic at the great man’s board, To fetch and carry nonsense for my Lord.”