Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

others had joined in associations, which had no other object than to overturn the institutions, one and all, by which the throne was surrounded. The chief justice declared there could be no doubt respecting the construction of the law. But it was impossible to convict Hardy, without making all political association in opposition to the ministry liable to capital indictment, and the prisoners were acquitted. Less than two years ago, some raving demagogues went beyond any thing that appears of Hardy and the constitutional society. They resolved not to obey the laws, and they recommended in their speeches physical force, as the only means of obtaining redress. Many of them were committed for high treason. the Government recollecting the lesson their predecessors had received, declined to prosecute for that offence; and have thus tacitly abandoned a pretension dangerous to the safety of every man in the country. The law of high treason, insufficient at first for the security of the state, and afterwards a snare for the subject, has been worked out at last into

But

a barrier, alike providing for the stability of the offended throne, and the safety of the innocent accused.

Let us now pass to the law of libel, the security by which the liberty of the press is to be protected. Blackstone tells us that libels, in the sense in which we are speaking, are “malicious defamations of any person, and especially a magistrate, made public by either printing, writing, signs, or pictures, in order to provoke him to wrath, or expose him to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule." He tells us that "the communication of a libel to any one person, is a publication in the eye of the law:" and that "it is immaterial, with respect to the essence of a libel, whether the matter be true or false !" Thus, then, a man may be punished for any writing on the conduct of a minister which may expose him to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule; although the allegations contained in it be true, and it has only been shown to one person. To make this power more formidable, the judges were wont formerly to maintain that they alone had the power of

deciding whether the writing were libel or no; and that the jury were only called upon to decide upon the fact of the publication. Here indeed is a law of tyrants! How has the liberty of the press ever survived it?

The miracle is soon explained. - The prosecutor on the part of the crown, contented himself with putting in the paper, and proving the publication. The counsel for the accused always dwelt upon the hardship of convicting any man for the publication of a writing without examining whether that writing was innocent or pernicious. The jury felt the injustice of the proceeding, and generally acquitted the accused. The libel bill of Mr. Fox, then, while it afforded a just protection to the public press, was rendered necessary by the breach which had taken place between the law and the men bound to administer it.

I cannot leave this subject of libel without mentioning the hardship to which accused persons are still subjected by being tried by special juries. These juries are, in the country, the nominees of the crown. Surely in a case where the powers of the government are brought to

bear against an individual in so delicate a matter as seditious libel, the subject ought to have a protection somewhat similar to that which he is allowed in cases of high treason, of challenging peremptorily thirty-five of the jury.

283

CHAP. XXX.

RESTRICTIVE LAWS.

Per me ho adottata nell' intero la legge d'Inghilterra, ed a quella mi attengo; nè fo mai nessuno scritto che non potesse liberissimamente e senza biasimo nessuno dell' autore essere stampato nella beata e veramente sola libera Inghilterra. Opinioni, quanti se ne vuole: individui offesi, nessuni: costumi, rispettati sempre. Queste sono state, e saranno sempre le sole mie leggi; nè altre se ne può ragionevolmente amettere, nè rispettare. AFFIERI, Vita, t. 2. p. 133.

[ocr errors]

THERE can be no doubt that public opinion acquired prodigious force during the late reign. Not that the power of opinion is, as some suppose, a complete novelty in this country, or an exclusive attribute of a free constitution. It was public opinion which induced the soldiers on Hounslow Heath to shout when the Bishops were acquitted; it was public opinion which obliged Sir Robert Walpole to relinquish the excise-scheme. Even in dis

« EdellinenJatka »