« EdellinenJatka »
though I did understand the doctrine of ano. person of the king himself, is he to wait till a iber effect stated in the outset, I am well con grand jury finds it such attack, and presents teut if we are agreed in law, and will proceed him what is his office ? and is he not to interupon it just in the manner in which I think it pose upon such subjects as this, where it is bis stands. I did understand, when the learned duty ? and, gentlemen, these are the grounds gentleinan spoke first of it, when be entered upon which it is to be determined by you. To into a defence of the paper, and embarked in it, speak properly of the gentleman that spoke that it was upoo the same line, and same no first, they are not his grounds; thougb the tion of law I have gone upon.
The learned second, he has endeavoured to mislead you gentleman who spoke second, thought proper upon the subject, by telling you, that in bis to go a little wider, and give a more general opinion, this is not a libel; hui he bas withal discussion than my learned friend who spoke given you his reason why be offers to argue it first; and be thought it necessary to tell you, is no libel, because he says, it does not apply that this information came under no sanction, to the person of the king. Now I agree perno kind of authority wbalsoever. I refer to fectly, that as far as this information goes, it your own memory, gentlemen, whether 1 re- charges, that this libel does affect the person of lied in the opening of this cause at all upon the king ; and if he has made out to your sathe authority under wbich this information is tisfaction that no part of the libel does so affect filed ; not the least upoo earth; did not 1? him, then that part of the charge will fall to and yet at the same time, if that should come the ground, as well as that part that affects the to be called in question, I am to inform you it great officers of state. If the defendant bas is filed by an officer of the crown, and whom made out there are no passages that apply to the constitution of this country has, in all ages, those persons, then he is discharged from that intrusted to his duty and his knowledge, a dis- part of the information ; so, with regard to cretionary power of filing these informations ; tbat part affecting the House of Commons, if and the very statute alluded to by the gentle. he has made out that the House of Commons men, was after the Revolution, and at a tiine are not directly and personally reviled and taxed when the constitution was well considered, and with the grossest corruption, even with being the liberty of the subject supposed to be esta- bought by the mipistry; if he has made out blished. At that time, and for the sake of the that proposition, then that will fall to the constitution, uoder which we live now, it was ground. I do not mean, (because you have expressed to be in that officer of the crown the paper before you,) to go over those pasto file informations for the sake of the preser sages, at ibe outset of which it appears, the vation of public order and peace, This is the person of the king has been direcily meant, law of the country firmly settled at the time of though some have been taken up, and otbers the Revolution; and yet now, when the law omitted, by my learned friend in the defence. comes to be put in execution, juries are enter I will contine myself to those that have been tained with an idea of the oppressive qualities taken up. He tells you, there is a great acexisting in that law, which the wisdom of ages, knowledgment of the royal virtues.
Wbat a and the best correction possible, applied to that, wretched misery is that in the obvious seuse of have established what it is that officer is en. those that are to determine upon it. If he does trusted with, a matter of duty and honour not acknowledge those royal virtues, be taxes the to file informations, which in his judgment and king with those that are directly opposite to discretion, do not call for the extraordinary in those qualities, and the taxing of them, I will terposition of his office. Whenever they do, it point out to you immediately. Jp the first is his duty to file them, unless something had place, my learned friend says, what is said of been said to impeach' his proceedings in that ihe king, is but the ordinary accident of part of the execution of his duty. But I can thrones, and the most active of kings bave, say, myself, it was filed by an officer of great in some part of their lives, suffered in the adjudgment, and unimpeached honour; and it ministration of government. And therefore it was his opinion, and it was accordingly done, might be as well said of all kings whatsoever, or not to proceed by indictment, but information at least the greatest number of kings, and no in the court of King's-bench. The Court harm could come from the zeal that is expresswould not have heard a motion at the instance ed to the presept king. Observe the language of the Attorney General to file that which is of the paper itself. “ It is the misfortune of his duty to file. The very circumstance of your life, and the cause of your reproach and his being to file it, would bave prevented the distress." Is this the language that may be Court from hearing the motion; they would said of all kings ? and his being unacquainted have called to him to do his duty in the course with the language of truth. This is only dropof information.* And is the Attorney Geperal, ping ideas concerning tbe application to the when he plainly sees it with the same eyes king, and very far from faci; and therefore the rest of mankind have seen, and the same the officers of the crown, are they who want view in which they have talked of it, when he to make that a libel upon the king, that was no sees a direct malignant attack made upon the libel. Were it only about in coffee houses,
that the king was upacquainted with the lan* See the Case of Rex v. Phillips, cited p. guage of truth, and constantly erring, and that 678, of this volume.
he had not discovered his prejudices; were
that laid about upon tables in taverns and cof- 1 to those that apply for justice, there consequentfee-houses, nobody understood it to be a libel. ly is neither liberty nor property, nor reputaBut it becomes a libel, when the officers of the tion, nor any thing which this country bas crown, for the vindication of the character of hitherto thought worth protection, and the laws the king, thought proper to bring it before a would not be able to protect them. I protest court to be justified there. With regard to the to God, it appears to me in a reasoning way, Jord lieutenant of Ireland, my learned friend too strange a proposition, to say liberty is consays, there is no application to the king. cerned in protecting a man in writing injuriously Certainly there is no application to the king and opprobriously against the character of a whatsoever.' Now let us see a little whether man, which is the same as if it was concerned there is not.
in protecting a man in robbing upon the bigh“The people of Ireland give you every day ways. Gentlemen, you may as well bave the fresh marks of their resentment;" so that it is question put for your discussion, whether you introduced to the king. “ They despise the mi- would have ten or fifteen guineas privately serable governor you bave sent them, because stolen from your person, by which the party be is a creature of lord Bute.” This is the would be liable to be condemned, or whether abuse upon lord Townshend; for what reason you would bave your name hung out to the is best known to the author himself; but if they public, as a man wbo is disgraceful, dishonest, are masters of men's characters to treat them and unworthy of any post you beld. Which just as they please, there is an end of all law would you choose ? And in the name of comand justice. But when it concerns the person mon sense, which can any mao expect you of a king, it is not from the natural ideas they shoul hoose? And how can you find your are so ready to confound the person of a king verdict when you are desired to withbold, conin the person of his representative, as he states trary to all evidence, and every necessary the people of Ireland, every day giving fresh conclusion, that justice which those conclumarks of their resentment, because they under- sions do call for? You are not desired to bestand there is no difference between the original | lieve they are not published by the defendant; of a king, and their representative. It is not that is given up here; you are desired to beowing to a confusion of their ideas they do in lieve, that they do not talk of the king in the that manner confound it. What does be
paper. That argument is not what I exthe next part after Ireland ? He then proceeds pected to have been proved. You are desired to state America, of which be first of all says, to think it would be a derogation from your “they were ready enough to distinguish between authority, should you be obliged to find, acthe king and his ministers, and to throw the cording to the evidence. To be sure you are fault upon them;" and that I suppose is not to bound, if we could not make out the truth that be applied to the king. But afterwards he belongs to the charge, which, if we do, without says, “ the decisive, personal part you took you can find reasons to deny that very truth against them;"—is this charging the ministry? wbich your reasons and consciences cannot " that decisive, personal part you took against resist; to be sure, that is one of the inferior si. them, has effectually banished that first dis- tuations of a jury. But that is an inferiority tinction from their minds; they consider you which don't belong to your situations alone. as united with your servants against America, Judges are likewise sworn to pronounce acthey knowing how to distinguish the sovereign cording to law; and that is all the constraint and a venal parliament on one side, from the upon the office you now hold; and if you find real sentiments of the English people on the the facts are as I stated in the outset, notwithother.” Has this no application to the king? It standing what has been said in the defence, it certainly has. I have stated these few in- will be too plain an absurdity to say he is not stances, merely because they were those that guilty. have been taken up, in order to shew they have no application to the king. Gentlemen, I have Lord Mansfield. Gentlemen of the jury, if stated them to you, imagining we are so far the direction ibat I am going to give you, as to upon a just ground, and ihat you can imagine the object of your consideration, and the rule no other but that the king is as plainly distin- and ground upon which your verdict ought to guished from every body else, as any thing in be founded, according to ihe law and constituthe world can be distinguished.
tion of this kingdom, and that oath that is They are right in saying, that if you find it taken by each of you; I say, if that direction is meant so, what avails all that has been said. should be mistakeu, J bave this confort in my But they go beyond that; and very properly own mind, that it will not be final, but upon say you are the refuge of liberty. You are application to the Court for a mis-direction, it
You are the refuge of those who find can be set right. The direction I am going to themselves wronged contrary to the laws of give you, is, with a full conviction and coofi. this country, and apply to the laws of this dence, that it is the language of the law. This country for redress. "And if you, who are the is an information that is brought against the refuge of liberty, in that sense, should either defendant for printing this letter, which you by such delusion, or ivAuence of prejudice and have heard read, of the tenor set forth, and of warmth in favour of such strange ideas, endea- the meaning put upon those parts of it
, voured to be put upon them, deny that justice which are blanks in the original, by the in.
formation, and concerning the persons charg., bare act of printing and publishing. If be ed by the information, to be the persons prints that which is unlawful, it follows in concerning whom it was wrole. This is the course, whether it is with a degree of greater charge. Now the question for you to try or less malignity. For there is no one act, that upon the evidence, is, whether the defen- may be attended with a greater variety of cirdant did print or publish, or both, a paper of cumstances (almost infinite) than the manner the tenor, and of the meaning, so charged by in which a man might print and publish ; it the information ? As to its being of the tenor, might be from the lowest to the highest dethe paper has been read to you, and if it gree of guilt, even to a very venial degree of had not been of the tenor, there would have guilt. Now that is not established by your been an objection made during the course verdict, all those epithets being a mere form of the reading; and there would have been in informations, and they are interences of law, an end of the information, if the charges which are drawn upon the printing and pubwere wrong, for they could not have gone lisbing a libel, it it comes out upon the face of on ; therefore there is no objection as to the it to be a libel. It is very true, I am used to tenor.
speeches made to juries, to captivate them, and The next thing is the meaning; and the carry them away from the point of enquiry. meaping is what is put upon it by the infor- Mr. Serjeant Glynn did admit, the inducement mation, in those places where there are blanks was not to be proved; not so much proved, 'as in the original, as k dash g for king, m dash y is set forth, as malice of forethougbt, in cases for majesiy, aud on, as you heard it read. of murder, or the instigation of the devil, and As to that, there has been no particular ob- yet the form is kept up. As to the other epijection made by the counsel, that in any one thets, he did admit of them, as his candor made instance the blank is ill filled up. If that could him do. After arguing upon the epithets of have been made, their ingenuity would bave seditious and malicious, he did say at last, I found it out. If you say they are not well do not see it is necessary to give proof of the filled, and the paper is not of the meaning set whole; therefore that is not the faci to be found forth in the information, then you must, to be by your verdict, that is inference of law; and sure, acquit him. But, if it is of the tenor and many instances shew when the jury have found meaning, set out in the information, the next him guilty, before the defendant comes up for consideration is, whether he did print and pub- judgment, he is at liberty to extenuate his Jish it? Now, as to that, the evidence stands crime, and even his own affidavit will do it; uncontradicted, and without any observations. and if the fact had been found by the verdict, It is proved to be bought of his servant, at his it is impossible that can ever be controverted, house: that dropt from the counsel without nor ever further looked into. These are the any observation. If you by your verdict find grounds, therefore, which I leave to you for the defendant not guilty, the fact established your consideration. If you are not satisfied by that verdict, is, he did not publish a paper that the paper proved, is of the meaning put of that meaning; that fact is established, and upon it by the information, where the blanks there is an end of the prosecution. You are to are filled up, and the persons concerning whom try that fact, because your verdict establishes it is spoken of, you must acquit the defendant. that fact, that he did not publish it. If you If you doubt of the evidence, as to its being find that, according to your judgment, your proper evidence, you must acquit the defendant. Ferdict is final; and if you find it otherwise, it If you are satisfied, as to both those, that is is between God and your consciences, for that the matter to be established ; hy both those, is the basis upon which all verdicts ought to be and according to right, you ought to find it. founded; then the fact finally established by And, indeed, if you were for having the power your verdict, if you find him guilty, is, that he of pronouncing a verdict of not guilty, as to printed and published a paper, of the tenor, and the fact; to be sure the jury, in every cause, of the meaning, set forth in the information; may make an end of the question, whether they that is the only fact finally established by your have not a right to find ibat verdict. verdict; and whatever fact is finally established, take upon you to determine the law, you must, never can be controverted, in any shape wbat- for the sake of your own consciences, be sure soever. But you do not, by that verdict, give to determine according to law, and you must an opinion, or establish whether it is or not, be sure that the law is,t that such a paper may lawful to print or publish a paper, of the tenor be printed and published, of the tenor you find and meaning in the information; for supposing it; the consequence of which is very obvious the defendant is found guilty, and the paper is to be seen upon this occasion. If the law was such a paper, as by the law of the land may be to be determined in every particular cause, printed and published, the defendant has a right what a miserable condition would this country to bave judgment respited, and to have it car be in with regard to that part of it, as it is said ried to the highest court of judicature. There ibere cannot be a greater curse than uncertainty is nothing upon the fact : if in point of law it is innocent, it would be an innocent thing, ap. See vol. 6, pp. 1013, et seq. pearing so upon the record. Neither is it found + As to this method of address to a jury is established upon your verdict, that he did it such a case, see • Apother Letter to Mr. Alwith any degree of malignity or guilt in the mon,' p. 58.
in the law; for one jury in Middlesex find one at bis parlour door, in the passage, and the way, and a jury in London another way. A foreman having pronounced their verdict Not jury in Middlesex has found a verdict, and Guilty, his lordship went away without saying convicted one person * for the publication of a word. Bat there being a vast concourse of this same paper, but you are not bound by that people in the square, who had followed the If juries were to find according to the different jury from Guildhall, they, as soon as the verimpressions the different points of law have dict was known, testified their joy, by the upon them, there might be no law at all upon loudest huzzas. the subject. You will consider of it, and I will repeat to you again, you must be satisfied as to the meanings laid down in the information, Several inaccuracies in the preceding reand concerning the persons, and you must be ports of the cases of Almon and Miller I have satisfied with regard to tbe publication; if you not ventured to alter. are satisfied you will find him guilty; if not As to the proceeding for an attachment you will find him not guilty.t
against Almon in respect of the publication of
tbe • Letter concerning Libels, Warrants, SeiThe Trial began about nine o'clock in the zure of Papers,' &c. see vol. 19, p. 1082; and morning, and was finished about twelve. The Lord Chief Justice Wilmot's • Notes of Opijury retired into a private room, and continued nions and Judgments' as there cited, locked up, till half an hour past seven in the Concerning the nou-examination of Miller, evening, at which time they were agreed in p. 835, see what Mr. Duoning said in the their verdict; and the Court being broke up, House of Commons, reported 16 New Parl. they carried it to lord Mansfield, at his house Hist. p. 1279. in Bloomsbury-square. His lordship met them Of ihe conversation which passed between
Mr. Mackworth and lord Mansfield, p. 838, • See Almon's Case, p. 868, of this volume. see Mr. Mackworth's account, 16 New Parl. + But now see stat. 32 G. 3, c. 60.
Hist. 1149, 1189.
555. The Case of HENRY SAMPSON WOODFALL, on an Information
filed by the Attorney General for publishing Junius's Letter to the King: 10 GEORGE III. A. D. 1770.* [London Museum.] June 13.
tion filed by Mr. Attorney General ex officio,
against Henry Sampson Woodfall, for printing Tais day came on at Guildhall, before lord and publishing a letter signed Junius, in the chief justice Mansfield, the trial of an informa- Public Advertiser, of tbe 19th of Dec. 1769.
The report here given, is the fullest which he says, "I am now meditating a capital, and, I have seen of this Trial. I have therefore in- . I hope, a fioal piece.' It was for this proserted it, notwithstapiling the flippancy and duction that the printer was prosecuted, and partiality of its manner. Io Mr. G. Woodfall's obtained the celebrated verdiet of guilty of recently published edition of Junius's Letters printing and publishing only, the consequence (in which edition is exhibited various illustra- of which, as already observed in note to vol. 1, tion of that work, and consequently of the p. 29, was, that two distinct -motions were history of these prosecutions) is inserted in a made in court; one by the counsel for the depote io the author's preface, a very abridged tendant in arrest of judgment, grounded on its account of this Trial, from which I shall print ambiguity, and another by the couusel for the below the report of lord Mansfield's charge to crown, to compel the defendant to shew cause the jury.
why the verdict should not be entered up acThe following passage from a note to vol. 2, cording to the legal import. The case being p. 62, of Mr. Woodfall's publication, is not decided, that a new trial should be granted.
argued, the court of King's-bench ultimately impertinent in this place:
This accordingly commencerl, when the At“The address to the king through the me- torney General observing to the Chief Justice, dium of this Letter, made a very great im- that he had not the original newspaper by pression upon the public mind at the moment which he could prove the publication ; his of its appearance, and though 500 copies of the lordship laconically replied, That's not my Public Advertiser were printed in addition to fault, Mr. Attorney: and in this manner the usual numbers, not a single copy was to terminated the second trial. The fact is, that be procured in a few hours after its publica- the foreman of the jury upon the first trial had tion. The author bimself, indeed, seemed to pocketed the paper, upon its being handed to entertain a very favourable opinion of it; as in ibe jury box for inspection, and bad afterwards Private Letter, No. 15, speaking of this Letter, destroyed it. . The expence the defendant was Only seven of the Special Jury attended, as it proper to explain his own conduct; because follows:
he was not merely an advocate in these matWilliam Bood, of Walbrook.
ters, but officially answerable. This letter of Peter Cazalet, Swithin's-lane,
Junius, he assured the jury, had given univerAlexander Peter Allan, Mark-lane.
sal offence. He bad therefore in hand six Frederick Cumerell, Minciog-lane.
other prosecutions of different publishers for Hamın Meyer, ditto.
the same offence. He thought it his duty to Joho Thomas, ditto.
prosecute them, and had therefore demanded Barnington Buggin, Philpot- lane. the names of the publishers, because he, Mr.
Attorney General, does not read news-papers. To which were added the following five In the objects of prosecution, be endeavoured talesmen :
to make a distinction, and to pass by those who William Halyard.
were poor or had large families of children, Paul Varges, carpenter, Distaff-lane.
He declared upon his honour, as a man, William Sibley.
that he had no motive to nrge him against any William Willet, plaisterer, Distaff-lane. particular publisher, but merely the execution William Davis.
of his office. That he could have wished to
have tried Mr. what's bis name?-Woodfall, After Mr. Walker had opened the cause, by aye, Mr. Woodfall, the original publisher, first: reading the letter signed Junius, &c. with the because as for who was the author of Junius, inuendoes of the information,
that he could by no means discover, that reMr. Attorney General (De Grey) began, mained an impenetrable secret. exactly at ten o'clock, by saying, that nothing After this defence of himself, Mr. Attorney bad ever raised a juster indignation in the mind General returned again to the cause in band; of every man who wishes the continuance of by repeating to the jury that if, 1st, the blanks in our excellent constitution, tban tbis letter of the Public Advertiser were fairly filled up by Junius. He then addressed himself to the the inuendoes of the information; and if, 2dly, passions and interest of the jurors, by telling the publication was proved, the jury must find them that they were more than any other men Mr. Woodfall guilty. concerned to bring such offenders to justice,
Crowder, the first witness, was then called because any thing that tended to public confusion, was more especially fatal to commerce, Mr. Thurlow, (Solicitor General.).
at twenty minutes after ten, and examined by and to those wbo bazard large fortunes in trade. He said, that this letter of Junius
Crowder deposed, That it is his office and tended to public confusion. He then haran- employment to buy up the publications of gued with great seeming zeal on the glorious every day for
the Treasury (on Almon's trial, liberty of the press, which he acknowledged assistant to the Messenger of the Press) tbat he
this same witness, Crowder, called himself, an ought to be encouraged and exercised, as far bought the Public Advertiser in question, of as could possibly consist with the very being of society: But be said, that the abuse of the
one Colford, whom he supposes to be Mr. liberty of the press is more fatal than any fall's publishing room; he bought twelve of
Woodfall's man; he bought it in Mr. Wood. other; and therefore entreated them not io
them. He had bought the Public Advertiser suffer that liberty, intended for our salvation, to be turned to sedition, 4n our perdition. He every day at Mr. Woodfall's for a year past. said, the jury would be instructed from the The Letter of Junius was then read from the bench,--that is,-a-a-he must believe they paper. would be, instructed from the bench ; that the only two things for their consideration were,
The second witness, Robert Harris, was 1. Whether the blanks in the printed paper said he was the register of the stamps. He
sworn, and examined by Mr. Morton. He were fairly filled up in the information : and 2. Whether there were sufficient evidence for produced his book, in which the news-paper of
each day is kept, for an account of the adverthe publication of the paper by Woodfall. Mr. Attorney General then said, he thought count for the Public Advertiser is kept in the
tisements which are paid for: he said, the ac
name of Mr. Woodfall; that receipts are made put to in this prosecution, as stated in Private Letter, No. 19, amounted to about 1201. The
out to him; that his servant generally attends Jate Mr. Almon, who was also prosecuted for monthly to settle accounts for the duiy on the selling a reprint of this Letter, asserts, in a note times Mr. Woodfall had aitended in person.
advertisements in that paper, but that someto another edition of this work, that the legal expence incurred in defending his own action, The third witness, [Lee] was sworn and which could not exceed that of the original examined by Mr. Wallace. He said he was a printer, amounted to between 5 and 6001.! An servant to sir John Fielding; that he had exaggeration which proves the necessity of often carried advertisements from his master to exercising no small degree of caution, in esti- Mr. Woodfall; had sometimes seen Mr. Woodmating whatever other facts he has attempted fall and delivered them to bim, but very rarely; to advance, with a view of elucidating the ge- that he had one receipt for advertisements in "Heral bistory of the times."
the Public Advertiser, signed by Mr. Woodfall. VOL, XX,