duty to the crown as paramount to all other obligations whatsoever. To us, says the anonymous writer, to us they are indebted for an accidental existence. I wonder of what member he happens to be the elector! it would be more honest if he was to shew himself, that we might know who he is. To us they are indebted for an accidental existence, and they have justly transferred their gratitude from parents to benefactors, meaning from the electors to the ministers; from those who gave them birth, to the minister, is the very expression. Now, whatever may be the flippancy of some men's manner of telling things, all orders of government, where the form of government subsists, as well as in this country; no man of sense can admit that it ought to exist, and at the same time it ought to be subjected to re

thinks proper to put reproach upon them, by publishing a libel. I only wish to have those two propositions examined. That two great bodies, whose whole benefit and existence, nay their authority, is to govern the whole nation; and are they to be in the power of every man

people in the way in which I have now stated to you, as never having once consulted his own understanding? I do not even dwell upon the epithets, which are the natural consequences of treating the person of the king in that manner. The next charge upon him, is, that he takes a share in the narrow views, and fatal maliguity of some individuals, and to sacrifice, consequently, private objects under the government, for the private purposes of gratifying pique and resentment; then it mentions [that by the peace] England was sold to France, and his majesty was deserted and betrayed in it. But the next article, the king is charged with, is what I mentioned to you before, which is, he has put himself into the condition of an enemy, a private enemy to an individual man. For God's sake, why? What man could, without offending the laws, put himself in a situa-proaches, at the pleasure of every man that tion, either to deserve, or actually to meet the private enmity of the king; and, as I told you before, in order to lessen the king the more in your esteem, this gentleman is represented to you, who, in the former part of his life had acted upon a settled opinion, that there were few excesses to which the character of an Eng-whatsoever to revile them with what personal lish gentleman might not be reconciled, and that he could take the same latitude in the choice of political principles as he had in the conduct of his private life. With regard to the former, it seems to be somewhat singular. I have always understood that principles, either moral or political, were fixed upon the consciences of men, and an honest man was not at liberty to choose different principles. But this is all said with a view of lessening the character of that gentleman, to make the conclusion afterwards, that it is an unworthy contention, (and it is represented as unworthy) and giving an air of ridicule to the difficulties, in which the king has been betrayed; and making it a principle of government; that he had not only stretched every nerve of government, but violated the constitution by an ill-advised personal resentment. Is this language to tell a king? If you were to tell a common justice of peace, that in the administration of the duty of his office, he had sacrificed his duty to his resentment, I apprehend my lord will agree with me, and I lay it down as a proposition of law, you would be liable to be prosecuted; and if such a thing was published, it would be a libel it wrote upon him. And here we are come seriously to debate, whether telling the king he has not only sacrificed the duties of his office, but betrayed the trust reposed in him, and his articles were not performed-and all that to gratify ill-humour and resentment-if that is not a libel, I own my imagination cannot reach to what is a libel, and I do not understand the subject the least in the world, if it is not to be so understood. After that, he is pleased to go to the House of Commons: with regard to them, he says he can readily believe there is influence enough to recall what they look upon as a pernicious vote. The House of Commons consider their

insolence of language he pleases? Does this come at all to the idea, that an honest man would allow his own opinion, under the pretence of discussing public subjects? Will any man of honour say you may revile, with imputations of reviling, the persons of men, without going any further? Is that a colour to cover this libel? After having treated the House of Commons thus, he returns again to the king, and is pleased to threaten the king with an universal revolt of all his injured subjects. He begins with the kingdom of Ireland, which he is pleased to call a plundered and oppressed kingdom, with no more regard to truth than understanding and knowledge enough of the subject to keep up the probability; for of all quarters of the world, he should not have looked there for that sort of imputation, as he is pleased to put it. And here he is introducing another character upon the stage, merely for the sake of traducing the king afterwards; that is lord Townshend. "The people of Ireland every day give you fresh marks of their resentment. (speaking of the king) They despise the miserable governor you have sent them, because he is the creature of lord Bute; nor is it from any natural confusion in their ideas;" no, they are right enough in that, he supposes" that they are so ready to confound the original of a king, with the disgraceful representation of him." This is the manner of talking to the king. I have had the honour to converse and live with lord Townshend, as long as any body. All I have to say of him, is, he is very far from deserving such a character. But I hope that will not be taken as a very gross observation, that a man who bas lived with him, dare to say

so.

But I desire but one word concerning the immorality of that sort of conduct, that under the cover of anonymous publication, men are to bespatter in this kind of way, and in that

way reflect upon the condition of officers in this situation. If he should apply to a court of law, and submit it to a jury, if they were not deaf to his complaints he would be relieved, unless they were not disposed to protect his character, and, upon the contrary, were to take the part of a man, who under cover of an anonymous publication, attacks his character in this manner, with this method of tacking to it at the end, that he was a proper representative of the king.

another. If you have any difficulty of imagining what that crown is, what his title is, who is in possession of that title, acquired by one revolution, and what it is that is meant by another; they are difficulties that have not yet occurred in any one coffee-house in this great metropolis, nor one place in the country, from one end to the other, wherever this libel has been published; such is the nature of the libel, with respect to that. After having stated to you, what I look upon to be the ap plication of the paper, to the several articles mentioned more particularly than all to the king; and having laid before you what will be the general form of the evidence, in order to prove the present defendant guilty of printing and publishing this paper, it will be for you to determine, if I may use a word that looks so like doubting the determining upon such a question as this. If you have, any of you, any serious thoughts, whether the author of this paper did mean the king; and whether be did mean the great officers, the lord lieutenant

mean concerning the officers of this country, and endeavouring to set one party of the country against another; if you have any doubts upon that among yourselves, that will admit you to acquit him. If you have no doubts, and do return a verdict of acquittal without such doubts, or that you return a verdict which the Court must understand in a different way, which the Court must construe different from what you intend, then you find a false verdict. For it lies upon you, to find a conclusion from the evidence; or to say, whatever we think of the evidence, and however we are convinced of the conclusion, we are determined to reject that evidence, and to deny that conclusion, and to betray the sense of our own minds, rather than to execute the laws. But, gentlemen, upon the contrary, you will proceed in the administration of justice and the law, without adopting the part of the author, who has set himself up for the accuser of his king, and as yet has not had the face to shew himself, though he has been the rancorous enemy of so many people.

The next article is "He has taken a decisive personal part against the subjects of America, and those subjects know how to distinguish the sovereign and a venal parliament upon one side, from the real sentiments of the English nation upon the other." For God's sake, is that no libel? To talk of the king, as taking a part of an hostile sort against one branch of his subjects, and at the same time to connect him in the article of acting in this manner with that parliament, which he calls a venal parliament; is that no libel? I beg leave to observe, concerning what parts apply to him, that Eng-of Ireland, or any other; and whether he did land he has represented as being engaged in a quarrel against the king; and consequently, that he stands against them with a few unhappy people, who are not at liberty to choose their principles; but fancy themselves bound to unhappy principles; those few men, he desired to be understood, were the whole support, and the whole attachment to the king. Then he goes to the partiality of his understanding to the soldiers. Now it is worth your attention, gentlemen, to see how very malignant the object of that man must be who wishes to set this party against the other; and tells the king he might learn to dread the undisguised resentment of people that are ready to meet their sovereign in the field. Then you see how malignant that must be, and how it applies, when you read that part with respect to the guards, where he says, "when the distant legions took the alarm, they marched to Rome and gave away the empire." This is the representation of the occasion, upon which the guards had preferments lavished upon them, and the cruelty with which the marching regiments had been treated, in order to raise a quarrel, in short, between them. Now, gentlemen, there are an hundred different passages, in which the king is told he has no good quality, but every bad one upon earth. He is bid to discard his little personal resentments, which have so long directed his public conduct. Is it not shameful to talk in that manner? and in a thousand instances, too long and too disagreeable to repeat, the king has been treated thus, from the beginning to the end; and in conclusion, he is told what he is to expect next, unless he conforms to this anonymous writer; that is, another revolution; and that the prince who imitates the conduct of the Stuarts, should be warned by their example, and while he plumes himself upon the security of his title to the crown, should remember, that as it was acquired by one revolution, it may be lost by

Daniel Crowder sworn.
Examined by Mr. Morton.

Crowder, what is your business?—I am an assistant to the messenger of the press, Sir.

Very well. Do you know the defendant John Miller ?-I believe I know him, I believe he is in that quarter.

Now, Sir, give my lord and the jury an account, whether at any time, and when, you bought the paper, which I believe you have in your hand.-[No answer. The paper produced.]

What is Miller? low?-He is the Evening Post.

What business does he folpublisher of the London

Now give an account where you bought that paper.-I bought it at Mr. Miller's; it was served to me by his publisher.

What is his name?-His name is Phipps, I and when printed, brought into the office to be believe. charged for the duty, one of each paper every

Where did he serve you with it?--Inday. Queen's-Head Passage.

Is that the place where his business of printing is carried on?-I never saw them print there.

Is that the place where they are sold?-It is the place where they are published.

Have you frequently bought that paper at that shop? I have.

What name do you call his shop where you bought it?-The publishing room; 1 do not know whether that is proper, but that is what they call it.

At any time have you been there, and have you seen the defendant?-[No answer.]

Whom did you buy it of?-I bought it of a lad, who is servant to Mr. Miller, they call him Frank, and I think Phipps, I won't be certain as to that; he was always called Frank by every body.

Have you at other times been at that place called the publishing room, for the paper that bears the name of the London Evening Post, and have you bought them there?—Yes, Sir, every time they were published; either I, or one belonging to me; I can't say always that I have been there myself.

Have you frequently?-I have frequently. Have you waited at any time till the papers have been ready to be delivered?-Very rarely. I have seen people wait and go up stairs, but they are generally the readiest of any body.

They are the most diligent of any others?They are in general the most forward.

A Juryman. You bought that paper?Crowder. Yes, gentlemen, I bought that paper. Mr. Morton. How long have you known Frank Phipps, the lad you bought it of?— Crowder. I have known him ever since he began to publish that paper.

How long is that?-About three quarters of

a year.

The London Evening Post read in court, N°. 26,572, that part of it signed Junius.

Robert Harris sworn.

Examined by Mr. Wallace.

In what business are you? What office do you belong to?-The Stamp-office.

What office do you hold there?—The register of pamphlets and news-papers.

Pray, Sir, are news-papers brought to your office to be stampt?—Yes, Sir.

Do you receive the duty for advertisements in news-papers?—Yes, Sir, I do.

Pray, Sir, do you know who the printer is of the London Evening Post?-1 have it here. [Looking at a large parcel of news-papers bound together in a book.]

Do you know the defendant Miller ?—Yes, I do.

Are papers brought to your office for printing the London Evening Post on?-They are first brought to be stampt, and sent out blank,

Whose servants bring them to be stampt?Mr. Miller's. After they are stampt, the money is sent, it may be by himself, or his servants; the money for 15,000 may be brought together, then they are returned to the office after they are printed, for the number of advertisements to be found out and charged with the duty.

Who pays for the advertisements ?-Mr. Miller. It does happen sometimes that the number of papers may not be sold, then the money is returned.

You say, the duty is returned?-For the unsold, the duty is returned.

How do you verify that?-They are returned, and they make an affidavit that they made no profit of the papers, and then the stamps are returned again, and the duty is re

turned.

Who makes that affidavit ?-Mr. Miller. How is the account of the advertisements settled ?-We settle it every month. Who comes to settle with you ?-We charge them.

Whom do you charge the London Evening Post to?-To Mr. Miller.

Who comes to pay you at the end of the month ?—It may be two months, or it may be three months before they are paid.

Who comes?-May be Mr. Miller, may be his porter.

Does he come himself frequently?—Yes,

sometimes.

Does he settle and pay for the advertisements? Yes.

Have you the paper of Saturday December 16, to Tuesday December 19, 1769?

[The witness looks at his volume of papers and turns to that paper.]

This is the paper sent from Mr. Miller to your office?-Yes, Sir, they are brought into

our office.

Mr. Wallace. The paper is of the same date, and number 26,572.

Mr. Thurlow to the defendant's counsel. Do you ask this witness any questions? Defendant's Counsel. No.

Sol. Gen. Then we have done.

Serj. Glynn. Please your lordship, and you gentlemen of the jury, to favour me in this cause, in behalf of Mr. Miller, the defendant. Gentlemen, the learned gentleman who opened the cause in support of the information, has told you, that of this publication, no lawyer, not a man of the profession in the kingdom, he thinks will seriously avow,-the learned gentleman who appears in support of the information, has said, no man will seriously avow a defence and justification of the publication now under your consideration. Gentlemen, I have had the misfortune to be very much misunderstood, if I gave any inference of myself, or any

admission of the least degree of guilt or crimi- you; it is a case of a different sort; and I am nality in a similar publication to this. I en- at a loss to guess how the word 'mercenary' tered into a defence as seriously, and as ar- can bear any application to the present charge. dently wished, that such weak arguments as I have always in my own thoughts distinmy understanding might furnish me with, guished between those that prostitute their own might be prevalent in that case, with that peus, and become the stipendiary instruments anxiety that always will attend questions of the of parties and ministers, and those pens which most important nature, and expecting an in- are called forth in the defence of particular stant decision. I appear now, as then, avow- opinions, and only offer the discussions of those edly defending the publication of the paper. I opinions to the public. I have always thought approach with the same anxiety, and have it of the utmost importance, that the latter some relief to that anxiety, finding the deter- should be protected and encouraged. If in the mination of this important question in the hands paper here before you, you see no more than 1 of a jury of the principal citizens of London. profess I see, a writer called forth by ardent Gentlemen, I made no objection to that neglect zeal, for the safety of that sovereign which he and remissness, in convening a full jury here, thinks in danger, and for the safety of that persuaded as I am, that collect the jury where country whose rights are involved in the same they will, among the inhabitants of this me- danger, called out to deliver his opinion of that tropolis, it is impossible to find men with hearts in this publication; I am so far from thinking so foreign to the ideas they owe to liberty and that paper obnoxious to any degree of censure public justice as to allow the conviction of the and condemnation, that I think the author must present defendant. Gentlemen, my learned have been said to have acted a justifiable part, friend has said, that upon the last trial, no par- to have obeyed the call on a good citizen, in ticular passages were pointed out to which we conveying the alarm, and giving notice where thought proper to apply a particular vindica- he thought it necessary. My learned friend tion. The charge was general; the answer, I has the same idea of the matter now to be deallow, was as general; and I think it seems as termined, upon the grounds on which you are proper and becoming to leave the construction to form your decision, that I entertain; it lies of a paper to a jury of citizens, who are the entirely in your own breasts to determine it; most competent judges of what sense and con- and I would not insinuate any thing that I struction belongs to a paper, unassisted by think they ought to adhere to, as I know you counsel. And if I did not enter into a defence to be a jury so well acquainted with your duty, of particular passages, it was because a general that no instructions are necessary. For we all charge was exhibited, and no particular pas- know, that in all times, the honest, intrepid, sages pointed out, as bearing an unjustifiable upright conduct of a jury must be the refuge construction. My learned friend says, be of the people of this kingdom. That has been knows no party so dangerous, as mercenary their security, when all other securities have writers employing their pens in the aspersion been taken away, and their liberties likewise. of private characters, or the misrepresentation They must and will, in the natural course and of public measures. I do most heartily agree evolution of things, flee again to the same asywith the gentleman, in a detestation of those lum; and upon that account, gentlemen that men who can be procured by any emoluments are called to exercise that important duty, do coming from any quarter, to prostitute their not want to be informed of that line of jurispen to the calumniation, slander, and depre- diction that falls to them; that jurisdiction that ciating of the best characters in the king- they are to keep inviolable, and that jurisdicdom. I do most heartily agree with him in tion upon which depends the security of every despising and contemning the authors; but I subject of this kingdom: and that jurisdiction, do look further, and I bestow the higher mea- if once broke in upon, makes juries useless; sure of indignation and condemnation on that and the practice and insult upon that substanfountain from whence flows the encouragement tial benefit, the constitution boasts of in it, and to such pernicious prostitution. None of that the public have constantly reaped from it; sort has, however, been thought proper to be that line of distinction the jury have to deterbrought before you, with regard to the great mine of the full matters before them, and I and respectable characters that have been at- believe I shall be in no degree contradicted, tacked, as they say they have acted with im- when I shortly state the question you are to propriety in leaving the publisher to the pu- determine. Gentlemen, Mr. Miller is a citizen nishment that a just and indignant public jury of London, and is charged with having sedi will always inflict upon indignant writers; tiously published a paper reflecting upon the and if that is to be pursued, it should be of person of the king; vilifying his subjects, and those writers there should be a reparation wrote with a view of exciting a sedition; vilisought for, to the constitution; and those cha-fying the person of the king; wrote with a racters that you see every day in daily publications, publicly libelled and traduced, there might be reparation sought for to those great characters, though they cannot be protected from the scurrility of malignant pens. But gentlemen, none of them are brought before

view of exciting sedition, with intent to alienate the affections of the subjects from his ma. jesty. That is the general description of the charge against him before you. It is alleged in the information, that it is a seditious libel, reflecting upon the king, bis administration of