Libel in the "London Evening milerable this Kingdom. Michaelmas Term 25 Geo. 2. 1752. K. B. MSS. The King v. (a) William (b) Owen. An Information was exhibited this Term by the Attorney (c) General against the Defendant, for printing and Polt." publishing a certain falfe, wicked, fcandalous, feditious and malicious Libel, intituled, "The London Evening Poft, England in a from Saturday, September 7, to Tuesday, September 10, Condition. 754. No. 4185." tending to reprefent this Kingdom in a Conftitution miferable and wretched State and Condition; and the Conin Danger. ftitution thereof in Danger of being overturned and fubverted under the prefent Government and Adminiftration; Revolution and alfo to traduce the late happy Revolution, and to fugtraduced; unce nftitu- gest that it was an unjuftifiable and unconftitutional Protional; ceeding; and alfo to difpute and call in Question the SetSettlement tlement and Limitation of the Succeffion of the Crown of this of the Crown Realm in the prefent moft illuftrious Family; and to reprefent Question; the fame as illegal and unwarrantable, and to make it be bethe fame il-lieved that the faid most happy Revolution, and the Settlement legal; Revolution of the Crown of this Realm, as now by Law established, had been attended with fatal and pernicious Confequences to the Subjects of this Kingdom; and alfo to fcandalize the Parliament of this Kingdom, and to reprefent the MemConfequen- bers thereof as perjured Slaves, bought at the Expence of ces, the Public for vile Purpofes; and alfo to abufe the King's fcandalized, principal Officers and Ministers, and to reprefent them as Members wicked Perfons, by no Means fit to be employed or intrustperjured; ed by the King. Michaelmas Term 27 Geo. 2. 1754. K. B. Officers and MSS. The King v. Richard Nutt. called in and Seule ment, attended with fatal Parliament bought, Minifters 2 bufed. AnInformation was exhibited this Term by the Attorney (d) General against the Defendant, for printing and publishing a (a) It is obfervable that the Defendant was called John Owen throughout the Information. (b) This Profecution was a caufe of great Expectation, it being commenced at the Request of the House of Commons, who had voted the Cafe of Mr. Murray to be "An impudent, malicious, fcandalous and feditious Libel, falfely and most inju ioully reflecting upon, and afperfing the Proceedings of the House, and tending to create Milapprehenfions of the fame in the Minds of the People, to the Difhonour of the Houfe, and in Violation of the Privilege thereof." An Addrefs was thereupon p:efented to the King, to defire his Majefty would give Orders to profecute the Publisher, which was accordingly done: However, the Defendant was acquitted on his Trial. which was by a fpecial Jury, before the late Lord Chief Juftice Lee, at Guildhall, London, fixth of July, 1752. (c) The Honourable William Murray Efq. now Lord Mansfield, and Lord Chief Juftice of the King's Bench. Whitw Lift 167, 140. (d) Charles Pratt, Efq. the prefent Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. Whitw. Lift. 167, 147. certain King Willi of King certain falfe, wicked, fcandalous, fediticus and malicious Libel, intituled, "A fixth Letter to the People of England, on the Progrefs of national Ruin; in which it is fhewn, that the prefent Grandeur of France and Calamities of this Nation are owing to the Influence of Hanover on the Coun- Revolution cils of England;" tending to traduce the Revolution, and traduced. to reprefent it as the Foundation of all thofe imaginary Evils and Calamities which he the faid Defendant would falfly infinuate the Subjects of this Kingdom did labour under; and alfo to afperfe the Memory of King William the Memory of Third, and of King George the Firft; and to reprefent am the the public Meafures which were taken and purfued during Third, and the Courfe of their respective Reigns as wicked, corrupt, George the and fatal Measures to this Kingdom; and alfo to afperfe, Firft traIcandalize and vilify the late King, and his Adminiftra- duced; tors of the Government of this Kingdom; and to make King George it thought that the public Affairs of this Kingdom were in vilified. a moft unhappy and declining State; and that the Subjects of this Kingdom were unneceffarily and most intolerably Unneceffary loaded and oppreffed with Taxes, Debts and Subfidies; rable Load and alfo to infinuate that the late King had no Concern for of Taxes. the People of England, nor any Regard for the Interest, Honour or Welfare of this Kingdom; but that the Trea- Treasure, &c. mitapfure and Riches of this Kingdom were mifapplied, wafted plied: difiand diffipated in Support of the Electorate of Hanover, and pated in uphis German Dominions. Hilary Term 31 Geo. 2. 1758. Port of Has K. B. MSS. The King v. Doctor fohn Shebbeare. the Secord and molle nover &c. ton, Num An Information was exhibited this Term by the Attorney "The (a) General against the Defendant, for printing and pub- North Brilifhing a certain malicious, falfe, feditious and fcandalous ber XLV." Libel, intituled, "The North Britain, Number XLV." tending to tending to vilify and traduce the King and his Govern- traduce the King's ment, to impeach and difparage his Veracity and Honcur, Speech; and to reprefent and make it be believed that his Majefty's to impeach moft gracious Speech delivered from his Throne to the the King's Veracity. Parliament, on Tuefday the 19th Day of April, 1763, contained many Falfities and grofs Impofitions upon the Public; and that his Majefty had fuffered the Honour of his Crown to be funk and proffituted, and the Intereft of his Subjects and Allies to be treacheroufly betrayed; and alfo to ren To render der the King and his Government contemptible and odious; King and and to excite Tumults, Commotions, and Infurrections; and government (a) Charles York, Efq; White, Lift. 167. contempti ble. to The like. Publication of North Briton in to violate and disturb the public Tranquillity, good Order, and Peace of the Kingdom. Eafter Term 3 Geo. 3. 1763, K. B. MSS. The King v. John Wilkes, Efq. The like Information was exhibited by the Attorney (a) General this Term against the Defendant, for printing and publishing, "The North Briton, Number XLV.” Eafter Term 3 Geo. 3. 1763. K. B. MSS. The King v. George Kearsley. The like Information was exhibited by the Attorney (a) General this Term against the Defendant, for pubVolumes. lifhing the faid North Briton Number XLV. in Volumes, Hilary Term, 4 Geo 3. 1764. K. B. MSS. The King v. John Williams. The like. The like Information was exhibited by the Solicitor (b) General this Term against the Defendant, for printing. and publishing the North Briton, Number XLV. in Volumes. Michaelmas Term 4 Geo. 3. 1763. The King v. John Wilkes, Efq. Other Cafes I fhall now proceed to digeft the other Cafes wherein concerning there have been Profecutions for Libels, which did not feem to come so properly under any of the foregoing Divifions. Libels di gefted. A Scotch Peer capi tally convicted for ber of the The Defendant was indicted for being the Author and Contriver of a fcandalous and feditious Libel, intituled, "The humble Supplication of a great Number of the Nobiliwriting ty and others, Commiffioners in the late Parliament," reflect""The hum- ing on his Majefty and the Government, and was capitalble Supplication of a ly convicted, but pardoned. The Trial was at Edinburgh, great Num- 3 Dec. 1634. 10 Car. The King v. John Lord Balmerino. By this Trial we find (which was the Reafon for infertNobility and others, Com- ing it) that a Nobleman is not tried by his Peers in Scotmiffioners in land, but in the ordinary Courts, and by a Jury confifting the late Par- of Peers and Commoners, who are always above thirteen liament, but pardoned. (in this Cafe fifteen) and their Verdia determined by a MaNobleman jority of Voices. It is obfervable alfo, that the Court first his Peers in determine whether the Facts in the Indictment amount to Scotland. Treafon or Felony, and whether they are well Court deter- laid; and afterwards a Jury is impanelled to try the Law, Facts. Whereas in England the Jury take both the and then a Law and the Fact upon themfelves, and bring in a Jury the general Verdict of Guilty or Not guilty: Though, it English Jury is true, in England Exceptions may be taken to the take both Indictment before the Trial, and the Prifoner may move in Arrest of Judgment after Conviction, where any Thing not tried by mines the Facts.. Law and Fact. [a] Sir Fletcher Norton. Whitw. Lift. 169. appears vict in Scot demned. appears illegal or infufficient on the Face of the Indict- CapitalConment. It is obfervable alfo, that where a Perfon was ca- land execu pitally convicted in Scotland, it was ufual to execute him ted fame the fame Day he is condemned, and not allow him Time Day as conto prepare for Death as is practifed in England: But then Proceedings the Proceedings appear to be much longer depending in more tediScotland than England; for this Trial of Lord Balmering's us in Scotbegan the 3d of December 1634, and the Jury did not England. bring in their Verdict till the 20th of March following: Evidence, And lastly, It appears that the Evidence confifted of writ aminations ten Examinations and Depofitions; and the Witneffes were and Depofinot produced perfonally in Court, to give their Testimony tions. in the Prefence of the Prifoner, according to the Practice not viva of the Courts of England in capital Cafes. land than in written Ex Witnesses voce. Vender, and Speeches and Prayers of convicted nor. The Defendant was charged in the Indictment only with Printer, a Mifdemeanor, for which he was tried and convicted, in Publisher printing a Libel, intituled, "The Speeches and Prayers of of "The the late King's fudges;" and felling and uttering the fame: Part of the Words laid in the Indictment being taken out the late of a Letter from Cook the Regicide to his Friend, a little King's before his Execution, wherein he fays, "The Caufe for Judges," which I am in Bonds is as good as ever it was; And I be- only of a lieve there is not a Saint that hath engaged with us but will Mildemeawifh at the last Day that he had fealed to the Truth of it with his Blood: I am fatisfied it is the most noble and glorious Caufe that has been agitated fince the Apoftolical Times, being for Truth, Holiness, and Righteoufness; for our Liberties as Men and as Chriftians; for removing all Yokes and Oppreffions: It is fuch a Caufe, that the Martyrs would come from Heaven again to fuffer for it, if they might: 1 look upon it as the most high Act of Justice (the Murder of the late King) that our Story can parallel, &c." Publisher of "The Pho Brewfter was a fecond time indicted and convicted for Printer and printing and publishing a Libel called, "The Phoenix; or The Solemn League and Covenant;" in which it was nix; or the declared, "That a King abufing his Power, to the Over- folemn throw of Religion, Laws, and Liberties, which are the League and very Fundamentals of this Contract and Covenant, may convicted of Covenant," be controuled and opposed: And if he fet himself to over- a Libel. throw all these by Arms, then they who have the Power, as the Estates of a Land, may and ought to refift by Arms; because he doth by that Oppofition, break the very Bonds, and overthrow the Effèntial of this Contract and Covenant: This may juftify the Proceeding of this Kingdom, againft Profecutor may call Of meanor only. If Charge against the late King, who, in a hoftile Way, fet himfelf to overthrow Religion, Parliaments, Laws, and Liberties; and that the breaking this Covenant, was a greater Sin than the breaking a Commandment." Hillary Term 15 Gar. 2. 1663. K. B. The King v. Brewster. We may obferve that it is in the Power of the Profecufence what tor, to call the Offence what he pleafes: Though the Fact he pleates. be really an Overt Act of High Treafon, he may charge Teaion the Prisoner only with a Mifdemeanor; nor can the Jury chargeable as a Mifde- find it to be any thing elfe, though the Treafon be never fo evident: On the other Hand, where the Prifoner is charged with High Treafon, and it appears upon the Evidence, High Trea- that the Offence amounts to no more than a Mifdemeanor, fon, and E- the Jury must acquit the Prifoner, and cannot find him vidence a guilty either of Treafon or Mifdemeanor: It appears alfo, that in a Trial for a Misdemeanor, a Man might have had The Jury Counfel formerly, but not where he was charged with must acquit. Count for High Treafon; though at this Day, by a late (a) A&t, merly for a he may have Counfel in Treafon: However in Murder, Misdemea and other capital Offences, he is ftill denied (b) Counfel; unless where a Point of Law arifes on the Frame of Treafon; the Indictment, or on the Facts that are given in Evi Mifdemea nor only, nor. Counsel in not in other dence. capital Of fences, Law. An Information was granted against Henry Carr, and he unless upon was this Terrn in Guildhall tried and convicted of Writing a Point of and Publishing a Book, called, The Weekly Packet of AdWriter and vices from Rome, &c. in which, among other Things, was Publisher of contained the following fcandalous and libellous Paffage: The weekly There is lately found out by an experienced Phyfician, Packet of Advices an incomparable Medicament, called, The wonder-working from Rome, Paifler," truly Catholick in Operation, fomewhat of Kin to the Jefuits Powder, but more effectual. The Virtues of it are ftrange and various: It will make Juftice deaf as well as blind; takes Spots out of deepest Treafons, more cleverly than Caftile-foap does common Stains: It alters a Man's Conftitution in two or three Days, more than the tried and convicted of a Libel. Libellous (a) Stat. 78 W. 3. c. 3. See, Foft. Cr. Law 21. (b)" There is no other good Reason can be given why the Law refufeth to allow the Prifoner at the Bar Countel in Matter of Fact, when the Life is concerned, but only this, because the Evidence by which he is condemned ought to be fo evident and plain, that all the Counfel in the World should not be able to answer it." The Earl of Nottingham's Speech (as Lord High Steward) on Lord Cornwallis's Trial, which fee in St. Tri Virtuofo's |