The National Register.
London, England, 1811-02-10 00:00:00

REGENCY ADDRESS.

Another Court of Common Council was held on Thursday,
to take into consideration a motion for agreeing to an Address,
to be presented to his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, on
his being appointed Regent.
Mr. Alderman WOOD opened the business in a short speech,
and concluded by moving—I
That a dutiful and loyal Address be presented to his Royal
Highness, condoling with him on the indisposition of our most
gracious Sovereign, which has rendered him incapable of the
exercise of the Royal finctions; lamenting the degree of Re-
straint and Restriction imposed upon his Royal Highness in the
arduous duty of supplying the incapacity of our beloved Sove-
reign ; expressing our firm confidence in the Prince's know-
ledge and personal endowments ; and relying, that, under cir-
cumstances so awful and embarrassing, every measure that de-
pends personally upon him, and his inclination, will he adopted
for the 'defence of the personal liberties of the King's subjects,
under their present difficulties, and promoting the peace, hap-
piness, and security of the county.
The. motion was seconded by Mr. Waithman, and after some
opposition from Alderman Birch and Mr. S. Dixon, carried
unanimously. An Address was then brought in and agreed to,
and the Sheriffs, attended by the Remembrancer, were desired
to wait upon his Royal Highness, to know when he would be
pleased to receive the same.

Forty-four Sterling Prizes-1, Skinner-street.---Lucky W.
Turner, of the Lucky Office, 1, Skinner-street, Snow-hill, grate-
fully acknowledges the txtensivo favours received to the present
period, and begs to remind his Friends and the Public, who have
not yet purchased, that on Friday next the State Lottery will
begin and finish. An advertisemrnt would be too long to enu-
merate the State Lottery Prizes he has sold, together with the
City Lottery Prizes, which may be seen at his Lucky Office,
Skinner-street.—Lticky Turner requests Ladies to make their
purchases immediately, as the crowd of purchasers generally in
the Office the day before Drawing renders him incapable of
showing them the attention he wishes.
Valentine's Day is Next Thursday, and it is also the last day
of purchasing in the present State Lottery, as the Drawing will
begin at 10 o'clock on Friday Morning, and finish the same
Day. Last Valentine's Day Bisiit told 3,734, a Prize of 20,000/.
and 12 other Capital i'rizes hi Shares; on Valentine's Day.
ISO 4, he also sold 9,633, a Prize of 30,000/. &c. &c. He hopes
his friends will be as fortunate this year; at all events they have
a superior chance, as the. Scheme
VL$O,O4Ol•
44 Capitals, and I:00,0001. in Yrues.

LAW REPORTS.

COURT OF OF KING'S BENCH.
WED?IESDAT, sss.6.

THE KING V. J. KING.
A Rule Nisi was granted in this case on a motion of Mr.
Common Ser jeant, to shew cause why a new trial should not be
granted. The defendant, who was present, stood Committ ed

MiI•MMS
THURSDAY, FIB. 7.
THE KING EUGENIUS ROCHE.

Mr. ATTORNEY-GINERAL moved for the judgment of the
Court on the Defendant, who immediately apppeared in
Court.
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL then informed their Lordships,
that the defendant was. the Editor of The Day Newspaper, and
had let judgment go by default in a Criminal Information which
had been filed against him for inserting a Libel against the
Army in that Paper. It was the same Libel that Fisher and
Harvey had received the
_judgment of the Court for, and Mr.
Lovell, the Proprietor of The Statesman.
The Criminal Information was then read by the proper
Officer, which set forth, that the Libel consisted of charging
the military with cruelty on the day that Sir Francis Burdett
was taken to the Tower, and wantonly spilling innocent
blood.
The defendant put in several affidavits. made by himself, and
by Messrs. George Vincent Dowling, David Kirwan, Edward
Seymour, and Peter Courtier, gentlemen likewise on the literary
establishmenti of The Day ; from which it appeared, that the
proprietorship of that paper was divided into 1300 shares; and
that the pacer was conducted by a Committee of 13 of these
Proprietors, together with a Chairman and a Secretary. The
paper is well known to be the propel yof the Auctioneers. It
was at first edited by a gentleman, who had the entire manage-
ment of it, and gave to it what political tone was consonant to
his feelings; and when it was conducted in this manner, the
defendant filled the situation of second writer in it. 'Fhe Com-
mittee afterwards saw reason, however, to make an alteration
in this plan ; and upon the secession of the first editor of the
paper, that office, as fir as related to the management of the
parer, and the conduct of its politics, was assumed by the Corn-
nuttee themselves, who appointed the defendant nominal
editor under their entire controul. For the purpose of giving
in his name at the Stonp-office, as the law required, five shares
in the paper were transferred into his name. Previously to the
publication of the libel in question, it had been settled by the
Committee, that, for the purpose of increasing the sale of The
Day, the popular side of the question relative to the apprehen-
sion of Sir Francis Burdett by the Speaker's warrant should be
taken by that pa er; it having been found that the sale de-
creased by the circumstance of its having sided with the pro-
prietors of Covent-garden Theatre in their dispute with the
public. The defendant gave it as his opinion, that this measure
would c,:rtainly have its effect of increasing the sale of the paper;
but added, that the politics of Sir Francis Burdett did not coin-
cide with .his views; and that, although he considered it his
duty to conform to the wishes of the Committee, he must not
be expected to support the principles of Sir Francis Bur-
dett with any degree of warmth. On the evening before
the publication of the libel in question, Mr. Dowling was
appointed by the Committee to go to Piccadilly, for the pur-
pose of repi.rting the conduct of the populace and the military
there assembled. Mr. Dowling arrived at Tke Day office
about one o'clock in the morning, and was met there by
Mr. Harry Phillips, auctioneer, of New Bond-street, the Chair-
man of the Committee, with whom he held a conference, in
which the defendant did not join. It was sworn, however, by
Mr. Dowling, that he took Mr. Phillips's instructions as to the
tone of the article which formed the libel; and that upon Mr.
Dowling's asking him what he was to say of the military, Mr.
Phillips replied, " dont spare therm." At this late hour Mr.
Dowling began to write the libel upon very small slips of paper,
which were carried away to the printers as fast as they were
written, without giving even Mr. Dowling an opportunity to
revise them. The ekferioant waited at the office till five o'clock,
in hopes to be able to revise what Mr. Dowling had written;
but upon his asking the printer fir a proof of the article, he was
informed that tnere was not time for him even to have a sight
of it ; and that such revise could be of no use, since, if the defen-
dant were to mark any thing for correction, it would be quite
impossible toe such correction to be made. The printer of the
newspaper had contracted with thy- proprietors that the paper
should be ready for publication every morning by six o'clock,
and had received orders from them, not to obey any commands
which sle.oid militate against this punctel publicAtion, under
.
penalty of io;inghis situation ; and IVl,ssrs Dowling and Flu-
. vtran's allidaVit staved Instances fn which the dtteridant's otAlexs

0-5

had been to their knowledge forced to yield to these general
ones of the Committee. Upon the publication of the libel in the
morning (till when the defendant never saw it), he saw its inje-
rious nature with regret and horror ; and, for the purpose ofi.
counteracting its effect, he caused a letter to be written, signed
" A Loyalist," and entitled " A Vindication of the Army,' '
which was two days after inserted in the same paper. This in-
direct apology for the libel was the only one the defendant could
insert, as it had been ordered by the Chairman of the Committee
that no direct apology should ever be made for any article is
The Day. The defendant contrived, however, to insert two
paragraphs in the paper, in direct contradiction of the statement
which had been before made, relative to the conduct of the sol-
diery in Piccadilly ; and otherwise endeavoured to counteract
its effects in a paper, of which the defendant was the uncoit-
trouled editor,—The National Register. Since the period Of the
libel, the defendant had become less restricted in his conduct of •
the paper, and it now bore the character of a Government print,
to which tone the defendant had brought it round by degrees.
The defendant put in other affidavits by Mr. Hoare, the
banker; Mr. Derby:hire, the surgeon; and others, as to his
peaceable character mid loyal principles; and the surgeon fur-
ther swore that the defendant had been afflicted with an asth-
matic complaint, and had at times been visited with a spitting
of blood; and that he verily believed the dampness and confined
air of a prison would endanger his life.
fhe A•reottN ev-Geteeee r. began his address to the Court by
stating, that from what taken place at the time that Harvey atel
Fisher had been brought up for judgment, he would now have
little occasion to trouble their Lordships, as they then beard
what he had to say on this cause. The only question ite
his mind for the Court to consider was, whether the defendant
could attain his object by the affidavits produced—whether or
no they could serve to extenuate the effence of the defendant.
For this purpose the affidavits, he thought, had stated too inuele.
The Attorney-General then explained the law as relating to the
responsibility of the Editors of Newspapers, and defended e s
policy ; how then could the defendant, when he had once divas
in his name, attempt to withdraw it, and place the responsibility'
on another. Though the Chairman of this Committee was
greatly criminal, though he ss as, at the time of the offence, with-
drawn from public censure, and now brought forth as a shield
under which the defendant might shelter himself, could such is
subterfuge weigh a feather in the judgment of the Court?
Could it be suffered for a moment, for an Editor to bay that !lie
was merely nominally so? What mischiefs would arise from
giving any countenance to such a doctrine. The Learned Geo-
tleman, after a few more observations to prove the respousihi-
lity of the defendant, ended with declaring, that he was unwil-
ling to trouble the Court on the subject of the paper, and; lett
the whole to the consideration of their Lordships.
Mr. GRORGE MARIOT addressed the Court for the defendant,
and began by stating his own inexperience in matters 01 such
magnitude, never having before appeared but in causes of
importaece. He feared therefore that the defence of his
client might he in his hands ;educed to comparative weaknesi, ;
but, under every circumstance which had appeared, he was in-
duced to hope for a mitigated sentence. He would not, how-
ever, attempt to extenuate the conduct of his client by any at--
tempt to defend the libel itself. He stated several ICASUIIS to
shew the impropriety of such a proceeding on his part. His
own private feelings would revolt against it, inasmuch as lie
considered the Attorney-General exercising a duty very salutary
to the press of the country, and, in his mind, the man who
would endeavour to encourage the licentiousness of this instru-
ment of public instruction, to which this country is so much t e-
debted, would be found as great an enemy to. the welfare and.
happiness of his country as the man who would endeavour to
subject it to the degrading thraldom of a licence. He proceeded
to comment on the affidavits, and ou the conduct of his clieet.
It was a circumstance, he hoped, that would weigh • with. the
Court, that, as soon as the defendant perceived the mischievous
tendency of the libellous paragraph, he recommended a pablie
apology, and when this was, according to the principles of the
Directors, refused, he even inserted one of an indirect stature.
He would also offer in extenuation, what he hoped the Attor-
ney General himself knew, and would admit to be of some
weight, that he sees proprietor of another paper remarkable fur
loyalty, and also that, in the very paper itself, the nominalcon-
trout of which was in his hands, but the real in :he hands of
others, he had inserted two or three subsequent apologies.
From the affidavit of Mr. Kirwan and Mr. DowlingA: the
innocence and loyalty of his client was clearly manitaat.—
He dwelt also on the affidavits of the very nespectableperaons
who stool forth in defence of that character, and. said, that,
under the circumstance of very ill health, a long confinement
would .almost lead to the certain death of the defendant, ..The
Attorney-General had spoken as to the time that be lecame
Editor 61 the Paper, was stated • to be tinearlier
than las% and be has eveie stated tbsanaeries ant Soule