The National Register.
London, England, 1822-10-28 00:00:00

VIE NATIONAL REGISTER

sound, a hoax, the theatre of venality, &e. Could such passages
be considered a trne definition elite t.lessings of the constitu.
lion? Would his learned friend contend that the press was
not free aides' it aaa ut full liberty lo villify every thing ?
rite liberty or the press could not exist without law, and the
moment the press olvjosin,ll a victory over the law, it would
obtain a victory over &eV, arid be extinguished.
Horatio Orton was si.eu examinvil by Mr. Tindal.—The
aituess purchased the hoot. of Mr. Dolby, at his shop, 299,
Strang.

Cross-examined by Mr. Searlett.—The defendant sells cari-
catures and stationers.
Did you est for this work ?—I asked fur one.
Had you seen it before t—l had.
Did you read it throu,ch 1-1 did not read it through.
Then you wished to 6ni h your reading, I suppose
ei.hod from cariosity to see it.
Who directed you to purchase it was directed by the
committee of the association.

Who are the committee?-1 don't recollect. I was directed
to purchase it by Mr. Murray.
Was M•. Murray attorney to the society ?-11e was solicitor,
%serif the committee, mid secretary.
Did you ever receive pay (rum him'—Never.
Who paid you t—The society.
How much a week ?-1 net et bad pay by the week ; by the
year.
\Viten did you receive it last?—About a month ■go.
What was your salary
[llere the witness appealed to Judge whether he was bound
to answer the question.l
The Lord CbiefJustiee said there was no reason why be
should not answer it.

The witness then stated that be did not wish the public to
know what he rrei•ived.

Mr. Searlett.—llow much is it?—Eighty pounds a year.
Hare you any other oserupation I—No. He was introduced
to the society by Mr. Sharp. Ile purchased the book on the
pith of May.
Mr. Gurney then desired to base the libels read, in which
are mentioned, Lam—Any thing the Judge pleases. Aisiy's
Speech—A few unmeaning sentences. Meeting of Parliament
—A meeting of prisons to augment public iniiiefies, and
scramble fur tlie spoil. Parliament, 4c.—A house of ill-
fame.
Mr. Seerlett the■ addressed the Jury• for the defendimt.—
He adverted to the objecting lie had made before the Jury
were sworn. He too► the objection from the best motives.—
Ile then expressed a hope that the Jury came to the box with
unbiassed minds, His learned friend had selected a few pas-
sages from the book to prove the wickedness of the publica-
tion, bathe had not said one word to explain to them who Mr.
Doily was. If indeed this book had deserved the observa-
tion his learned friend expressed, it was extraordinary that
his Majesty's Attorney General and the Constitutional Associ-
ation bad aufreied it to remain so long dormant. With respect
to the book containing libels, it was well known that scarcely
any satirical work would he found that might not be made the
subject of prosecution for libels, if persons were disposed to
examine closely. The works of Swift, Lord Chesterfield,
Dr. Johnson, and Pope, were written in the general spirit of
satire ; but did any one accuse these authors of in intention to
overturn the constitution. Speaking of the jurisprudence of
the country Pope has said—
•• And Judges Wirtz,
That Jurymen may dine."
Was Mr. Pope considered a libeller in consequence of these
line•, or did any one ever say his intention was to briag the
Judges into contempt. Dr. Johnson had raid oats o ere
food for men in Scidlund, and horses in England," and did any
one charge him with a ibel on all the people of Scotland
The Lord Chief Justice, in his address to the Jury, de-
clared that the work in his opinion was a libel, bet be left them
to exercise their own judgment on the question.
The Jury retired f the box, and Im•ing been out Iwo
hours and a half, returned at live minutes alter fuug o'clock
with a verdict of guilty.

TIIE I[l,o n. CIArKII•
This-was an indictment against the defendant for the pnbli-
cation of a blawhemous libel, in a vroilt. called •• Queen
flab:' The blasphemous matter denied the existence of a
Cod.

Mr. Carney stated the case as one of the worst class. 11
was a prosecution preferred by the Society for the Suppres-
sion of Vice. The learned counsel detailed the offensive mat-
ter, and called upon the Jury to vindicate the Christian itch-
gion by finding the work a libel.
Charles Jones deposed, that he purchased the hook at the
shop of the defendant, on the 4th of May, 1521. lie paid
12s. fur one copy.
T::e libellous passages were then read. _ _ .

Junes Rignold, a person employed by the Society for the
Suppression of Vice, also deposed, that he purchased a. copy
of the defendant on the lUtli of May.
The defendant, who had no counsel, addressed the Jury at
considerable length. He stated, that he wrote to this Society,
olVeting to give up the copies of the work in his hands, stop
the publication, provided they did not prosecute. His object
in publishing the work was merely to get custom in business.
He weited on Mr. Pritchard, Secretary of •ie Society, with
the aforesaid proposal, but was told they could do nothing in it.
The defendant called Mr. Pritchard, who proved bia state-
ment; but on the cross-examination of that geinlenian, it ap-
peared the defendant had published the work after be wade the
proposal.
The Lord Chief Justice summed up the evidence, and hay-
ing commented on the libel, left the Jury to deride whether
the defendant bad published the libel or not.
The Jury found the defendant guilty.
INDAY, OCT. 22.
CONSTANT AND CO. O. HAGUE AND TIIONIPSOM.

Mr. Campball opened the pleadings.
Mr. Gurney stated the case for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs
are sour-boilers, and proprietors of a su:Ar-house, adjoining
the difeetilmits' premises. who are millwii;lits, carrying on bu-
5i111.63 in 11 ell street, 11 !skeetlapel. Defendants had erected
steam engine for tlu• plaintiffs, which exploded, and occasioned
great damage, for the recovery of which this action vv as
brought.
L,rd Chief Justice having summed up at eousideraLle
length the Jury found n erdict for tilt pl.tiutiffs.