The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1820-03-25 00:00:00

their iticlinetiona iu whatever nuiribers, and to pass whatever
resolistiou• they might, is spite of the Geriteroment or any
of Ite authorities. The writer, is observing " this may be
abbot," air. proved that though he hail vieitlei iii haste, he
was CUOlltiolls of leaving written that whit:hemsly to be .
- rteem. d bb, (lung. It leas nu matter whet opiemerhe enter- .
tamed of the law or present practice iii cameo( libel. The
, • neat pasmage referred to a celebrated period of most hietiwy,
, Ike whob Hoe Bishops had oppinsed adeclarstiou fur /medusa
.-.•f conscience sod g I toleration. Hr wished Only 10 take
• the ralf and natural conetractiou of the wools. He asked the
Jury to consider the terms as plena men. But whist could be
• a fns-red from the aunties I. the eadleololo of the flovero•
sO, it by James 11. trot au inainisation that he looped fur the
•annir coma-Teton if he should he tried fir libel like the
. green Bishops. A. to the ismer, of the Wiwi esliseribeil by
• tinise•teareed sad pious tueii,liad be (Me. Vaughins) !owe a
soldier Ileum is those days, he weald hare been diet- I
forted. smooch •tu shoot too. Ist what emsembluire wen
diem •betweeu their ease mad the ? The seven
-P•shops had retailed matell btf MO a iltelseatio• in the
✓ ureters' fur litany of awaeMasw..iablalli tbsdallatiosi was
fouaded me • power armapilltif by the eristra, mid bellies
rte-
e;wred to be illegal by the lffindia'snebt, of diapasons( on its
won authority, with the paballties spirt (*migtolics nod Dia-
' winters. They respectfollyeettealed the King to forbear tram
preasiug it, mail humbly renwestreted against it.
()Ir. Isaias Bug said, their remonetrance was couched
im a Petition.)
'I he Learned Serjesnt resumed.—ln the entwine for's-
eeektisge of the times, soul in opposition to the attempts,
of their infatnated Monarch, they acted to the best of
their ability. There was sot the slightest degree of pa-
rallel between their emus and the present, and yet she
Jo", sushi perceive that the same consequoisces were asitici-
patod. The reference to the soldiers must have been Ascent
for an iiitintatioes, that the soldiers of these times were
image debased and creel than thine of James, " tearing the
lvoing flesh from their banes." This was obviously
tOmiled W bring the - Goveroopent tutu eoutempt aid dia
the among the eoldles7. He had guise tbruagli the whole
letter. It would be for the Jerry Weal, whether it was or.
dimwit or not. In the small compass of a letter it would
have beim difficult to introduce stronger matter. The Jury
womid see how iitcessary it was to take the present moose, la
uoler to put down the libels which had been spread, and
were still spreading over the country. He hoped he felt as
touch as any man fur the Itlserty of the press, which, accord.
tug as it was used, became as engine of powerful utility or
of t,emensloos evil. Perseus were at liberty to write what
they phaed, bet they were liable to puishilinteut for ion
prop. r writings. Juries were the best croons of the press.
They were the (sardines of the law, end by them only
• its justice be adinieistered purely. Of this justice
it might be said, as was said of the divine law, " Her seat
is the broom of Owl, her voice is the harmony of the world.
All things do her homage; the weakest as enjoying her pro.
tee (lon, and the strongest as mut exempt from her power."
Mr Samuel Brooks of Westminster, beau' then sworn,
depo•rd to ro rived the letter containing the al-
leged libel through the bands of Mr. Iliekeratalf. Hr
believed it to be Sir Francis Borden's writing. He had
mislaid the envelope, mid did not know where to fad it.
Soppo.ing the letter intended fur publication, hr had gin. ii
espies Of it to the London Newspapers, aisainig the reel to
'1 n• Burnett Psis. The Editors inserted it on their own
esinsii-ibilisy, as Bathing was paid for it. He did not so
east., reeuguite She letter to laird Sidewalk to be the Hato.
los is head-writing. He did nut believe the envelope to be
wt,tlrn by Sir Francis at all.
%Ir. Tiede, of Pedfordarew, Loadun, knew the bawl-
s., i.ing of Sir F. Burdett, nod believed the letters and este-
lope to have been writhes. by him.
Sinspkie, keeper of the tull.giste ewer Kirby, saw
Sir Francis Burdett about 100 yard. from Insdwelliagini the
'kid of August last ; saw him again en the 43d.
Croes.exansined by Sir Francis Burdett—Did out Moue
that kirby was un the bulelers of the county.
Mr. Brookes called again—Tux 011rrISIS PRISM of the
25t1. of August, cootaisting the letter is question, being put
into his hand, supposed that meet have brew about the time
u b. n he received it, or a day sir two after.
"I he letters were them put is and read.
'the Clerk aunorinted to hie Lordship, that there was a
letter in as tervelope.mideamed Sta hard Itidestinth.
Mr Deana, ..bailed that it was osty a letter, and as
aereluiw.
Mr. Denise* now rose, sad submitted that there was sit
case for proarcatino. The M(0,8004211 alleged a libellous
pnbl.catimi in the county of Leicester, of which there was ii.
proof. It might be aseineed from the date that the letter
40 written in Kirby Park, mad there was evidence that Sir
F hardest was in that meighbourhood at the date of the
triter. Het there was slaking MOM proved than that he
was seen there. The writing and composing of a paper,
however unworthy the cositents, were mut criminal. There
mast be an act of publication proved by direct evidence upon
the ai•cused party. The charge was, that be bad published
lettei in the comity of Leicester. But it might as well
hate been published in say other county. It was quite as
eonsitterit that be might have written the knee im his
etody, taken. a ride out, met Stir. Birkerstalf in another
von 'sly, end there delivered the letter to him. Such a thiug
could be in MU Wily int-moistest seleb the facts just gives,
in evidence. There was no proof that the letter was pub.
hiked in the county of Leicester; sued airy would be per.
jo!ed if they found a man guilty au abaft alleged to be
committed in one county, without proof that it was coot-
soiled in such county.
Mr. Girding objected to this mode of argument, as be-
ing an address to the Jury, and nut a point of law submitted
to the Benda
DESSSAII said there were many cases ie point, and
ore of them was the very caws alluded to by Mr. Serjeant
Vaughan—thin of the seven Bishops, where the Judges
gs.e their opinion that there was nu woof of the peti-
tion to the King hawing bee*, published in the county
of Middlesex, until Lord Susi/eland proved that he
had presrated it to the King oa behalf of the Bi-
shops Now he submitted that there was ou proof as to
what county the letter was written in. But even if the
letter was put into a puset.oilfiee is the county of Leirreter
at was no publication in that comely, because it was not
',hewn to any one there ; our was it any publication at all
66,11..1 :t OftiOrd at the place of ill. destination. Mr.
Demos° quoted some tuber cases is support of his ar-
gument. Ile admitted that Sir 'Presets Burdett might
very properly have been brought before a Jury in
MAdlorees; lost Fe maintained that the fact of publication
oeght to be clearly sheen, *het the case might came withfo
the pitlidirlicifl ef that Court, mad that it could not be tried
so soy jurisdiction 'except where it was issoird:., the simple .
tart of writing the letter was iu libel; it was not a libel
811.111 it wee ttelovered. Sir Francis might have rude out as
rat as Oalthsisi. in Rutlandshire, which was net far elf, at
hie time whew he ass seen ridline oat on the 113.1 of August,
and left the letter there: It was this is his °pignuts a use
which couhl ant go to a Jury. The eaves Bishops wrote
their petition in Surrey, yet they were out tried is that
esiouty, bid in the comely in which it woe delivered 110 the
K.ux Their was nu proof of this letter hiving been seri, •
by soy human rye ice the comely of I.eicteter' until it was
.Lawn w this,, Cella that day. Therefore there dos tie prose'
au. its I e•ing born written or published there.
Me PwiLitts fotinwed un the spew side. The writing'
of tee lei tee was nut a ion btu:shun by Sir Francis Bartlett ; it •
011,4' was published unlit it came to Midillevel; and there'
was tot even any evidence to show that the letter was ever
vsrotien in Leicestershire. Is Oversee of the terms Bishops,
they admitted that they wrote the paper in Surrey, mild then
it ear admitted vu behalf of the Crown, that there was nut
say evidente of joistification in Surrey. The present waa a
nun only iii petal, but even muck stronger; fur there
ca. neither admission iior evidence to *hew that this letter
written ice Leicestirshore; There was wit the shiftiest
evidence to shew where Si.. Sickerstaff received the letter.
The moue rested ou the Gown to shew how it came out of
the Landis of Sir F. Burdett to Mr. klickeritaff. Nu such
thins was dome; amid therefore there was a complete CIMINO ia
the evidence.
Mr. Jss.tice Ban said, he wag of opiuine that there was
evoleoce suffitieist to go to the hays • and the 1111111.C11•11 new
pat might hereafter be urged in aorither plear;in arrest of
jeolgeneet, if a coonstelite• 'Weld fah, plate. l'iseismit of the
"even Bishops was different, for the libel ties woe tried is
the roomy in which at was alone circulated.' fa the ease of
Jetties 'idioms, it was &Mika that be might bae Neat in
•
. .
•