The National Register.
London, England, 1820-12-03 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

shire. On the whole he was of opinion there was no
evidence of publication to go to the Jury ; and if mere
was not, it ottelit not In nave gone to the Jury. The
Learned Jud,;e, in a most luminous judgment, concluded
by sayntg, it there was any doubt of the poevcr 01 the
kiiy to decide upon the publication, the verdict might
not to static!.
TheChiei Justice expressed his opinion, that the rule
oburttied Farr nF v trial must be discharged. The pre-
sumption drawn by the Jury was properly drawn.—
Hat ing comiderecl the question again and again on all
the oltiectioas, he was of opinion that the premise=
warranted him in saying the paper was written in Lei-
cestershire. • Tom was nu ground to disturb the verdict.
Rule discharged.
- - - - -

The Solicitor General said, as• the defendant had not
been put to the expellee of attending the Court from day
to day to melee judgment, and was icmorant of the
decision this day, it was not the intention of the Attorney
General to pray the Judgment of the Coon before next
Term.

THE ZING V. WOOLER, CARTWRIGHT, 11ADOX AND

OTHERS.

In this a rule to shew cause why there should not be
a new trial, was obtained by Mr. DCIIIII3II, but it ap.
peared the rule had not been drawn up, and the Court
allowed it to vtand over to the first day of next Tenn.

SEDITIOUS LIBEL: THE LING V. GIigATHEAD LEWIS.

The Solicitor-General prayed the judgment of the
Court on the defendant, convicted of publishing a sedi-
tious libel concerning the Manchester Meeting, which
appeared in the Coventry paper, of which the defendant
is Editor.
Mr. Justice Best read the report of the trial, which
came on at the Summer Assizes for the County of
Warwick.
The libel was calculated to excite persons to rebellion,
by stating that the Manchester Yeomanry Cavalry mete
murderers. It also reflected grossly on the King for
havim; approved of their conduct. The defendant, in
his affidavit in mitigation of punishment, complained
that he was the victim of a conspiracy, inasmuch as the
Jury had been packed by the Master of the Crown Office.
The libel he described to be taken from a work pub-
lished in London, which the Attorney-General hail not
thought proper to notice. The defendant, filler his attida-
s it had been read, addressed the Court, and allndind to the
conduct of Hunt and others, when they received judg-
ment, observed, that he had heard those persons appeared
before the Ju lges with the feeling men would have who
had pert rated a meritorious service. Ile was under the
saute feeling, believing he had done no wrong.

The Solicitor-General, on behalf of the prosecution,
said he had but little to observe. The defendant had
stated that he took the libel from a pamphlet. He
could only say, the Attorney-General and himself had
niter heard of that pamphlet. The Solicitor-General
the', read the strong part of hie libel, and contended
tlia it was calculated to produce the grettest mischief
Mr. JtIS:ICC, Bayley, addressing the defendant said—
" Yon ate to receive the judgment of this Court, con-
vi-ted of publishing a 1'66 by .1 Jury selected in the ordi
nary mode. Itbel is one of the most mischievous
tenth-icy. It is most unjust. An unfortunate event had
taken pi Ice at M mchestur, in consequence of which
lives mete lost. libel in question imputes to toe
troops that tney were murderers, and if they had been to
be tried for the crime of murder, I ark you, judging of
your own case, to say, whether every man is not. tootled
to have a fair trial beim,. an unbiassed Jury?
The Learned Jud,4e coiraluded by passiug, sentence on
the defendant, namely, to pay a fine of 501 be imprisoned
two years in Warwick gaol, and find sureties for five
years, himself in and two in tool. each.
Ater sentence, Mr. 'Lewis asked if it was usual
for persons in his situation to be imprisoned in solitary
cells.

Mr. Justice Bayley said the Court ntf!e no order for
suck conlinetneui.
'rue de:end.ilit was 1,-ken out or Court.
Tit:WAY, NOV. 26.
ALASNItEDY.-Tilt KIND I. DAVISON.

Mr. Gunn.; 11,0%,:ii fur the judeosent (A the Court on
the defendant, cuitvicted of publishing a blaspilL:ntotts
hoe!.

Ur. Justice Bayley delivered the judgment of the
Court, and after ‘ithertinis to thepurity of the Scriptures
which the libel had vilified, it was necessary, he said,
that society should Le protected against all attacks of this
sun, which struck at the root of human happiness.
'lnc defendant was soitenccd to be imprisoned two
yeas in the waol of Oakilam (Itutlandshire), and to find
sureties for his good behaviour for five years, himself in
501. and two others in 201. each.