The Sun.
London, England, 1802-04-26 00:00:00

After having heard so much at-yod have, froth 'the
Lerned Cotinsel, on the one Side and on ,the other,
I am sure that when you are to 'recollea what the
simple 'question in this case is, you will not expect
from toe that-I
should detain, you' This is an
Information filed by His Majesty's late Attorney
General against the attendant, charging him with
having traduced the We Lord Clare, and likewise'
forhaving, by these publications, excited evil- mind.
ed persons to acts, .of violence -against Lord Clare,
a person of high rank in Ireland, and a Privy
while my Lord Camden was Lord' Lieu-
tenant of Ireland. ,In the support of this Prosecu-
tion, it was necessary that these faas should be
proved, "and they have been proved ; namely, that
my Lord Clare was a person of_ high rank and a
' Privy Councillor ; that my Lord Camden was
',Ord Lieutenant of Ireland ; that this publication
ok place at the time stated in tlie information i;
and lastly.., that the Defendant published the
Paper in. question ; and if he haspubliThed this Pa.
per for one or other of the pUrposes stated in the In-
formation, as has been stated'to you, it is riot neces_
sary for you to be of opinion that this was publish-
ed with intentiok to excite. others to 101 Lord
Clare. If you are only- convinced it was published
with a view of traducing his chit:after, that will he
sufficient to 'call upon you 'to conyid 1.4 u on th.s
ainatiOn. ..Iris nut necessary' that saiild read
dl the in t.erial charges in this
you have heard read inure than once. The 'ques-
tion is, Whether yoii are satisfied that the publica-
tion you have' heard, over and over again, is pi. is
not
.a Libel on my Lord Cia're ? A point on which,
I think; no man of common sense, bestdwing ;my:
.attention upon it, can form a doubt: The words to
which I advert- now are these, " You say that the
Irish Peasantry are vintiietive and blood-thirsty."
Here -the Learned Jlidge read the whole of the
passage recited by theAttorney-General, by which
it was said that Lord Clare's heart never over.
flowediwith beneficence; nor head devised any coup.
sel that was not cruel, .Bcc. ending with the ac-
.eount of the fate of the Duke of Buckinghini,
and applying., t to the case.,•el my Lord, ;Clare,
by saying, "'Perhaps the public hatred is not the,
only circumstance in, which your case may be simi-
lar to his."

" Now Gentlemen, read .and reflect on these
words, as any cotnirion man would read relled.upon
them,, and then task yourselves, whether they are
or are. not, an aspersion, or intended to bean asper-
sion, on the charader of my Lord Clare and
whether it is not more, or intended to be more, to
.
-excite those ill-minded o,r intemperate people,, into
whoSe hands such a publication might fail, to do
him an" injury With respect to the publication, it
•is proved; more than in the common way, by -the
person, who gives you the account of it, who tells
you that he-saw the:Defendant set his name to the
very papers that are/produced to you. To.he sure,
a- clearer proof, or a more decided ad of ppblioa-
tion, cannot be _gi‘,7n. Why then, if you are sa-
tisfied that the Defendant Published, the next point
is, whether there is a rational around for What you
have heard stated on behallof the Defendant ? You
are told that this- is•• to be considered as a true his-
tory of the transadions.it relates, to I Is telling 4.
man that his ..heart never overflowed with benefi-
cence : that he never gave any tounsekhatswas not•
cruel that his' mouth never Opened but -with 'mt-•
invidiyelike telling a story, or giving a
charrittr ? 7f it 'be like one or the other; then the
Defendant is no guilty ; but I think yOu
cohsider it a waste of-time in nle to liken- it 7ro either
of these cases. Whai then is' there iri this case on'be-
half of the Defendant ? in truth, nothing at all.—
You 'are-to say, whether he ha's published- this in-,
vedive upon my Lord Clare ? If he did not. mean
to asperse :-the-- charader of that Noble Lord, I
wood ask, 'what he Slid mean ? Could it possibly
occur •to any man to publish such a thing
thisi without intending to libel the charac-
ter who was the 'object of it, after what you
have heard ? However, 'all I will say is, that-
if you entertain- a- doubt upon the matter you
should. find your verdid in favour of the De-
fendant: - 'We are fold the. Liberty of the Press
is concerned; upon that subject I have had occa-
sion more than once to say, that the Liberty of the
Press is best supported by suppressing the licentious-
ness of -Ole Press. But when a man of common fair

reputatiOn cannot find a remedy against the: licenti-
ow:ness of the PreSs, for fear of eheckint, the Liberty
of the Press, I think there will be an end soon of that

veryliberty, and of every thing else that is valuable
in Oa raeter;for so. it will be, tivtier► fair fame CiIII
no protdftiolin a Court of Justice.. I do, not mean

,
to'petsuade you to any thing : aetoiding to your
own common. fee,lin& and common sense. If you
have any doubt of the evil intent of the Defendant,
let the Defendant have the- benefit of that doubt,
for that is the constant rule- it. -Courts ofjudic:utire ;
but, if-as men of common sense- acid common feeling,
yOhiiiave no doubt of his evil dien the god
of rhe Countiy requirei you should find him'gtfilty.

'Mr..GAiRow said, that under die Libel Aa the
Learned Judge was called upon to declare his
opinion, 'whether the Publication in question Was
a Libel or not.

Mr. Justice GaosE..7.--‘‘l am aware-of the pro-
vision of the At of Parliament upon Libers Ido
not kohl that Lam bound to state my opinion: to
the Jury in the way you mention, because' the Ael,
says, that the Judge shall, at his discretion, ,state
what his opinion is, to the Jury.—But now that I
am called upon to give niY.opinion, I ani bound to
say that I think this is an abtaminable
•

The same Defendant was tried for. another Libel
publi.shed in the same NeWspgpet, reficaing on the
Proceedings. of Parliament fur iVlartial-Law in Ire-
land, .and found Guilty.