The Sun.
London, England, 1820-01-29 00:00:00

TRIAL OF JOSEPH SHAW FOR LIBEL.

After the lapse of about half an hour Shaw re-
turned into 'Court, and having declared himself
ready to proceed to trial, he was given in charge
to the Jury. The indictment charged him, that
he being an evil-disposed person, and wishing to
excite in certain of his Majesty's liege subjects a
hatred and contempt of the Laws and Govern.
ment of this Realm, and also a hatred and con-
tempt of the Houses of Parliament, did, on the
2.3 d of August last, publish a certain seditious
libel, entitled " A Letter to the Soldiers on the
State of the Country, and showing the means
that were used to separate them from the great
body of the People." This better was publisher)
in one of Sherwin's Political Registers, the date
of which was not mentioned; but which, from.
what was afterwards mentioned by the defendant,
we could infer was first published in• London
about the lit of August. •
The defendant was asked whether he would have
the indictment (which was extremely long) real
over, to which he replied in the tiffirtnat lye. The
clerk began to read it, and had proceeded for
some time, when

Mr. ‘VILLiAbIS objected. He contended bat
as tie defendant had beard the indictment read
over before, (on his pieading last Sessions,) it was
contrary to pract;ce to have it read over now 5 be--
sides, it would consume a great portton of the
time of the Cona.

Mr. Flay Observed, that the defendant bad a
right to have it read ; and however inconvenient
it might be as to time, his request should be com
plied with.
Mr. STARKIE also observed, that it was not the
usual practice to have it lead at thiS stage of the
proceedings. The defent!ant would hear it in the
course of the trial;the clerk should read it to the
Jury.—The defendant, however, whiled the read-
ing to be continued, which was done for smite
time longer, when, at his own request, it was
given up.
Mr. I'ARKIE then opened the case, and read
principal petits of the alleged libel from his brief.
I'll' hey mere too numerous and voluminous to be
given at length, with any hope of this account
reaching London in sufficient time for publica-
tion.] The stibstance of the leading parts is as
follows :—The Letter began by alluding to an Act
passed in the year 1817, by which it was made a
felony, without benefit of clergy, for any person
to atteMpt to seduce any soldier or sailor front
hist allegiance, or to excite them to any act of
mutiny or disobedience to their officers; and it
observed, that this Act was passed because the
borouglimongers, meaning the Houses cf Parlia-
ment, were afraid, that if the soldiers embraced
the doctrines of Reform, they could no lone-er
look upon them (as they now did) as their only
hope and safeguard in the country, and that
they (the soldiers) would no longer submit to
be .the tools of such men, in attacking their
peaceable fellow subjects. It further stated, that
it was not the wish of the writer to disturb their
allegiance to the King ; that, it obse.rvrd, would
be a dangerous subject, and bete again it relcirtd

to the Act of Isly, Jr -was not the wish of the
writer to say any thing of the Royal
" for," it added, '' God knows they are unpo-
pular enough already; it. continued, " to
the horoughosongers (meaning thy IL.u,us of
Parliament) you (tne-ining the soldiers) owe
,no
allegiance, and you might to perform uo duty to
them." it then went on .0 point out the uses to
which the army were tle.tinetl by Nlinistk'lS, one
of Avhont , ob:erved,- that without the
aid 44 tire.-military force it would he impossible to
•
collect the taxes, It next toieetttdto what it
termed the military escort id: the Soverei.n from
•Carlton-liotise to St, Steptieo'—cha.p.l, anti eon-
:tr.asied this alleged tondof c, tor milit.aiy gii4rd with
the 'conduct of Queen The horou,:iiminigers
(meaning the Hotise e, it obsetv-
ed,afraidthat the soldiers wo length provenn-
scilling
f(1 draw'ibeir sword, t,p6l) their
jects,whose distresses migro induce them' o Jemaiid
their rigliti from those Pot o-ig honing. r, (tleanitie
the Houses of Parltanwiii), to whO.e conduct all
those distresses were to he attr'ihuted, and in con-
.
segience.of 4his fear they were every day etrcou-
raging'armed assOciatioliS ill the couotry, in ordet
that ther(the ass,,ciations) 1.1041;1-he ready
to perpetrate thoae de. cis which au hoot.,n .soldier
would he ashamed to pe,foroi, tinest ion
will► the, Borongiimongets (nt..oiog du! flouses
of Parliaioetrt), was not, whe tic r: tiny (the
soldiers) were willing to do their tl.t y, nut
whether
.they would consent to molder their
fellow subjects itr . cold bled ; tent wlo (her
they lie soldiers) Would supp•trt the King
of England, . but wheel:. r they kroiild give alle-
giance to, and suppOrt Kin!: -Castletca....:ll, King
Si !niottth, anid a thoti,and fithers of their descrip-
tion. It also alltwr'd to the grant of 10,0001
year to the Duke of York, tor going mire a month
to viPit his afflicted father a tew miles trom Lon-
don, and. added a report that that'mpoey had a 4-.
ready been lost by his Royal Highness at play. In
the'conelosion it stated, that it had not touched
upon the subject of the Milt ary that it was nag

the. intention of the ,t;i:littr to sedtice soldiers

• from their allegiance,- or to encourage them to
disohey_the,ir comniantrtig ()dicers ; but it wade
it broad distinction (Is, indeed, it did tbrooomiii)

. , . ..
between the obedience to their- Commanders, a•,d
.that
_which they owed to the Boroughmongers
(meaning the Houses of Patliament} ; hut it
added, that it, night not beacen,etrot omitting
so important" a subjec' as an allusion to tre indi-
vidual conditions of the.soldiers, it higaell their
pattirular attention to an extract from Voltaire's

Cqudide., if then gave the extract, 'beginning
with that part where Caudide is desired by his
comrades, on entering the regiment as a recruit,
to drink the King of Bulgaria's health," and
ending .with his description of the terrible car-
nage he had witnessed in a battle with the
enemy.

After Mr. STANK'S had concluded,

. -
Mr.Wrwasts stated the case to the, Jury.----He
• began by observing, that from what they had al-
ready heard from the opening of the, case, they
• must be aware, that the present was .a nearer ap-
• proeirrhifjonlo that class of publications to which
he had helot e alluded, (poldica, ions where the
object of the writer was a fair discussion of a
public question) than that upon which they had
Jost decided. It was full of stattments, of Mos-
,: tratious; and in some places of attempts at argu-
• ment in support
,of certain op'ttions-argitmen's
. sometimes connected, but in many others far
removed from .what could show fair discussion.
Ile would not, therefore, on this occasion, retract
one. word of the observations -be had addressed to
them on the last trial; but on the contrary, he
would tell them, that in proportion as it should
be seen to approach fair discussion, so should it be
the duty of the Jury to construe. it liberally, and
that not until they
.were clearly of opinion, that
the great and predominant wish the defendant
Was to excite discontent" amid disaffection, should
they bring in a verdict of guilty, It had now been
decided for a series of years, that great indulgenne
should be extended to all writings which affected
to discuss political questions, and this indulgence
was in the breast of the Jury- to give aceordiog
to circutnstances and why did he say this ? Be.
cause he found it was the definition given by the
law of England that any attempt, in speaking
or writing, to excite disaffection or discon-
tent, was 'a seditious libel ; de.finition which,
if not modified •by the tii it by Jury, would
extend to a fearful latitude. The question'
therefore which the Jury had this day to de-
cide, was, as it bad been for a century,- whether
the writer intended to argue the question, and
fixing himself upon some real. or imagined griev-
ance,
,had proposed any alteration, or suggested
any plan, for the removal of it !.or whether the
subject chosen, and,the' arguments' adduced, were
only incidental; and the' reap object was not to
excite discontent and disaffection iri the public
mind, it the Jury believed ibis, and they alone
were to decide upon it, then they were bound to
return a verdict of guilty against. the. accused.
The present was not ,a case in which any great
lsoliticel question was ioVolved : the great ques-
tion of the liberty of the press was not here at
issue,; of that, as-a general principle, he would
most freely admit that it was one of the greatest
bulwarks of Brit isb freedom ; one without the full,
free, and fair exercise of which it would be vain to
Lope for a coolinuanceof our liberties. Speaking or
the 'benefits IO be derived tram a free press, and
which England bad derived, be sa.id that a Very in-
genious' work 'was published by au intelligent fo-
reigner, who leely visited.ihni country, M. Cot-
tu,* who had observed, that if under the most'

14- It is proper to observe, that M. Corfu, quoteq by the
Learned Comae!, borrowed the observation alluded to from
M. Dr.:.I.OLME, as cited by Junius, in the fulloWing passage
in the Preface tO his Letters : .. -

In short, whoever considers whlrt it is that constitutes
the moving'principle of 'what we earl great .afrairs, and the
invincible sensibility of mall to the opinion of his fellow-
,creatores, will not hesitate-to affirm that, if it were possible
for the liberty the press- to exist in a despotic gocerniucut,
and (what isnot less tlitlirilt) for it to exist without changing
the bmit it ution, this liberty <it t prrs's would alone form
a counterpoise to tite power of the•ptioce. If, for e,:ample,
in au empire of the East, a ,anetuary could be found, w, ich
rend& red respectable by the ancient religion of the people,
might .insane safety to those ,wltO bring thither their
obstrvati,jus of any kind; and: that, from thence, printed
papers should issue, which, under a.certain seal, might be
equally respeZlA; And which, in their daily appearance,
should examine and freely discuss, the Conduct of the-Ca'dis,
the liashaws, the Vizir, the Divan, and ,the Sultan himself,
that would introduce immediately some degree of liberty."

despotic goVernment, under that of Turkey for
instance, there was some refuge for public opi-
ttiati,seme means-by, which tt,at opinion might be
kooWrr.i'lind tire conduct of Viziers, Cadis, &c.
disch!ist it would- from • that moment .posess
some degree of freedom. It would become the
Jury, therefore, to consider the latitude which
ought to be allowed, to_ a fair discussion, and.
to give the prisoner every benefit arising from
a liberal construction of the writing before
them. Tire defendant seemed a very observing
Man, and would very probably address them, and
he (11r. Williams) defied him to .place the liberty
of discussion upon a broider ground than he had
just done. As long as the Jury found that fair dis-
cussion was the object,t hey would so long give the
prisoner the benefit of it ; hut whet) they perceived,
it they should so perceive, that the intent to excite
discontent was' manifest, :hey would believetfiat
the boundary of free and fair.discossiou bad been
:passed, arid they would judge of rite prisoner
• accordingly. Ile would nosw proceed to read to
them several passages from the writing in the in.-
dietinent, and he was certain that he would prove
to their satisfaction that discussion was not the ob-
ject of the writer, but that kis great, his sole, ob-
ject, was to excite discontent, paricidarly in the
minds of the soldiers, against the Government, and
also to bring both Houses of Parliament into con-
tempt. The Learned Gent. then continued at great
length to point out those parts. of the libel which
showed the evil inteotion ti,e- writer, and he
dwel' particularly upon the leading poin's of it,
which We have given .abose. After this he fur-
ther • observed, that _he now laid before tire
Jot y all the farts of the
,ease, as 'they had ap-
peared to his nriurt, and lie would put it to the,
Jury, to say roost ientionsly, whether this was
arty thiiig Ike a mistaken• attempt, at discus-
sion ; not merely whether it 'was that kind of
guarded 'and temper ate discussion which a man
.might attempt with an Attorney on one hand and
a LaWyer on the other; bra whether it was- dis-
wussion-at all ? It was this. they had to try, and of
this they were the sole judges, 00 the' authority
of an act introduced by that illustrious Statesman,
, whom be• would never cease to admire. This"was
his --re!ase,- and he "world not trespass further on.
th, time of the Jury in laying it before theM. Of
tie defendant he knew nothing, and therefore
could have no possible-feeling against him. Of
the way in which the case was introduced, here,
ire knew nothing, He had., asvCounsel for the
prosecution, discharged- his duty, as he had ever
,-done, faithfully; and he bad no doubt the July
woiddifaithfully discharge theirs, and that in the
present case their conduct would give a refuta-
tion to an assertion, which.had been made else-
where—certainly with nu love of freedom—that
Juries were•found in malty cases of this kind 'un-
willing to dischatge their duty. - Their verdict
this day would, he trusted, prove that Juries
would be found ready to discharge their .duty
whenever a fair case was I rid before them.
Wm Mlson was then called to prOve the'ptle
'of the work-in question. He knows the prisoner,
who is a , calicolzrinter, and who also keeps a
small bookseller's shop in Church-street,• Bolton.
He- purchased the number of Sherwin's Register,
then befrtre the Court, from the defendant, at his
house, on the 23d of August last.

Here the case fpr the prosecution closed, and
the h►isoner being called upon for Lis defence, ad-
deesseil the Jury to the following effect :'—

" Gentlemen of the Jury—You cannot expect
any great things from me on this occasion, as 1
' am but a poor labouring mechanic, and only was
driven to selling little books by the badness of
my trade. If the writer of the article before you
was present, he would no doubt be better able to
speak to you than I caught a severe cold
in king arrested, and I have already lost two
unowbs of my time, and a great -deal 'Ol. money.
At the time my papers were seized, the officer
took away several accounts, by which I was
'prevented from getting several sums of money
front my customers, and thereby am not
now able to pay. a Learned Friend (Counsel)
to plead my cause. As to therlibel, it is no-
thing to the ;I am not the writer, nor-the printer,
nor have I had the books from -the publisher ;
they passed through two or three hands before
they.came to Me ; trade being bad, I was glad to
do any little business by which
_;1 might support
myself and family, rather than be idle. Tire
writer of the article, Mr. Sherwin, is at large iii
London, awl has not been punished in any way
for what he has done. It, rests then with you,
Gentlemen, wheiber I shall be allowed to return
to the bosom of my family, or be incarcerated in
a daugeon for the act of. another. As God is my
judge, I had no intention whatever of bringing
his Majesty or the Government into .contempt
by any thing I did. I am not one of that sort. All
that know my character know me to be an honest
industrious man, endeavobring.to support a wile
and two small children. Whatever' may be done to
me now, 1 shall always he ready to do my duty
to my King and Country. 1 think indeed the case
it very hard, that -1 shoidd be punished, and that
Mr. Sherwin should be at large, though he is the
writer. It is a very hard case indeed. i3eing a
very poor man, 'I have not been able to pay a
gentkman of the bar
.to advocate my cause for
cite. • I have done for.the present,"

" Mr. WILLIAMS.II is right yojt should know,
that if you have any thing mote to say to the Jury,
you must do it now, as you cannot address them
after this.

Rev. Mr. HAY.—Perhaps you may have some-
thing More to say, which yott cannot nosy recol-
lect. Take your own time, •
Prisoner.—lf the Court woold allow me, 1
would wish 10 mid what LOT, Liverpool said ill
the,House of Commons some time ago. Here he
read a, passage trout The Manchester- Observer Of
the 15th inst., in which the writer con,:ratmlAtes

the public on the, tact atitnitttql by Lon! Liverpool
in his spiech in- the House of Prers ot, the Sc-

ditious Lilicls Rill ; (t.itat a-libel on his 4‘l.jesty's
Ministers could not he consideyed as a libel on

his Miljestv't, Government.)--Thn, aner,a pause,
the Defendant contionctl, I cannot say I li aye
any abilities to study the late oil these snbj, cis,
or the la w about libel; tar be it from me to st{aiy
any thing of that snr , I krl) "il;ffieretirsvol
of life, and I hope ;"“r.71,2..• do any sue l► thing

I (rope you will ft•
as Er.giiNiapAL.,

cues. al,cl
iti n hich I aril

looks like a trap to catch me ; for the book I
cold was published three. weeks -before, and Mr.
Sherwin was not indicted, for it. Why was not
that done It Mr-. Sherivin had been punished, I
would willingly stiffer any thing for publishing it
afterwards; but now I am to.-.suffer for what I
did not In* wfasv crime., „)...tits47l% \
his ac+chess, in Calif& of Inch 'the defen-
dant pause4l several times, as if not knowing what
to say, was delivered in a very mild and.submis-
sive manner, and with apparerst
The Rev. Mr. HAY, in addressing the Jury, ob•
served, that after the observations they had heard
from the Learned Counsel, his duty on this oc-
casion was rendered very short, and defendant
could not at all events complain of the narrow-
ness of the ground which the Learned Counsel
had taken, for he had certainly given every chance
which he could. The Rev. Gentleman then ob-
served, that after looking over the article which he
had never seen before, be had no hesitation in
saying that it was a gross libel. The defence set
up was untenab!e, for it, would have been better
for the accused to work- as a weaver than to earn
a livelihood by such means. With respect to his
not being the miter, that was not a. defence its
point of law.

The Jury, tvith very little hesitation, returned
a verdict at Guilty.

THE KING V. SARAH HOUGH.

The defendant in this case, a young woman of
..sflout seventeen or eighteen years old, was in-
dicted for publishing a seditioos libel, by selling
a number of the Manchester Observer, containing
the same libel for. which the young man (Churl-
ton) was committed.

Oa bring rut to :he bar, Mr.Colturan objected
to the Jury, on thef*round of their having already
decided on the very same charge in the.case of
Choi.lton;. but Ibis objection was over-ruled.
The trial then went on, and after the state-
ment of the care. by • Mr. Williams, and a long
and very able speech by Mr. Coltman, in which
he took a review of the affair of the 16th of Au-
gust, the diefendant was found Guilty. Site wept
bitterly during the whole' trial.
Louisa !lough, mother of the last. defendant,
was
,next tried and convic:ed upon the very
same charge.

SENTJNCES.

, Mr, WILLIAMS next rnse to say, that if David
ll'roe, being outy a child of 13, would submit,
he would consent-to, his being discharged, upon
paying a fine of 6d. Mr. Atkinson paid 6:1, and
the child was led out of Court.

Joseph Shaw was sentenced to imprisonment for
12 months in Lancaster gaol, and then to find
securities for his good .behaviour for two years,
himself in 1001. and two sureties in 501.-each.

Louisa Hough was sentenced to impyisonment
for six months, .and to- find sureties, herself in
40!.. and two sureties in:201: each.

Sarah Hough was sentenced to pay a, fine of 51.
and to be imprisoned till it should be paid.
John Charlton was sentenced to be imprisoned
for tour months, and to find securities for two
years, himself in 401. and two sureties in 201. each.