The Sun.
London, England, 1829-12-24 00:00:00

insensibility. lam aware of the power of the press, and in
some cases its usefulness, but this is no excuse for its traduc
ing, day after day, the most exalted character•. For in the
country, many ignorant persons take their opinions entirely
from the public Press. Surely then it behoves every
man whose character is attacked, to sit Itito right with
the mild. We are told that excuses ought to be made
for the hurry in which matter is prepared for pUblication,
lint that was not the case in the present instance. Months
were allowed to elapse after the Duke gave offence by
sanctioning the measure of Catholic Relief before the
pub'ication appeared ; it was a most deliberate composition;
and if written by the Rev. Gentleman whose name is af-
fixed to it, I should almost be inclined to think received as
much consideration as he would give to one of his sermons.
The Duke of Wellington was charged with abusive
the power of his office for his own personal ag-
grandizement. If, however, such had bren the case
he would indeed have been unworthy of the high station
he ❑ow fills, and justly liable to a charge of a criminal
nature; but the fact was the very reverse, and there was
no authority to justify the writer of this article in making
such charges, except it was the authority of a corrupt and
licentious Press. 1 know I shall be accused of great ty-
ranny in the said prosecutions; the Press of the country
will make common cause with each other. I knew an in-
stance some time back, where a (lay or two after the
trial of a proprietor of a newspaper for libel, he thought
proper to publish the names of the Jury—if I could prove
tat this was done to show to the world who the men
were that convicted him ; or if, in any such case, the names
were published to influence any future Jury in giving a
verdict, I now declare that I will take my part in bringing
the Editor of sny newspaper, that so publishes the name
of the Jury, with such an intent, to condign punishment.
Let, Gentlemen, the administration of justice be kept pure,
The publications of the Press are not to be passed by with
impunity by a Minister of the Crown, except a law should
be passed, and a Jury should sanction such a law, to pre-
vent a public functionary from noticing its attacks. Sup-
pose such a law could be passed, the Press would at once
lose all its influence—it would abound with base falsehoods
and sink into the filthy language of Billingsgate. We can-
not suppo e, Gentlemen, but that Ministers have the same
feelings as other men ; and if they are charged with
cowardice and treachery, and every other species of base-
ness, it is only natural that they should seek the same
redress. The Duke of Wellington is destined to go down
to posterity as one of the most distinguished Generals and
eminent statesmen that ever adorned this or any other
country; would it not, therefore, be imprudent to let these
libels go uncontradicted. I call on you, gentlemen, upon
the oath you have taken this day, to do justice ;
do not fear by your verdict of pulling down the liberty of
the press. It is the cause of the people of England that
you are this day to decide, for should the time ever come,
when Juries were fearful of incurring the anger of the press,
then indeed would tyranny reign, and justice would never
be administered. You are called upon to decide whether
this publication is not calculated to injure the feelings of the
Duke of Wellington. What would you think if it were levelled
at you, and the Duke of Wellington feels it not the less
because he is a Cabinet Minister; after there have been
already three prosecutions, I beg pardon for occupying so
much of your attention, but I wish to impress on you
that the time is come when punishment ought to, and
must, follow.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up. Ile gave it as
his opinion that the publication was clearly a libel; and
there could be no doubt that the highest character
i❑ the land had an equal right with the meanest
subject, and was authorized in coming into Court to
vindicate his ch,u•acter against the calumnies with which
it had been assailed.

The Jury, without retiring from the box, found all the
defendants Guilty.

THE KING v. BELL.

Mr. ALDERSGN opened the pleadings. This was an
ex-officio information, filed by the Attorney-General against
the defendant, who was Editor of a newspaper called the
Atlas, for publishing in that Paper a false and scandalous
libel, reflecting on the character of the Lord High Chan-
cellor of Englaad. There were other counts in the decla-
ration, charging the defendant with publishing a false end
scandalous libel on Lady Lyndhurst.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL addressed the Jury, This
was the fifth time he bad to address them on the subject
of libels, and it gave hint great pleasure to say, that for
some time it would be the last. This was a prosecution
instituted by the Lord Chancellor, whose Counsel he was,
and it was his duty to state to them the article reflecting
on the honour and character of his Lordship. The libel
had charged in a mast artful manner one of the Ministers
of the Crown with carrying on an illegal traffic in the sale
of ecclesiastical situations. The libel was worded
in the most insinuating manner, anti well calculated
net only to bring his Lordship into contempt, bat also his
Lady. The Jury must be aware that the Lord
Chancellor, from his high station, bad considerable
patronage. They must also know that he was
bound to bestow that patronage unbiassed by
sordid motives, and if he had acted otherwise, he had
been guilty of crimes of the deepest die. He would
read the libel, and then the Jury would see the artful
manner in which it was worded. It was as follows :—" It
was generally stated in the political circles last night that
a certain Noble and Learned Lord who enjoys great pa-
tronage, had been trafficking in Ecclesiastical pre-
ferments." The libel went on to say, that his Lord-
ship's friends did not believe it, but that if any eccle-
siastical appointments had been bartered, it must have
been through the medium of his Lordship's wife. The
Attorney-General then said, the reason the Proprietor of
the Paper was not included in the prosecution was, that the
defendant had stopped the Press, and inserted the offensive
article without his knowledge. The Attorney-General went
on to remark, in strong language, on the 'nature of
the libel, and bow calculated it was to injure
the character of the Lord Chancellor. Gentle-
men, in conclusion, I beg to remind you, that this
information was filed by the leave. of the Court of King's
Bencn, upon affidavits filed by the Lord Chancellor and
Lady Lyndhurst ; and every opportunity was given to the
defendant of getting rid of this prosecution, if he would
give up the names of the parties from whom he received it.
Mr. Edward Panter, the printer of the Atlas, and Mr.
Shepherd, a relation of Lady Lyndhurst, were examined.
Mr. Bell then rose—He trusted the Jury would not
attribute any feeling lie might evince to fear, but to the
novelty of his situation. He felt the greatest anxiety
to vindicate himself from the charge of being a
scandalous libeller. The qnestien with bins was more a
question of i haracter than any thing else; he had no
political or personal objects to answer—the character of
the Paper he had the honour to conduct was distinguished
for its neutrality in political matters. He was anxious
also to state that he had no intention whatever to wound
either the feelings of Lord or Lady Lyndhurst. He
thanked the Attorney-General for the temperance with
which he had acted towards him. It must be well known
to all that the Editor of a newspaper stood in a peculiar
situation—he stood between the public and the proprietors
whose interest he represented. It was necessary for him to
obtain such amusement and instruction as would please all.
being placed in such a situation, he was above all liable
to the risk of prosecution. The matter complained of was
furnished to him by a confidential correspondent ; and
sooner than barter the trust reposed in him by those who
gave him that information, he would suffer all the incon-
venience of the present prosecution—he never would be
denounced to the public as a man who would barter a trust
reposed in him. The Atlas newspaper was, perhaps, one
of the most ambitious attempts ever known on the part
of one publication to give matter generally contained
in many publications ; it entertained
:no hos-
tilities to any man, or any body of men. It had oc-
curred merely from mistake—mistakes occurred every-
where, even in this Court—not long since a Learned Gen-
tleman argued a case most strenuously, and shortly
after discovered, on looking at his brief, that he was
for the other side. A newspaper might be consi-
dered a mirror which reflected passing events, and in a
moral point of view could only be considered re-
sponsible for the shadow, and not the substance.
The alleged libel stated nothing definitive, it merely
dealt in rumours. It was true rumours were not
the legitimate property of newspopers ; they would go
from one to another, and increase like Mrs. l'iozzi's " three
crows." Was it, he would ask, unlawful to print that
which it was not unlawful to speak? The law of libel
was certainly very imperfect, but he hardly thought it
would allow such a course to be taken. It bad
been remarked by Holt, that nothing could be
onaidered a libel unless it were personally known
and understood. His case came precisely under
that denomination. In the case of Lord Addington, who
was tried for publishing a speech in the House of Lords,
calculated to wound the character of a solicitor, Lord Ken-
yon observed the matter of that libel must be clearly under-
stood, and a malicious intention be shown. The liberty of
the Press was a natural right. No matter in what form—it
was a natural right. It was true that if the Press were
not to have boundaries it would certainly be a curse to the
country, but where were those boundaries to be found, or
in what manner they were to be fixed ? Not by legal pro-
ceedings, but by public opinion. The liberty of the Press,
we are told, is a bidden gem, and that the moment
vou put foi th your hand to reach it, you are punished
for the attempt. By their decision the Jury would fix