The Sun.
London, England, 1816-05-09 00:00:00

r ~

•
•
in, padiglied fvvelve ;Tent's Iterate,'
cc iebrated letter Of Mr, 'Tooke to :11r,
Dmitri 'orier:,',.!rdsLord A,lo.ntrzon, on the sub,-
jt (it Reioe,.; in which, ieh le argn flgtii it clues.
,“1,; !rival* sentiments had escaped the
chore brought to skew the Jury
lie w.ts not a man to prove a traitor. lie
wished .0 'know tclty tfiat sort of evidence should
rapt be received in erl§e*S'oilibel which iu i Il.ttthet's
Aviv; Th :light fit tribe' snbmittial, to a Why,
should riot' that be Wien into consideration,
which in many cases svouhl he conclusive, but
aviii*.b in all cases must have considerable weight, ,
al c tog Materially,On the tnotives by which
the party' tats actuated 1 It wonld be for
those %slit) opposed a negative to his motion,
to-prove that' in the great bulk of cases of libel,
tl•e truth tw;is of no impottance at all to the mat-
ter At issue. If this could he established, he
should be-content to retire from the 'ttguinent.
The licentionsuess of the press, not only in latter
times, but at all former periods in this cmintrY;
he explained by describing the impunity derived
iiat the sithatiort in which the party libelled was
placed. The individual who sustained the greatest
p t, and injury front a libel, had two modes of
prt,ceetting tuft opts to hint. lie might proceed
by actiOn or- by iodietment. If he brought an '
Lion, after incut ring a great expellee, and endur-
ing a speech from the defendant's counsel ten times
worse to hint than the libel itself, he might after all
.veceive, for a. injury sitstained, which no.ttioney
(amid repair, 401. or 501. damages. Judo, while
they contiuned to be composed of men, would be
likely to give such verdicts, and to be inflnenced
no't merely by the circumstances, hut by the names
which garnished their paper. lie had marked the
greatest disparity in the damages given in various
• cases of a nature pi ecistly similar. Front these
considerations, he would never advise an ac,
tion, but for the _circumstance of the defendant
being precluded from proving the truth of
what he bad advatnal, if the party aggrieved
proCetaled. by indictment. This deterred, in
many eases, those who were libelled front tak-
ing that course, while the inconveniences he had
described made them mita-Ming ,to venture on
the other. This struck him to be of so: much
ii.n-
pottittice, that he considered the public had more
reason to complain of, the impunity afforded to
libellers of private character by, the law as it now'
stood, than evenahe defendants, in being prohi-
bited front proving the truth of those pnblicat-.
Tinos for which they were prosecuted. Since the
flak of Lord Hardwicke,frpm the year 1735, the
truth of a libel had been allowed to be proved
where an action was brought. The saute course
nught to be sanctioned in cases of indictrncitt,--
In criminal prosecutions the truth or false-
itood might he considered on the qnestion.of guilt
or innocence. in private cases the truth or raise-
hood of the libel should be proved,, With a view
to the assessment. of the damages called for. In
some public
,cases he was aware that the truth of
the, hd iiughu.Wit, to be received as a just,fication,
and there ", r C unts:y where private chariteter had
beta iii which such is defence was not to
•be thought oft too itt tt.ll it was proper that this
Should ho submiued to the conshreration 11. the
Jury, lie strongly objected lathe ease as it now
stood, which. punished a libel, for its having it
tendeticy Kovtike fl bread) of the peace,
toot eSeverely titanic punished an actual breach
of the peace. For the former a. year's Itupristm-
" meat, irt some eases two years' imprisonment,was
'frequently awarded, while an actual breach of the
peace was rarely visited by more than months'
confinement, Whyre a man was killed in aduel, the
survivor got,off with the trouble of a trial; if con-
victed, he was pardonetl (this at least was the
practice oldie law), while for a libel intended to
provoke a dnel he might he punished with t tvelve
or eighteen inooths' iinprisonmeot. He proceed-
' e.l to suety the inconverneoces arising out of- the
prtatent state of the law, where the party libelled
proceeded by indictment. He wished to guard
against the possibility of looking, or whispering,
or shmgging a mate's character away, as was now
frequently done ; and by admitting, the truth of
the libel to proof to save the prosecutor from bora,
jug his teputation assailed,by tt side wind, withont,
any notice being given of the attack, to enable
to prepare ftir his-defence. There was no,
case to which these objections could apply aa, to
which they would not he eqoally strong as the
• law now stood. On all the grounds which he
bad 'stated, it seemed that not only no harm
coalt result, but the greatestbenefit, as affecting
• the Liberty of the Press, front the adoption of
the regulation which be proposed. The first,
branch-of the alteration which lie proposed was,
'that_ the tlistinction between oral and written
slander should be done away, both as respects
nit action and a prosecution. The next branch
was making the author cognizant to the pub.,
)itch ion of a libel ; and on this branch he would
nllaw all evidence to, go to the Jury. Lastly,
and most materially, he would propose thnt the
truth of the matter lhould be.given in evidence,
that the prosecutor should have -notice that it was
intended. to prove the truth of the libel, xtul then
be would take away the-power of. justifying on
the ruth; Th;c other points on which lie would
touch related merely to jurisdiction—natnely, the
cx Officio power of filingiucormationl, and Special
Jut ies„ The real reason for the practice of ex
officio information's. was ,:that Government thought
it a more sore, way of proceeding ,against oh-
noximt,,, intik than to trust to the oaths
of twelve good anti lawful men forming the Grand
Jury,, Government. knew that the Grand Jars
took
,this into,aeconat----that in sueh a arse the
truth was not allowed to be pleaded, and.there--
fore Grand Juries were very cautious of, lindiug
Nib jut such cases. But, if evidence of the truth•
• was allowed, this objection, would he put an end
to at once. Another great objection to the prac-
tice al e,r officio informations, Was the power of.
keeping them hanging ore; die heads of in:
t!ividuals for an indefinite length of time. The
,resetu, was a most favourable fime for dis-
t'
ritssing - the subject, as the titres were
iu all. respects. Of lite there had been no
cw3es Of political libels, so that -it was a most
fit opportunity to revise this important chapter pt
the hoki, The next point on which he touched
was Special,,Jorit%. There ;vas no reason why it
fibs l 1.,-Ittittiri be die only, crime of any importance
• actorbefore'a Common tract pow