Star.
London, England, 1814-02-08 00:00:00

venge. Revenge, indeed, was stated to be the molt
tive of the pamphlet; and the public is always the
bar to which these libellers drag their victims. "As
yet. (said Mrs. Clarke) I have :hewn up no one who
did not richly deserve to be exposed to the pa& ;
this is the only revenge I am desirous of taking on
those by whom I am ill-treated ; and hiving brought
them before that trilunal, I rest perfectly satisfied that
impartial justice will be administered." " This hin•
(she proceeds) I have just thrown out by the way, as
a caution to those who either do not know, or require
to be reminded, that it is not my disposition to sit
down quietly under the studied injury of ingratitude,
and the neglect of promises given to dupe or cajole
me, by men who never meant to perform them, or
who think that they may at any time be broken with
impunity.. For the benefit, therefore, of all whom it
may concern, I here, announce my intention of sub-
mitting to the public, in a very short time, two or •
three volumes, which may be followed by others, as op-
portunity shall suit, or circumstances requires"—
So that the whole world were at the mercy of Mrs.
Clarke's opportunities and circumstances. The At-
torney General hoped the sentence of the Court would,
at least, teach her to hold her hand, and to refrain
from the publication of future4ibels.
Mr. BROUCTIANI then addressed the Court in miti-
gation of the defendant's punishment. She stood on
the flor to receive the judgment of the Court for
having published a libel against a private individual;
and although her Counsel was. not permitted to jus-
tify her criminality, which she had confessed by suf-
fering judgment to pass against her by default, and
had no intention to deny her contrition for that cri-
minality, which she had avowed by her affidavit that
had just been read, still he was entitled to urge all
•circumstances which, in any other case of libel by one
private individual against another, the Court would
feel it their duty to take into their consideration, in
apportioning the punishment to the offence. This
was not the case, then, of a wanton and unprovoked
attack, upon the private character of an individual,
for the sake of ministering to the public appetite for
domestic slander. This publication arose out of a
long connection between the parties, commencing
with an acquaintance with the prosecutor's father ;;---
an intercourse, the Learned Counsel was not entitled
to say, consisting in reciprocal obligations, for the fa-
vours seemed to be all on one side ; the family of the
prosecutor bed founded their hopes of preferment in
another connexion of the defendant's, of a still more
delicate nature. It was a connection of 14 years'
standing, of their seeking, not her's, and, as far as
regarded the prosecutor, founded upon his father
early introducing him to her patronage and protec-
tion, as likely to assist him in his progress through
public life. All these things she distinctly swears.
Her oath bad formerly been believed in this Court,
when. in competition with the swearing of others.—
It would now be believed not the less, that she was
uncontradicted by any affidavit of the prosecutor, to
whom the Court would undoubtedly havo given time
for the purpose, had he been disposed or able to deny
the statement. The letters under the hand of pro-
secutor, and his father, further substantiated these
things ; and they, too, were mentioned in the affida-
vits. Out of such an intercourse, sought by them
for their own purpose, and cemented by various acts of
kindness on her part—kindness always freely acknow-
ledged in theirletters—the quarrel arose which led
to this offence. On getting possession of the letters,
both of those the publication of which would prove
ruinous to him; and of others in trust ; the former
she, at his earnest, nay, impassioned intreaty, and.
to relieve the agony of his mind, allowed to be de-
stroyed; the latter, affecting others, he obtained,
and privately destroyed without her permission.—
Among them was one containing promises of provi-
sion for her son. The Learned Counsel had not
urged in extenuation =of her yielding to such feelings
of provocation, and under great irritation doing an
act of violence, or it might be said spitefulness ; in
palliation of this act of womanly animosity he had
not urged, that the person who had committed it
was a woman, lest it might be said, that when the
sex no longer imposed a restraint, it should cease to
afford a protection—but he would say (And the re-
mark was not liable so any such objection) that she
was a mother, and entreat their Lordships to reflect
on the effects of her punishment on those whom she
had, notwithstanding her own errors, brought up in
honour and virtue, by giving them that education
and those habits of which, if she did not already, she
possibly might live to fed the want. When the
Court took these things into the account—the long
standing and origin of the connection—the steps by
which it led to the offence—that the libel originated
not in any desire of gratifying the public malignity
at a stranger's expence, or any wanton gratuitous
desire of mischief towards one who had not put him-
self in the way of it—still less in base views of a mer.
cenary kind, it was hoped that their Lordships would
' mingle the portion of justice which those considera-
tions might affix, with a merciful regard to the inte-
rests of the guiltless. •
, REX V. WM. MITCHELL.
Before the Court pronounced judgment upon, the
defendant, M•zry Anne Clarke, the ATTORNEYGE-
NERAL thought it hir duty to intimate that he bad
also to pray judgment against William Mitchell, who
, bad suffered it by_default, • under an indictment for
, printing the fore-mentioned libel. At the same time
the Attorney-General believed bim to be the ignorant
agent of other persons whose names he refused to
give np, and he had nothing to urge against him
beyond the mere fact of his being the printer of this
; atrocious libel.

An affidavit was put in by the defendant, in
which he expressed his contrition for the offence,
but positively wore that at the time he was e-
quested by his master (for he was only a journey-
man printer) to put his name to the title-page as
printer, he had not the slightest knowledge of the na-
ture of the publication, and placed implicit confidence
in his employer's preserving him from any personal
danger. He had not received a single farthing for
all the anxiety he had suffered, and had no means of
subsistence for himself and family, save what his own
labour afforded, added to which, he was upwards of
60 years of age.
Mr. Justice LE BLANC then proceeded to pass the
judgment of the Court upon Mary Anne Clarke
and William Mitchell. Atter noticing the nature of
the offence, be remarked, thatrt Grand Jury +>f their
countrymen had found the defendants guilty ; that
judgment had beer. allowed to go by default; and