The recorder. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1802-1803, 1803-03-09
DE12OCR.f7ICAL
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

tAOi' "a N>ASA"eA41 l'AilItNi VI l. ~ Aot!tttHGG.
IN part of this piece, we heartily agree
with Nat. Jones. We conGder, as he
does, the fedigion law, TO have been
a inoaftef Of ulurpa.ion. Setting aide
this objection, aho, the behaviour OF
the federal Judges, and other federal Of
hcers, was in itielf 70 ntriniic lily foam
daious it displayed fuch an utrcr ex-
flnction of principle, and even of lharne,
that il deierveS all the hard names which
Mr., Jones may think proper &c give
1t. The federal printers never betray
Cd greater folly, and they have often
betrayed d great deal, than by drag
glng this outcait from irs grave, and
boating OF its merits. Their eternal
chime is that 1t ailoGced TIE truth IN be
gi1ca ia e0j&encs. This noneienie will
not go down. Was Cooper allowed
TO give truth in evidence, when he was
reluied a warrant Tor bringing John
Adams into court? Was Calender
allowed this privilege, when he had
only one witnelS in court, and when
Chaie would NOT fuffer that wirnefs to
be examined General Mafon, in DO
lite, and William Giles ia a brutal lille,
refuied to attend. Chafe refufed the
nme Eecedary TO COMPEL them. The
distinction IN point Of character, be-
tween them and Chafe, becomes ex-
ceedinglY minute. But, in the near
TING, what becomes OF Callendef's
privilege Of gi7'iMg he frutb IN eViAenee?
Sod forbid shat the pages of the Re
cordef ihould ever be polluted with
one iyilable IN defence of this law, or,
OF any thing about it. The odiun
excited by the fedition act was one OF
the PsInciP~i caaics, by which the lac
federal cabinet was 70 deiervediy fent
TO perdiuon. Thus far we go with Mr..
Jones.
But there is always a material difin-
zion between one thing which is bad, and
another, which is great deal worie.
Auguitus CafaF committed many hor
rid murders. YET nobody compares
h'm with ms lucceflor Tiberius. Jult
10, the ieclition at was hateful in theory,
and wofie in pra6tice. Under chs act
there was nothing TO have hindered an
attorney general from arreiting and
lmprnoning printers apprentice,
COY who perhaps the week before had
become acquainted with the boxes.
Under this act, a man might have been
lent TO Jail and fined for reading fedi-
Gus newspaper TO his wife and children.
6ut all this was fate of freedom, and
even OF dignity, when compared With
the picture drawn by Mr.. Tones of the
Prelent forF of freedom of the prels.
Two projections were RATED dgaina
Gro. well, and both at the inRance of
the attorney general Of the ttate OF New
York. On this, Mr., Jones obfcrves that
they were conducted on the PRINCIPLES
Of the common law. &c Now flaws he.
{" there is no principle of the common
law morS clearly fixed, or more
g exteniively known than that, on a
g Proiecution for libel, The truth of
" the libel eaa80t be given in evideule,
& and the realon aligned by the books
Sc IS thar the libeller, If he knew hi,
g charges to be true, ought, initead of
+" ibelling, TO prolecute the offender.
g This, If his purroies were upriaht.
he would invariably do. If his pa
triotic fpirit be fired by a public
wrong, by a breach ofpubic law, let
him compel the offender to expiate
" his crime under the icourge Of the
law. fla prei1denf has violated his
oath Of Office, he is liable 70 impeach-
menG and It was Mr.. Crofwell's bu.
iineis as patriot, and man 70 adopt
that mode OF proceeding, There
IS much more IN the fame file.