Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1817-08-01

1
maxim was futile-ior, IN the aiminisira-
ton OF the government, he, like others,
was liable 70 error. The defendant then
proceeded TO argue, that lis statement,
win respect 20 the aduin istraion ITSELF.
was wei!-foanded. When warfare was
commenced ior the purpose OF putting
down the principles OF the French Reyo-
luton, they were told, ;hat all their hopes
OF happiness IN heaven .1ld of blessing
upon earth, depended on resistance to
those principles. They all knew the pro-
mise made by the minister Of the day
| and they all knew the result Of those pro-
nilseS-thry were all faIlacious Every
thing except legitimate monarchy, bad
been lost. And here he wished TO know,
! whether, by the triumph, of legitimate
monarchy, the learned gentleman meant
the triumph of those accused and deles-
table principles. which were recognised
ny the ministerial writer's 9th day II
ne cid, then had England fought to esta-
blish Tie most presidential principles that
ever Were adopted principles which En-
gIlshmen had always resisted and which
treemen would be always ready to OPP
pose. Ii a system founded on such prin-
clpes we're to be adopted, he would ia
Their be It's victim than its slare-the lear
ned gentleman might exchange his brief
TOR dagger and write his epitapit III
his blood. They were told that the IL
berry oithe press lnnst have lis bounds
and limits. lit mast have those limits,
he hoped Ehglislnnen would not suffer
AN attorney general 10 prescribe them.
Ihey loved that liberty too much 10 trust
1t III such hands-and. If the orphan were
! too weak TO walk alone, they would not,
he was SIRE lntruSt the leading-striBSS
10 tina individual who siOod directly be
tween the government and the people.
the defendant t.cu went on to animal
vert or the whole of the publication in
which the alleged libel was contained
| contendlDG with much energy, that, as
q pubic writer, he was justified i'll dcscan-
ting on the conduct OF public men--who,
The moment they became public men,
merged their priv ate in their public cha
racter. tie would assert, that ministers
not only tell desire 10 destroy the con-
Stitution oil the country, but he would 20
tuFlher and declare that they had ac-
compiISied their desire and lie cOncei-
we'd he was perfectly justified in charging
them with any motives which might fair
y be inferred from their conduct. At the
time lie wrote The article in question, mi
nisterS had subverted the constitution.
They stated, that it was Insufficient TO
guard The nation against treason, which
existed only iii their own minds-against
plots, OF which the people knew nothing
-agaiust consplracles, of which they
we're themselves the only repositories.
When, IN consequence ofsuch statements,
me constitution was suspended, and the
liberty Of the subject was placed under
The mercy of the ,SecretarV ct STATE, he
had rIghtto contep.., that he was only
ns Ian,
ioB 81 tnoSe who planned such measures,
'.nlch as Il public writer, he was autho-
rlsed 10 do, IN the production Of the pub
licatIon exhibited against him. The de-
PENDANT next advcrted 10 the preSen, law
libel, which, he Observed, was bor-
rowed from the proceedings of the Star
Chamber, and might be traced ultimately
10 the Jnstinian Code. That which was
intended 10 put down the last spark of
freedom III Constauilnople (such was cur
commercial enterprise had been import
ed here-but 1t was not uaturaliZed-and
he trusted the Jury would look at il with
most suspicious eye and that, by their
verdict this day, they would declare, that
no character in public situation, should
hereafter be exempted from inquiry, nor
from accusation, when accusation was
deserved. The Defendant, after great
variety OF remarks on the speech of the
attorney-general, proc eeded to state, that
he believed the present prosecution was
commenced, il consequence ofhs having
demonstrated withthc late attorney gene
raj, on the conduct pursued by the Rev.
Mr.. Fowls, magistrate in Staifordshire,
who caused person to be appreheI-
dcd while selling The Black Dwd1 The
deiepdant called on the late altornev-ge-
neral oprosecute the author Off in Lon
don, and TO put all end TO proceed
ings against those who retaied it in the
country. Soon after this communications.
two informatlOns were filed against him
which he attributed TO this circnm-
stauce. The defendant then adverted TO
the strongest points in the alleged libel,
which he strenuously defended. He adj
mItted that they were strongly written
and he intended thai they should be so.
IN order, ifpossible. to awaken the people |
to just sense of their situation.
The attorney general replied at great |
length. he defended the course of !
proceeding which had been adopted with |
respect to The defendant as strictly legal. |
MIR. Justice Abbot charged the jury. |
1t was he observed, open 10 every sub
Ject, To discuss the measures ofihe Go |
yernment, provided he did so reasonably. |
- - but "a lIi>itdi VI 50 tllSCHS- |
sing measures, a person choose to utter 81
issue forth to the world SANDER aud ca
Ia mny against tie government OF the in
diyidgals composing il, he was guilty Of
a libel. There was Il point where rca-
sonlng ceased, and SANDER and calumnv
began; aud II was for tie jury TO consi-
der whether ihe paper in question was,
IN point OF law, a free, fair, and candid
discussion, or whether it did not 20 be-
You'd that line Of argument, which ought
to be preserved. His opinion was, that