should assent to a declaration to dine together, and to have a ball, where every one must appear in the manufacture of the country. This would be a declaration not required by law; but would any one venture to say, that this was an illegal combination? This construction would equally affect numberless valuable societies and institutions; and let it be remembered, that this object was now avowed, as the learned gentleman had contended, that let their intents be wicked or charitable, they were all equally within the meaning of the Act. Thus he might claim an acquittal, on the high ground of the principles of the Association, and a denial that any test existed among them; but there was not even a tittle of evidence in support of the facts set forth in the information. The existence of the Association had not been proved. No evidence had been given that they had ever met. Mr Parkins had seen only Mr Sharp alone in a room, and solitude and society he had always understood were direct opposites. No proof had been adduced but the list of subscribers; and persons

might be subscribers, and yet not members. Even in the list Mr Sharp was set down as secretary, and it seldom happened that the secretary was a member of a society; nobody thought that the Clerk of the House of Commons was therefore a member; the very printed address had not been proved to have been issued by the society; the manuscript should have been produced, and evidence brought forward, tracing it to the defendant.-The learned gentleman concluded, by repeating that he had a right to claim a decision in his favour, upon the high ground that the Association was not within the meaning of the Act; but even if that should fail him, upon the total absence of evidence to prove the facts stated in the information.

The Lord Mayor consulted for a few minutes, with Mr Newman, when the latter gave the decision, that his Lordship thought there was not evidence before him to induce him to pronounce the Association an illegal combination, and therefore he dismissed the information.

Jury should hear.-[Here the Learned Sergeant read the article in the Western Luminary of July 11, in which the Libel was contained.] This, he said, was the paper on which the Jury, under the obligation of their sacred oaths, would have to pronounce; and unless some species of proof, some line of argument with which he was wholly unacquainted, should be adopted for the defence, he was sure they would be bound to consider it, as he himself did, a foul, scandalous, and malicious libel. Proof of publication was then adduced, and Mr Sergeant Pell said this was his case.

Mr Coleridge rose for the defendant. If in his conscience he went along with the Learned Counsel for the prosecution, as to the character of the alleged libel, and the probable result of the case, he would not waste the time of the Jury, or that of his Lordship, by another word, but would reserve his arguments for a future opportunity. However the prospect of being engaged in this case might have been flattering to him, as he approached it, the nearer view was alarming. It needed not the disparity that existed between himself and the Counsel for the Crown, to clothe this case with disadvantages to the defendant; for the information charged him with having published a foul, slanderous, and malicious libel; and such a charge was inferior only to those that affected the lives and property

of individuals, because it attacked the reputation. And against whom was the defendant charged to have published this libel? Against a woman who of all others was in a situation entitled to commiseration--an individual of exalted rank, the Queen of this mighty empire. He would not justify the passage which formed the ground of this information-it was an intemperate sentence; and if the defendant would have had him justify it, he must have sought another advocate. The

evidence of crime, however, rested on the intention of a party; and if he could shew them, from a train of circumstances, that Mr Flindell had no malicious intent, he would be entitled to their verdict. In doing this he should be compelled to enter into a painful detail of particulars, which he deeply deplored should ever have taken place, and which he wished could be forgotten.-The Learned Counsel, after disclaiming the influence of any personal feelings, proceeded to narrate the circumstances that preceded the late trial of her Majesty. He particularly dwelt on the Report of the House of Lords, which cast a reflection on the Queen's character, ten thousand times more serious than any thing the defendant had said; and a bill was brought into Parliament, that, for the charges it contained, out-heroded Herod. The libel, in comparison with it, was milk and water. Was Mr Flindell to take no notice of this? Was he to be the only one to remain unmoved on the subject? But he should wrong his cause if he stopped here. It was generally thought that those who favoured the Queen's cause were connected on other political points; and it was Mr Flindell's intention to oppose them; an injury to the person of the Queen was not his intention; he thought only of the idol whom the party had set up; for in the same breath as he makes the accusation against her Majesty, he tells you, that her answers to addresses were written by the same persons as the addresses themselves. He should not, however, be dealing candidly, if he did not admit, that the line of defence he was pursuing did not cover the whole of the alleged libel; yet, if the Jury found that the sentence, though intemperate, was not written in a bad spirit, they would give a verdict in his favour. He had brought the matter to a balance of evidence on one side they had the bare proof of publication, on

the other a thousand facts of extenu ation. If the evidence appeared to them so balanced, that their minds wavered, they should acquit; for the still small voice of mercy was of more avail than the loudest tones of justice. Could either of the Jury go home and say, "I have consigned an honest, industrious man, the father of twelve children, to a prison, although the reasons in his favour raised a doubt in my mind whether his error was the effect of intemperance or guilt?" The Learned Counsel concluded by saying, he knew of no occurrence more heart-rending to an honest Juror, than the reflection that he had given an inconsiderate verdict. Mr Sergeant Pell rose to reply. He could not conceive how the Jury were to consider the defendant the innocent man represented by his Learned Friend. At the very time when the defendant published this paper, the Queen of England was, according to his Learned Friend's statement, in a situation that ought to have excited the greatest commiseration; this was a broad admission of his Learned Friend, but it was nothing more than the truth. On that day, when her Majesty was surrounded by dangers that almost reach ed her life, the defendant had described her as abandoned to the utmost profligacy, a fit inmate for a prison, and deserving of a degrading punishment, inflicted only on the most notorious criminals. His Learned Friend had admitted it was a coarse publication, that reflected no credit on the taste of Mr Flindell. He agreed with his Learned Friend, that it was as coarse, as illiberal a sentence as was ever put forth from the press; but, though vulgar, it was not less malignant; though the weapon were rough, the wound inflicted by it would not be less deadly. His Learned Friend had commented on a circumstance which he confessed he heard with some degree of surprise that because the King up

on his throne, aided by his Privy Council, had made representations of the nature alluded to, every subject in the kingdom had a right to do the same. This was sacred ground-it was not for him to call in question the motives of such high authority, or to impugn the wisdom of his councils. Yet Mr Flindell had gone far beyond even that description. Good God! was it in England, a country where a charge was not considered as implication of guilt, that a person charged with a crime should be prejudged just on the eve of being called up for trial? Was that justice?-was that according to the spirit of the Constitution under which we live? What would this innocent man-this father of a numerous family say, if one of his children were about to be charged with a crime before a tribunal of his country, which God forbid—what would he say of that man, the justice of his mind, or the honour of his feelings, who should attempt to corrupt the source of justice, and poison the minds of those who may be called on to pronounce on his guilt or innocence? The liberty of the press, invaluable as it was, had unfortunately gone beyond what may be termed its legitimate bounds. God forbid he should ever live to see the day when its power should be cramped beyond a ne cessary restriction-he would rather see it licentious than dead. It could not be ascertained where its limits be. gan, or where they ended-a British Jury were its guardians, and would best protect this invaluable blessing by restraining it when it degenerated into licentiousness; for where there was licentiousness there was crime. He would call their attention to the strong language of the libel, and leave it with the Jury to say, if it were not of the foul, infamous, and malicious description charged in the information.—“ A woman as notoriously devoted to Bacchus as to Venus." It was false-he would

confidently assert it to be an unfound. ed and scandalous libel. He did not find in any of the charges which had been brought against her Majesty, that she was "notoriously devoted to Bacchus;" he had, indeed, heard the filthy whisperings that were abroad, but he treated them as they deserved. "Shall such an one as would, if found on our pavement, be committed to Bridewell and whipped, be held up in the light of suffering innocence?" There was a coarseness here-a degree of personal bitterness that did no credit to the heart of any man. The contrasting her Majesty with her daughter, in the same paper, also went beyond any thing of human guilt he had ever heard. The Learned Sergeant made some further observations on the libel, and concluded with enforcing upon the Jury to find the defendant Guilty.

The Judge, in his address to the Jury, principally directed their attention to the injustice of prejudicing the public mind against a person charged with an offence. The offence of the defendant was precisely of this description, and it was his duty unequivocally to state, that he considered it a libel.

The Jury deliberated a few minutes, and returned a verdict of Guilty, but strongly and unanimously recommended the defendant to the clemency and consideration of the Crown. The Judge said, he would take care that their recommendation should be made known in the proper quarter.

Court of King's Bench, May 28.

The Solicitor-General moved for judgment upon Thomas Flindell.

The defendant put in a long affida vit, stating that he was fifty-four years of age, that he had twelve children, nine of whom were dependent upon hin. for support, and that if he was im

VOL. XIV. PART II.

prisoned for any length of time at a place distant from that where he carried on his business, it would be ruinous to himself and family.

He then addressed the Court in mitigation of punishment, while the Solicitor-General spoke in aggravation. Mr Justice Bayley pronounced judg ment. He said, that the defendant had been found guilty of what was truly described as being a foul and infamous libel upon her Majesty the Queen-a libel too, which was published at a period well calculated to aggravate the character of the offence. It was at a time when a Committee of the House of Lords had recommended an inquiry into certain conduct imputed to her Majesty; the defendant said, that, as a public journalist, he felt authorised by the report to publish the libel in question; but he should have known that inquiry was not in itself identified with guilt-he should have known, that when a form of proceeding, in further. ance of that Report, was ordered by the House of Lords, where witnesses were to be seen, examined, and their testimony sifted, it was his bounden duty to have abstained from criminatory remarks upon her Majesty, until the result of a constitutional investigation had decided upon the case. There was nothing more important to the due administration of justice, than that the party whose conduct was impugned, should go unprejudiced before à constitutional tribunal. It was the wisest and most leading maxim of the laws of this kingdom, that a person should be presumed innocent until the contrary appeared in due course of law. The defendant had not only disregarded this maxim of law, which it ought to have been his first duty to have obeyed, but had added other charges against her Majesty, which were properly designated in the indictment as being calculated to defame and

slander the character of her Majesty, the Queen. The defendant had said, that he had uniformly supported the reigning family upon the throne; he should have recollected that her Majesty was the consort of the King who sat on that throne, and that she was nearly allied to the royal family for which he professed so devoted an attachment. The Learned Judge in conclusion said, that the Court had taken seriously into its consideration the very strong recommendation of the Jury, who must have known the defendant's character in his neighbourhood, and that that recommendation had materially weighed with them in pronouncing their judgment, which was-that the defendant should be imprisoned in the county gaol of Devon, at Exeter, for the space of eight calendar months, and that at the expiration of that term he should give sureties to keep the peace for three years, himself in 500l. and two sufficient sureties in 250/. each.

THE REV. RICHARD BLACOW, for

LIBEL ON THE QUEEN.

Lancaster Assizes, Friday, Sept. 14.

Mr Tindall stated the pleadings. This was an indictment against the Rev. Richard Blacow, for a scandalous and malicious libel against the late Queen. The first count charged, that he had composed and preached the words charged as libellous; the second count charged that he had composed and published the words in a pamphlet, entitled "The Substance of a Discourse," &c. ; the third count charged, that he had composed and published the words set forth in the indictment. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty, upon which issue was joined.

Mr Brougham.-May it please your Lordship, Gentlemen of the Jury,

It is my painful duty to lay before you the particulars of this case, and it is yours to try it; and my part shall be performed in a very short time indeed, for I have little, if any thing, more to do, than merely to read-what I will not characterise by words of my own, but what I will leave to you, and may leave to every man whose mind is not perverted, to affix a proper description of. I read to you what the defendant composed and printed. You have heard from my learned friend,- and if you have any doubt, it will soon be removed,-to whom the following passage applies. Of the Queen it is that the passage is written and printed :

"The term 'cowardly,' which they have now laid to my charge, I think you will do me the justice to say, does not belong to me; that feeling was never an inmate of my bosom ; neither when the Jacobins raged around us with all their fury; nor in the present day of radical uproar and delusion. The latter, indeed, it must be allowed, have one feature about them even more hideous and disgusting than the Jacobins themselves. They fell down and worshipped the Goddess of Reason, a most respectable and decent sort of being."

And you know, Gentlemen, that she was a common prostitute taken from the stews of Paris.

"A most respectable and decent sort of being, compared with that which the radicals have set up as the idol of their worship. They have elevated the Goddess of Lust on the pedestal of Shame, an object of all others the most congenial to their taste, the most deserving of their homage, the most worthy of their adoration. After exhibiting her claims to their favour in two distant quarters of the globe, after compassing sea and land with her guilty paramour, to gratify to the full her impure desires, and even polluting the holy sepulchre itself with