829.] and Liberty of the Press. 401 



gave him divers blows. The defendant was committed to the Tower 

 during the king's pleasure, ^ned 10,000/. to acknowledge his offence, 

 and submit himself to liis majesty, the treasurer, and the comptroller ; 

 to pay the relator 1,000/. damages, and make him such recognition as 

 the earl marshal should direct." 



We shall content ourselves with one single case to shew how offenders 

 were dealt with who neither wrote nor spoke libels of public men, nor 

 affronted the retainers of the court, but OJtly did some grievous private 

 wrong to a private individual. 



" Anno ltJ33. IVingJield, Miles, ver. Ogle Armigero, el al. The de- 

 fendant, Thomas Ogle, bearing malice to the plaintiff, he and the other 

 defendants sought for him in several places ; and at length finding him, 

 with one only in his company, and without weapons, after some 

 .speeches past, told the plaintiff he lyed, and lyed in his throat ; and 

 the plaintiff thereupon hitting him in the face with his gloves, the said 

 Thomas Ogle, armed with dagger, sword, and pistol, struck the plaintiff 

 over the face with his riding rod ; and then he and the other defendants, 

 di-awing their swords, wounded the plaintiff in the head, and cut through 

 his skull, so that three or four pieces jverc taken out, and he was a year 

 and a half before perfectly cured. The three Ogles were committed, 

 fined 500/. apiece, bound to their good behaviour two years, to ask the 

 plaintiff forgiveness m this court, and to pay him 500/. each." 



Thus, to shake the head, and bend the brow, at a courtier, to shake 

 him and threaten to cut his throat, could not be atoned for in those 

 days at a less price than eleven thousand pounds, while actually to break 

 a man's head, and all but murder him, he being a private gentleman, was 

 considered to be very handsomely paid for, by a penalty of 07ie thousand. 

 This sum, however, was held to be too small a mulct for the scandalous 

 crime of imputing to an archbishop the heresy of toleration. Ex. Gr. 



" Anno 1034. yitt. Regis ver. Robins el al. The defendant AUinson, 

 reporter at Ipswich, that his IMajesty in his journey to Scotland, being 

 pleased with the Archbishop of York's entertainment, and bidding him 

 ask something, the archbishop kneeled down and requested a toleration 

 for the papists in some churches, and his majesty being discontented 

 thereat confined him to his house ; and the defendant Robins reported 

 this for news at Yarmouth. They were both committed, fined 1,000/. 

 apiece ; Alhnson bound to his good behaviour during life, and set in the 

 pillory at Westminster (and there to be whipped), York, Ipswich, and Yar- 

 moutfi, with a paper on his head, and to acknowledge his offence at all 

 four places ; Robins to acknowledge his offence at Yarmouth, and to pay 

 the archbishop 1,000 marks damages." 



Thus we see, not only how sensitive the great men of that age were, 

 on the subject of libels, but what an admirable method they adopted 

 for abating the nuisance. They were accusers, jurors, and judges, in 

 their own persons, and were deeply impressed with the salutary effect 

 of multiplied punisliment, by following up enormous fines with per- 

 petual imprisonment, whipping, nailing ears to the pillory, sometimes 

 cutting them off, bi-anding, and, occasionally, slitting the nose. The 

 case of Prynn is well known ; but it may not be amiss to advert briefly 

 to it. 



He was a gentleman of good family and a barrister of Lincoln's Inn ; 

 but having, as he says in the Epistle Dedicatory of his Histrio-Mastix 

 to the Society of Lincoln's Inn, " been drawn in, at his first arrival in 

 .AI.M. AV;/. .SV/w.—VoL. VIII. No. 4(). 3 F 



