APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



'269 



able for publishing a true report of 

 wliat passed in parliament. 



Sir Simon Le Blanc over-ruled 

 this point ; — and the learned gen- 

 tJeman then addressed the jury. 

 He said, that Mr. Creevey had been 

 urged by many members of both 

 houses, justly alarmed at this pro- 

 secution, to insist upon his privi- 

 lege : but the learned judge hav- 

 ing decided against him, he should 

 now proceed to the other ground 

 of his defence. He then, in a very 

 eloquent and ingenious speech, 

 contended that there was nothing 

 libellous in the publication; that 

 matters reflecting in a much higher 

 degree upon the characters of in- 

 dividuals had been published, as 

 the speeches of Mr. Burke, Mr. 

 Pitt, Mr. Windham, and other emi- 

 nent parliamentary characters. He 

 inferred the injurious operation of 

 imposing any restraint upon the 

 publication of reports of what pass- 

 ed in parliament, and on this 

 ground principally trusted his client 

 would be acquitted. 



Sir Simon Le Blanc stated his 

 clear opinion, that it was no exte- 

 nuation of a libel, to say that it 

 was the report of a speech in par- 

 liament : the publication in ques- 

 tion was one which tended to vilify 

 the prosecutor, who was in the 

 execution of a public trust, and he 

 was therefore bound to say it was a 

 libel answering the description 

 given of it in the indictment. 



The jury were of the same opi- 

 nion, and without hesitation, pro- 

 nounced a verdict of Guilty. 



Mr. Brougham said, he wished 

 to tender a bill of exceptions, but 

 he was informed by the learned 

 judge he could not do so in a cri- 

 minal prosecution ; and, besides, 



that he should have tendered it be- 

 fore he had taken the chance of 

 the verdict being in his favour. 



A motion was afterwards made 

 in the court of King's-Bench for a 

 new trial, when, after the matter 

 had been fully argued by Mr; 

 Brougham, the judges were una- 

 nimous in refusing a rule. 



Thesentence pronounced onMr. 

 Creevey was a fine of 100/. 



Dublin, July 27. — Court of 

 Ki)ig^s-Be7ich, July 26. — The King 

 v. John Magee. 



Mr. Kemmis opened the indict- 

 ment. 



The Attorney General.—" My 

 Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury, 

 it is a very painful part of the duty 

 of the office which I hold under 

 the crown, to bring before you the 

 present case. This is an indictment 

 against the traverser, John Magee, 

 for a libel on his grace the duke 

 of Richmond, the lord -lieutenant 

 of Ireland. It will be my duty to 

 explain to you the meaning and 

 motives of this libel, in order to 

 justify this prosecution. I must be 

 aware of the jealousy which your 

 minds must entertain for the inva- 

 luable privilege of a free press ; 

 but I trust, I know the value, and 

 venerate that privilege, no less than 

 any other man in the community: 

 within its legal and proper bounds, 

 it is the security of the subject 

 against the government, and of the 

 government against faction in the 

 Ftate ; but when it transgresses 

 those bounds, it is peculiarly in- 

 cumbent on those who administer 

 and dispense the law, to correct 

 its abuses. Every subject of the 

 land has a right to carry a staff in 

 his hand ; but if he will use that 



