278 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1812. 



century without one single claim 

 on the gratitude of his country, or 

 the respect of posterity !" 



The Solicitor-General, having 

 asked Mr. Brougham, counsel for 

 the defendants, whether he wished 

 to have any other part of the arti- 

 cle read than the mere libel, he re- 

 plied that he should be content 

 with reading them himself; but 

 Lord Eilenborough said, that if 

 any other parts of the paper were 

 to be observed upon, the court 

 should know the subject of obser- 

 vation. Some other passages were 

 therefore read, which were intro- 

 ductory to that charged as the libel, 

 and related to the disapprobation 

 with which the Prince Regent's 

 health was received at the dinner 

 of the Irish Society in London, and 

 to the adulatory language of the 

 Morning Post, in speaking of his 

 Royal Highness. It was chiefly 

 upon this last topic that Mr. 

 Brougham founded his exculpa- 

 tion of the defendants ; and he re- 

 presented, that at the time when 

 the expectations of those who had 

 indulged a hope of the most bene- 

 ficial political changes as conse- 

 quent upon the Regent's coming 

 to power, were frustrated, the 

 appearance of such panegyric as 

 that paper had bestowed upon him 

 was a kind of provocation which 

 could not be resisted ; and that the 

 offensive article was rather to be 

 considered as a commentary upon 

 this unworthy adulation, than as 

 written with a malicious or libel- 

 lous design. Mr. Brougham then 

 went through some of the particu- 

 lars ofthe article charged, and whilst 

 he was apparently endeavouring to 

 palliate or do away their obvious 

 meaning, it was evident that his 

 purpose w£is to show that they were 



founded in fact. He concluded 

 with strongly urging upon the jury 

 the danger to morals of rendering 

 it criminal to animadvert from the 

 press upon the vices of a prince or 

 his courtiers, which are above re- 

 proof and control from other quar- 

 ters. 



The Solicitor-General, in reply, 

 disclaimed all title to discuss the 

 measures of the Prince Regent, 

 and it was not for him to presume 

 to defend them. He, however, 

 took a general view of the charges 

 contained in the prosecuted article, 

 and endeavoured to show their ex- 

 aggerated and libellous nature. 



Lord Eilenborough began his 

 charge to the jury by a severe cen- 

 sure of the defendants' counsel, 

 who, he said, had imbibed the spi- 

 rit of his client, and seemed to have 

 inoculated himself with all the 

 poison and mischief which this li- 

 bel was calculated to effect. He 

 then told the jury, that they had to 

 decide to-day, whether we were in 

 future to live under the dominion 

 of libel, or the control and govern- 

 ment of the law; for against all 

 the law and its provisions had this 

 libeller set his front of defiance, and 

 had contended, that every person 

 holding superior rank and situa- 

 tion is amenable to this sort of at- 

 tack, and that when the ancestors 

 of a man accepted of rank, they 

 renounced for themselves and their 

 posterity all protection ofthe law. 

 After dwelling for some time upon 

 this idea, his lordship proceeded to 

 the excuse made for this libel, that 

 it was a comment upon a per- 

 sonal eulogy which had given dis- 

 gust to the writer; and observed, 

 that adulation might have been re- 

 probated without making the cha- 

 racter of its subject a topic of defa- 



matioR 



i 



