274 A COLONIAL AUTOCRACY. 



Macquarie to transmit a full report of the trial. 1 He was, how- 

 ever, ready to let the matter rest, and did not express sympathy 

 with Marsden's desire for Campbell's dismissal. 2 



Marsden for a time very unwillingly continued to act as 

 magistrate at Parramatta. In March, 1818, the Judge- Advocate 

 being in the town, visited the gaol, and on his return to Sydney 

 suggested that the Governor should release some of the prison- 

 ers in order to lessen the pressure on the gaol accommodation. 

 This was done without further communication with Marsden, 

 who had been the committing magistrate. Already bitterly 

 hurt by Wylde's behaviour in the libel action, and always very 

 ready to accept any action as a criticism on his magisterial 

 sternness (for his severity was probably often brought into in- 

 vidious comparison with Macquarie's clemency), Marsden at 

 once wrote to Macquarie resigning his office. This was on the 

 1 8th March, 1818, and the only answer Marsden received was a 

 copy of a General Order which stated curtly, '' that his Excel- 

 lency the Governor had been pleased to dispense with the services 

 of the Rev. Samuel Marsden as justice of the peace and magis- 

 trate at Parramatta and the surrounding districts ". 3 



Although from this time Marsden might with good reason 

 have displayed a greater hostility towards the Governor, there 

 appears no evidence to connect him with any hostile demonstra- 

 tion. Under the circumstances the clergyman, who was a hot- 

 tempered, full-blooded man, behaved with remarkable self-control, 

 and showed himself more sinned against than sinning. The 

 chief interest of the whole affair lay, however, in the fact that 

 this was the first trial for libel in the Colony, and that in the 

 criminal trial and in the civil trial which followed it the defend- 

 ant was not merely a Government official, but one in very close 

 and intimate connection with the representative of the Crown, 

 and one who styled himself the Censor of the Press. More im- 

 portant still was the fact that judgment was given against this 

 official, and that the Censor of the Press learnt how narrowly 

 the law limited his functions. In short, the action in the 



1 Given in D. 8. See above. 



2 See Bigge, Report I. 



3 For facts of this quarrel see Bigge's Report, I. Bigge gives a very full 

 account, and it appears, from all the evidence, to be a very just one. The G.G.O. 

 appeared in S.G., 2ist March, 1818. 



