LIBELLUS FAMOSUS. 



fier, of an inch focus, shows, that the cor- 

 jiea is marked by u prodigious number of 

 minute decussating 1 lines, giving a kind 

 of granular appearance to the whole con- 

 vexity ; but with a microscope it exhi- 

 bits a continued surface of convex hexa- 

 gons. According to Lewenhoek there are 

 12,544 lenses in each eye of this animal. 

 See Shaw's Zoology, vol. vi. 



LIBELLUS famdsus. A contumely or 

 reproach, published to the defamation of 

 the government, of a magistrate, or of a 

 private person. It is also defined to be a 

 malicious defamation, expressed either in 

 printing- or writing, or by signs, pictures, 

 &c. tending either to blacken the memo- 

 ry of one who is dead, or the reputation 

 of one who is alive, and thereby expos- 

 ing him to public hatred, contempt, and 

 ridicule. 



Libels, says Blackstone, taken in their 

 largest and most extensive sense, signify 

 any writings, pictures, or the like, of an 

 immoral or illegal tendency. This spe- 

 cies of defamation is usually termed writ- 

 ten scandal, and thereby receives an ag- 

 gravation, in that it is presumed to have 

 been entered upon with coolness and de- 

 liberation ; and to continue longer, and 

 propagate wider and further than any 

 other scandal. 



The important distinction between li- 

 bels and words spoken, was fully esta- 

 blished in the case of Villers v. Mousley, 

 (2 Wils. 403.) viz. that whatever renders 

 u man ridiculous, or lowers him in the es- 

 teem and opinion of the world, amounts 

 to a libel ; though the same expressions, 

 if spoken, would not have been defama- 

 tion : as, to call a person, in writing, an 

 itchy old toad, was held in that case to be 

 a libel; although, as words spoken, they 

 would not have been actionable. And on 

 this ground, a young lady of quality, in 

 the year 1793, recov ered 4,000/. damages 

 for reflections upon her chastity, publish- 

 ed in a newspaper, although she could 

 have brought no action for the grossest 

 verbal aspersions that could have been 

 uttered against her honour. An action 

 for a libel also differs from an action for 

 words in this particular ; that the former 

 may be brought at any time within six 

 years, and any damages will entitle the 

 plaintiff to full costs. To print of any 

 person that he is a swindler, is a libel, 

 and actionable. 



All libels are made against private men, 

 or magistrates, and public persons; and 

 those against magistrates deserve the 

 greatest punishment : if a libel be made 

 against a private man, it may excite the 

 person libelled, or his friends, to revenge 



and to break the peace ; and if against a 

 magistrate, it is not only a breach of the 

 peace, but a scandal to government, and 

 stirs up sedition. 



Where a writing- inveighs against man- 

 kind in general, or against a particular 

 order of men, this is no libel ; it must de- 

 scend to particulars and individuals, to 

 make it a libel. But a general reflection 

 on the government is a libel, though no 

 particular person is reflected on : and the 

 writing against a known law is held to be 

 criminal. 



Though a private person or magistrate 

 be dead at the time of making the libel, 

 yet it is punishable, as it tends to a breach 

 of the peace. But an indictment for pub- 

 lishing libellous matter reflecting on the 

 the memory of a dead person, not alleg- 

 ing that it was done with a design to bring 

 contempt on the family of the deceased, 

 and to stir up the hatred of the King's 

 subjects against them, and to excite his 

 relations to a breach of the peace, cannot 

 be supported; and judgment was in this 

 case accordingly arrested. 



Scandalous matter, in legal proceed- 

 ings, by bill, petition, &c. in a court of 

 justice, amounts not to a libel, if the court 

 hath jurisdiction of the cause. But he 

 who delivers a paper full of reflections 

 on any person, in nature of a petition to a 

 committee,to any other persons except the 

 members of parliament who have to do 

 with it, may be punished as the publisher 

 of a libel. And by the better opinion, a 

 person cannot justify the printing any 

 papers which import a crime in another, 

 to instruct counsel, See. but it will be a 

 libel. 2. The communication of a libel to 

 any one person, is a publication in the 

 eye of the law ; therefore the sending 1 

 an abusive private letter to a man, is 

 as much a libel as if it were openly print- 

 ed ; for it equally tends to a breach of the 

 peace. 



In the making of libels, if one man dic- 

 tates, and another writes a libel, both are 

 guilty : for the writing after another 

 shows his approbation of what is contain- 

 ed in the libel ; and the first reducing a 

 libel into writing may be said to be the 

 making it, but not the composing. If one 

 repeats, another writes, and a third ap- 

 proves what is written, they are all mak- 

 ers of the libel; because all persons who 

 concur to an unlawful act are guilty. 



If one writes a copy of a libel and does 

 not deliver it to others, the writing is no 

 publication: but it has been adjudged 

 that the copying of a libel, without au- 

 thority, is writing a libel, and he that thus 

 writes it is a contriver ; and that he who 



