LIBELLUS FAMOSUS. 



bath a written copy of a known libel, if 

 it is found upon him, this shall be evi- 

 dence of the publication ; but if such libel 

 be not publicly known, then the mere 

 having 1 a copy is not a publication. 



When any man finds a libel, if it be 

 against a private person, he ought to burn 

 it, or deliver it to a magistrate ; and where 

 it concerns a magistrate, he should deliver 

 it presently to a magistrate. 



The sale of the libel by a servant in a 

 shop, is prima facie evidence of publica- 

 tion, in a prosecution against the master ; 

 and is sufficient for conviction, unless 

 contradicted by contrary evidence, shew- 

 ing that he was not privy, nor in any way 

 assenting to it. 



It is immaterial, on a criminal prose- 

 cution with respect to the essence of a 

 libel, whether the matter of it be true or 

 false ; because it equally tends to a breach 

 of the peace ; and the provocation, not 

 the falsity, is the thing to be punished 

 criminally; though, doubtless, the false- 

 hood of it may aggravate its guilt and en- 

 hance its punishment. In a civil action, 

 a libel must appear to be false as well as 

 scandalous : for if the charge be true, the 

 plaintiff has received no private injury, 

 and has no ground to demand for a com- 

 pensation himself, whatever offence it 

 may be against the public peace ; and, 

 therefore, upon a civil action, the truth 

 of the accusation may be pleaded in bar 

 of the suit. But in a criminal prosecu- 

 tion, the tendency which all libels have 

 to create animosities, and to disturb the 

 public peace, is the whole that the law 

 considers. And, therefore, in such pro- 

 secutions, the only points to be enquired 

 into are, first, the making or publishing 

 of a book or writing ; and, secondly, 

 whether the matter be criminal ; and if 

 both these points are against the defend- 

 ant, the offence against the public is com- 

 plete. 



It is not competent to a defendant 

 charged with having published a libel, to 

 prove that a paper, similar to that for the 

 publication of which he is prosecuted, was 

 published on a former occasion by other 

 persons who have never been prosecuted 

 for it. 



The punishment of libellers for either 

 making, repeating, printing, or publish- 

 ing the libel, is fine, and such corporal 

 punishment (as imprisonment, pillory, 

 &c.^) as the court in its discretion shall 

 inflict; regarding the quantity of the of- 

 fence, and the quality of the offender. 

 Also, if booksellers, &.c. publish or sell 

 libels, though they know not the contents 

 of them, they are punishable. 

 VOL. IV." 



It has been held that writing a sedi- 

 tious libel is not an actual breach of 

 the peace: and that a member of par- 

 liament writing such a libel is entitled to 

 his privilege from being arrested for the 

 same. 



In informations, the libel must be set 

 out correctly, according to the words or 

 the material sense. 



It has been frequently determined, 

 that in the trial of an indictment for a 

 libel, the only questions for the consider- 

 ation of the jury are, the fact of publish- 

 ing, and the truth of the innuendoes ; that 

 is, the truth of the meaning, and sense of 

 the passages of the libel, as stated and 

 averred in the record; whether the mat- 

 ter be or be not a libel, is a question of 

 law for the consideration of the court. 

 But the statute 32 Geo. III. c. 60, after 

 reciting that "doubts had arisen whether 

 on the trial of an indictment or informa- 

 tion for the making or publishing any li- 

 bel, where an issue or issues are joined 

 between the King and the defendant on 

 the plea of not guilty pleaded, it be com- 

 petent to the jury, impannelled to try 

 the same, to give their verdict upon the 

 whole matter in issue," enacts, that " on 

 every such trial, the jury, sworn to try 

 the issue, may give a general verdict of 

 guilty or not guilty, upon the whole mat- 

 ter put in issue, upon such indictment 

 or information ; and shall not be requir- 

 ed or directed by the court or judge, 

 before whom the indictment, &c. shall 

 be tried, to find the defendant guilty, 

 merely on the proof of the publication 

 by such defendant, of the paper charg- 

 ed to be a libel, and of the sense ascribed 

 to the same in such indictment." But it 

 is provided by the said statute, that the 

 court or judge shall, according to their 

 discretion, give their opinion and direc- 

 tions to the jury on the matter in issue, 

 as in other criminal cases, that the jury 

 may also find a special verdict ; and that, 

 in case the jury shall find the defendant 

 guilty, he may move in arrest of judg- 

 ment, as by law he might have done be- 

 fore the passing of the act. 



It has, in the case of the King v. Lord 

 George Gordon ; and the King v. Peltier, 

 been held, that a writing tending to de- 

 fame the Sovereign of a foreign country, 

 is a libel punishable in England. The law 

 was not questioned in the first case; in 

 the second the punishment was not en- 

 forced. We think there are many serious 

 arguments against the doctrine. 



In the case of Gilbert Wakefield, and 

 of Hart and White, recently, although 

 fho offences wove committed, and the 







