LIBELLUS 
A common magnifier, of an inch focus, shows 
that the cornea is marked by a prodigious 
number of minute decussating lines, giving 
a kind of granular appearance to the whole 
convexity ; but with a microscope it exhi- 
bits a continued surface of convex hexagons. 
According to Lewenhoek there are 12,544 
lenses in each eye of this animat. See Shaw’s 
Zoology, vol. vi. 
LIBELLUS famosus. 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 memory 
of one who is dead, or the reputation of one 
who is alive, and thereby exposing 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 im- 
moral or illegal tendency. Tins species of 
defamation is usually termed written scan- 
dal, and thereby receives an aggravation, in 
that it is presumed to have been entered 
upon with coolness and deliberation; and 
to continue longer, and propagate wider 
and further than any other scandal. 
The important distinction between libels 
and words spoken, was fully established in 
the case of Villers v. Monsley, (2 Wils. 403.) 
viz. that whatever renders a man ridiculous, 
or lowers him in the esteem and opinion of 
the world, amounts to a libel ; though the 
same expressions, if spoken, would not have 
been defamation: 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 action- 
able. And on this ground, a young lady of 
quality, in the year 1793, recovered 4,000Z. 
dairrages for reflections upon her chastity, 
published 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 great- 
est punishment : if a libel be made against 
a private man, it may excite the person li- 
belled, or his friends, to revenge and to break 
FAMOSUS. 
the peace; and if against a magistrate, it is 
not only a breach of the peace, but a scan- 
dal to government, and stirs up sedition. 
Where a writing inveighs against mankind 
in general, or against a particular order of 
men, this is no libel; it must descend 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 publishing 
libellous matter reflecting on the memory 
of a dead person, not alledging tliat 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 ar- 
rested. 
Scandalous matter, in legal proceedings, 
by bill, petition, &c. in a court of justice, 
amounts not to a hbel, if the court hath 
jurisdiction of the cause. But he who de- 
livers a paper full of reflections on any per^ 
son, 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 jus- 
tify the printing any papers which import a 
crime in another, to instruct counsel, &c. 
but it will be a libel. 2. The communica- 
tion of a libel to any one person, is a publi- 
cation in the eye of the law ; therefore the 
sending 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 contained 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, an- 
other writes, and a third approves what is 
written, they are all makers of the libel ; 
because all peVsons who concur to an unlaw- 
ful act are guiltjf. 
If one v^rites 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 authority, is 
writing a libel, and he that thus writes it is 
