LIBELLUS FAMOSUS. 
a contriver ; and that he who hath a written 
copy of a known libel, if it is found upon 
him, this shall be evidence of the publica- 
tion ; but if such libel be not publicly 
known, then the mere having 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 vvhere 
it concerns a magistrate, ho should deliver' 
it presently to a magistrate. 
The sale of the libel by a servant in a 
shop, is prima facie evidence of publication, 
in a prosecution against the master ; and is 
sufficient for conviction, unless contradicted 
by contrary evidence, shewing that he was 
not privy, nor in any way assenting to it. 
It is immaterial, on a criminal prosecu- 
tion 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, thj falsehood of it may 
aggravate its guilt and enhance its punish- 
ment. 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 compensation himself, whatever of- 
fence it may be against the public peace ; 
and, therefore, upon a civil action, tlie truth 
of the accusation may be pleaded in bar of 
the suit. But in a criniinal prosecution, 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 prosecutions, the only 
points to be enquired into are, first, the 
making or publishing of a book or writing ; 
and secondly, whether the matter be crimi - 
nal ; and if both these points are against the 
defendant, the offence against the public is 
complete. 
It is not competent to a defendant 
charged with having published a libel, to 
prove tliat a paper, similar to tiiat 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 publishing 
the libel is fine, and such corporal punish- 
ment (as imprisonment, pillory, &c.) as the 
court in its discretion shall inflict ; re- 
garding the quantity of the oft'ence, and the 
quality of the oftender. Also if booksellers, 
^q. publish or sell libels, though they know 
not the contents of them, they are punish- 
able. 
It has been held that writing a seditious 
libel is not an actual breach of the peace : 
and that a member of parliament 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 consideration of the 
jury are the fact of publishing, and the 
truth of the inuendoes ; that is, the truth of 
the meaning, and sense of Uie passages of 
the libel, as stated and averred in the re- 
cord ; whether the matter be or be not a 
libel, is a question of law for the considera- 
tion of the court. But the statute 32 
Geo. III. c. 60, after reciting that “ doubts 
had arisen whether on the trial of an indict- 
ment or information for the making or pub- 
lishing any libel, where an issue or issues are 
joined between the King and the defendant, 
on the plea of not guilty pleaded, it be 
competent 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 matter put in 
issue, upon such indictment or information ; 
and shall not be required or directed by the 
court or judge, before whom the indict- 
ment, &c. shall be tried, to find the defen- 
dant guilty, merely on the proof of the pub- 
lication by such defendant, of the paper 
charged 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 directions 
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 m arrest of judgment, as by law he 
might have dope before the passing of the 
act. 
It has, in the case of the King, d. Lord 
George Gqrdon ; and the King, v. Peltier, 
been held that a writing tending to defame 
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 enforced. We 
think there are many serious arguments 
against the doctrine. 
