themselves, but by the integrity and innocency of the judges 34.?

In no cafes have the judges behaved with more shameful partiality, than in trials for libels, and in trials for high treafon. In many inftances, in fuch cafes, their conduct has been fo notoriously indefenfible, that the STATE TRIALS have been pleasantly termed, "a libel upon the judges." Indeed, the unfavourable statement of their conduct, in that collection, is fo much the more li bellous, as it is unquestionably true. Hence, however, fufficient evidence may be adduced of the extreme folly and abfurdity, which would be manifefted by the people of this country, if they were to suffer juries to be deprived of any part of their antient power and authority in fuch cases. These are the cafes, in which judges are the most

Hift. Vol. I. Part I. p. 69, 70,

Edit. 8vo.

1707: .

likely to be under an undue influence on the part of the crown; and these, therefore, are the cafes, in which the subject has the most occafion for the protection of a jury.

NOTHING can be more infamous, nor more inconfiftent with a free conftitution, than the doctrines which have been maintained by fome of the judges concerning libels. Mr. Juftice Allybone, in the cafe of the feven bishops, laid down the following doctrine refpecting libels. 'I think, in the "first place, that no man can take upon him to write against the actual EXERCISE of the government, UNLESS HE HAVE LEAVE FROM THE GOVERNMENT, but he makes a libel, be what he writes true or false; for if once we come to impeach the government by way of argument, 'tis the < argument that makes the government or not the government: fo that I lay down

that in the first place, that the govern *ment ought not to be impeached by argument, nor the exercise of the government fhaken by argument; because • I can manage a proposition in itself doubtful, with a better pen than another man: This, fay I, is a libel. Then I lay • down this for my next pofition, That no private man can take upon him to write concerning the government at all; for what has any private man to do with the government, if his interest be not stirred or fhaken? It is the business of the go

vernment to manage matters relating to ⚫ the government; it is the business of fub, jects to mind only their own properties and interefts. If my intereft is not fhaken, ⚫ what have I to do with matters of govern

ment? They are not within my sphere.

• If the government does not come to shake my particular intereft, the law is open for

• me,

no

rite

for

the

irred

= go 1g to

fub

erties

aken,

vern here. fhake

en for

• me,

vernment, any fpecious

fhall put upon it fhall d

another form, and give i

⚫mination; and truly I t

worfe, because it comes in

for by that rule, every m ⚫ on a good vizard, may be governm

as he will to the

tom: fo that whether it be

a fupplication, or an add tion, if it be what it ough us call it by its true name right denomination, it is

State Trials, vol. IV

On the trial of Henry Carr at Guildhall, for a libel, before lord-chief-juftice Scroggs, ino1 680, Sir George Jefferies, then recorder of London, in his fpeech, as counfel for the crown, faid, All the judges of England having been met together, to know whether any person whatsoever may expose to the public knowledge any manner of intelligence, or any matter whatsoever ⚫that concerns the public: They give it in * as their resolution, that no person what• foever could expofe to the public know• ledge any thing that concerned the affairs of the public, without licence from the king, or from fuch persons as he thought • fit to entrust with that affair 36. And he afterwards faid, uncontradicted by the court,"

It is the opinion of all the judges of Eng• land, that it is the law of the land, that no perfon fhould offer to expofe to pub

36 State Trials, vol. III. p. 58.

• lic