a jury, that would convict Almon, muft convict the attorney ge neral. And yet who can believe the attorney general would leave Junius on his table, or in his window, with a defign falfely, fcandalouffy, and malicioufly, to libel his royal mafter?

God forbid we fhould fee the day, when, under a pretence of punifhing a falfe, fcandalous, and malicious libeller of the King, the liberty of the prefs fhould be confined only to those who are hired to traduce and vilify the friends of liberty, and when they alone fhall be permitted to go fcot-free; and God forbid that fuch a doctrine too fhould prevail, which may make the attorney general, the twelve Judges, and the members of the two houfes of parliament, liable to the charge of publishing libels.

An exa& Account of the Trial of Mr. Woodfall for printing and pub lifbing Junius's Letter.

ON

N Wednesday morning June 13, 1770, came on at Guildhall, before Lord Chief Juftice Mansfield, the trial of Henry Sampfon Woodfall, by an information filed by Mr. Attorney General ex officio, for printing and publishing a letter figned JUNIUS, in the Public Advertiser of the 19th of December, 1769.

After Mr. Walker had opened the caufe, by reading the letter figned Junias, with the inuendos of the information, Mr Attorney General began, exactly at io o'clock, by faying, that nothing raised a jufter indignation in the mind of every man who wishes the continuance of our excellent conflitution, than this letter of Junius. He then addreffed himself to the paffions and intereft of the jurors, by telling them that they were more than any other men concerned to bring fuch offenders to justice, because any thing that tended to public confufion was more ef pecially fatal to commerce and thofe who hazard large fortunes" in trade. He faid that this letter of Junius tended to public confufion. He then harangued with great feeming zeal on the glorious liberty of the prefs, which he acknowledged ought to be encouraged and exercised as far as could poffibly confift with the very being of fociety. But he faid that the abufe of the liberty of the prefs is more fatal than any other; and therefore intreat ed them not to fuffer that liberty intended for our falvation to be turned to fedition, to our perdition. He faid the jury would be inftructed from the bench,- -that is, aa he must be lieve they would be, inftructed from the bench, that the only two things for their confideration were, imo. whether the blanks in the printed paper were fairly filled up in the information: and zdo. whether there was fufficient evidence for the publication of the paper by Woodfall.

Mr. Attorney General then faid, he thought it proper to explain his own conduct; because he was not merely an advocate în thefe matters but officially answerable. This letter of Junius he affured the jury had given univerfal offence. He had therefore in hand fix other profecutions of different publishers for the fame offence. He thought it his duty to profecute them, and had therefore demanded the names of the publishers, because he,

Mr,

Mr. Attorney General, does not read news-papers. In the objects of profecution he endeavoured to make a diftinétion and to pafs by thofe who were poor or had large families of children, &c. He declared upon his honour as a man, that he had no motive to urge him against any particular publisher, but merely the execution of his office. That he could have wished to have tried Mr. what's his name ?- Woodfall!Aye, Mr. Woodfall, the original publisher, firft: because as for who was the author of Junius, that he could by no means difcover, that remained an impenetrable fecret.

After this defence of himself Mr. Attorney General returned again to the caufe in hand; by repeating to the jury that if Imo. the blanks in the Publick Advertiser were fairly filled up by the inuendos of the information; and if zdo. the publication was proved, the jury muft find Mr. Woodfall guilty.

Crowder, the first witnefs, was then called at twenty minutes after ten, and examined by Mr. Thurloe..

Crowder depofed, that it is his office and employment to buy. up the publications of every day for the treasury (on Almon's trial, this fame witnefs, Crowder, called himself, an affiftant to. the meffenger of the prefs) that he bought the Public Advertiser in queftion, of one Colford, whom he fuppofes to be Mr. Woodfall's man; he bought it in Mr. Woodfall's publishing room; he bought twelve of them. He had bought the Public Advertiser. every day at Mr. Woodfall's for a year paft.

paper.

The letter of Junius was then read from the The fecond witnefs, Robert Harris, was fworn, and examined by Mr. Morton. He faid he was the register of the ftamps. He produced his book, in which the newspapers of each day were kept, for an account of the advertisements which are paid for: he said, the account for the Public Advertiser is kept in the name of Mr. Woodfall; that receipts are made out to him; that his fervant generally attends monthly to fettle accounts for the duty on the advertisements in that paper, but that fometimes Mr. Woodfall had attended in perfon.

The third witnefs

-, was fworn and examined by Mr.

Wallace. He faid he was a fervant to Sir John Fielding; that he had often carried advertisements from his master to Mr. Woodfall; had fometimes feen Mr. Woodfall and delivered them to him, but very rarely; that he had one receipt for advertisements the Publick Advertifer, figned by Mr. Woodfall.

Here ended the evidence and pleading on the fide of the profecution, which took up the space of one hour and five minutes.

At five minutes after eleven, Mr. Serjeant Glynn rofe as counfel for the defendant. He admitted the publication by Mr Woodfall, he said he would even consent with all his heart that theblanks were properly filled in the information; but he denied that there was any GUILT in the publisher or in the publication; and left it to the confcience of the jury to determine both on the letter itself, and on the intention of Mr. Woodfall: concluding, that

“(",:,

if

if they found either his intention free from GUILT, or the paper not criminal, they could not pronounce him GUILTY.

Mr. Lee, the other counfel for Mr. Woodfall, made the fame. defence. The defence was finished at twenty minutes before twelve.

Mr. Attorney General affected a kind of surprise; he faid, the counsel for the defendant had stated points of law to the jury; that he believed he had a right to reply, notwithstanding they had not examined witneffes; and he believed fo, he said, because they had ftated points of law which he did not allow.

Lord Mansfield told him, that, as attorney general, he might reply, notwithstanding the defendant had not examined witneffes: that the folicitor general indeed, or any other counsel, could not; but that the attorney general might.

Mr. Attorney General doubted about his right to reply; said, however, he believed he had a right; but that he would not be particular, that he would not reply (yet all the while he still kept making reply, fuch as it was,) at length finished with fayingThe bench will reply on thofe points to the defendant's counfel, and inftruct the jury properly..

Mr. Attorney General was not mistaken in his former belief, and in his latter declaration of what the bench would do and fay, for Lord Mansfield then gave his charge to the jury according to Mr. Attorney General's anticipation.

Lord Mansfield told the jury, that there were only two points on which they were fworn to give their verdict; there were only two points on which, according to their oath, they must determine. That as for the intention, the malice, fedition, or any other still harder words which might be given in informations for libels, whether public or private, they were mere formal words; mere words of courfe; mere inference of law, with which the jury were not to concern themselves; that they were words which fignify nothing; juft as when it is faid in bills of indictment for murder, inftigated by the Devil, c. that the two points mentioned were the only things for the cor.fideration of the jury. That if indeed there was nothing criminal in Junius's letter, their verdict of guilty would do no harm, would be attended with no confequences. The court would confider of that; the court were the only Judges of that. If that is made appear to the court, the court will arreft judgment. He faid, my brother Glynn has admitted that the truth or falfhood of a libel, whe ther public or private, however profecuted, is out of the quef

tion.

1

At this affertion of Lord Mansfield, every man in court was fhocked. Serjeant Glynn was aftonished, and, on application made to him inftantly by feveral of the counfel and his friends, to contradict Lord Mansfield's affertion, Mr. Glynn, with that honeft diffidence natural to him, afked them, "Good God! Did I admit any thing like what Lord Mansfield fays? Did I, by any incorrectnefs in the expreffion, or by any mistake,

ufe

ufe words that could be fo mifunderfood or mifinterpreted ?" Every gentleman near him affured him that he had not. Whereupon Serjeant Glynn rofe, and very modeftly affured his lord fhip that he had never admitted what his lordship fuppofed.Lord Mansfield begged Mr. Glynn's pardon, and turned it off with great dexterity, juft faying flightly- "Oh! I find I was miftaken; well then, my brother Glynn is of a different opinion :" and then inftantly proceeded ;- "As you have been told these are the only two points for your decifion; if, indeed, you think that the blanks in Junius's letter can have another application than that put upon them by the information, that is matter for your judgment; but you must observe, that even the counsel for the defendant have not pretended to put any other meaning to the blanks. If you think the evidence for the publication not fufficient, that is likewise a matter for your confideration; but you must obferve, that even the counfel for the defendant have admitted the publication." Lord Mansfield then obferved that the laws and proceedings in regard to libels were perfectly equal, equally advantageous to high and low: for that the low might profecute for a libel, if they were defamed, as well as the rich, and would be fure to have juftice done them by the law. He faid, that it was not then the proper time for aggravation or alleviation, or confideration of the matter of the letter, or of Mr. Woodfall's intention; to be fure the court would confider all that, when they fhould come to pass fentence, "as for the liberty of the prefs, (faid he) I will tell you what that is; the liberty of the prefs is, that a man may print what he pleases without a licenfer: as long as it remains fo, the liberty of the prefs is not reftrained: it is the fame thing as in all other actions: a man may use his arm, but he must not strike his neighbour: a man may use his tongue, but he muft not speak blafphemy." At the word blafphemy fo lugged in, a general whifper ran through the court, for every one perceived the aim of it, Mr. Wilkes fitting fo very near the chief juftice.

About twelve the jury withdrew. At half an hour after three Lord Mansfield began to whifper with Serjeant Davy, who had been out of court and returned, with the attorney general, with Mr. Wallace, and the other crown lawyers. In the space of a quarter of an hour he fent three times to the jury to know if they were not agreed in their verdict. He faid he would not fit longer than four, if the other business of the court should be over, The jury not returning Lord Mansfield propofed to Mr. Lee, that he fhould fign an agreement with Mr. Attorney General, that the jury might give their verdict to Lord Mansfield privately at Lord Mansfield's houfe. After fome time and perfuafion from Lord Mansfield, Mr Lee confented, and figned fuch agreement; after which Lord Mansfield pulled off his hat, and faid Mr. Lee you have done right to confent. Lord Mansfield then adjourned the court, and retired. The jury continued undetermined till near 10 at night, when they agreed upon their

verdict,

verdict, and went in hackney coaches from Guildhall to Lord Mansfield's houfe in Bloomsbury-fquare, and gave their verdict in these words:" Guilty of printing and publishing only." It should be remembered, that feven only out of twenty-four fpecial jurymen attended, to make up the number, five tales or common jurymen were taken. Lord Mansfield ftood at his parlour door, and made the jury give their verdict in his hall where the footmen were, and when they had given it, he withdrew, without faying a word.

An Account of the Motion in the King's Bench by Mr. Almon's Counsel for a new Trial.

N Tue day June 19, Mr. Serjeant Glynn moved the court of King's-bench for a new trial, in the caufe of the King against John Almon, on an information ex officio, for only felling the London Mufeum, in which was reprinted a letter of Junius to theon two grounds; the firft a mifdirection to, or misapprehenfion of, the jury, appearing by the queftion of Mr. Mackworth as follows: Whether felling in the shop, by a fervant, a pamphlet, without the knowledge, privity, or concurrence, of the master, in the fale, or even without a knowledge of the contents, of the libel, or pamphlet, so fold, be sufficient evidence to convict the mafter?"

To which Lord Mansfield made the following answer: "I have always understood, that evidence of a public fale, or exposal to fale, in the fhop, by a fervant, or any body in the houfe, is prima facie evidence against the matter :" he obferved alfo, that he was told by a gentleman a few days fince, that he had given it as his opinion, that in all criminal cafes the mafter was answerable for the acts of his fervant. His lordship faid, he had never given fo abfurd an opinion; that if a fervant committed a rape, it never could be fuppofed his mafter was accountable for the act.

Mr. Serjeant Glynn contended, that the question clearly conveyed an idea that the jury were not fatisfied that any proof at all had been made of guilt in the defendant; but Lord Mansfield faid, the question was untruly ftated, for that Mr. Mackworth admitted proof; Mr. Serjeant Glynn replied, that it did not appear from his note, which he had fhewn to others, and believed to be accurately taken; nor did he think it could be fo from what he had heard (though he had not feen that gentleman) that Mr. Mackworth had faid fince the trial; I ord Mansfield replied," he should not afk Mr Mackworth the quetion."

The fecond ground was the general propofition, which Mr. Serjeant Glynn maintained was confiftent with the laws and rules of juftice in this and every other country, that the mere proof of fale in a fhop or houfe, by a fervant or any other perfon, could not in a criminal profecution charge or convict the mafter.

The court granted a rule to fhew caufe on Monday June 25.