mankind; becausé all mankind must be cognizant of their contents.

There is another observation upon the dates, which strikes me very forcibly.-When Mr. Hatchard is first threatened with a prosecution, he is desired to furnish the author, both of the report and the letter. When does he begin to make any inquiry upon the subject? He is satisfied, in the first place, with referring to Mr. Harrison-which is in other words saying, you may take your own means to find out the author. He takes no steps for this purpose, according to his own affidavit, till the commencement of the present term; and the first application he makes for that purpose, is stated to be the 23rd or 24th day of April, the day after the commencement of the present term.

Mr. Scarlett.-Will your lordship excuse my reminding my learned friend, that there is no affidavit before the court to show, that there was any application made to the defendant for any author, but the author of the letter, till a very late period; and that the probability is, that the application to him was made at the time he made his appli

cation?

Mr. Marryatt.-I think it is in evidence upon the trial, that an application was made to him to give up the author. At all events, upon the trial we offered to stop all proceedings, if he gave up the author. But he inquires about neither till the 24th day of April. Then he goes on with that inquiry according to his own statement from the printer, for the purpose of seeing whether he can get any information upon that subject, subsequent to his filing his former affidavit, which is subsequent to the 1st of May. Then he follows up that inquiry upon the fifth day of the present month, I think, for the purpose of obtaining that information from Mr. Harrison; when he knew, from Mr. Harrison's former letter, the information would not be given him; and when he knew, therefore, it was a mere formal inquiry between himself the publisher, and the primary delinquents in this case. It has been asked, whether the African Institution defend Mr. Hatchard? I know no further, than that appears to be the very same gentleman who is described in the introductory part, naming the officers, Mr. Lambert as the solicitor for the defendant. He may certainly have individual clients as well as the society, introduced by the very res pectable names which appear at the head of that report.

It has been asked what is the object of this prosecution, beyond repelling the slander or soothing the feelings of the gentlemen whose feelings were aggrieved? There is undoubtedly an ulterior object, very well becoming the interference of the legislature of the colonies in which slavery is tolerated. In modern times (I dare say the gentlemen of the African Institution intended a very different object), pains have been taken to instruct the slaves to read;

| and this report holds out to them, not only in this, but in other instances, in the very preceding page, that they cannot have justice done to them in the courts in which the white inhabitants are the judges and the jury. There is, in the page preceding this, another libel upon a petit jury, who acted upon the trial of another person, stated to have been indicted for an offence in relation to the slavetrade.

Mr. Scarlett. That has not been read in

evidence upon the trial, and it is not referred to by the affidavits.

Mr. Marryatt. It is part of the same publication, and is part of the opposite page of the same book.

Mr. Justice Bayley.-I apprehend you can read only those parts you have already read, unless you introduce them by affidavits.

Mr. Marryatt. Then I will not refer to it, if the Court is of that opinion; but I will ask, whether it is not of great importance to those in which slavery exists, to repel an attack upon who have the supreme authority in any colony the administration of justice in that colony; especially if slaves, being instructed to read, have the means of reading this report; which, though Mr. Hatchard, I dare say, does not send out to the West Indies, most undoubtedly has been circulated very extensively indeed. It is stated in Mr. Hatchard's affidavit, that 800 and odd of these copies were altered in consequence of the resolution of the committee; and I see in the account of the annual disbursements, in this same publication, that many hundreds are spent in printing, in the course of the year, for the purpose of distribution and circulation. If the slaves are taught that they cannot obtain justice in the island, but oppressions upon the black population are stated to exist in one island, which the inhabitants of another island have no means of contradicting or knowing the falsehood of, such publications are highly calculated to induce the slaves in the colonies to take the law into their own hands, and to avenge themselves.-I shall make no allusions to any insurrections which have taken place, or any plots which have broken out; but I know of nothing so likely to induce insurrections in the West India colonies, as the encouraging a publication of this description.

Mr. Curwood. I am also of counsel for this prosecution.-I should feel contented in a common case to say nothing; but I feel in this case compelled to trouble your lordships with a very few observations. With respect to the nature and character of this libel, but one opinion can be entertained: it is not my intention to examine it in detail; but it is very clear, that libels like this, with other subsidiary ones, tend to shake the safety of our West India colonies to their very foundations; and it, therefore, becomes most important, my lords, by every means, to stop the circulation

of such publications as your lordships have heard read to-day.

It is with great regret, and very painfully to my own feelings, that I stand up to ask for judgment against a gentleman whose character stands so unquestionably high as the gentleman who now stands upon your lordship's floor for judgment. But your lordships know it is a law of stern political necessity that where the author of a libel of this kind cannot be found, the publisher must answer for it; and if Mr. Hatchard is to be made a victim, according to the phrase used by his learned counsel to-day, let it be recollected, he is not made the victim of the prosecutors, but the victim of those persons in whom he has reposed confidence, and who have deserted him in the hour of necessity; but who in a single moment can relieve him, by giving up the author of this libel. That is all we ask; and we pray for no vindictive judgment against Mr. Hatchard, if that can be done.

It is not my intention to go into the subject of the Slave-trade at all; but those who entertain an opinion different from that which had long prevailed-those who think that the slave-trade ought to be abolished-affect to be persons of purer morality than others. My lords, persons of pure morality pursue virtuous ends by virtuous means. It is not my intention to throw out any reflections against the members of that society; I know, among the members of that society, there are names exalted in virtue as they are exalted in rank: but whenever a society is formed for laudable objects, many persons lend their names to it, who would revolt from any indirect means of carrying their measures into effect. I do not therefore mean to apply my observations to those high and honourable names, but only to those who have been actually parties to the transaction now before your lordships. I should not have adverted to this, had it not been, as I conceive, strictly before the Court. -Mr. Hatchard, in the affidavit he has put in, has inserted a letter from the secretary of the society, which I presume he thinks furnishes him with a sufficient justification for not giving up the author of this publication. That letter, which is addressed to Mr. Hatchard, the secretary, states is written by order of the board of directors; and there the excuse made, why they cannot give up the author, is, because "they conclude, that, he believing in the erroneous information which he sent them to be true, they, therefore, do not feel themselves at liberty to violate the obligation arising from the confidence reposed in them." My lords, has not Mr. Hatchard himself reposed a confidence in them?has not their high name in duced him to believe that they would put nothing into his hands but what was fit for publication?—and do they not now desert him when called upon to answer for their offence? Is that conduct which becomes persons who affect purer morality than the rest of mankind? Is it not more consistent with pure morality to

give up a guilty man for judgment, than suffer an innocent man to stand upon the floor?→→ My lords, as I said before, if this was not done, the fault is with them, it is not with the prosecutors-let them take shame to themselves; and if Mr. Hatchard is made the victim of any, it is not for me to say, severe judg ment, but whatever judgment Mr. Hatchard may sustain from your lordships, let shame fall where shame is due.

JUDGMENT.

Mr. Justice Bayley.-John Hatchard ;-You are to receive the judgment of this court for the libel which has been sold by you. The libel itself casts very gross reflections upon some one or other of the aides-de-camp of sir Jaines Leith, the governor of the island of Antigua, and also on the administration of justice in that island, importing that there had been an act of great cruelty committed by one of the aides-de-camp of sir James Leith, an high insult from this person afterwards to sir James Leith, when he interfered to punish that, and afterwards a disposition in the grand jury of that colony, when that case was laid before thein, from motives which must have been corrupt, to refuse justice to an injured individual. It is certainly a libel of no mean or inconsiderable character; and it is the greater, because it imports to come from a body of persons of very high respectability, who would not be likely to send out into the world, that which they had collected from information, unless they had canvassed that information; and unless they had had strong grounds to believe, that that information was true; and though they describe it as information, they describe it as information applicable to a fact which had occurred about a year before; so that there must have been full time to have investigated into the truth of that fact. It came, therefore, to the world under those circumstances which made it the imperious duty of those persons upon whom the libel was made, to appeal to the laws of the country, in order that it might be known, that there was no foundation for that libel. It is a libel stating a variety of circumstances, which would carry with them at least the appearance that it could not have been fabricated.

This being the character of the libel, it appears, that it was published and sold by you. Not that you are the printer; it does not import to have been printed by you: but it ap pears, that you are the person by whom it was sold, having been printed by order of the directors of the African Institution. "The directors are informed, that about a year ago, the following circumstance took place in the island of Antigua. A gentleman, who held the situation of aide-de-camp to the governor, sir James Leith, having severely cart-whipped a negro woman of his own, who was pregnant, she laid her complaint before the governor, who humanely attended to her story, and dis missed her with some money for herself, and

a note to her owner." I need not go through the remainder, because it has been stated already to the Court, and it has been fully discussed and canvassed at the bar. It turns out, that there is no reason to believe, that from beginning to end, there is a word of truth in the story; but that it is a wicked fabrication, coined somewhere or other.

The Court, in considering the circumstances of the case have no reason to believe that it was fabricated by you. They have no reason to believe, that you knew or had the means of knowing by whom it was fabricated. You received it as you had received other reports, from a society in which there were a great number of persons of high character and high consideration in the country, and from whom you might fairly expect that there would have been at least personal caution-from whom you might also have expected, that if there were any thing improper in any publication coming from then, they would not have stopped the course of justice, but that they would have enabled any person against whom any insinuation had been made, to have traced that insinuation up to the fountain head; so that if there were any attack made upon any individual whatever, they should not interpose between the course of justice and that attack.

It appears by your affidavits, that you received only a limited number of this report, and that that had also been the course with respect to all the other reports which had been published; that there were a great many others published, there can be no doubt. It is a work intended for very extensive circulationprobably not merely for circulation here, but for circulation in places where publications of supposed and fictitious facts of this description may be calculated to do a great deal of mischief. Your own circulation was, according to the affidavits of which the Court see no reason upon earth to form any doubt, to a very limited extent, you published only six.

It had not escaped my observation, when it was observed by Mr. Marryatt, that the society had it called to their attention early in the month of October, that at least there was ground for doubting the truth of the statement which this libel contained, and that they had adopted some public means, first, for the purpose of insinuating that it was matter of doubt whether it was true, and afterwards for the purpose of saying, that that doubt was increased; but it does not appear that any act of the society in that respect reached your knowledge until the month of November when you were called upon by Mr. Martineau-if you had known that they had come to a resolution of that kind, it would have been your

It should seem that the libel which formed the subject of this indictment is not the only example of a want of proper caution on the part of the African Institution in the promulgation of the reports of their directors. See the Quarterly Review, Vol. 28, p. 174, note. VOL. XXXII.

bounden duty, the instant it was matter of doubt whether it was true or not, to have forborne and stopped the circulation as far as it respected yourself. But there is a paragraph in your affidavit to which I called the attention of the counsel, according to which I think it is but just to you to say, that we have no reason to suppose, that you had the least knowledge of what had been done by the society on the 12th or 29th of October, or that you had any reason to believe that they entertained any doubt with respect to this paragraph, prior to the period when you were called upon by Mr. Martineau, the solicitor for this prosecution.

Mr. Hatchard-I beg leave to confirm that, my lord--that I did not know it till Mr. Martineau called upon me.

Mr. Justice Bayley. It has been insinuated that you were not so active as you ought to have been, in order to discover who the real author was. Upon fairly looking over the affidavits from the beginning to the end, I think that that imputation against you is hardly warranted. I think it is the fair result of the whole of the affidavits, that from first to last, you appear to have given the prosecutors as much information as you really possessed; and that it was matter of absolute inability on your part to discover who the author was. Whether you have been kindly used by those persons in whose hands you have been the instrument, we cannot say. I feel myself warranted in saying, that it is at least unfortunate, that any resolution should have been passed, by which the author of a publication of this kind should have been effectually screened fromjustice.

It is insinuated that this originated in a letter from the West Indies. There is no affidavit that any such letter existed; but supposing, that there were such a letter, it is not necessarily true, that the author of that letter is the person upon whom this criminality ought to attach. He may have been misled by other persons; but when inquiry was made who the author of that libel was, it is to be regretted that there are any persons who step between, who prevent that information being given, and who prevent the persons upon whom the libel is made from tracing the libel to its source and fountain-head. That somebody is very highly criminal in this case, no one who has read the publication, can at all doubt; that it has originated in wilful and wicked fabrication, no man alive can doubt. That it is defeating the purposes of justice to withhold that information by which the wicked criminality might be traced up to the original author, is obvious. However, the Court does not feel itself warranted in visiting upon you that which is not your offence; satisfied as they are, that you have done every thing in your power to discover who the author is; and they feel that they have no right to add to your punishment, because you have not given up that author, whom you really are absolutely 3 C

incapable of giving up. At the same time, every person who publishes a libel is answerable for that libel; and if no other is forthcoming to the hands of justice, the person by whom the publication is made, is the person who must, to a certain extent at least, answer. Not that there is the same degree of criminality in, and consequently there ought not to be the same degree of punishment inflicted upon the person who stands merely in the character of a Bookseller, selling for other persons under circumstances which imply no want of caution on his part. You did not receive it from suspicious characters you received it from persons upon whom you thought you might with propriety and confidence rely.

Taking all the circumstances of the case into consideration-taking the character which has been given you into consideration—and taking into consideration that you are a sacrifice to other persons that this has not originated with you, and that you are not able to give up the real author; this Court doth order and adjudge, that for this your offence, you do pay to the king a fine of 100%., and that you be imprisoned in the custody of the marshal of the Marshalsea, until that fine is paid.

The defendant immediately paid the fine, and was discharged.

[At the Assizes holden at Derby for the county of Derby, on the 26th day of July, 1817, the Grand Jury found the following bill of Indictment:

Derbyshire THE jurors for our lord

to Wit the king upon their oath present that Thomas Bacon late of the parish of Pentridge in the county of Derby labourer Jeremiah Brandreth late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county labourer otherwise called John Coke late of the same place labourer otherwise called the Nottingham Captain late of the same place labourer George Weightman late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby sawyer William Turner late of the parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby stone mason Joseph Turner late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer otherwise called Manchester Turner late of the same place labourer Isaac Ludlam the elder late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby stonegetter Isaac Ludlam the younger late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Samuel Ludlam late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer William Ludlam late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Samuel Hunt late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby farmer Edward Turner late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby stone mason

Robert Turner late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Charles Swaine late of the same parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer John Onion the elder late of the said parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer John Mac Kesswick late of the parish of Heanor in the same county of Derby labourer John Hill late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Joseph Rawson late of the parish of Alfreton in the said county of Derby labourer otherwise called Joseph Thorpe late of the same place labourer Joseph Topham late of the said parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby blacksmith German Buxton late of the said parish of Alfreton in the same county of Derby labourer Edward Moore late of the said parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Josiah Godber late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer George Brassington late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer William Adams late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer William Hardwick late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer John Wright late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Thomas Ensor late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Joseph Savage late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer John Moore late of the same pa

rish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer William Weightman late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Thomas Weightman late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Joseph Weightman the younger late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer James Weightman late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Thom s Bettison late of the said parish of Alfreton in the said county of Derby labourer Alexander Johnson late of the said parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer John Bacon late of the same parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer Joseph Weightman the elder late of the parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer James Barnes late of the said parish of Alfreton in the same county of Derby labourer Edward Haslam laid of the said parish of Alfreton in the same county of Derby labourer John Horsley late of the said parish of Alfreton in the same county of Derby tailor Samuel Briddon late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer William Barker late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer William Elliott late of the said parish of Alfreton in the same county of Derby labourer James Taylor late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Joseph Taylor late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer Benjamin Taylor late of the said parish of Southwingfield in the same county of Derby labourer and Samuel Walters late of the said parish of Pentridge in the same county of Derby labourer otherwise called Samuel Dudley late of the same place labourer being subjects of our said lord the king not having the fear of God in their hearts nor weighing the duty of their allegiance but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil as false traitors against our said lord the king and wholly withdrawing the love obedience fidelity and allegiance which every true and faithful subject of our said lord the king should and of right ought to bear towards our said lord the king on the ninth day of June in the fifty-seventh year of the reign of our sovereign lord George the third by the grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland king defender of the faith and on divers other days and times between that day and the fifteenth day of the same month of June with force and arms at the said parish of Southwingfield in the said county of Derby together with a great multitude of false traitors whose names

are to the said jurors unknown to the number of five hundred and more arrayed and armed in a warlike manner that is to say with swords pistols clubs bludgeons and other weapons being then and there unlawfully maliciously and traitorously assembled and gathered together against our said lord the king wickedly malicious and traitorously did levy and make war against our said lord the king within this realm and being so assembled together arrayed and armed against our said lord the king as aforesaid did then with great force and violence parade and march in an hostile manner in and through divers villages places and public highways to wit at the parish of Southwingfield aforesaid in the said county of Derby and did then and there maliciously and traitorously attempt and endeavour by force and arms to subvert and destroy the government and constitution of this realm as by law established in contempt of our said lord the king and his laws to the evil example of all others contrary to the duty of the allegiance of them the said Thomas Bacon Jeremiah Brandreth otherwise called John Coke otherwise called the Nottingham Captain George Weightman William Turner Joseph Turner otherwise called Manchester Turner Isaac Ludlam the elder Isaac Ludlam the younger Samuel Ludlam William Ludlam Samuel Hunt Edward Turner Robert Turner Charles Swaine John Onion the elder John Mac Kesswick John Hill Joseph Rawson otherwise called Joseph Thorpe Joseph Topham German Buxton Edward Moore Josiah Godber George Brassington William Adams William Hardwick John Wright Thomas Ensor Joseph Savage John Moore William Weightman Thomas Weightman Joseph Weightman younger James Weightman Thomas

the

Bettison Alexander Johnson John Bacon Joseph Weightman the elder James Barnes Edward Haslam John Horsley Samuel Briddon William Barker William Elliot James Taylor Joseph Taylor Benjamin Taylor and Samuel Walters otherwise called Samuel Dudley against the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace of our said lord the king his crown and dignity

Second Count.-And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid further present that the said Thomas Bacon Jeremiah Brandreth otherwise called John Coke otherwise called the Nottingham Captain George Weightman William Turner Joseph Turner otherwise called Manchester Turner Isaac Ludlam the elder Isaac Ludlam the younger Samuel Ludlam William Ludlam Samuel Hunt Edward Turner Robert Turner Charles Swaine John Onion the elder John Mac Kesswick John Hill Joseph Rawson otherwise called Jo