far that man was connected with the ministers. One thing is evident, that Sir Robert Baker would never have allowed a man to escape under such charges, if he had not some higher authority than his own for so doing. I cannot go any further into this case, but I would remind you, that the Glasgow hand-bill, which cost the lives of so many persons in that neighbourhood, and for the discovery of the printer of which, the Government offered five hundred pounds, and which hand-bill almost created an insurrection throughout Scotland, has been traced back to Franklin. The letter which was sent to Sir Francis Burdett's jury has been traced to Franklin, and Franklin has been traced back and forwarded to the office of Lord Castlereagh. This is all I can say upon this subject, Gentlemen, and I must leave you to draw your inferences on this part of the extract on the record.

You will particularly observe, Gentlemen of the Jury, that a strong disapprobation is expressed of the measures of those unfortunate men, called Cato Street Conspirators, but who, I verily believe, were but the seduced agents of baser and still more infamous conspirators; of which, the late conspiracy against the Queen affords no slight proof.

Now, on the point of the majority of the present ministers being tyrants, I can say but little, not but that I might urge instances enough in proof of it; but our Judges proclaim truth to be a criminal and punishable libel, and say that it must not be justified: therefore, Gentlemen, Imust be content to draw you the picture of what constitutes a tyrant, and leave you to say where it is applicable.

Plato and Aristotle, in describing a tyrant, use the following assertions: "They endeavour to abase all excellent persons, and to rid out of their way all those who have noble minds. They dare suffer no assemblies of the people. They have spies and dilators in all places, and particularly a number of small spies, who affect discontent and opposition to them the better to obtain trust and make discoveries. They stir not without a guard. They impoverish the people, that they may want the power, if they have the will, to attempt any thing against them. They make war to divert and busy the people. And above all things they pretend a love to God and Religion." This Aristotle calls: Artium tyran

nicarum potissimam, "the most powerful of all the arts of tyrants."

Machiavel says: "tyrants accomplish their ends, much more by fraud than by force; neither virtue nor force are so necessary to their purpose as una astutia fortunata, a lucky craft; which, without force, hath been often found sufficient, but never force without that." In another place, the same author says: "that the plan of tyrants is: Aggirare lucevelli degli huomini con astutia, &c. when cunning plausible pretences, to impose upon men's understandings, and in the end they master those who had so little wit as to rely upon their faith and integrity."

If studiously and openly to corrupt the representatives of the people be not tyranny: If to imprison men for months and years without any specific charge, and then to liberate them without trial, be not tyranny: If to seek Indemnity Bills for admitted violations of the laws, be not tyranny: If to encourage the assassination of a peaceable and legally assembled multitude, such as was the Manchester Meeting, on St. Peter's Plain, on the 16th of August, 1819; and to shelter the murderers, by screening them from justice, be not tyranny: If the late Bill of Pains and Penalties against the Queen be not. tyranny: then, indeed, I am ignorant in what tyranny consists: If all those things do not constitute tyranny; then the word is but a word of sound, and Dionysius, Draco, Tarquin, Nero, and Caligula, have been falsely libelled. During their reign no official character would call or consider them tyrants, but doubtless, they obtained flatteries and approbations, such as the official and servile part of this community confers upon the present ministers. All official characters will ever sing praises to the system under which they are employed, even if that system be one of the worst of tyrannies: therefore, Gentlemen, you will be able to judge rightly of the professions or protestations of Mr. Solicitor-General, or of any other official person, who shall trumpet up the propriety of the conduct of the present ministers, or of their system of government. The Solicitor-General is but the breath of ministers, and we are too often annoyed with a degrading servility from other quarters equally suspicious.

I verily think, that if the sense of the nation could be taken, as to whether the present ministers be or be not

།

DEDICATION.

ΤΟ

HENRY COOPER, Esq.

BARRISTER AT LAW;

For the noble stand and more noble attitude which he took on this Trial-for the very eloquent, very bold, and very honest style of his Defence-and, above all, for the manly resistance which he made

to, and the contempt which he shewed for, the menacing frowns of those persons who conducted, advocated, and supported this Prosecution: and to those HONEST JURYMEN who resisted their fellows in the attempt to throw the Defendant into the hands of her enemies, and the enemies of their country; and who, by their honesty and independence, have given a death-blow to those corrupt, wicked, and malignant would-be-Censors of the

if you throw me into the hands of my Prosecutors, vain will be a recommendation or a plea for mercy. I feel this comfort and assurance, that whatever be your verdict it cannot bring me into disgrace. It may punish but it cannot disgrace. Prosecutions for libel under the present system of government are almost desirable, for they are become the best proofs of honest and good intention, where the Attorney-General is the Prosecutor. In closing my defence, I would observe, that the present verdict will be one of importance to the ministers. A verdict of not guilty will be calculated to shake them from their holds, whilst a verdict of guilty will give them additional strength.

"Take away the wicked before the King and his throne shall be established in righteousness.'

The SOLICITOR GENERAL replied.-It is evident, Gentlemen of the Jury, that the defence which you have heard cannot have been the production of the Defendant. To me, it appears, that the Author of the Libel has been the writer of the Defence, and truly sorry am I to think, that there should be found one man in this country to advocate such principles. The defence set up is nothing more than an aggravation of the libel: its stile and tendency are calculated to produce still more mischief. I have scarcely need to recapitulate any thing that has passed; it must, from its nature, have impressed itself on your mind, and I shall sit down satisfied, that your verdict will mark it with just reprobation.

CHIEF JUSTICE ABBOTT summed up the case in a very brief manner, by saying: This was an Information filed by his Majesty's Attor-. ney General against the Defendant. From the evidence produced, it appeared, that the Defendant had continued the business of her husband, who, as has been proved, is now a prisoner in his Majesty's Gaol at Dorchester for having published a libel on a former occasion. To me, it appears, that the libel is an evident encouragement to the assassination of His Majesty's Ministers, and the Defence set up, I can but consider as an aggravation of the libel. It will be for you, Gentlemen of the Jury, to say, whether the share which the Defendant has taken in this publication be sufficient, to establish the charge of the record against her. The situation of her husband can have left but little doubt on that subject, and of the nature and tendency of the publication, I am of opinion, that no doubt can be entertained. The Jury retired for a quarter of an hour, to examine the libel and the Defence, and returned a verdict of Guilty.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL prayed the judgment of the Court on Jane Carlile for having published a Libel.

CHIEF JUSTICE ABBOTT. Will this case occupy much time? SOLICITOR GENERAL.-Not on my part, My Lords: I shall have but little to offer to the Court.

CHIEF JUSTICE. Then let it proceed.

SOLICITOR GENERAL. The contents of this publication, entitled "The Republican,' have been too often brought under your Lordships' notice, to require that I should expatiate on its tendency, in praying the judgment of the Court on this Defendant. The shop whence it has proceeded is still kept open; but by every necessary enquiry. that I have made, I believe it is not now in the Defendant's name. 'The libel which now comes under your Lordships' judgment is of that nature, as to make comment or explanation unnecessary. The Defendant has persevered in issuing such publications in spite of every caution and warning.

Mrs. CARLILE then presented the following address to the Court: In standing before your Lordships to receive the judgment of the Court, for having published a number of "The Republican," I can but. repeat that I had no controul over the contents of that publication, and in issuing it to the public, I was guided entirely by the instructions of my husband. I did not feel myself a competent judge to decide on its propriety or impropriety, as having been brought up as the daughter of a humble cottager, in a sequestered part of Hampshire, I had reached the years of maturity without any, the least education.

In the opinions, which my husband has espoused, either political or theological, I have no participation, further than feeling it my duty to follow his instructions, where, from his conduct and zeal, he appeared to me to be mentally and morally right. If he be in error, I am certain, that he is not aware of it; for, I have ever found him the decided opponent of every species of delusion or imposture. But I beg leave to assure your Lordships, that, if I could have foreseen any error or impropriety in what he requested me to do, I should have resisted it, whilst I was acting apparently as a principal. In proof of this my last assertion, I would remind your Lordships, that, I have resisted the most urgent requests of my husband to publish the report of his Trials, since your Lordships convinced me I was wrong, by granting a criminal information against it.

It is usual with persons in my situation to lay before your Lordships affidavits of former good conduct or moral character. I have abstained from this rule, because, I have considered it a mere matter of form, and I do not feel that my moral conduct or general character has been impeached by this prosecution, in the least instance. A proof of moral conduct or general good character is not to be made by affidavits. I must leave those to judge of my general character, who have had an opportunity of examining it.