Page images
PDF
EPUB

Soon after this a very fair opportunity was also afforded for distinguishing himself, in the case of Mr. Peltier, a rench journalist, residing in London, who was tried in the court of king's bench on the 1st of February 1803, at the suit of the King, for a libel against Napoleon Buonaparte, then First Consul of the French republic.,

After a speech from the Attorney-general, and the examination of witnesses, the advocate for the defendant remarked, that a very arduous duty had been thrown upon him, "which he could not decline and still less betray." He then represented his client as a royalist, who fled from his native country in the autumn of 1792, and who was editor of the "Ambigu," the "only, or almost the only, journal which still dares to espouse the cause of that illustrious family, which but fourteen years ago was flattered by every press, and guarded by every tribunal, in Europe."

Having then descanted on the power of the first magistrate of France, who had applied for the expulsion of Mr. Peltier from England, he added: "I consider this case as the first of a long series of conflicts between the greatest power in the world, and the only free press now remaining in Europe." This led him to animadvert on the state of the press in Holland, Switzerland, and the imperial free cities of Germany, anterior to the desolating progress of re

cent events.

"These feeble states," said he, "these monu❤ ments of the justice of Europe, the asylum of of industry, and of literature, the organs of public

peace,

reason,

reason, the refuge of oppressed innocence and persecuted truth, have perished with those ancient principles which were their sole guardians and protectors. They have been swallowed up by that fearful convulsion which has shaken the utmost corners of the earth. They are destroyed and gone for ever.

"One asylum of free discussion is still inviolate. There is still one spot in Europe where man can freely exercise his reason on the most important concerns of society, where he can boldly publish his judgment on the acts of the proudest and the most powerful tyrants. The press of England is still free. It is guarded by the free constitution of our forefathers. It is guarded by the hearts and arms of Englishmen; and I trust I may venture to say, that if it be to fall, it will fall only under the ruins of the British empire. It is an awful consideration, gentlemen. Every other monument of European liberty has perished-that ancient fabric which has been gradually reared by the wisdom and virtue of our fathers. still stands it stands, thanks be to God! solid and entire; but it stands alone, and it stands amidst ruins."

After this Mr. Mackintosh entered into a discussion relative to the offence with which his client was charged, and observed, "that those who slowly built up the fabric of our laws never attempted any thing so absurd as to define by any precise rule the obscure and shifting boundaries which divide libel from history or discussion, as the same words may be perfectly innocent in one case and mischievous in another.

R4

other. The principles in this case were few and simple; for every publication which is intended to vilify either our own government, or the government of any foreign state in amity with this kingdom, is by the law of England a libel. To protect the liberty of political discussion, however, our ancestors trusted to an administration of justice habitually mild; to the moderation of the legal officers of the crown, educated in the maxims and imbued with the spirit of a free government, controuled by the superintending power of parliament, and peculiarly watched in all political prosecutions by the reasonable and wholesome jealousy of their fellow-subjects. But above all, they confided in the moderation and good sense of juries, popular in their origin, popular in their feelings, popular in their very prejudices; taken from the mass of the people, and immediately returning to that mass again.

[ocr errors]

By these checks and temperaments," added he, "they hoped that they should sufficiently repress malignant libels, without endangering that freedom of inquiry which is the first security of a free state. They knew that the offence of a political libel is of a very peculiar nature, and differing in the most important particulars from all other crimes.

"In all other cases the most severe execution of law can only spread terror among the guilty, but in political libels it inspires even the innocent with fears. This striking peculiarity arises from the same circumstances, which make it impossible to define the limits of libel and innocent discussion; which make

make it impossible for a man of the purest and most honourable mind to be always perfectly certain whether he be within the territory of fair argument and honest narrative, or whether he may not have unwittingly overstepped the faint and varying line which bounds them. But, gentlemen, I will go further: where severe and frequent punishments not only intimidate the innocent, but deter individuals from the most meritorious acts, and from rendering the most important services to their country, they indispose and disqualify men for the discharge of the most sacred duties which they owe to mankind. To inform the public on the conduct of those who administer public affairs, requires courage and conscious security. It is always an invidious and obnoxious office, but it is often the most necessary of all public duties. If it is not done boldly, it cannot be done effectually; and it is not from writers trembling under the uplifted scourge that we are to hope for it."

The advocate of Mr. Peltier here entered into a dissertation on the advantages resulting from the liberty of the press; and observed, that although in domestic dissensions it might sometimes be supposed to be the interest of the government to overawe it, when the danger is purely foreign, "a king of England who in such circumstances should conspire against the free press of his country, would undermine the foundations of his own throne; he would silence the trumpet which is to call his people around his standard."

After this he observed, that the Attorney-general

admitted

admitted historical composition to be exempt from a prosecution of this kind; and he contended that by a fair extension of this principle he must admit republishing historically a circumstance that included the present case, which was an Ode* ascribed to Chenier or Ginguené. The intention of the original author might indeed be deemed libellous, but the intention of the compiler" is merely to gratify curiosity, or perhaps to rouse just indignation against - the calumniator whose production he republishes.

* Here follow the two passages supposed to constitute the libel in question: the first is from an Ode attributed to Chenier, but now said to be written by the brother of Carnot, the director; the second from some verses, entitled "Vou d'un bon Patriote au 14 Juillet 1802 :"

I.

"De la France à honte eternelle !

Cæsar, au bord du Rubicon,

A contre lui, dans sa querelle,

Le Sénat, Pompée & Caton;
Et dans les plaines de Pharsale,
Si la fortune est inégale,
S'il te faut céder aux destins ;
Rome, dans ce revers funeste,
Pour te venger au moins il reste

Un poignard au derniers Romains."

II.

"Pour moi, loin qu'à son sort je porte quelqu' envie,

Qu'il nomme, j'y consens, son digne successeur,

Sur le pavois porté, qu'on l'elise empereur !
Enfin, & Romulus nous rapelle la chose,

Je fais vou...dès demain qu'il ait l'apotheose!

AMEN."

« PreviousContinue »