THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT'S PROSECUTION OF THE SPJCTATOR.

[This two years' prosecution was brought to an issue on Monday last, in the Court of King's Bench, before Mr. Justice PATTEnON and a Special Jury. We have been requested by several of our readers to give au account of the proceedings on the trial at length ; which is our • apology for permitting it to occupy so large a space in our columns this week. We make a free and sometimes a bold use of the rights of dis- cussion ; but we are far indeed from coveting the eclat of libellers ; and, as we have more than once declared, had not the least wish or intention to hold up the Duke of BEAUFORT, or any of his family, to the especial reprobation of the public. Our allusion to the public money received by the SOMERSETS only occupies seven lines in an article of two columns; it was introduced incidentally, and merely by way of illustrating a general argument concerning Parliamentary influence. But the Duke, smarting under the then recent loss of his Borough power, and being in the hands of bad advisers, thought fit to select us as objects of the prosecution

which has just ended in his defeat and our vindication. Whether we shall now, at our leisure, direct public attention more particularly to the claims of this monopolizing family upon the national purse, will depend entirely upon the views which we may entertain of the amount of public benefit likely to result from the exposure.]

THE KING V. CLAYTON AND OTHERS.

This was a criminal information, filed by leave of the Court of King's Bench, against Mr. Clayton as printer, and Messrs. Riutoul and Symonds as registered proprietors of the Spectator, fur a libel on the Duke of Beaufort and his family.

Sir James Scarlett, Mr. Sergeant Ludlow, and Mr. Scarlett, conducted the case for the prosecution; Mr. Hill and Mr. Baines for the defendants.

Sir James Scarlett stated the case to the Jury. This was an information on the application of his Grace the Duke of Beaufort, for the purpose of protecting himself and his family from an-attempt on the part of the defendants to excite the public feeling against them, by a libel published in the Spectator newspaper, which had created considerable agitation, and made them and their property the subject of much discussion. There were periods and seasons when words which might otherwise be of insignificant importance were capable of inflicting the greatest injury on individuals ; 'and, on the other hand, there were seasons when the publication of the most gross and unfounded calumnies were treated as ab- surd and utterly unworthy of notice. Every one oust recollect the eventful period of I8:31, when a vast number of publications were circulated throughout the country, having for their object to depreciate the magistracy, to degrade the nobility, and to attack all persons of rank, wealth, and station, as being the just objects of popular fury and indignation. At such a period, the application of any particular calumny might be capable of exciting in the popular mind a de- gree of vengeance towards particular individuals, that might be attended with disastrous consequences. The calamities that occurred in that year were now a matter of history : the houses of the nobility had been attacked and demo-

' fished—the second city in the empire was burnt—the palace of a bishop was de- - stroyed—and almost every magistrate in the kingdom was held up us an object of

- popular indignation. However laudable the ultimate object of parties might be, they could not be permitted to accomplish that object by means of violence, - and in contravention of the most obvious rules of older and of law. Far be it from him to wish that a stop should be put to fair argument, or to limit discus- sion by the public press ; but in endeavouring to effect such a change in the in- . stitutions of the country as parties were desirous of, they should pursue only those means which were in themselves legal. Every man had a right to pro- pose such a change, provided he made no direct attack upon the constitution of the country. He might do it by argument through the press, or by any other mode of publication which he might think fit ; but to endeavour to accomplish his object by attacking the reputations and ruining the fortunes of individuals, was not consistent with any principle of law or justice. Ile need hardly inform the Jury, that the measure which was in contemplation at the time he alluded to was that of Reform,--a measure of which he hoped the country was now en- joying the fruits. Different men had different opinions on that subject : some thought it a measure highly. prejudical to the interests of the community ; others, on the contrary, conceived it to be moat beneficial. If it were beneficial, God grant it might long continue. Ile did not himself object to the expression of any man's opinion on the subject—God forbid that he should; but he did say, that So long as law or justice existed, persons would have no right to interpose opinions of their own to the ruin of individuals. It was supposed-Ae knew not from what cause—that against that extraordinary change in the institutions of the country, a strong prejudice existed among the higher, the wealthier, and most intelligent classes in the kingdom ; and it was the object among a certain description of persons, to accomplish the measure by holding up those higher classes to the public indignation. That that attempt was wicked—was illegal-- no one could'entertain a doubt. Among thine who had been thought fit objects for attack, was the Duke of Beaufort, a nobleman of the highest honour and purest character ; and the defendants thought fit, in the eventful month of April 1831, pending the General Election, when the minds of the people were more excited than at any period since the time of Charles the First, to hold up that nobleman and his family as objects of public vengeance. Ile asked, was that a proper period for attacks of a private nature on coy individuals? Who could have told the personal consequences which might have accrued to the Duke of Beaufort from the passage which he was about to read to them ? • A very few words addressed to an infuriated people would sometimes lead to the most dangerous, the most disastrous results. He did not mean to offer any opinion on the question of Reform ; but he did think, as lie had always thought, that the prosperity and superiority of this country could only be secure under a constitutional monarchy. Some persons thpught that a republic, similar to that in the United States of America, would be more desir- able. He thought differently ; and lie sincerely believed, that if that form of go- vernment were resorted to, the country would very soon be under the domination of the most (heedful description of tyranny—that of a popular assembly. He be- lieved also, that for the preservation of the constitutional monarchy, it was ne- cessary that the hereditary nobility of the kingdom should be treated with vene- ration and respect ; and he considered that to treat theta as the defendants hail done, as odious tyrants and plunderers of the people, was a grass offence and one deserving of punishment. The defendants bad laid a long time and ample op- portunity to make animals for their conduct towards the noble family whom they had libelled, but they had offered no atonement : they had not attempted in their aRidavits, on opposing the rule for a criminal information, either to make any explanation to support their statement, or to deny it; and therefore it was to be presumed, that up to the present period they persisted in it. The paper which contained the libel was published on the 30th of April 1831, at the time of a general election ; and the object of the article appeared to be to excite the feelings of the people, in order to induce them to return to Parliament such persons as were desirous that the measure of reform should be carried. Sir James Scarlett proceeded to read as follows, the article containing the libel.

"TOPICS OF TIIE DAY.

" A PILL Foil BOROVOI1MONGERS.

" Every week. from the hour when the Reform Bill was announced, we have implored our countrymen to make ready for a General Election. Acid we practised what we pmached ; for our journal has been conducted, since the let of March. as if the disso- lution had taken place on that day, having been constantly filled with suggestions, recommendations, warnings, and useful information, all bearing on the struggle now begun. In pursuing this course of preparation fur the inevitable battle, we were ac- cused of ' forwardness and dictation.' What happens? Those same lazy Reformers who so sneered at ire. have this week been crying out, • The danger is great for want or preparation."There has indeed been a sad want of preparation ; but the danger is not great. As, doubtful of vietaev unless proper means were used, we sought to insure it by timely preparation, so now, alien others talk with regret of the past and without hope of the future, we are still mindful oily of what is best for the present ; and are still coatident of succe.,..s, if the Reformers will but make up fur their past neglect by ex- traordinary exertion. " A correspondeut, who objected to what lie called our " premature cries " of " Help fma the Ring trill help you, England experts it, ry man to du Ms duty,' and to our Lists of National Trustees, writes to us to be that we will this week suggest an. rangements ror defeating the greatest number of Anti-Reform candidates. We refer him to oar nine last numbers. It is now too late for ' arrangements ' involving much inquiry and co operation. The elections are going ou; to deliberate and lay plans would now he a waste of the most precious titne. In the way of taking counsel, let every Reformer commune only with himself. saying. ' What can I, by myself do to promote the good cause ?"Flie question answered, let him rush to do what strikes him as the best t hing to be done at the moment ; and that thing finished, let him begin • another instantly. Ira this way, as most Relbriners think alike as to what ought to be done. unanimiO, or opinion and action will supply the want of previous concert. The - one thing needful at this moment is—ettomerrrens. " It must be eoaressed that the liorouglimongers have rallied. The disturheills had state, . not of London, but of the country, previous to the introduction of the Reform frightened them out of their us its ; and they were disposed to yield to what then looked like necessity,—and indeed is so still ; but the political calm produced by the Bill,—and afterwards Lord John Russell's ill-judged talk or alteration in the Bfil,—revived their old impudence ; awl they are now as bold as ever, and much more profligate. The • subseription of the great borough•owuels is the most bare-faced piece of profligacy to he found iii the whole history of boroughmongering. Why, the money subscribed is • rightfully the nation's,—at least, if that still belongs to a man which has been wrong- fully taken from him, and if, as is clear, these borough-lords would not have had flee • money to subscribe, unless they bad quartered their brothers and sisters and mothers and aunts on the public, as well as, not a few of them, their mistresses and illegitimate children."

Thus much of thin article, Sir James Scarlett said, related immediately to the political subjects to which 1:e had alluded ; and it was not for him to offer his • remarks on the propriety or impropriety of such addresses to the people. He did think, however, as the gentlemen of the Press had been described as consti- tuting the fourth estate of the realm, and were to all appearance exceedingly well qualified to give their opinions and perform great services in the affairs of the public, that it would he highly expedient that they should themselves be elected into the Parliamentary body : and he hoped, therefore, that when next the constitution of the country was altered, arrangements would be made to • elect them, in order that they Might be in the situation of being able to dispose • of every man's character as they thought fit,—an office for which they were, doubtless, eminently qualified. Sir James went on to read from the article in the Spectator, the words more especially founded on in the information, as ap- lineable to the Duke. Who forgets the history of the late Duke of Reanfort's will, which may be seen at Doctors Commons on payment of a shilling. and which charges the estates of the • present Duke with annuities to his brothers ' until they shall he better provided for by Government' ? The amount of public money received by the Somersets since the late Duke of Beaufort came of age, far exceeds the value of the estates which he be- queathed to the present Duke.'

This was the libel. Now, he would just suppose that the two sons of the Duke • of Beaufort, while canvassing in Gloucestershire and Monmouthshire, had had this paper put into their hands: what would have been their fate in some of the great towns in' those counties? Would it not have excited against them no small portion of that odium which existed against the nobility ? It appeared that it was now considered a crime for any man to have received pay from the public. One of the sons of the Duke of Beaufort had lost an arm at the battle of Waterloo, and had received a pension from Government. Sir James sup- posed it would be said that that nobleman had robbed the public also. It was • not true that any of the Duke of Beaufort's sons or brothers had held sinecure offices. Sir James traced the history of the Civil List, from the original grants. by the English Kings from their own private property until it was transferred tri the Parliament ; and the whole compensation to the Crown was, in the reign of George the Third, turned into what was called the Civil List. This was not "public money." The charges as to the family of the Duke of Beau- fort were unfounded in fact. No member of his Grace's family had received pensions from the public, but in return for important services rendered to the State. In times of quiet, the libellous articles published by the defendants would have been as nothing, and would have been treated with contempt ; but under the circumstances attending their publication, their effect was most injurious. The defendants were now brought before the Jury ;• and if they thought that a public writer was justified in holding up the Duke of Beaufort and his family to public odium, as the defendants had done, then they would pronounce a verdict of acquittal ; but if they should be of a contrary opinion, they would find the defendants guilty.

The publication was admitted ; and the article, of which only a small portion had been read by Sir James Scarlett, was now read in its entire form, by desire of the defendants' counsel.

Mr. Robert Pennyyroduced the probate of the late Duke of Beaufort's will. The late Duke died in October 1803, and left eight sons and four daughters.

The present Duke had two sons, the Marquis of Worcester and Lord Granville Somerset. Mr. Penny had read the paragraph in question. Cross-examined by Mr. Hill—He had had the honour of knowing the Dukes family all his life. He held no office tinder the Duke, except that he was his

legal adviser. Lord Charles Somerset is dead; he was formerly Governor of the Cape of Good Hope. Witness was not a reader of the Spectator. He never beard any thing of a rumour about the late Duke's will until he saw the

paragraph in question. [This question was put several times before the witness save any other answer than that he did not understand it. Mr. Hill said— "Then you are the only person in Court who does not."] He never knew that the Duke had made a will charging the estates with annuities for the present Duke's brothers until they were better provided for by the public. Lord Robert Somerset was a General in the army and Colonel of a regiment : did not know the nature of his other employments. Lord Arthur Somerset was dead : he had

been in the Army : never heard that he had any diplomatic appointment. Lord William Somerset was now a clergyman, and had several beueficies and a pre-

bend. Lord John Somerset was also alive, and was on half-pay. Lord Fitzroy Somerset was at present Secretary to the Commander-in-chief. The son of Lord Charles Somerset is Commandant at Caffre Land.

By Sir James Scarlett—Lord Charles Somerset was a General in the army be- fore he went to the Cape. Witness believed that none of them received pensions, except Lord Fitzroy Somerset, and he lost an arm at Waterloo. By a Juror—Witness never heard or read a statement that the Duke of Beau- fort had granted annuities to certain persons until provided for by Government. This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr. Hill commenced his address for the defendants by saying that Sir James Scarlett had made a grand melodramatic display of a piece of parchment—the probate of the late Duke of Beaufort's will—as though it were to be supposed to contain a refutation of the statements in the alleged libel ; knowing very well, that, as the prosecutor had framed the record, the will could not be -given in evidence on either side. Mr. Hill knew, and he believed his learned

friend's legal reputation would warrant his saying, that if that probate had -contained any thing which had been good for his case, Sir James Scarlett

would have put himself in a condition to prove it, by stating the subject of it

in the introductory matter to the charge contained in this information. Sir James very well knew that the information might have been so drawn as to

have included it ; and Mr. Hill could not account for its not having been so framed, as his learned friend appeared so anxious to use this probate, except on the supposition that his friend's anxiety went no further than appearance. It could not have been through inadvertence, the consequence of haste ; for a whole year had elapsed between the publication of the libel and the prepara- tion of the information.

Sir James Scarlett—" That observation is unfounded. The rule to show cause was granted on the 7th of May 1831; and the libel was published on the 30th of April, only a few days preceding:" Mr. Hill said that there was no occasion for the interruption. He was per- fectly correct in his statement, that a delay of one year had taken place between

the publication of the libel and the drawing up of the information, which was

not on the files of the Court until one year after that publication ; and he stated -this to show that there had been a want of bond fides in these proceedings. Sir

-James Scarlett, in his opening of the case to the Jury, had made an address in which the publication which formed the subject of this prosecution was in- vested with an extraordinary importance—an importance to which Mr. Hill did not consider it in any way entitled. Sir James had said a good deal to the Jury on the tendency of such publications to overturn all order, and to involve the 'kingdom in anarchy and confusion. He had spoken of their influence in -bringing about the destruction of the houses of noblemen and the palaces of the Bishops, to say nothing of the burning of the second city in the kingdom. He had told them that unless the nobility—and of course the Duke of Beaufort in particular—were treated with respect and veneration, the consequence would be the destruction of a constitutional monarchy in this country, and the establish- ment of a republic on its ruins. Now, if all these dire consequences were ex- pected to result from allowing such publications to exist, how was it that the

proccediugs in this case had 'been allowed to slumber from Trinity term 1831, when leave-to file the information had been given, to Easter term 1832, when

the information was placed on the files of the Court ? How was it that such an

interval ;had occurred ?—an interval, be it remembered, when many of those terrible events which his learned friend had adverted to were hourly expected

or were daily taking place ; and when, in fact, one of the events alluded to

—the burning of the city of Bristol—did actually. occur ? In another part of his speech, Sir James had called their attention to the necessity of the

hereditary nobility being protected even from disrespect, if they hoped to pre- serve a hereditary monarchy in this country. What then must be the remorse of his friend, and the noble Duke his client, in having suffered these great delin-

quents, the three defendants, to go at large for twelve months, and twelve such

months as they had proved ! His learned friend had alluded with terrible energy to a passage in the alleged libel, wherein the writer implored his country- men to "make ready" for a general election; and had insinuated to the Jury,

with great seriousness, that the fact of those words " make ready " being in Italics, was a convincing proof that they were intended to convey some further, sonic hid-

den meaning—in fact, that they were intended to produce on the mind of

the reader the same effect as the military command—" Make ready !—present ! ! —fire! ! !" (Laughter.) Such had been the astonishing ingenuity of his

learned friend. But there was another passage in the paragraph containing the alleged libel, which must have escaped the notice of his learned friend, or he would undoubtedly have made a similar use of it, as it was capable of being made infinitely more effective. He alluded to the passage—" As, doubtful of

victory unless proper means were used, we sought to insure it by timely pre- paration, so now, when others talk with regret of the past, and without a hope of the future, we are still mindful only of what is best for the present." Here

was an expression—and again the awful Italics ! The writer had before confined himself to the "make ready !" but here he actually spoke of "what was best

for the pre-sent!" (Much laughter.) Seriously, however, lie did not think it right that a person of such great weight and influence in this Court as Sir James Scarlett should attempt to delude a Jury into believing that that which was in itself harmless, was worthy of punishment, by pressing into his service charges like, this, which even the gravity of his learned friend had hardly en- abled him to state without laughing. Sir James Scarlett had dwelt much on the licentiousness 'of the Press at the time the article under consideration was published. The-Press had teemed with libels of the most abominable kind ! How came it, then, with such a harvest of libel offering itself to his choice, that he should have selected such a pitiful gleaning as the paragraph of which he complained ? Mr. Hill thought he might have found a thousand newspapers which would have answered his purpose better than the one he had chosen to animadvert upon,—viz. the Spectator, a paper which was admitted on all hands, and even by Sir James himself, to be well written and well conducted, and one which, both from its price and the nature of its contents, was more adapted for the wealthy and higher classes than for those whose feelings, at the particular time alluded to, were supposed to have been excited—viz. the "lower orders." Sir James Scarlett had made an allusion to the time at which the supposed libel was publishedera an aggravation, and as making extremely mischievous that which at another time would have been looked upon with contempt. Mr. Hill, however, begged the Jury to consider, that the circumstance of the ublication

being made at a time of great public excitement, was rather a palliation than

Iotherwise; fur it was precisely at such times that allowance ought to be made for the excited feelings of public writers. The law did not punish a mart for bepig a bad 1. gician, or for having been misinformed on the suirjectst on which lie wrote ; but, on the contrary, in times of excitement, it looked at what was she probable state of mind of the party, and treated widt leniency thaf rich under different circumstances it might regard as a crime. His learned frietvi had invited their attention to the public events of the time when this article sVate,published : he joined in that invitation. He did not know the political opinions of the Jury, nor would he inquire : but he would not do them the injustice of supposing they were indifferent spectators of the great struggle. Doubtless they had held opinions either on the one side or on the other. Perhaps they were among those who, knoiting this our beloved couatiry had obtained its glory and its prosperity under institutions then sought to be changed, thought that the risk of loss outweighed the chance of benefit. Many excellent and able men had held such opinions. Or perhaps they felt that the defects in our system of representation had prodneed great evils, which could no longer be endured with patience, and that the demands of the people neither ought to he nor could be neglected. Whichever side they hail adopted, he was sure they hail espoused it with the zeal due to a question of such vital import- ance to the happiness of millions yet unborn. Let them reflect on their owa feelings at this great epoch ; and ask themselves, if it is fair to scan, tivo years afterwards, the writings of that time of honest fervour, with the severe and mi- nute criticism with which they had heard them attacked by his learned friend. ' Editors of newspapers were not stocks and stones. • Thrown into the heat of time political affray, it was hardly possible that, if sincere in their opinions, they should avoid some warmth in expressing them. The party which had been worsted in this great contest, doubtless came out of it with feelings of anger and disappointment. All this was very natural ; but let Juries beware how they became instruments of vengeance in the hands of political disputants. We re- fused to compensate borough-holders in money—let us not pay them in revenge on their adversaries. Sir James Scarlett had almost made it appear that the whole Peerage was endangered by the little paragraph now under discussion. Such indeed had been the effect of his address, that Mr. Hill could hardly per- suade himself that his learned friend had not comae there with a brief to plead the cause not merely of the Duke of Beaufort, but of the whole House of Peers, and the Bench of Bishops to boot. (Laughter.) And to see his learned friend ad- vancing to the field with such a force, made him doubly anxious for time success of his defence. His learned friend hail indulged in some sarcastic observations as to editors of newspapers being elected to the next Parliament. Mr. Hill saw no reason why they should not be so elected ; and as to his learned friend, he thought he must have been elected as advocate of all the Peers Spiritual and Temporal ; for otherwise be had certainly occupied the Court with a great deal of matter calculated very much to prejudice the minds of the Jury, but which had nothing to do with the case. Mr. Hill went on to animadvert very kr ongly on the pro- ceeding by Criminal Information ; which, lie said, gave an unfair advantage to the one party over the other. He wished that the whole of that part of the article which had been read had been put upon record, instead a that part merely which related to the statement about the will. The noble Duke had denied that part which was charged as libellous; but would be have denied, as be must have done before putting the other part of time alleged libel on the record, that he was a Boroughmonger, and a subscriber to that fund which was to be used for the undue influencing of the People at the elections ? The advisers of the noble Duke had taken hold of time fringe and left the substantial part of the garment. He could not sufficiently admire the ingenuity of his learned friend in endeavouring to introduce by inference into the case that very matter of the absence of which he now complained. lie would remind the Jury, that there were other modes of bringing libellers to punishment besides that of criminal information : an action might have been brought against the defendants, and the Jury would then have been able to see the witnesses brought forward, as well as to hear their statements. They would then have been able to judge of the truth or falsehood of the matters in question of their own knowledge; . whereas now they were called on to act on proof supposed to have been given at another time, and before another tribunal—on proof too, not from witnesses who gave their evidence in open court face to face with the accused but who put their depositions on paper, which, as it had been well said, had no power to blush for the falsehood of the characters inscribed upon it. Mr. Hill pro- ceeded to read and comment on the supposed libel. He asked how could the will of the late Duke of Beaufort he considered as implicating time present Duke? How, indeed, was it made to be improper in the late Duke to say that his sons should receive annuities until provided for under Government? They all appeared, no doubt, in the Duke's paternal eye, to be men of talent ; and there could be no doubt, therefore, that their services would be speedily required by the Government of their country. Again, as to that part of the article which stated that the Somerset family had received since the late Duke mine of age more money from the public flints the value of the estate bequeathed to the present Duke, Mr. Hill did not see that such a fact was improbable, or incon- sistent with propriety ; for, considering the long series of years which had elapsed since that period, it was not to be wondered that a family so distin- guished by aptitude for the public service, should have received sufficient money to give a colour to such a statement. But if the family had been unjustly at- tacked, how could a mere passing allusion like this really injure them? He would refer to one of the works of the most splendid and powerful controver- sialists which this country had ever produced—he alluded to Burke's letter to the Duke of Bedford, in which that nobleman and his ancestors were attacked with all the power of which that great man was capable ; but did the family of the Duke of Bedford suffer from that letter any such injury as his learned friend had supposed would arise to the Duke of Beaufort from the attack of the Spec- tator? Did the noble family of Bedford enjoy any less respect in consequence of Burke's letter? How, then, could his learned friend lay the stress he did upon the probable results of so comparatively trivial an allusion as this in the Spec- tator? Mr. Hill contended, that if any one were libelled in tids article, it was the late Duke of Beaufort, and not the present. How far, he asked, was the doctrine of hereditary libel to be extended ? They all remembered the Cardinal Beaufort of Shakspeare: they would recollect that his death-bed scene, as de- scribed by the poet, (lid not speak much in favour of that right reverend person —he died and "made no sign"—for there was no will in the ease : Mr. Hill was not genealogist enough to say whether or not the Cardinal was a member of the noble house of Beaufort ; but if he were, let the publishers of Shakspeare take care of themselves—his learned friend might be called upon to repeat the speech they had just heard from him; and sure he was, that the topics which Sir James Scarlett had urged would apply as well to that case as to the present. (4 laugh.) Sir James Scarlett, according to the old and accustomed form in such cases, hail called himself a friend to the Liberty of the Press. All prosecu- tions fur libel were opened in thisWay. FOr his part, if he ever should be pro- secuted for libel, nothing would terrify him so much as to hear his learned friend enlarging on the value of the liberty of the press : he should hear the knell of his own liberty in every word that was uttered. His friend's concessions to the - liberty of the press would not indeed alarm the most jealous despotism. The Inquisition itself might safely have granted such freedom. He took down his friend's words, amid they were these—" A public writer has a legitimate right to pursue legitimate objects in & legitimate manner !" No doubt ; for, with all this legitimacy, he would never k read. As Erskine said, an author to escape prosecution fur libel, ought to write with an ati.niney at one elbow and a counsel at the other. That was true ; but, at Mr. Hill thought, not be-

cause he would ovoid writing libels with such restraints upon him,—far, as the law stood, all the attornies en the rolls and all the counsel at the bar would hardly suffice for this,—but the safeguard of the antlo.e would be,

that with two such censors, his writings would be too (lull to be read ! As the law now stands, said Mr. Hill, the duty of the deli:wholes advocate in pra - secutions fur libel is arduous and painful.. Ile is shut out from the plait: and

natural defence that his client has spoken the truth ; and thus, a tedious exami- nation of the nature of the supposed libel, and a warisonie discussion of mat- ters purely, legal, souretinas running into refinements having but a slight relation

to the justice of the case, become absolutely necessary. 'A few weeks more,

however, and this state of things might probably be altered. He hoped it would; for, without going so fur as to say that the truth of the statement was

in all casts a justification for publishing it, he did say that it was in all eases of the highest importance that the question of truth or falsehood should not be withdrawn front the consideration of the Jury which is to pronounce on the

fate of the accused. To keep then) in ignorauce of the facts, is cruel end un- just to him ; it is degrading to them. But too often it makes them the mere ministers of vengeance to a haughty and vindictive prosecutor. No Jury

ought to be so treated. Juries ought never to be employed in any ollice less honourable than that of administering justice on a full kuowledge of all the facts. Justice, did he say ?—without such knowledge, no conviction could be just. Juries might become lictors to execute the decrees of others, but a tri- bunal of justice they could not be, while they were called on to decide in the dark. In the present case, be trusted there was no possibility of their finding a verdict against his clients. There was no pretence to stigmatize them as cri- minals and malefactors, for the few wonls which alone had been charged against them. He called to their attention the circumstance of the noble Duke pro- secuting all the gentlemen now called as defendants, when the chief !meiotic- tor of the Spectator had avowed himself as the author of the paragraph, bad stated that tine conduct of the journal was vested solely in Itim, and that the other defendants were ignorant of the existence of the article, until, like the public, they saw it in print. To the editor, Mr. Hinton], they had properly confided the control of the newspaper ; fur when they had put theinselves in the bands of a gentleman of talent, education, honourable feeling, and high character, it was but just to leave hint to act as his judgment should direct. Mr. Rintoul had for many years been engaged in conducting similar publications ; and although he had never flint:lied from maintaining his opinions, yet never bad he been convicted of libel. Mr. Hill felt that Mr. Rintoul would be able to make the same statement when he left the court to-day. He felt assured that the Jury would release him and the other defendants front all anxiety respecting this charge, which had been so long held over their heads.

Justice Patteson charged the Jury concisely and temperately. He limited their inquiry to the few lines respecting the will cud the receipt of public money. The question, he said, was whether this passage contaffied a charge that the family of the Soniersets had obtained more Oldie money than they ought. " Can it be said that there is no libel, if you think the meaning of the paragraph is, that to relieve themselves from annuities, they obtained places and-elma- luments without adequate service?" The expression of his opinion, which he was entitled by law to give, did not bind the Jury, who were the true judges of the object of the writer and the tendency of the publication. The Jury, after conversing together for a few minutes in the box, retired : in about an hour they returned, with a verdict of Not Guilty in favour of the defendants. This was received with marks of approbation in the court; which

were immediately repressed, by the officer calling Silence ! "

tAs we took no notes at the trial ourselves, we have mainly relied, for the foregoing account of it, on the report in the Times; which, how- ever, though the fullest and best given in the Daily Papers, is necessa- rily imperfect. In particular, it fails to do justice to the speech of our counsel, Mr. HILL ; who kept up the constant attention of the Court and Jury.—now directing it to the more serious parts of the case, and now exposing its absurd features—by alternate ridicule and argument, most effectively delivered. He completely unmasked the professional trick of Sir JAMES SCARLETT, and showed the utter irrelevancy of his sly allusions to extraneous matters, intro- duced for the purpose of prejudicing the minds of the Jurors. He stated clearly what it was Sir JAMES'S business to mystify and inis represent ; repelled and chastised his interruptions ; and pointed out to his junior brethren the effectual way of meeting this leviathan of the bar. Indeed, Mr. HILL was prepared for a more formidable battle than that of Monday proved to be.]