which may petition, the vast weight of the manufacturing towns would no longer suffer our hopes and fears, our recovery or our total ruin, to hang in doubtful balance; but the sterling gold of reformation would preponderate, and treachery and oppression kick the beam. "18. Take a sketch of such elections as are proposed. It being found that the proportion of English electors to every representative, according to the present number in the House of Commons, is about three thousand, it follows, that each town ought to be divided into districts of election, containing each about that number of male inhabitants, of twenty-one years of age. By the militia lists alone this might be easily done. In towns where the whole number of electors for each district might inhabit one parish, there ought to be ten or twelve subdivisions of them, so that not more than three hundred at most elect in one place. This would not only preserve the peace, but ensure the completion of the election in one forenoon; it would also so facilitate the attendance, that no manufacturer or mechanic need lose an hour's labour. 19. A moment's reflection will convince any candid man, that in such elections annually repeated there could be no such thing as bribery; and if a ballot were added, all undue influence of wealth or authority would be guarded against. Bribery and threats out of the question, who could have an interest or temptation to promote any licentiousness? It has already been shown also that in parliaments so elected, and so dependant on the esteem and confidence, and power of the people, it would be as impossible for a minister to obtain support by corruption, as now it is impossible to find support without corruption. 66 20. But a minister, it is said, cannot carry on the business of the nation without a majority. This is held to be an axiom in politics. And so it is. No maxim is more true. But it is equally true, that, in parliaments chosen as ours now are, that majority must be had by means of faction and bribery; in a reformed parliament, it must be gained by rectitude of measures alone. "21. A reformation of parliament would produce a total revolution in the condition of the minister. Instead of continuing to be an haughty lord and master of the nation, he would instantly become its servant, as the word minister imports;-instead of having through a corrupt majority the purse of the whole nation at his mercy, he would find that it should not yield him an extravagant or an unnecessary shilling. Instead of creating jobs, offices, and contracts, and squandering millions of the public treasure to gratify himself, his connexions, his creatures and dependants, besides the enormous bribery within the walls of parliament, he must correct every wasteful expenditure, and transfuse a spirit of economy through every department of the state. Instead of being in a condition to make inroads on the liberties of the people, or to make any thing law, by which he could ingratiate himself with royalty, or strengthen his own hands against every opposition to his will, he must be content to act within his own sphere, which is to execute the laws made by the concentrated wisdom of the nation in parliament assembled. "22. In such a parliament as must be the consequence of asserting our right to an equal representation and annual elections, it would be as impracticable for any faction to displace an able and virtuous minister, as for a cabal of grooms and chambermaids, in a private family, to displace the steward, whose reputation had been established for talents and integrity, and who acquitted himself to the satisfaction of his master. So long as the minister did the business of the nation to its satisfaction, the representatives of that nation, having no temptation to do otherwise, but an evident interest in supporting him, would support him accordingly. Nevertheless, the House of Commons would still be the political theatre for ambitious spirits to act their parts in; and it ought to be so. It is the proper school of politics; and whenever a great genius for government should arise, and could satisfy parliament as to any considerable incapacity in the minister, and of his own superior talents, it would be the duty of parliament to see the nation was served by the fittest person in the kingdom; and a change would take place as naturally, and as peaceably, as when a gentleman parts with one servant and takes another. Thus so far from annual elections preventing amongst foreign courts a confidence in our government, as some maintain, they would raise its reputation for wisdom, vigour, and permanency throughout the world and by preserving a perpetual harmony between the crown and the people, and keeping always at the helm the person best able to guide it, the king of England would once more become the most powerful and glorious monarch on earth. "23. Petition then, with one voice, my friends and countrymen, for that share in making your own laws to which, by the constitution and the laws of nature, you are entitled. Pursue the only course which can ever effect any considerable reduction of debts and of taxes, materially advance the interests of manufactures and commerce!—In short be Englishmen! be free, prosperous, and happy! And give your posterity, the same cause to revere your memories, as you have to bless those progenitors who left you an inheritance in a free constitution !"* In the Monthly Magazine, vol. xix. p. 34, is inserted a letter signed John Cartwright, respecting this address. The writer of that letter noticing the Memoirs of the Life of Gilbert Wakefield, remarks that "In THE KING against DANIEL HOLT. to wil. the king, before the king himself, at Westmiaster, on Wednesday next after the octave of Saint Hilary, in this same term, and for our said lord the king, giveth the Court here to understand and be informed, that Daniel Hult, late of Newark-upon-Trent, in the county of Nottingham, printer, being a wicked, malicious, seditious, and ill-disposed person, and being greatly disaffected to our said lord the king, and to the constitution and government of this kingdom, and wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously, designing, contriving, and intending to disturb the peace and tranquility of our said lord the king, and of this kingdom, and to scandalize, defame, and villify its said majesty's government and the parliament and statutes of this kingdom, and the representatives of the people of this kingdom in the parliament thereof, and to bring them respectively into hatred and contempt with his majesty's subjects, and to Nottinghamshire,? BE it remembered that sir Archibald Macdonald, knt. attorney-general of our present sovereign lord the king, who for our said lord the king in this behalt prosecutes in his own proper person comes here into the Court of our said lord the note vol. ii. p. 433, it is said, that Holt, the publisher of the Newark Journal, was ' imprisoned in Newgate, for reprinting, with out alteration, a pamphlet by major Cartwright; to which the minister, (Mr. Pitt) as a member of a political society, bad given countenance and circulation. The consequence to this young man was, the ruin of his affairs, and death in a short time after "True, indeed, it is, that the paper (for it was a single sheet) had been written by me, and at my request published in a Leeds news-represent and cause it to be believed by his paper in 1783; true it is, that the prosecution said majesty's subjects that their said repreproved the ruin of Holt's affairs; and no less sentatives in parliament were corrupt and true I hold it to be, that his imprisonment profligate, and betrayed their rights and inwas the cause of his premature death: but, il terests, and to excite and stir up discontent, as I have learned from experience, to think and sedition amongst his said niajesty's subof the minister that has been mentioned, as I¦jects, on the first day of January, in the thirtywish not to see added to the heavy accusa-third year of the reign of our said lord the tions against him, a grain of untruth, it is proper I should correct that part of the state ment which speaks of my paper having had his countenance and circulation.' Of its original appearance he certainly had no knowledge; and, for cogent reasons, I am convinced he never could have promoted, in any way, its publication. "The paper, Sir, was an exhortation in favour of parliamentary reformation; and contained not a sentiment in which, so long as I hold the use of reason, I shall not glory, In the year in which it was written, a poli'tical society' did indeed give it countenance and circulation to a wide extent. I speak of the Society for Constitutional Information; but Mr. Pitt never was a member of that society, nor, as I imagine, of any other, having similar objects. "Mr. Wakefield, in common with the public in general, had, as I conceive, been led into the error I have noticed by a speech made by one of the counsel of Mr. Holt. Where that error really originated I know not; but as often as it has been mentioned in my hearing, it has been contradicted; a circumstance which, had it been known to the sincere votary of truth, whose loss we deplore, would assuredly have prevented his adoption of the report. "Holt had republished the paper in question without my knowledge; nor was 1 apprized of it until applied to on his behalf, to prove that he was not the author. With that intent I appeared at his trial, but my intended evidence was rejected, as inadmissible; on the ground that such evidence would not disprove the act of publication." now king, at Newark-upon-Trent, in the said county of Nottingham, to complete, perfect, and bring to effect his said wicked contrivances and intentions, wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously did print and publish and caused to be printed and published in the the form of an address to the tradesmen, mechanics, labourers and other inhabitants of the town of Newark aforesaid on a parliamentary reform, a certain wicked, scandalous, and seditious libel (amongst other things, of and concerning his said majesty's government and the administration thereof, and of and concerning the parliament and statutes of this kingdom, and of and concerning the representatives of the people of this kingdom in the parliament thereof, in one part of the said libel according to the tenor and effect following: That is to say, 6. If the present inequality of represen tation" (meaning representation in the parliament of this kingdom) " and length of parliaments" (meaning the parliaments of this kingdom)" be the causes of parliamentary corruption, as they undoubtedly are,” (meaning that the present parliament of this kingdom as to the representatives of the people in the parliament, was undoubtedly corrupt) "we must remove the causes before the effect will cease. 7. By a corrupt parliament is meant that, which instead of being a shield against unnecessary taxation, is the hired instrument whereby the nation" (meaning this kingdom) " is pillaged, that which instead of proving check upon the crown" (meaning the crown of this kingdom) "when disposed to enga in unnecessary and ruinous wars, is the bilber iniquity of corrupt elections, make their way into parliament" (meaning the parliament of this kingdom,)" and there let out their tongues and their votes for hire?" And in another part thereof according to the tenor and effect following: (to wit.) "19. A moment's reflection will convince any candid man, that in such elections" (meaning the elections of representatives to serve in the parliament of this kingdom) "annually repeated there could be no such thing as bribery; and if a ballot were added, all undue influence of wealth er authority, would be guarded against. Bribery and threats out of the question, who could have an interest or temptation to promote any licentiousness? It has already been shown also that in parliaments" (meaning the parliaments of this kingdom) "so elected and so dependent on the esteem and confidence, and power of the people" (meaning the subjects of this kingdom), "it would be as impossible for a minister" (mean ing the minister of our said lord the king employed in the administration of his government)" to obtain support by corruption as now it is impossible to find support" (meaning support from the parliament of this kingdom) without corruption." tool by which the nation" (meaning this kingdom) was first gulled into an approbation of war, and afterwards drained of its blood and treasures to carry it on:-And again, uniform experience teaches us that whenever parliaments" (meaning the parliament of this kingdom) are under an undue influence from the crown," (meaning the crown of this kingdom) "they are ever ready to betray the most sacred rights of the people." (meaning the subjects of this kingdom.) "Suffice it at present to recall to your recollection a few instances only. In the reign of Henry 8," (meaning Henry 8, heretofore king of England) "parliament" (meaning the then parliament of this kingdom)" enacted that the king's proclamation should have the force of law in the reign of William 3." (meaning William 3, heretofore king of England) " they made a precedent for suspending by statute the benefit of the Habeas Corpus; and it has since been several times practised: in the reign of George 1," (meaning George 1, heretofore king of Great Britain)" by means of the statute vulgarly called the Riot Act, all the constitutional means of giving support to the civil magistrate were supplanted in favour of the practice of calling out the standing" army. That government" (meaning the go- "20. But a minister" (meaning such minis vernment of this kingdom) "which cannot ter as aforesaid)," it is said cannot carry on the preserve its authority without such an instru- business of the nation" (meaning this kingment, deserves not the name of government; dom) "without a majority. This is held to be and that country," (meaning this kingdom) an axiom in politics, and so it is. No maxim "in which it is an ordinary practice to sup- is more true. But it is equally true that in port the execution of its laws by a standing parliaments chosen as ours" (meaning the pararmy, is not a free country. But the dead-liament of this kingdom)" now are, that ma liest wounds that freedom ever received from parliament," (meaning the parliament of this kingdom) were those which have been given it by the disfranchising statute of Henry 6," (meaning Henry 6, heretofore king of England)" the triennial act of William 3," (meaning William 3, heretofore king of England)" and the septennial act of George 1," (meaning George 1, heretofore king of Great Britain) "for by the joint operation of those three statutes the very foundation of the constitution" (meaning the constitution of this kingdom)" are removed. Those statutes not only defraud the nation" (meaning this kingdom)" of six parts in seven both of its election and its representation, but they have effectually vitiated the remaining seventh. "8. Parliaments chosen as they now are, and continuing for seven years as they now do, will ever be composed, for the most part, of a few factions, under the guidance of particular noblemen, perpetually contending for the power and emoluments of office. The common soldiery of these several factions, like that of all other standing armies, is made up of mercenaries from the most idle and profligate orders of the community. Who so idle as men of pleasure, and the vicious part of our nobility and gentry? Who so profligate as murdering nabobs, prostitute lawyers, and unprincipled adventurers, who through the VOL. XXII. jority must be had by means of faction and bribery; in a reformed parliament it must be gained by rectitude of measures alone;" In contempt of our said lord the king, in open violation of his law, to the evil and pernicious example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace of our said lord the king, his crown and dignity. Whereupon the said attorney-general of our said lord the king, who for our said lord the king in this behalf prosecutes for our said lord the king, prayeth the consideration of the Court here in the premises, and that due process of law may be awarded against him the said Daniel Holt in this behalf to make him answer to our said lord the king touching and concerning the premises aforesaid. Several witnesses were called by the counsel for the crown who proved the mere fact of publication. After the evidence was closed, my leading counsel, Mr. Dayrell, then addressed the jury in a very able, pointed, and energetic speech, of considerable length; in which he exposed with singular felicity, the various abuses that had crept into the government; and very suc cessfully, and with great ability insisted on the right of every citizen to deliver his opinions on the form of government under which hẹ lives, and dwelt with peculiar force and energy 4 H found guilty on two informations, and is now in Court ready to receive your lordships judg ment.-But I do not know that it may not be better to hear the learned judge's report on the second information, that I may take them both together. on the singular cruelty of prosecuting a man for re-printing, in the way of his business, a paper, sanctioned by the first characters of the age, and subscribed by the two first men in the present administration, viz. Mr. Pitt and the duke of Richmond. He stated, that the paper in question, had been printed in all the newspapers of the year 1782, and notoriously circulated throughout the kingdom for the space of ten years; and that he then held in his hand the original copy from which the present paper was printed, and that he should call evidence to prove that it had been so printed, circulated, &c. &c. He then proceeded to call major Cartwright, who was one of the committee at the Thatched House tavern, in the year 1782, by whom this paper was first given to the public, but the counsel for the crown objected to the major's being called. Mr. Dayrell strenuously contended that he had a right to produce any evidence that would at all serve the cause of his client. To this it was answered, that if the judge committed a mistake in receiving the evidence, it could never be rectified or redressed; but if he did not receive the evidence, and it was afterwards discovered that he was wrong in so doing, a motion might be made for a new trial. The counsel for the crown farther observed, that it did not in the least signify if the paper in question had been first printed in the year 1740 instead of 1782, and had never before been noticed by government; yet, if it was re-printed so many years after, and the innuendos would then apply to those times, they certainly had a right to prosecute whenever and whomsoever they pleased. These objections on the part of the crown were admitted, and of course no evidence in my favour was examined. After the summing up by the judge, the jury withdrew, taking the paper with them and returned in three quarters of an hour with a verdict of-GUILTY.* The hon. Thomas Erskine. My lords, I am of counsel for this defendant, who has been I lament that I was disappointed of the assistance of a short-hand writer at these trials: but as the two cases were afterwards so ably and copiously re-argued in the court of King's-bench, the omission is not so very material, as the reader will find those proceedings reported at full length, when he comes to that part of the paniphlet. Orig. Edit. In the original it is erroneously called the 20th. Mr. Attorney General. It is indifferent to me whether the informations are taken together or not; but I hope your lordships will pass a separate judgment on each information. Lord Kenyon. That is matter of course. We must pronounce distinct judgments on each offence. Separate punishments certainly. Mr. Erskine I know that; but, my lords, I conceive that it is competent to me to suggest such reasons as occur to show that my client has been illegally convicted, and that if your lordships should be of that opinion, he ought to have a new trial. Mr. Attorney General. My lords, this is the first moment that I have heard it was the intention of my learned friend to move for a new trial. At the same time I would not wish to be understood that I meant to blame him, or to say that he has no right to it.-I confess I do not know, and I do not pretend to know, so much of the practice of this Court as to say, whether or not an application for a new trial is now in time or not. Although I appear on behalf of the crown, I do not wish to deprive a defendant of any of his rights. I do not wish by any means to shut out his application. Lord Kenyon. Mr. Erskine; can you produce any precedent where a new trial was granted after the first four days of the term after trial, except in a few excepted cases, where the Court itself interfered. I remember perfectly the case of the king and Gough is of that nature; as also the case of the king and Morris. And there is one instance of two more of the same kind, that may be mentioned. In the first of these cases a question arose," Whether the town-hall of Gloucester was within the county of the city, or within the county at large?" and the Court itself, on hearing the report of the learned judge read, were of opinion that it ought to go to a new trial; but that was the act of the Court it self, without any application from the bar. Mr. Justice Ashhurst. I have always understood the rule of this Court to be, that a defendant may move in arrest of judgment at any time before judgment is pronounced; but that a motion for a new trial must be made within the first four days of the term after the defendant is found guilty. Mr. Erskine. In the case of the king and Aylett, and in another case, to my certain knowledge, new trials were granted long after the four days in the subsequent term had expired. A new trial was granted when the defendants were in the Court ready to receive its judgment:-Nay, my lords, I appeal to the whole bar, "whether it is not their general opinion that a new trial may be granted a at any time before the judgment of the Court Lord Kenyon. I would not have a cloud is pronounced ?" hang over it, and therefore let it stand over Lord Kenyon. I very much doubt whether to Saturday, to see what can be said upon it. that is the general opinion of the bar. I am Mr. Erskine. In point of reason, my lords, informed by one of the officers of the Court, and of common sense, there is no difference, that in the case of the king and Aylett, the whether the defendant himself, or his counsel Court had expressly given leave to move for for him, point out an error to the eye of the a new trial, on a future day. I have no wish Court, or whether the Court is led to discover upon the subject either one way or the other. it by any other means. I wish only to go according to the practice of Lord Kenyon. Well.—Let the defendant be the Court. remanded. Mr. Erskine. My lords, as on the one The defendant was then accordingly rehand I do not wish to deceive the Court, so manded to the King's-bench prison. on the other I should be extremely unwilling On the following Saturday morning (Nov. to give up any advantage or privilege which 23rd.) he again appeared in Court, when as belongs to any man who puts his trust in me. before, the attorney-general moved for the · Lord Kenyon. Let this motion be post- judgment of the court.* poned to the second day of the next term. Mr. Erskine. If it could be done without * The arguments on this occasion are thus any inconvenience, I should be glad that this reported, 5 T. R. 436. .case was settled at an earlier period. Lord Kenyon. We are now got to that pe Saturday, Nov. 23, 1793. riod of the term, when I do not know how we The King against DANIEL HOLT. can do it at an earlier period, consistently with The defendant was brought up on Thursthe other business that should be done. Why day last, the 21st of November, to receive did not the defendant move for a new trial judgment upon two informations for libels, within the first four days of the term? which had been exhibited against him by the Mr. Erskine. My lord, I was only applied Attorney-general, and of which he had been to yesterday, and in the judgment of the gen- convicted at the last Newark assizes before tlemen who are concerned with me, as well Judge Wilson. The first of these was an in. as in mine, we ought to take the previous formation for a libel intituled, “ A Letter adopinion of the Court, “ whether this gentle dressed to the Addressers on the late Proclaman has been legally convicted ?” mation;" the second for a libel intituled, Lord Kenyon. Is the motion for a new “ An Address to the Tradesmen, Mechanics, trial meant to be made on what is disclosed Labourers, and other Inhabitants of the town in the report of the learned judge, or on afli- of Newark, on a Parliamentary Reform." davits? The first information stated that, before the Mr. Erskine. My lord, it is meant to be publishing of the libel thereinafter mentioned, moved on both. to wit, &c. “ our lord the king, hy the advice Lord Kenyon. Let it stand over until Sa- of his privy council, had issued his royal proturday, when we may hear that multitude of clamation whereby, &c. [reciting the procla mation); that, after the said proclamation Mr. Attorney General. My lords, if the de- had been issued, and before the publishing of fendant thinks that any serious mischief will the seditious libel therein-after-mentioned, result to him from the verdicts that have been divers addresses had on occasion of such progiven under the idea that he had been ille clamation been presented to his said majesty gally convicted; I do not wish that the Court by divers of his loving subjects, expressing should be troubled with hearing this argu- their loyalty and attachment to his said mament; but shall think it a substantial ground jesty, and the government and constitution for saying, that I conceive it to be my duty of this kingợom, &c.” It then proceeded to to permit the defendant to bring it again be- state that the defendant, well knowing the fore the Court. premises, &c., but maliciously and seditiously Lord Kenyon. We, the Court, are bound intending to bring the said proclamation into er debito justitia, to hear this application to contempt, &c., and to stir up sedition, &c., the Court, in as much as the practice of this published the libel in question intituled," A Court is part of the law of the land. Letter addressed to the Addressers on the Mr. Bearcroft. The practice of this Court, late Proclamation,” which was averred to as I understand it, is this : If the party moves mean his said majesty's proclamation : after for a new trial, he must move within ihe first which followed the libel itself. The judge's four days of the next term: but if what passed report upon this information stated that the at the trial comes before the Court in any proclamation was read, after an objection course, and the Court sees the verdict is not made to its admissibility had been overright, the Court shall see that justice take ruled ; and then stated the evidence of the place. fact of publication. The report upon the seMr. Justice Buller. In the case of the king cond information merely stated the fact of and Gough, on reading the judge's report, the publication, and the circumstances attending Court was of opinion that the defendant ought it. not to have been convicted. cases. |