Neither can I make any protestations of sorrow before your Lordships if I did, I should only act the hypocrite and the liar, a character I am not disposed to play, and I should hope your Lordships have no disposition to witness.

I have acted entirely from a sense of conjugal duty, without consulting my own interest, or my own ideas, of right and wrong. I stand before your Lordships, as the instrument of my husband in this publication, I know that he would gladly meet the Attorney General on any subject contained in it, and that he would as gladly bear any punishment that might fall upon me; but if this cannot be the case, I must be content to share his suffering, as I have shared his prosperity. For better, for worse is the motto of the altar, and I am happy in giving my husband this instance of my regard and affection.

I have already suffered all the misery that can befal a Wife and a Mother, and I have to entreat that your Lordships will not further agonize my mind by separating me both from husband and children.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL, in reply, observed; that no plea of a want of education could serve the Defendant, as it was impossible that the most illiterate person could have served in the shop whence this publication has been issued and be ignorant of its tendency, after hearing of so many prosecutions instituted against it. He felt no wish to aggravate the case of the Defendant, although it was evident, from the nature of the defence offered at the trial, and the address, which their Lordships had just heard, that she did not feel disposed to sue for the mercy of the Court.

After a moments consideration, during which the Judges enjoyed a laugh, Mr. Justice Bailey proceeded to deliver the sentence of the Court: It was, that, Jane Carlile should be imprisoned in His Majesty's Gaol at Dorchester for the term of two years; and at the expiration of that term, to find two sureties in £100 each for her good behaviour for three years.

Mrs. Carlile was then placed in the custody of the Marshal of the Court, and on the 9th of February removed from the King's Bench Prison to Dorchester Gaol.

FINIS.

R. Carlile, Printer, 135, Fleet Street.

GIFT OF IRVING LEVY BRIDGE-STREET BANDITTI,

VERSUS

The Press.

REPORT OF THE TRIAL

OF

MARY-ANNE CARLILE,

FOR PUBLISHING

A NEW-YEAR'S ADDRESS

TO THE

Reformers of Great Britain;

WRITTEN BY

RICHARD CARLILE;

AT THE

INSTANCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ASSOCIATION:

BEFORE

MR. JUSTICE BEST,

AND A SPECIAL JURY,

AT THE

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL, LONDON,

JULY 24, 1821.

WITH THE

NOBLE AND EFFECTUAL SPEECH

OF

MR. COOPER

IN DEFENCE, AT LARGE.

London:

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY R. CARLILE, 55, FLEET-STREET.

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

of that man who is now suffering imprisonment for his own criminal conduct. It is entitled, "A New Year's Address to the Reformers of Great Britain ;" and, among other objectionable passages not charged as libellous, it contains the following; "As far as the barrack system will admit".

Mr. Justice BEST.-I do not think that you are entitled to read that passage, Mr. Gurney.

Mr. COOPER. I think not, my lord; I was just rising to interrupt Mr. Gurney.

Mr. GURNEY.-I have no objection, my Lord, to abstain from reading the passage to which I was about to call your attention. I shall read the passage which is charged as libellous, and if the Learned Counsel for the Defendant can find throughout a single passage to qualify its malignity, do you, Gentlemen, give the Defendant the benefit of it. The passage is this:-"To talk about the British Constitution, is, in my opinion, a sure proof of dishonesty; Britain has no Constitution. If we speak of the Spanish Constitution, we have something tangible; there is a substance and meaning as well as sound. In Britain there is nothing constituted but corruption in the system of Government; our very laws are corrupt and partial, both in themselves and in their admininistration; in fact, corruption as notorious as the sun at noon-day, is an avowed part of our system, and is denominated the necessary oil for the wheels of the Government; it is a most pernicious oil to the interests of the people." And in another passage the following words were contained:" Reform will be obtained when the existing authorities have no longer the power to withhold it, and not before. We shall gain it as early without petitioning as with it, and I would again put forward my opinion, that something more than a petitioning attitude is necessary. At this moment I would not say a word about insurrection, but I would strongly recommend union, activity, and co-operation. Be ready and steady to meet any concurrent circumstances." Now, Gentlemen, these are the passages charged as libellous, and I defy even the ingenuity of my Learned Friend to show that they are not most odious libels. What! are the people of this free and independent country to be told that they have no Constitution? It is an assertion, the malignity of which is only equalled by its falsehood. We have a free and glorious Constitution. It has descended to us from our brave and free ancestors, and I trust that we too shall have virtue and magnanimity enough to transmit it unimpaired to our posterity. We have laws, too, equal in their administration. We have a Constitution where no lowness