panel's opinions are unsound or dangerous, reflect, that he may still be an innocent and a worthy man. If he has said or published any thing that does not agree with your own sentiments, recollect that in this land of liberty men are free to speak their minds, and even to print their opinions and views of public affairs, though they may be such as it would be inexpedient, and even dangerous to follow.

Gentlemen, Mr. Palmer has been indicted for the publication of a writing alleged to be seditious. It certainly shows abundance of that party zeal, of which there have been so many examples. But though the language is not to be commended for its moderation, it is another question whether such terms are seditious, and punishable as a state crime. The language of party is intemperate, abusive, too often slanderous,-without candour, charity, or decency,-disgusting to all lovers of quiet and moderation. Asperity is naturally incident to controversies of all kinds, and it is eminently so to the party disputes of our country, in the course of which disputants, availing themselves of our free constitution, indulge without restraint in venting their anger and indignation. The abominable malignity of our religious contentions during the progress of the reformation, and afterwards, is not yet forgotten. The virulence of party rage in the reigns of the Stuarts abated in the following reigns; but we have generally had enough of heats and dissentions ready, and as it were in a state of preparation for breaking out in violent animosities.

satisfied in your minds, that each of the articles in this indictment is substantiated by proof; and whether you shall be of opinion that Mr. Palmer wrote every line of this paper or not, that the other parts of this indictment are proven, namely, that he caused the paper to be printed, and when printed, did distribute, and did circulate it. With these observations, I leave the cause in your hands, gentlemen of the jury, and have no manner of doubt, you will bring in such a verdict as will exonerate yourselves, and serve your country. Mr. John Clerk.*-Gentlemen of the Jury; It is now my duty to address you in behalf of the panel. That you mean to try his cause fairly and impartially I have no doubt; and yet as a preliminary to my remarks, I must take the liberty (without offence I hope) to guard you against certain prepossessions, which often lead to the greatest injustice in cases like the present. Unhappily the times are so violently disturbed by political animosities that the opposite parties, not contented with disputing about their public principles, a contention that may subsist without personal differences,-seem now to exhibit in many instances a degree of mutual hatred and rancour, which could hardly be exceeded, if there was a civil war in the kingdom. The friendship and cordiality, that very lately subsisted among us, has been so much affected by these political squabbles, that friends and relations have separated with mutual disgust. The clamour of party spirit resounds in every quarter. Nobody escapes the fury of the times. If one is a whig, he is distrusted and avoided by the tories; if he is a democrat or Gentlemen, some of you may remember a reformer, he is execrated. On the other the political disputes in the beginning of the hand a tory is exposed to the hatred of the present reign. No colours were thought by opposite factions. The common charities of the disputants to be too black for representing life are lost in the whirlwind of political the character and conduct of political adverphrenzy, which now agitates the minds of saries. At last a new topic of discontent was men. Happy they, who in the midst of such introduced or rather revived, I mean the suba ferment, can look on calmly and dispassion-ject of reform in the government, into which ately, and form candid and moderate judgments, as to the conduct of their fellowcitizens.

Gentlemen, though I am not personally acquainted with any of you, I am satisfied that I now address a sensible, an enlightened, a well informed jury. Whether you have mixed in the political disputes, to which I have alluded, I do not know. Should you disapprove of schemes of reform in parliament, or innovation of any kind, I hope your disapprobation is not of that violent sort, which is now so common. But whatever your sentiments upon these subjects may be, I earnestly intreat you to remove from your minds the prejudices, which at present more or less affect the minds of most men. If you think the

* By the assistance of Mr. Clerk I have been enabled to correct numerous errors which had crept into the reports of this speech in the printed accounts of Palmer's trial.

as it was alleged a number of corruptions had gradually made their way. A long and disas trous war with America had terminated disgracefully to Britain, leaving behind it an im mense addition to the public debt. The misfortunes of the American contest were ascribed to disorders in the administration, and reform was loudly called for as the proper remedy for these abuses. On the other hand the abuses were denied, and the reform opposed. The bitterness of these disputes is far from being exceeded in the hand bill now called a sedi-tious libel. In this way the temperate language of reason and moderation was given up for the more animated effusion of party zeal. The taste of the public, or of those who were interested in such discussions, again sought the excitements of violent and inflammatory declamation. Any other way of treating political arguments would have been held as insufferably tame, tasteless, and insipid, and would have been utterly disregarded as lukewarm and contemptible. I may refer you to

341]

for Sedition.

the letters of Junius as a well known sample | of political argument, exceeding in elegance, but not much if at all, in acrimony, many of the cotemporary publications. The petitions to parliament itself, not to speak of other documents, and the common publications relative to reform, for a number of years past, may be generally referred to, as evidence of the heat and violence of the reformers and their adversaries.

Gentlemen, I need hardly mention that those plans of reform concerning which the public mind has been so much agitated, were first suggested in consequence of certain opinions, as to the influence of the Crown, and the employment of that influence. It was thought by persons of the highest consideration in the state, and openly asserted even in parliament, that the influence of the Crown had increased to a degree, and had been used in a manner highly dangerous to the liberties of the people. The same assertions were made at public meetings, and eagerly listened to by all those who wished for a parliamentary reform as a remedy for grievances. It was observed that the American war, though it was popular at first, became very much the reverse. And yet the minister, through the influence of the Crown, found means to continue that contest even after it was universally detested for its injustice and impolicy.-The influence of the Crown enabled him to keep his majorities in parliament, who totally disregarded the voice of the people. It was observed that the representation of the people in parliament was unequal: that individuals, a number of whom were peers, had the nomination to seats in the House of Commons, by which nominations the people were in no way represented. That a very few persons could by these nominations command a majority of the House of Commons, and a majority of that kind necessarily fell under the influence of the Crown, so that the constitutional right of the people to a voice in the legislature by their representatives, was nearly lost, if not entirely abolished. It was said that a state of things so dangerous to the liberties of the people, urgently required reform. Accordingly plans for a more equai representation were proposed in parliament, but they were defeated by parliamentary majorities. Still, however, the proposers of reform continued their exertions, and endeavoured to influence the public mind by publications of different sorts, in hopes of carrying through their favourite measure by its popularity. I need bardly observe, gentlemen, that these plans of reform in parliament were supported with great zeal by his grace the duke of Richmond, and by Mr. Pitt, as well as by many other men of importance. Mr. Pitt continued his support of parliamentary reform, even after he was minister, and wielded the influence of the Crown with that assistance of borough nomination, which he had so strongly reprobated.

Even Mr. Dundas* himself, did at last upon
one occasion, make a speech for reform, when
he was secretary of state.

Gentlemen, at this period, though the plan
of reform was keenly opposed as well as sup-
ported, and the contest of interests and opi-
nions upon a subject so important necessarily
produced a good deal of that warmth that is
attendant upon party or political disputes, no-
body had yet heard of the furious charge of
sedition being made, either on the one side or
the other. The language employed by the
promoters of reform was pointed, zealous,
acrimonious, imputing corruption in plain
terms, to the system of which they demanded
a reform;-but it was the language of contro-
versy, not the language of sedition. It was
the language of freemen, who had a right to
complain of their grievances for the purpose
of having them redressed. It was the lan-
guage of discontent, and it had a tendency to
spread the discontent. But still it was not
seditious, nor in any other respect illegal.
He who speaks or writes to raise discontent
or disturbance, or to bring the government
into hatred or contempt, is seditious; and he
whose speeches or writings have that tendency
is seditious, unless in either case the speaker
or writer has a legal object in view. But
non injuriam facit qui jure suo utitur. Men
may have a right to complain, and to com-
plain loudly, though their complaints should
be discreditable to government. If they
bona fide seek reform, or any thing else re-
lating to their rights, whether public or
private, they do no wrong, though their exer-
tions in the defence of those rights which they
still possess, or the recovery of those of which
they have been unjustly deprived for a time,
should raise discontents or disturbances. In
every case of this kind, the question of right
is first to be disposed of. Gentlemen, so it
was thought for a long course of time, and in
relation to many examples of all sorts, in
which individuals or men in collective bodies
loudly set forth the gross abuses that had
taken place in administration and representa-
tion. I apprehend that the proposers of re-
form were not mistaken in law, as to the
legality of their proceeding. I apprehend
that the law is now, as it was then.
and the duke of Richmond were guilty of no
sedition, and the same law that applied to
their case does now protect Mr. Palmer.
Gentlemen, there is no change in the law,
but there has been a very considerable change
in the views of the disapprovers of reform. I
do not merely allude to the opinion which is
now much stronger and more prevalent than
it was formerly against reform, but to the in-.
crease of violence and hostility against the
reformers. Gentlemen, I have already cau-

Mr. Pitt

*Afterwards lord viscount Melville. See in this Collection, post, his trial before the House of Lords on an impeachment by the House of Commons, a. b. 1806.

tioned you against the prejudices which may arise from such sentiments. Justice is due to every man, even to a reformer. But I must notice the cause of the increased rancour of our dissentions. It is closely connected with the view that ought to be taken of the present case by all men of sense and probity.

Gentlemen, before the French revolution, the argument was all on the side of the reformers; and so much was this the case, that the most sensible men I know declared themselves to be convinced, that a moderate reform in the House of Commons would be of the most essential service to the community, by strengthening the constitution. But the French revolution took place, an event unparalleled in the history of human affairs, and a mighty monarchy, apparently secure and unassailable in its establishments, was suddenly overturned by its own corruption. At the first news of this great change, it was supposed to be a sort of reform in France, introducing a representation of the people, but with a continuance of the nobility, and all the glory and splendour of the monarchy. Every benevolent and liberal mind in this country rejoiced, that the French had recovered their liberties. But new events took place. Gentlemen, the glory of the revolution was done away, and anarchy and confusion succeeded. But many people in this country, who had at first applauded the revolution, still continued to think notwithstanding those unfortunate circumstances that the French revolution would be of advantage to France itself, and to the rest of the world. Gentlemen, the people who applauded the French revolution did not suddenly change these opinions, but their numbers lessened by degrees; and on the other hand the proceedings in France at an early period of the revolution had been so atrocious, that a violent party in this country arose, decided enemies to every species of reform. Thus a new flame was kindled here, and the most furious debates took place in parliament upon the question of reform. And, gentlemen, those discontents, and the virulence of parties was aggravated by the separation and the quarrels of men who had formerly entertained a warm friendship for each other, and had cordially acted together in public affairs.

Gentlemen, at this unfortunate time, when parties were running so high, popular writers in this country applied the doctrines circulated for the most insidious purposes in France, to the state of our affairs, and assailed the vulgar mind with arguments too well suited to the vulgar in all ages, though wicked and highly dangerous in their nature. They were answered by writers on the other side, with the virulence of invective; and matters ran so high, that men of opposite opinions could scarcely speak to one another, or communicate their sentiments on political subjects. I really believe that, if you go back in the

history of this country to the most violent times ever known, such animosities did not exist.-You have heard to day from my friend Mr. Burnett, that the existence of government itself has been threatened by the reformers. On the other hand, you are no strangers to the hand-bills and pamphlets, that are circulated by the latter, treating the doctrines advanced by Mr. Burnett, as the doctrines of despotism and tyranny.-In short the two parties have exhausted against each other every topic of abuse.

Now, gentlemen, while matters were in this situation, and parties ran so high as they did, the king's proclamation was published, stigmatizing certain publications in vindication of the French doctrines, and the other new doctrines which have been grafted upon them Gentlemen, the proclamation mentioned no book in particular; but it was well known that it alluded to Paine's book. Such was the liberty of the press, or the licence of the press, that the book was universally circulated through the kingdom, and recommended, nobody supposing it to be a libel, that is, an unlawful writing. Nobody supposed, though it contained doctrines in themsclves dangerous, that either the author, or the printer, or the publisher of such a book, had been guilty of any crime; and so little did the people suspect it to be of that nature, thatdifferent societies advertised in every newspaper recommending the writings of Paine; and they were at pains to have cheap editions printed and circulated among the lowest of the people. I believe no book ever had such a rapid circulation; and yet even the lawyers were not aware that this book was a libel, till the opinion was at last announced to them, upon authority, entitled to great respect indeed, though not properly speaking a legal and binding authority.

In the mean time it was supposed that the populace were infected with dangerous opinions, in consequence of the different popular works that had been distributed among them. And this happened at the same time that the French had been successful in driving their enemies out of France, and even in over-running a great part of the Low Countries. A sudden alarm was spread among the higher classes, and many were afraid that their property was in danger from the pernicious influence of the doctrines that had been circulated among the people-the foolish and extravagant doctrine of Paine concerning the Rights of Man.-Now, gentlemen, I need not state how much that alarm must necessarily have increased the violence of party prejudices; nor need I state to you that those gentlemen, who still thought that a reform in parliament was necessary to keep down the increasing influence of the Crown, were unfairly confounded with those who entertained the pernicious French doctrines; and it was not very difficult to represent them as men of the same principles, because every person

constitutional means. Gentlemen, you know well, the difference between such a plan, and a project formed on the new and dangerous doctrines. But certainly there is no evidence that the society with which my client connected himself entertained any ideas hostile to the constitution. On the contrary, it is proved that they, on a former occasion, laid a dutiful petition before parliament, praying for the reform they wished for, a reform of the same nature that had been sought by so many excellent men in this country.

And, gentlemen, on the other hand, it has not been proved, that the prisoner has embraced any of the new and dangerous doctrines; his only object was the same reform in parliament, which has been approved of by so many, and has been stigmatised by none as illegal; and there is the best negative evidence, that no idea hostile to the constitution was entertained by any one member of that society. Their debates, their designs and acts went no farther than to the same legal reform; and however inexpedient you may think it, you must never forget that the object was not illegal.

even this great and glorious establishment, excellent as it may appear in its contrivance, would be totally inadequate for the purposes of a free government, or for the maintenance of civil liberty, or for the comfort of society at all, were it not for THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS De Lolme, in the passage read to you, says so expressly. The same principle is laid down in the writings of Hume, the great philosopher and historian, whose authority, which is otherwise of the greatest weight, is much greater on this point, from the general tenor and tendency of his political doctrines. He was no advocate for reformations; on the contrary, he was a Tory writer, who preferred the monarchical part of the constitution; and the whole of his arguments have a leaning to that side. He tells us expressly, after showing the advantages of public freedom, provided it is duly controlled and prevented from running into disorders, that "These principles account for the great liberty of the press in these kingdoms, beyond what is indulged in any other government. It is apprehended, that arbitrary power would steal in upon us, were we not careful to prevent its progress, And, gentlemen, I must here take the and were there not an easy method of conliberty to give you another caution. Gentle- veying the alarm from one end of the kingmen, you must judge of this cause, secun- dom to the other." Here the author predum allegata et probata," that is, upon the supposes that the people have a right, by libel and the evidence laid before the Court. I means of the liberty of the press, to print know nothing of this cause, but what I have against any measure of government of a danbeen able to learn from the prosecutor's allega- gerous tendency, and convey their sentiments tion, and the evidence upon it. I cannot go be- from one end of the kingdom to the other; yond them in my endeavour to vindicate the and he declares his opinion, that the excelprisoner; nor are you, gentlemen, at liberty to lent structure of our government in other do so. You may be well acquainted with respects, with all the provisions of law, this part of the country; and you may know would be totally inadequate, without some or suspect that some of the people, associated such engine as this, to keep the people conwith the prisoner, had embraced the doctrines tinually in a state of alarm about their liof Paine. If that had been proved, it might berties. The spirit of the people must frehave affected the prisoner, though very littlequently be roused, in order to curb the ambiif he is not a convert to the same doctrines.tion of the court; and the dread of rousing But, gentlemen, nothing of this is proved either against the prisoner or his fellows in the society, and you must lay your private knowledge, or suspicion, if you have any, entirely out of consideration.

Gentlemen, having said so much as to the legal and constitutional object of the society, the next consideration is, with regard to the measures that were pursued for its attainment. For though an end is lawful, it will not justify unlawful means. But, gentlemen, the means were lawful, and in particular, the hand-bill for which the prisoner is indicted, contains no statement that is not warranted by law. It contains some free remarks upon the measures of government, but the subjects| of Great Britain have a right to discuss all the measures of government.-It is a printed paper, but the free subjects of this country are entitled to discuss the measures of government by means of the press: And, gentlemen, notwithstanding the just praises universally bestowed upon the British constitution, it has hardly ever been doubted that

this spirit must be employed to prevent that ambition.' These are striking passages, and one would think that, if Hume had anticipated such a trial as this, and had intended to give his opinion upon it, he could not have used expressions more directly applicable to the case." The spirit of the people must frequently be roused, in order to curb the ambition of the court; and the dread of rousing this spirit must be employed to prevent that ambition. Nothing is so effectual to this purpose as the liberty of the press, by which all the learning, wit, and genius of the nation, may be employed on the side of freedom, and every one be animated to its defence. As long, therefore, as the republican part of our government can maintain itself against the monarchical, it will naturally be careful to keep the press open, as of importance to its own preservation."And here, gentlemen, you should be very careful to distinguish be

* On the Liberty of the Press, Essays, vol. 1, p. 12, 8vo. 1809.