No More Learning

"
But we must turn again towards the courts of
law to see how they had been interfering with the
In 1764, Mr. Meres, the printer of a popular evening Paper, had been fined £100 by the House of Lords, for mentioning the name of Lord Hereford in his journal—the London Evening Post. Several other printers were afterwards fined, every session for some years, £100 each time they printed the name of a member of the House of Peers. Mr. Almon the bookseller, and friend of Wilkes, was the author of the paragraph that brought the law down upon Meres. Almon was at this time, and continued to be, a very
strong assertor of the public right to know how public affairs were conducted in Parliament, as we shall have occasion to see.
The North Briton Newspaper excitement was fol lowed, a few years afterwards, by the equally intense feeling raised by the Letters of Junius. The first Letter by this writer appeared in the Public Advertiser on the 28th of April, 1767, and was followed by the sixty-nine others so often since reprinted. The last of these Letters appeared on the 2nd of November,
1771*
* The 69th Letter, addressed to Lord Camden, is without a date; and there are other private letters to Woodfall, the printer of the Public Advertiser, the last two of which are dated 10th May, 1772, and 19th January, 1773.
press.
ALMON. 227
Several trials arose out of the publication of these political strictures. In June, 1770, Almon the book
seller, then of Piccadilly, was tried and fined in King's Bench for selling a work called The London Museum, containing a copy of Junius's Letter to the King. Soon afterwards, H. S. Woodfall, printer and editor of the Public Advertiser, was tried for issuing the same letter, and found guilty of printing andpublishing orAy . Woodfall was tried in the city of London, before Lord Mansfield ; and the jury were nine hours con sidering their verdict, which in effect was an acquittal.
Mr. J. Miller, printer, and Mr. Baldwin, a bookseller, were tried on a similar charge, and acquitted. Though the issue of the letter was clearly shown, the jury re garded themselves as judges of the import of the Paper as well as of the intention of those publishing it. On this trial, Lord Mansfield said, " The liberty of the press consists in no more than this, a liberty to print now without license, what formerly could be printed only with one. " The secret of Almon being selected for prosecution before the real publishers of Junius's Letter to the King had been proceeded against, was
that Almon had offended the King by publishing a valuable public document in his Paper, and had refused, when asked, to reveal the name of the official who had furnished him with it. *
When the town was excited by the massacre in St. George's Fields, and by the decision in the House on Wilkes's election for Middlesex, Almon went about and collected from members of Parliament some par ticulars relative to the debates. These, he put into
* Memoirs of John Almon, bookseller.
r2
22S THE FOURTH ESTATE.
shape, and printed regularly three times a-week in the London Evening Post. Meres at this time was dead, and that Paper was printed by John Miller. For two sessions Almon continued his reports with tolerable accuracy and regularity. This success sti mulated a rival Paper, the St. James's Chronicle, to employ a reporter also, and a Mr. Wall was employed to collect notes in the lobby of the House, the coffee houses, and elsewhere. After supplying his first employer, Wall sent copy to a third Journal, The Gazetteer, and soon other Papers, in self-defence gave reports also. This infraction of the rule of the House
caused much discontent amongst those who wished to legislate in secret, and hence, in 1771, a contest arose which must ever be memorable in the history of the press in England. Since the time of Cromwell, the people had never been allowed to read an authorized report of the doings of their representatives ; but the deficiency had been partially supplied as we have seen by reports furnished in the Newspapers, whose editors
thus risked punishment by offending the privileges of Parliament. The people had begun to regard the pub
licity of Parliamentary proceedings as one of the few checks upon Parliamentary conduct, and they estimated the efforts of the reporters accordingly. Many of the
members were strongly opposed to this publicity — secrecy suited them best; and, in 1771, it was moved that two offending printers be called to the bar, for infringing a standing order of the House.
This was the first movement in a contest that lasted long, and excited the greatest interest through out the country. The writer of the Annual Register
for the year—who, be it remembered, was penning
THE PARLIAMENT ATTACKS THE PRESS. 229
his record whilst the sounds of the warfare were still ringing in his ears — says : " Though this session had already been uncommonly fruitful, either in the
production of events, or the furnishing subjects for discussion of the most interesting nature ; it had, how ever, still in reserve a matter which excited the pub lic attention, and was attended with more extraordinary circumstances than any other which had taken place for some years. This was the affair of the printers ;
which, though a matter in its first outset that carried nothing new or extraordinary in its appearance, was capable in its consequences of calling the privileges of the House of Commons into question, and of com mitting the legal right upon which those privileges were founded to a public discussion ; whilst it also was productive of the new and extraordinary spectacle of the Lord Mayor of the City of London, and an other of its principal magistrates, being committed
prisoners to the Tower. "
The Newspapers, in their discussion of public
affairs, had the boldness to mention the names of those whom they referred to. This was regarded as most unwarrantable audacity ; and though the law of libel and the courts of justice were in existence for the punishment of such as committed offences in print, the Legislature and not the law courts took the matter up.
" In the latitude now taken," continues the Annual Register, " the publishers of Newspapers had for some time inserted certain performances as speeches of the members of Parliament, which in the House had been
denied, some of them in many essential parts, to be
THE FOURTH ESTATE.
genuine; but, if they had been the truest representation of the sentiments and expressions of the speakers, such publications were yet contrary to a standing order of the House of Commons. A complaint, on these grounds, was laid against two of them by one of the members, and a motion carried upon a division for proceeding against them. The printers were accord ingly ordered to attend, which they did not complywith. Other notices were served, and different questions arose upon the mode of serving them. The messengers had not seen the printers, and left the order for their attend ance with their servants. At length a final order was i ssued, and the leaving it at the houses was to be deemed h sufficient notice. " The whole of this measure was strongly opposed by a portion of the House. It was said to be an improper time, in the existing temper and disposition of the people, to commit the question of privileges to an unnecessary discussion, and to ad minister new opportunities for a popular opposition to the branches of legislature as well as to executive government : that prosecutions of this nature instead of putting an end to the practice would increase it, as they would promote the sale of the libels, which was known to have been the case in some then recent instances: "that the ministerial writers were publicly encouraged to the most flagrant abuses of the press : and, that while this was done in one instance, whereby some of the most respectable characters in the king dom were mangled without regard to shame or truth, it was in vain to curb it in other cases, or to say to licentiousness, 'so far shalt thou go, but no farther:' and that, though misrepresentations of any member
CONTEST IN THE COMMONS. 231
were undoubtedly infamous, they ought to be legally punished by the person injured, and not by the autho rity of the House. "
The supporters of secret debates declared reporting to be " highly prejudicial to the interests of gentlemen in their boroughs, that it had never been practised before during the sitting of Parliament, and when done in the intervals had been always conducted with de cency ; but that it had become absolutely necessary either to punish the offenders severely, or to reverse the standing order which had not only been unobeyed,
but violently and outrageously insulted. " The final order to the offending printers having been disregarded by them, a motion was made that the men who thus defied the House should be taken into the custody of
the Sergeant-at-Arms.
Another debate ensued. The friends of the press
and national liberty argued, " That it was highly im politic to provoke the people by a needless display of authority, at a time when they were already too much heated and alarmed, and watched every exercise of
with the utmost jealousy and suspicion, especially in the House of Commons, which, since the business of the Middlesex election, the people were but too apt to consider rather as an instrument of the Court, than the representative of the people. " The
power
" That, notwithstanding the unjust and groundless suspicions of the vulgar, the dignity of the House must be supported; and that, as the order had been made, it must now vindicate its own conduct by enforcing obedience to it. " The question being put was carried, as every other
despotic party responded
232 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
Royal proclamation against them, together with a reward for their apprehension, which being done, the proclamation was accordingly issued in the Gazette
9), and a reward of fifty pounds offered for the apprehension of the contumacious printers. Whilst this first affair was on hand, six other printers were reported as having offended in a similar way, and a motion was made to take them also into cus tody. Hereupon another debate took place. It was urged upon the House that, as the members whose speeches had been printed "had not made any particular complaint of the injuries done them, Parliament in general had no business to take it up ; and that the different publishers of Newspapers throughout England, who were a numerous body, were all under the same predicament with those com plained of, and if there was a general persecution raised against them, the whole time of the House would be taken up, and its attention diverted from all matters of moment to a ridiculous contest with a
the Annual Register) had been upon this
(says
subject, by a prodigious majority. The Sergeant-at- Arms not having been able to meet with the delin quents, and having been besides laughed at by their servants, made his report accordingly to the House ; upon which it was resolved to vote an address for a
(March
set of printers. "
Another section of the members viewed the ques
tion in a broader light. They " went so far as to deny the authority of the House in this respect, and said that it was an usurpation assumed in bad times ; that while their privileges and authority were used in
A STORMY DEBATE. 23:!
defence of the rights of the people against the violence
of the prerogative, all men willingly joined in support ing them, and even their usurpations were considered as fresh securities to their independence ; but, now that
they saw their own weapons converted to instruments of tyranny and oppression against themselves, they would oppose them with all their might. " They also said, that the practice of letting the constituents know the
Parliamentary proceedings of their representatives " was founded upon the truest principles of the con stitution ; and that even the publishing of supposed speeches was not a novel practice, and, if precedent was a justification, could be traced to no less an authority than Lord Clarendon. " After much dis cussion the question with respect to the first printer upon the list was carried by a great majority ; " upon
which those gentlemen who were averse to the whole of these proceedings, finding themselves unable to restrain the present ferment, and being uncertain to what pitch it might be carried, dexterously availed themselves of Parliamentary forms " to procure that delay which, they imagined, might give it time to subside. They accordingly, by motions for adjourn ment, and amendments to the different questions, pro tracted the debates to past four o'clock in the morning, during which the House had divided between twenty
and thirty times, a circumstance perhaps before un known. The numbers ran, upon these divisions, from 143 to 70, on the side of the majority, and from 55 to 10, on that of the minority; the result, however, was, that the six printers were finally ordered to attend the House. Of these printers, some were
234 THE FOUKTH
reprimanded, one was in the custody of the Lords for a similar misdemeanour, and one did not attend, who was ordered to be taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms for contempt. " The concluding circumstances may be quoted verbatim from the Annual
Register :—
A few days after, Wheble, one of the two printers men
tioned in the proclamation, was apprehended and carried before Alderman Wilkes at Guildhall, and was by him discharged, and bound over in a recognizance to prosecute the captor for an assault and false imprisonment, who was also obliged to give bail for his appearance at the next sessions to answer for the offence. At the same time, the Alderman wrote a letter to the Earl of Halifax, who was then Secretary of State, to acquaint him with the transaction and the motives of his conduct, which were the illegality of apprehending Wheble in consequence of the proclamation, without any crime having been proved or charged against him, which, he said, was a direct violation of his rights as an Englishman, as well as of the chartered privi leges of a citizen of London.
Thompson, the other of these printers, was apprehended in the same manner, and discharged by Alderman Oliver. The circumstances in both cases were exactly the same ; the persons who apprehended them were of their own business, and pro bably acted under their directions ; theyboth avowed the rewards to be the motives of their conduct, and obtained certificates from the magistrates to entitle them to receive the money at the Treasury ; which, however, it was thought proper not to pay.
The printer of the London Evening Post, who had not obeyed the last order, was apprehended in his own house by a messenger of the House of Commons, March 15th. Where upon he sent immediately for a constable, and the Lord Mayor being ill of the gout, they were carried before him to the Mansion House, where the Aldermen Wilkes and Oliver then were. The deputy Sergeant-at-Arms also attended, and demanded in the name of the Speaker, that both the messenger and the printer should be delivered
ESTATE.
up to him. This was
E SERJEANT-AT-ARMS AND THE MAYOR. 235
refused by the Lord Mayor, who asked for what crime, and upon what authority the messenger had arrested the printer ? Who answered, that he had done it by warrant from the
Speaker. It was then asked if it had been backed by a city magistrate ? which being answered in the negative, the warrant was demanded, and after much altercation produced; and its invalidity being argued by the printer's counsel, the three magistrates present discharged him from confinement. His complaint for an assault and false imprisonment being then
heard, and the facts proved and admitted, the messenger was asked for bail, which the Sergeant having refused to com ply with, a warrant for his commitment to prison was made out, and signed by the Lord Mayor and the two Aldermen : as soon as it was executed, the Sergeant then consented to the giving of bail, which was admitted.
When these bold steps taken by the city magnates were reported to the House of Commons a stormy debate ensued. The furious majority declared that the Lord Mayor of London had taken a step which struck at the very existence of the House of Commons ; and that, if the power of apprehending persons by the Speaker's warrant was taken away, it would be impos sible ever to get witnesses or others to attend on the summons of Parliament ; that, therefore, this question ought to be immediately proceeded with, to the exclu sion of all other business, however important. It was moved that the Lord Mayor should be ordered to attend in his place the next day. The liberal party, whilst asserting the privileges of the House, suggested that "these privileges were always odious when turned
against the people, and that it was impolitic to engage the honour of the House in a dispute with the city of London. Despite this and all other arguments to the contrary, the question for the Lord Mayor's attendance,
236 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
notwithstanding his illness, was carried by a great majority ; it was proposed that the Aldermen Wilkes and Oliver should be ordered to attend at the same time ; but this was not carried. At the appointed time the Lord Mayor justified his conduct upon his oath of office, " by which he was obliged to preserve inviolate the franchises of the city ; by the city charters, which exempt them from any law process being served but by their own officers ; and by the confirmation of those charters, which were recognised by an act of Parlia ment ; that he was compelled by all these ties, as chief magistrate, to act the part which he had done. " He further desired to be heard by counsel, " in respect to the charter and act of Parliament ; not so much on his own account, as on that of the city of London, of whose rights he was now the guardian. " The liberals urged that the Lord Mayor did not deny the privilege of the House, but only claimed a particular exemption from its operation under the sanction of charters and an act of Parliament. It was properly a question, therefore, to be debated by lawyers ; " that, if the city really had this exemption, it was a direct answer to the accusation ; and that an act of the whole Legisla ture must undoubtedly lay aside any privilege of the
House. " The majority would, however, listen to no
and declared that counsel could never be allowed to be heard against the privileges of the House — that nothing could be argued upon this occasion, but an exemption of the city, which would be striking directly at the root of their authority. The Lord Mayor's clerk was ordered to attend with the book of minutes. This step was declared to be pre-
thing,
VIOLENT PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE. 237
judging the question against the city magistrates, and declaring that the House had acted right, while the matter was yet in issue. But in vain. Another motion was made upon the subject of the Lord Mayor's being heard by counsel, and many reasons were strongly urged against the refusal; particularly the evident injustice that appeared upon the face of it, and its being contrary to the practice of all the courts of justice, where it was allowed even in cases of high treason. On the other hand, the refusal was supported by the custom of Parliament, which was, however, originally founded upon a precedent brought from the
arbitrary reign of Henry the Eighth ; but this was sufficient to over-rule the motion. The majority of the House, although they refused counsel, seemed afraid of their resolve, for it was immediately proposed and carried : —
That the Lord Mayor should be heard by counsel, so as they do not affect or controvert the privilege of the House. This excited the greatest indignation on the side of the minority, and was exclaimed against as a mockery ; that it would be im possible to plead the Lord Mayor's case, without in some degree, controverting the privilege of the House ; and that it was as gross an insult upon him, as it was a ridicule upon justice, and everything serious, to tell him he might employ counsel in every case he pleased, except the only one in which he wanted them. The clerk, having attended with the minute- book of recognizances belonging to the Lord Mayor's Court, was ordered up to the table ; and, a motion having been made and carried for the purpose, he was obliged, being in the cus
tody of the House, to erase the recognizance of Whittam, the messenger, out of the book ; after which a resolution was passed, that there should be no further proceedings at law in that case.
Most of the gentlemen in opposition had quitted the House
2-;s
THE FOURTH ESTATE.
during this transaction, declaring that they would not be wit nesses to such an unprecedented act of violence ; that it was assuming and exercising a power of the most dangerous nature, with which the constitution had not entrusted any part of the Legislature; and that the effacing of a record, stopping the course of justice, and suspending the law of the land, were among the heaviest charges that could be brought against the most arbitrary despot. The Lord Mayor, whose illness had for some days retarded this affair, having at length attended in his place, produced the charter and copies of the oaths administered to the city magistrates ; afterwhich he said, that itwas evident that
he could not have acted otherwise than he did, without having violated his oath and his duty ; that he had acted in defence of the laws of his country, which were manifestly invaded ; and that he should always glory in having done so, let the conse quences be as they would. It was then said that the privileges and practice of Parliament had at all times been invariably the same; and that the only question now was, an exception claimed by the city of London, through a charter derived from the Crown ; that the Crown could convey no powers through that charter, which were not inherent in itself ; and that it had no power over the privileges of that House. That their privi
leges were a check upon the other branches of the Legislature ; that consequently, their cause was the cause of liberty, and of the people at large ; and if the powers of the Commons were weakened, the security to liberty would be equally so. It was therefore moved, that the discharging J. Miller from the custody of the messenger was a breach of privilege. To this the minority objected, lamenting the condition into which the House was brought, by their listening to every insidious motion, or every trifling cause, purposely designed to make them instruments of the passions of the Court, and to render them odious, by continual contests with the people. That many of the majority seemed sensible of the imprudence of the first complaint ; yet when it was in their power to retract decently, they chose to renew the attack, and to bring six printers before the House, when one had proved too many for them.
All arguments were unavailing. The first resolution, to-
ALD. OLIVER COMMITTED TO THE TOWER. 239
gether with the two following, were then passed —that it was a breach of privilege to apprehend the messenger of the House executing his warrant under pretence of an assault ; and that it was a breach of privilege to hold the messenger to bail for such pretended assault.
The temper of the House is well shown by their after proceedings. It was proposed to proceed against Mr. Oliver, who was also a member, and had been refused counsel, as well as the Lord Mayor ; to this it was objected that it was then near one o'clock in the morning, and that no court ofjudicature in the world would proceed on a new trial at that hour; a motion was therefore made to adjourn : this was rejected by a
great majority ; and Mr. Oliver, being asked what he had to say in his defence, answered, that he owned and gloried in the fact laid to his charge ; that he knew no justification could avert the punishment that was intended for him ; he was conscious of having done his duty, and was indifferent as to the conse quences ; and as he thought it in vain to appeal to justice, so he defied the threats of power. It was then moved, that he should be sent to the Tower : great heat arose upon this question ; the severest censures, not without threats, were thrown out ; above thirty gentlemen quitted the House in a body, with declarations
of the utmost asperity. Some of those who cultivated an inte rest in the city, declared, that without regard to the present resolutions, they would now, in the same situation, act the part that Mr. Oliver did, and therefore, they should all be sent to the Tower together. Several attempts were made from the other side to bring Mr. Oliver to a submission, or at least, an acknowledgment of error, thereby, to give an opportunity of mitigating the punishment ; but he continued inflexible, declar ing that he had acted from law and principle, and therefore, would never submit to an imputation of guilt. The question for his being sent to the Tower was at length put, and carried
by 170 to 38, most of the minority having before quitted the House.
The city of London, (continues the Annual Register,) had taken a most active and sanguine part in favour of its magistrates during these transactions. A Court of Common-Council had
240 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
been held by a Locum-tenens at Guildhall, by which public thanks in writing were presented to the Lord Mayor and the
two Aldermen, for having supported the privileges and fran chises of the city, and defended our excellent constitution. A committee of four Aldermen and eight Commoners was also appointed, to assist them in making their defence, with instruc tions to employ such counsel as they should think proper upon this important occasion, and powers to draw upon the Chamber of London for money. The crowds which attended the magis trates, upon the different occasions of their going and returning from the House of Commons, were amazingly great ; the streets from the Mansion-house to Westminster re-echoed with shouts ; nothing could be more nattering to minds eager for popularity, than the acclamations of applause and gratitude which they received upon these occasions ; they were considered as sacrifices to public liberty, and the Lord Mayor was called the people's friend, the guardian of the city's right, and of the liberties of the nation. March 27th. — Two days after the commitment of Mr. Oliver to the Tower, the Lord Mayor with his committee attended at the House of Commons to receive his sentence; the crowd was prodigious, and great irregularities were com mitted; several gentlemen were insulted in the grossest manner, and some in very high office very narrowly escaped with their lives: the Sheriffs, though attended by the Westminster Justices, and an army of constables, were insufficient to preserve
order ; and a knowledge that the guards, both horse and foot, had been previously prepared, and were ready to act, if called upon, had but little effect. It is said, that some violent spirits proposed that desperate and fatal recourse of calling in the military ; but a happier temper prevailed in general. At length a number of the most popular gentlemen came out, and inter fered personally in the crowd, and, having taken great pains to remonstrate with the people upon the impropriety and danger of their conduct, and adjured them, by everything that was dear and sacred to them, to disperse and retire to their respective homes ; they succeeded so far, as to persuade them to retire to a greater distance from the avenues of the House, and to make no further disturbance.
THE LORD MAYOR COMMITTED TO THE TOWER.
The confusion and disorder, however, was so great, that it was evening before the House could proceed to business. The order of the day, with respect to the Lord Mayor, being then called for, most of the principal gentlemen in the opposition declared, that as he was not permitted to be heard by counsel, they considered it a prohibition of justice ; and for the same reason they could not be sufficiently informed of the strength of the plea, and therefore they would not stay to give judgment on it; and they accordingly quitted the House. The chief magistrate said, that he looked upon his case as already pre judged, and would therefore add nothing to what he had before urged in his defence. It was then said, that, though his crimes were of a higher nature than those of Mr. Oliver, yet in con sideration of his ill state of health, it should only be moved to take him into the custody of the Serjeant-at-Arms. This intended favour was utterly disclaimed by the Lord Mayor, who said, he wished for none ; and that whatever state his health might be in, he gloried in undergoing the same fate with his friend. The motion was accordingly amended, and the question for his commitment to the Tower carried by 202 against 39. The populace took his horses from the coach, and drew it to Temple-bar, though it was then midnight ; and, having con
ceived some suspicion of the deputy Serjeant-at-Arms, who attended him, when they got there they shut the gates and informed his Lordship that his company had been drawn to the utmost extent of their boundaries, and that they must now immediately get out. The chief magistrate comprehended the full extent of the danger they were in, and pledged his honour that the gentlemen with him were his particular friends, who were to accompany him home ; upon which they proceeded to the Mansion-house with loud huzzas.
The ministry had been frequently attacked for directing the whole weight of this prosecution against two only of the ma gistrates, while Mr. Wilkes, who was equally concerned with them, and had led the way in opposing the effects of the pro clamation, was allowed to triumph in his contumacy. They were repeatedly asked, Whether they considered him as above or below the law ? Whether it was fear or contempt that pro-
VOL. I. Q
241
242 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
cured an impunity to him, in a cause for which others were persecuted with such unremitted violence ? It seemed, indeed, that they were very cautious of involving themselves with that
He had been ordered to attend ; upon which he wrote a letter directed to the Speaker, that as no notice had been taken in the order of his being a member, and that his attend ance had not been desired in his place, both of which were indispensably necessary; that he now, in the name of his constituents, demanded his seat in Parliament, when he would give a full detail of his conduct in this transaction, which would consequently amount to a complete justification of it. This letter was offered to the Speaker in the House by a member, but, upon an idea of informality, after occasioning a long debate, it was neither received nor admitted to be read. Other orders were issued for his attendance, of which he took no notice ; and, at length, a few days before the recess at Easter, he was ordered to attend on the 8th of April. At the same time, knowing that he would not attend, and not knowing how to punish his contumacy, they had got into a great difficulty ; and no expedient occurred for freeing themselves from it, except one, that was more necessary than honourable. The House
itself to the 9th, and thus passed over the day appointed for Wilkes to attend. These proceedings in the House gave nearly as little satisfaction to those who took a lead in them, as to those by whom they were opposed. It was said, that the House had been drawn to show a disposition to the use of the strongest measures in support of their privileges ; but that all their exertion had tended only to lower the opinion of their power in the estimation of the world. Their commands were not followed by obedience ; their menaces were not accom panied by terror ; their punishments, by being marks of honour with the people, were converted into rewards. They had indeed committed their members to the Tower ; but this extending no further, seemed to confine their power to their own walls, some had been bold enough to assert that, legally, it ought to go no further ; that they themselves had seemed to admit the same thing in practice, since they suffered themselves to be insulted by every one abroad with perfect impunity. This state was
gentleman.
adjourned
PARLIAMENT DEFEATED BY THE PRESS.
243
admitted upon both sides. The opposition argued from thence that they ought to desist as soon as possible from the course of measures which had brought them into this disgraceful situation. The ministry, from the same facts, drew a different conclusion. They insisted, that they ought to pursue the same course they had begun, until they had obtained a complete obedience to their orders, and a submissive acknowledgment of their un doubted privileges. This latter opinion prevailed. A special commission was appointed by ballot (a measure which had not been taken for a long time on any occasion) in order to the assertion and support of their dignity. Great expectations were formed of a committee thus solemnly chosen, for the decision of such important points so very strongly controverted. The committee sat regularly for a long time. At length, when they came to make that report on which the public attention was so earnestly fixed, it amounted (after an historical deduc
tion, from their journals, of the instances in which the House had exerted the privilege of apprehension and imprisonment,) to no more than a recommendation to the House, that J. Miller should be taken into custody. Nothing was done in conse quence of this advice of the committee. The opposition threw out several bitter sarcasms on this miserable result of all the pretended vigour of the ministry ; and thus ended this long- agitated and vexatious business.
The Parliament virtually admitted themselves defeated. On the prorogation, which took place July the 23rd, the imprisoned magistrates left the Tower, as a matter of course, the Parliament who held them in prison being dissolved. It was a triumph for the popular party at the time, but the rejoicings which
the released Mayor on his return to the Mansion-house, were but slight evidences of the achievement for liberty compared with the enduring testimonies that have subsisted to this day. The
debates have been printed ever since. The Parliament Q2
greeted
214 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
made no formal concession of leave ; but they have
never since dared to deny the right of the people to a
knowledge of the proceedings of their representatives. We have seen that the Gazetteer and The Middlesex Journal were the two Papers first attacked ; the other publications that afterwards bore part in the memorable
fray were the Morning Chronicle, St. James's Chro nicle, London, Whitehall, and General Evening Posts, and the London Packet. The printers of the first two Papers were proceeded against on the 8th of February
1771 ; and steps were taken against the others on the 13th of the following March. The excitement caused by this battle between the Parliament and the press raised the sale of all, and gave the people an impressive
idea of the power of this rising Fourth Estate, and of its value as a bulwark of popular liberty.
Thischapterisheaded with the titles of a Newspaper of 1688 and one of 1788. The Orange Intelligencer started in the year of the Revolution. The first number of The Times appeared exactly a hundred years after wards, and they may therefore well stand as two boundary marks, indicating the extremes of a century of News paper history. Let us see what that century had done for such publications. The Intelligencer, though set up at a time of political importance, and of increased liberty, was small in size and meagre in contents. It appeared only twice a-week, and consisted of two pages, that is to say, one leaf of paper about the size of Charles Knight's Penny Magazine, but containing a smaller quantity of matter than two pages of that publication. As a specimen of the contents of these
Newspapers, let us examine the Universal Intelligencer
THE FIRST DAILY PAPER.
245
of December 11, 1688.
Itboasts two advertisements; a small paragraph amongst its News describes the seizing of Jefferies, in his attempt to escape from the anger of his enemies ; besides this interesting morsel of intelligence, the Paper has sixteen lines of News from Ireland, and eight lines from Scotland; whilst under its News of England, we have not very much more. One of the items tells us, that " on the 7th inst. the Prince of Orange supt at the Bear Inn, Hungerford. " There are other headings, such as "Forrain News" and "Domestick News," but the whole affair is meagre. In the hundred years between this Paper and number one of The Times, the Journalists had had much schooling. We have seen what men
of talent had contributed to the political disscussions of the period, and have noted, moreover, some of the persecutions to which Journalists had been subjected. * When the public required a daily Paper, a daily Paper was produced, and, appearing more frequently, it gave of course a more complete account of the world's
but how far did that account extend? The first number of The Daily Courant consists of
one page of paper, something taller than the Penny Magazine ; one side of which only is printed upon, the other being blank. The whole matter it contains
* Another instance may be mentioned here. In 1711, Mr. Secretary St. John committed to Newgate fourteen editors, printers, and pub lishers ; and, amongst them, the conductors of The Protestant Postboy, The Flying Post, and The Medley. One of the victims was Ridpath, who, in addition to his sufferings from the power of Bolingbroke, and the virulence of Swift, came" in for the ridicule of Pope, who gives him a line in the Dunciad. — To dullness Ridpath is as dear as Mist. " This Mist was the printer of another Newspaper which bore his name.
proceedings;
246 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
would scarcely fill a column of one of our present
morning Journals. The imprint is, " London :
let, next door to the King's Arms Tavern, at Fleet Bridge. " The News of the first number is all from abroad ; and the editor takes credit for unusual impar tiality, when he states that he intends always to quote the title of the foreign Papers from which he may extract News. Subsequent sheets contain home facts. By 1724, many other Papers had taken the field ; and in that year we find, by a list laid before Viscount Townsend, in which the politics of the Papers were indicated, the following entered as " well-affected to King George :—Buckley, Amen Corner, the worthy printer of the Gazette; Matthew Jenour, Giltspur Street, printer of The Flying Post ; Leach, Old Bailey, of the Postman ; Parker, Salisbury Street, Halfpenny Post ; Read, Whitefriars, Halfpenny Post and Weekly Journal ; Wilkins, Little Britain, Whitehall Evening Post, and Whitehall and London Journal. "
As time progressed, the Papers increased in size as well as number. Four pages of type began to be given ; and, in the files at the British Museum, we find, amongst a crowd of by-gone names, many familar titles. There are Posts, and Heralds, and Chronicles, and Advertisers. Post and Advertiser seem to have long beenfavourite headings for Papers—the first doubtless, from the custom of preparing News for the post-bags ; the other when advertisements required circulation, and became a source of income to Newspapers. There
were Daily Posts and Evening Posts, * St. James's
* Holcroft found an editor of a Newspaper —The Whitehall Even ing Post—who so far approved of his essays as to pay five shillings a
E. Mal
FIRST NUMBER OF " THE TIMES. "
247
Posts, Whitehall Posts, Daily Advertisers, General Advertisers, Public Advertisers,* Universal Adver tisers, and Morning Advertisers. One facetious jour nalist headed his Paper, " All Alive and Merry, or The London Daily Post; "—probably his enemies had raised the false rumour that he was defunct, and he took this mode of displaying their mistake. Some what later, Journals, Ledgers, Gazetteers, Mercury's, Heralds, and Registers appear in the list, and when the hundred years from number one of the Orange Intel ligencer is complete comes number one of The Times.
The first number of The Times is dated January, 1788; the heading being, "The Times, or " Daily Universal Register, printed logographically. Its price is marked threepence, and its imprint runs, "Printed for J. Walter at the Logographic Press,
House Square, near Apothecaries' Hall, Blackfriars, where Advertisements, Essays, Letters, and Articles of Intelligence will be taken in. Also at Mr. Metteneus's, confectioner, Charing Cross; Mr. White- eavese's, watchmaker, No. 30, opposite St. Dunstan's Church, Fleet Street; Mr. Axtell's No. 1, Finch Lane, Cornhill; at Mr. Bushby's, No. 1, Catherine Street, Strand; Mr. Rose's, silk-dyer, Spring Gardens; and Mr. Grives's, stationer, No. 103, corner of Fountain Court, Strand. " In appearance, size, and contents, the first number of The Times shows the great advance which a century had enabled the Newspapers to make.
column for them. One of these productions was copied into The Annual Register. —Hazlitt's Life of Holcroft.
* Some further reference to the Paper of "Junius" Woodfall will be found in the chapter on London Morning Papers.
Printing
248 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
Compared with the first number of The Intelligencer of 1 688, the number one of the new journal, The Times of 1 788, is a giant. It con tains certainly ten times as much
matter; it has four pages, each of four columns some what smaller than The Globe or Standard now present; it has sixty- three advertisements, amongstwhich are an nouncements of a play, with Kemble and Mrs. Siddons, at Drury Lane; of a concert, by his Majesty's command, " at the concert room in Tottenham Court Road;" and of lottery tickets to be had at offices open for the sale of those then attractive documents. Mr. Walter also had many naval and other Government advertisements. In the columns of this infant number of a Journal now so famous in the world, there is foreign as well as home intelligence; poetry ; shipping news ; and paragraphs of gossip, some of them rather doubtful in character. In the prospectus or address to the readers of the candidate for public support, is explained that The
Times was a title assumed as better adapted to the
Paper than the heading by which it had previously been known ; for The Times was a continuation of The London Daily Universal Register, started on the 13 th of January, 1785, of which more will be found in the chapter on the London Daily Papers. The Times came into a field already well occupied by the Morn ing Herald, Chronicle, Post, and Advertiser ; but enough has been said, in the present place, to in dicate the advances made during a century by the Newspaper press. During this period it had been courted by ministers, been employed by politicians, had come triumphantly out of a contest with Parliament,
whilst other victories had earned the praises of a poet ;
cowper's newspaper sketch.
249
for does not Cowper—who shrunk so sensitively from a world which he was nevertheless anxious to hear of and able to instruct —does not Cowper sing: —
This folio of four pages, happy work,
Which not e'en critics criticise. *#•*
What is it but a map of busy life,
Its fluctuations and its vast concerns ?
Here runs the mountainous and craggy ridge
That tempts ambition. On the summit see
The seals of office glitter in his eyes ;
He climbs, he pants, he grasps them. At his heels, Close at his heels a demagogue ascends,
And with a dexterous jerk soon twists him down, And wins them, but to lose them in his turn.
Here rills of oily eloquence in soft
Meanders lubricate the course they take ;
The modest speaker is ashamed and grieved,
To engross a moment's notice ; and yet begs,
Begs a propitious ear for his poor thoughts, However trivial all that he conceives.
Sweet bashfulness ! it claims at least this praise ;
The dearth of information and good sense, That it foretells us, always comes to pass. Cataracts of declamation thunder here ;
There forests of no meaning spread the page, In which all comprehension wanders lost ; While fields of pleasantry amuse us there With merry descants on a nation's woes.
The rest appears a wilderness of strange
But gay confusion ; roses for the cheeks,
And lilies for the brows of faded age ;
Teeth for the toothless, ringlets for the bald, Heaven, earth, and ocean plundered of their sweets, Nectareous essences, Olympian dews,
Sermons and city-feasts, and favourite airs, Ethereal journeys, submarine exploits,
THE FOURTH ESTATE.
And Katerfelto, with his hair on end,
At his own wonders, wondering for his bread.
'T is pleasant from the loopholes of retreat To peep at such a world; to see the stir
Of the great Babel, and not feel the crowd ;
To hear the roar she sends through all her gates At a safe distance, where the dying sound
Falls a soft murmur on the uninjured ear.
Thus sitting, and surveying thus at ease
The globe and its concerns, I seem advanced
To some secure and more than mortal height, That liberates and exempts me from them all. It turns submitted to my view, turns round
I behold
The tumult and am still. The sound of war
With all its generations ;
Has lost its terrors ere it reaches me ;
Grieves but alarms me not. I mourn the pride And avarice, that make man wolf to man ; Hear the faint echo of those brazen throats,
By which he speaks the language of the heart, And sigh, but never tremble at the sound,
He travels and expatiates, as the bee
From flower to flower, so he from land to land, The manners, customs, policy of all
Pay contribution to the store he gleans ;
He sucks intelligence in every clime,
And spreads the honey of his deep research
At his return— a rich repast for me.
He travels and I too. I tread his deck,
Ascend his topmast, through his peering eyes Discover countries, with a kindred heart Suffer his woes, and share in his escapes ; While fancy like the finger of a clock,
Runs the great circuit and is still at home.
CHAPTER VI.
NEWSPAPERS AND JOURNALISTS FROM 1788 TO 1800.
" The liberties of the press and the liberties of the people must stand or fall together. " —Hume.
The Press in the Reign of George the Third. —Numerous Laws and Prosecutions. — Statute on Libel. — Trial of Paine, and Speech of Erskine. — Sheridan. — Burke. — Crabbe. — Summary of Acts of Par liament. —Attempts to gag the Newspapers.
THE reign of George the Third was an eventful In the days of no previous monarch had so many laws been passed having refer
ence to the publication of News, nor had public writers ever before taken up so bold a position as the one they assumed during the life of the king who lost America and added several hundred millions to the national debt. When the revolutionary spirit roused America to a rebellion that eventuated in independence, the press was called upon to play an important part, and in spite of repressive enactments, public prosecutions, and heavy sentences when convictions were obtained, the doctrines of progressive reform and social ameli oration found expression in type, to the advancement of political knowledge amongst the people, and the improvement of our political institutions. The spread
THE FOURTH ESTATE.
of republican doctrines through the neighbouring country when its first revolutionary struggle began, gave a great impetus to political inquiry in England, nor was there any lack of pens ready to advocate doctrines very obnoxious to the existing authorities. A ready sale being found for such publications, their authors had a renewed stimulus for production, and when the law was called upon to punish the verbal rebellion, the honours of martyrdom were awarded to those who had already gained the profits of sedition. One hundred and fifty thousand copies of Paine's Rights of Man are said to have been sold in a mar vellously short time, whilst upwards of thirty thousand
impressions of Burke's reply found purchasers. This amount of attention given to two political combatants shows in itself the great interest taken by the public in the questions debated. Besides these two well-known partizans, a host of other writers came into the arena to claim the attention of the people, and to give discomfort to the government, —and amongst them were Mackintosh and Cobbett. Although each fresh law added to the bonds of the press, and crippled its operations by increasing the tax upon Newspapers, such publications continued to grow in numbers, size, and importance. A glance at the stated circulation
century will exhibit their rate of increase. The numbers in
of Papers during forty years of the eighteenth
1753 were 7,411,757; in 1760, 9,484,791; in 1790, 14,035,739 ; in 1791, 14,794,153; whilst in 1792 the number rose to 15,005,760.
Many prosecutions took place during the last quarter of the eighteenth century, and amongst those
ACTIONS FOR LIBEL. 253
who figured conspicuously as a defendant was Mr. Woodfall of the Public Advertiser. In 1776, that spirited journalist was sued for libel by Lord Chatham, but escaped conviction through a flaw in the proceed
In
ventured to print an expression of joy that Admiral Keppel, the companion of Anson, had triumphed over his enemies by securing an acquittal by court-martial, and for this Woodfall was tried, convicted, fined, and sentenced to twelve months imprisonment in Newgate. He also bore the brunt of actions byEdmundBurke and by Lord Loughborough. The former had the modesty to lay his damages for a libel in the Public Advertiser at £5000 ; the jury gave £100. A similar case of difference of opinion arose in 1786, when Almon was proceeded against by Pitt for a libel in the General Advertiser. The minister estimated the damage done to his character at £10,000, a sum which was reduced in the verdict to £150. In the same year that Lord Chatham proceeded against Woodfall, the Newspapers in which notices of the Constitutional Society appeared felt the displeasure of the Government. On the 17th of December, 1776, J. Baldwin, J. Miller, J. Wilkie, and H. Randall, four Newspaper printers, were found guilty of publishing a letter from the Constitutional Society respecting the payment of £100 to Franklin — three of them were fined £100 each. All the printers who inserted an advertisement from the Constitutional Society, signed by Home (Tooke), were served with writs ; but Home being convicted and fined, the affair dropped as regards the Newspapers.
Whilst the case of Warren Hastings was before
ings.
1 779, Woodfall was less fortunate. He
254 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
Parliament, the Newspapers came in for a share of the attention and the anger of the House of Commons. Mr. Markham, a member of that body, called attention to a paragraph in a public journal, in which it was said, " that the trial of Mr. Hastings was to be put off for another sessions unless the House of Lords had spirit
to put an end to so shameful a business. " " After some remarks," says the Annual Register,* "upon the scandalous licentiousness of the press, a motion was made and carried unanimously, for pro secuting the printer of the Paper. In the course of the conversation which this motion gave rise to, Mr. Burke read from one of the public Prints a curious paper, purporting to be a bill of charges made by the editor upon Major Scott, for sundry articles inserted in the Paper on his account. They chiefly consisted of speeches, letters, paragraphs composed by him, and amongst the rest was this item, ' For attacking the veracity of Mr. Burke, 3s. 6d. ' "
When the Chancellor of the Exchequer, brought forward his financial statement in June, 1789, Mr. Pitt proposed to raise an additional hundred thousand a year by new taxes. He fixed on the stamp duties as most convenient for his purpose, and proposed to augment certain of them to secure the sum he wanted. First on his list came Newspapers, which he suggested should pay an additional halfpenny each, and from this source he anticipated an annual return of £28,000. His second tax was an additional six pence upon each advertisement, and the gain from this he estimated at . £9,000. Probates,
* Annual Register, Vol. XXXI. , p. 164.
enough
legacies,
THE ARGDS. 25r,
and horses, also came in for a share of the
carriages,
money-wanting minister's regard, and much opposition was expressed to the demand. Sheridan was amongst those who demanded inquiry into the real state of the national finances. After six years of peace, it was declared to be unreasonable and impolitic to ask for additional taxes. The wit, dramatist, and politician launched one of his brilliant speeches against the Government, and exhibited in very startling light the mismanagement and unsound state of the national
of finance. Grenville followed Sheridan, to repair, by his advocacy of the Government scheme, the injury which the opposition speech had done but the upshot of the debate was the old story of strong majority, and the new taxes on Newspapers were voted by the House.
Sampson Perry, printer of The Argus, was found guilty, December 10, 1792, in the Court of Queen's Bench, of publishing libel on the House of Commons, in stating, " the House of Commons were not the real representatives of the people. " A reward of £100 was offered for Perry's apprehension. The title of Argus had more than once borne ill-repute. Shortly before this period, one Lewis Goldsmith, an English Jew and notary, had attracted persecution by publication called Crimes of Cabinets. To escape the consequences of sentence for libel and sedition, he fled to France, and there edited Paper called The Argus, with funds supplied by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs. In this he fiercely attacked everything English.
Getting information of police plot for delivering him up to the British authorities, he contrived,
system
it is
a
it,
a a
a
a
a
2. 30 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
said, to make terms for himself, and returned to this country, where he underwent the form of a trial for
treason, and was discharged ; whereupon he began a weekly Paper called the Anti-Gallican Monitor, in which he assailed Bonaparte most virulently, and continued to do so till Louis XVIII. was restored, when that monarch, it is stated, rewarded this venal writer with a large gratuity and a pension.
A most important change in the law was effected in 1792. In that year* an act was passed to remove doubts respecting the functions of juries in cases of libel, by which the law was declared to be, that on the trial of an indictment for a libel, the jury may give a general verdict upon the whole matter put in issue, and shall not be required by the court to find the
defendant guilty merely on proof of the publication, and of the sense ascribed to it in the information — the judges giving their opinion and directions on the matter at issue as in other criminal cases. This enactment, so influential in most trials where the liberty of the press is concerned, draws from Mr. Hallam the following remarks :—" The liberty of the press," says the writer of the Constitutional History, " consists, in a strict sense, merely in an exemption
from the superintendence of a licenser. But it cannot be said to exist in any security, or sufficiently for its principal ends, where discussions of a political or religious nature, whether general or particular, are restrained by too narrow and severe limitations. The law of libel has always been indefinite; an evil pro bably beyond any complete remedy, but which evidently
* 32 Geo. III. , c. 60.
THE LAW OF LIBEL. 257
renders the liberty of free discussion rather more precarious in its exercise than might be wished. It appears to have been the received doctrine in West minster Hall before the Revolution, that no man might publish a writing reflecting on the Government, nor upon the character, or even capacity and fitness, of any one employed in it. Nothing having passed to change the law, the law remained as before. Hence, in the case of Tutchin, it is laid down by Holt, that to possess the people with an ill opinion of the Go vernment, that is, of the Ministry, is a libel. And the Attorney General, in his speech for the prosecution, urges, that there can be no reflection on those that are in office under Her Majesty, but it must cast some reflection on the Queen who employs them. Yet, in this case, the censure upon the Administration, in the passages selected for prosecution, was merely general, and without reference to any person, upon which the counsel for Tutchin vainly relied. *
" It is manifest that such a doctrine was irreconcil able with the interests of any party out of power, whose best hope to regain it is commonly by prepossessing the nation with a bad opinion of their adversaries. Nor would it have been possible for any Ministry to stop the torrent of a free press, under the secret guidance of a powerful faction, by a few indictments
* State Trials, XIV. 1103. — 1128. Mr. Justice Powell told the Rev. Mr. Stephens, in passing sentence on him for a libel on Harley and Marlborough, that to traduce the Queen's Ministers was a reflec tion on the Queen herself. It is said, however, that this and other prosecutions were generally blamed, for the public feeling was strong in favour of the liberty of the press. Beyer's Right of Queen Anne, p. 286, quoted by Hallam.
VOL. I. K
258 THE FOURTH ESTATE.
for libel. They found it generally more expedient and more agreeable to borrow weapons from the same armoury, and retaliate with unsparing invective and calumny. This was first practised (first, I mean, with the avowed countenance of Government) by Swift in the Examiner, and some of his other writings. And both parties soon went such lengths in this warfare, that it became tacitly understood that the public characters of statesmen, and the measures of admini strations, are the fair topics of pretty severe attack. Less than this, indeed, would not have contented the political temper of the nation, gradually and without intermission becoming more democratical, and more capable, as well as more accustomed, to judge of its general interests, and of those to whom they were intrusted. The just limit between political and private censure has been far better drawn in these later times, licentious as we still may justly deem the press, than in an age when courts of justice had not deigned to acknowledge, as they do at the present, its theoretical liberty. No writer, except of the most broken repu tation, would venture at this day on the malignant calumnies of Swift. - - "Meanwhile the judges naturally adhered to their established doctrine, and, in pro secutions for political libels, were very little inclined to favour what they deemed the presumption, if not the licentiousness, of the press. They advanced a little farther than their predecessors ; and, contrary to the
practice both before and after the Revolution, laid it down at length as an absolute principle, that falsehood, though always alleged in the indictment, was not essential to the guilt of the libel, refusing to admit its
THE LAW OF LIBEL. 259
truth to be pleaded, or even given in evidence, or even urged by way of mitigation of punishment. * But as the defendant could only be convicted by the verdict of a jury, and jurors both partook of thegeneral sentiment in favour of free discussion, and might in certain cases have acquired some prepossessions as to the real truth
of the supposed libel, which the court's refusal to enter upon it could not remove, they were often reluctant to find a verdict of guilty; and hence arose, by degrees, a sort of contention, which sometimes showed itself upon trials, and divided both the profession of the law and the general public. The judges and lawyers, for the most part, maintained that the province of the jury was only to determine the fact of publication, and
also whether what are called the innuendoes were properly filled up, that whether the libel meant that which was alleged in the indictment to mean, not whether such meaning were criminal or innocent,
question of law which the court were exclusively com petent to decide. That the jury might acquit at their
was undeniable; but was asserted that they would do so in violation of their oaths and duty,
they should reject the opinion of the judge by whom they were to be guided as to the general law. Others
Pemberton permitted evidence to be given as to the truth of an alleged libel, in protesting that Sir Edmondbury Godfrey had murdered himself.