man of SMALL abilities, but also that his publications were of an insignificant nature, and on that account neglected by the public.

And the said John further saith, that the said Robert further contriving and intending to injure and damnify the said John as aforesaid, afterwards, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid, at Westminster aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, falsely, wickedly, wrongfully, unjustly and maliciously, published a certain other false, scandalous, defamatory and malicious libel of and concerning the said John, in substance and to the effect following, that is to say, "The profligate cowards who employ Anthony" (meaning the said John) can know no severer "punishment than the support of a man" (meaning the said John) "6 FAMY, AND WHOSE

66 WHOSE ACQUAINTANCE IS IN

TOUCH IS POISON."

(Thereby meaning that the character of the said John was so degraded and depraved, that it was infamous and dangerous to be acquainted or connected with him.)

By means of the publishing of which said several false, scandalous, defamatory, and malicious libels

hereinbefore mentioned to have been published by the said Robert, he, the said John, was, hath been and is not only greatly hurt, injured, and prejudiced in his good name, fame, credit, and reputation as a man, but also in his character and reputation as an author, and IS FALLEN INTO PUBLIC

DISGRACE AND CONTEMPT AMONGST ALL HIS NEIGHBOURS, AND OTHER GOOD AND WORTHY SUBJECTS OF THIS REALM, insomuch that divers of those neighbours and subjects have, on occasion of the publication of the said several false, scandalous, and defamatory libels, so VEHEMENTLY SUSPECTED THE SAID JOHN TO HAVE BEEN, AND TO BE, A PERSON OF IMMORAL AND INFAMOUS

OR DISCOURSE

CHARACTER, that they have, on that account, REFUSED, AND STILL DO DAILY MORE AND MORE REFUSE, TO HAVE ANY COMMERCE, CONNECTION, ACQUAINTANCE, WITH HIM, as before they were used and accustomed to do, and would still have done, had not those false, scandalous, and defamatory libels been so published as aforesaid; and also by reason and means of the premises aforesaid, he, the said John,

was, hath been, and is greatly injured and damnified, as well in the way of his said PROFESSION of an author, as otherwise, to wit, at Westminster aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, to the damage of the said John, of ONE THOUSAND POUNDS, and therefore he brings his suit.

COUNSEL FOR JOHN WILLIAMS:

The Hon. THOMAS ERSKINE, and Mr. WIGLEY. Attorney, Mr. GROVE.

COUNSEL FOR Mr. FAULDER:

Mr. GARROW, and Mr. LAW ES.
Attorney, Mr. ALLEN.

Mr. Erskine. May it please your Lordship-Gentlemen of the Jury, I am of counsel for the Plaintiff, who has brought this action against the Defendant, Mr. Faulder, an eminent and respectable bookseller, but who is nevertheless responsible in law for whatever may belong to this book, of which the Plaintiff complains as a libel upon him: and he has brought this action against the defendant to

render him responsible in damages for the injury he has sustained from it.

Gentlemen, I use these last words emphatically; for whatever controversies may have arisen upon a question which has agitated the best and wisest establishments, and which I shall not discuss at present, (I mean the extent of the liberty of the press) I believe that in all times, and among all judges, there has been but one opinion upon the Rule which I humbly, under his Lordship's direction, mean to lay down this day in an action for civil damages.

The Plaintiff says this is a Libel upon him. What is a Libel upon an individual no man has ever yet, I believe, made the subject of controversy. It is that which either injures him in his trade, or ín his office; or which, without injuring him in either, exposes him to infamy and disgrace among mankind.

Gentlemen, where a person brings an action for a Libel, if the matter charged upon the Defendant as a Libel be truth, the Defendant may justify for that truth; for although it may be necessary to bring

an indictment for a Libel for the preservation of the public peace, and to prevent men from revenging themselves, instead of coming before a tribunal for justice, (for a Libel, though true, may be the subject of prosecution) yet no man shall come into a court of justice to complain that his character is in any particular respect injured, if it be true that his character is as has been represented.

Gentlemen, this is a wise and salutary distinction, because it makes a man feel the value of character; it makes him know that his reputation is undoubtedly the greatest of blessings, yet people cannot complain of any attack made upon their reputation, if they have made that reputation vulnerable by their own acts.

I have just observed to you that the Defendant in an action may justify: but then it must not be a general justification; it must be a precise and particular one-that the Libel is true; and if it is so, the Plaintiff cannot complain. In the present case, the Defendant has put no justification upon the record, consequently there can only be given in evidence, circumstances in mitigation of damages.