vice or our indulgence, I hope, Sir, you | come in the proper spirit to mitigate a crime of which you have confessed the commission. ment and death, owing to ankiety of mind and that he was not yet quite recovered. Mr. FINNERTY.-When I last appeared here, the first interruption I experienced Mr. FINNERTY. I have, I hope, come was from the informality of Doctor O'Conhere to-day with a suitable spirit. I have nor's affidavit; providentially I have recome here, however, under no conscious-ceived a more correct one since from Banness of guilt, and I will avow none. That don-I now offer it. part of the affidavit which you have now interrupted, you suffered to be proceeded with on a former day. The part to which the Court objected has been expunged: I have expunged above two thirds of the affidavit, but have suffered that to which no objection was made to remain. Lord ELLENBOROUGH.-Then, hand it back to him. We reject it, Sir; you got very indulgent advice from us, and you have rejected it; you must take the consequence. Mr. FINNERTY-My Lord, you made no objection to this on a former day, and that misled me. I am willing, however, to have it framed unexceptionably by any referee your Lordship chooses. COURT. No, Sir, the Court will not hear of a referee. Mr. FINNERTY.-Will you, then, allow me till to-morrow to have it re-cast, according to your Lordship's wishes? The COURT.-No, we are not to wait here till you condescend to conform to the law. You were before told by me that this affidavit was improper, yet you have persisted. If you have any unexceptionable affidavits which can do you good, we will hear them. Mr. FINNERTY.-Am I, then, for one error, to be excluded from the benefit of my most important affidavit? I have shaped it by Draper's case, and I desire it may be read. The COURT.-Sir, your pertinacity shall not influence us. There may be a thousand distinctions between Draper's case and this. Mr. FINNERTY.-Well, then, be it so, though I have affidavits here which would astonish the country; since I am excluded from presenting them, it is my misfortune. Here is one unexceptionable. The affidavit of David Power, Esq. a volunteer in the army at Walcheren, was here read, stating the imminent peril in which Mr. Finnerty stood from Lord Castlereagh's order. The affidavit of Doctor Lipscombe was also read, stating, that he had attended Mr. Finnerty in November last, and that he was then in extreme danger of derange The COURT.-Who is this O'Connor ? Mr. FINNERTY.-He is a Gentleman who was transported on the mere unsupported warrant of Lord Castlereagh. The COURT.-Reject this. Mr. FINNERTY. If you believe Lord. Castlereagh guilty, of course it may be rejected. If you do not believe him guilty, I pledge myself here to produce, if I am allowed, above fifty affidavits, confirming on his part horrors so unparalleled, that not a man who hears me but will invoke the Throne of Justice for vengeance on his head. I offer this affidavit on the principle which Lord Mansfield The COURT.-We will not hear it. Mr. FINNERTY.-Here, then, is the affidavit of Mr. Clare. The COURT.-Who is Clare? Mr. FINNERTY.-The affidavits will tell that. The description will take up as much time as the reading. It has been sworn before the Judges of the King's Bench in Ireland. Mr. Clare's affidavits stated, that in the year 1798, various kinds of torture, such as whippings, picketings, half-hangings, &c. &c. were practised in Dublin, close to the Castle Gate. He swore also that Lord Castlereagh must have heard the cries. The COURT.-Can it be endured that such affidavits as this are to be put in when we have expressed our determination on the subject, and given our advice? Mr. GARROW. Certainly, my Lord, it ought not to be tolerated. You have given this man an entire week, and he has chosen to remain obstinate. Mr. FINNERTY.-I offer the affidavit to be read it will substantiate every thing I have stated in the original libel. The COURT.-Sir, have you any inoffensive affidavit? Mr. FINNERTY.-My Lords, according to the doctrine which was laid down by this Court, that truth was no justification, I pleaded guilty on my trial: I did so because I understood that on being brought up for judgment, I might produce thetruth in mitigation. This was no idle fancy of my own; it was built upon your precedents. Since the law was against me, I have deferred to it; but nothing on earth shall induce me to make any submission to Lord Castlereagh. No, my Lords, your language to Gale Jones on his trial was, that he had no proof of what he had stated. That shall not apply to me. I here tender you the plain, unquestionable evidence of Lord Castlereagh's guilt. I have written not a syllable which I cannot prove. I now offer to do so; and in the face of this Court and of the country, to exhibit him, beyond all doubt, the basest individual who ever prostituted the high office reposed in him. ́ ́ The COURT.-We cannot hear this. You may now utter fresh libels against Lord Castlereagh, which he can have no opportunity of rebutting. Mr. FINNERTY.-Yes, my Lord, he will have an opportunity. I offer my affidavits. Let him, as Colonel Draper did, put in counter-affidavits, if he can, and thus rebut my evidence. If he cannot do this, he must stand arraigned and convicted before the country. I ask your Lordships to give him the opportunity; or if you do not, I ask you, in the name of all that is sacred, how can you reconcile it to yourselves to send me to a prison for uttering the truth? Will you hear my affidavits? The COURT.-No; not if they are the same as these which you have offered. They cannot plead in mitigation. Mr. FINNERTY. According to this, I am curious to hear what your Lordship means by mitigation. I again offer my affidavits. The COURT-I said before, not to the purport of those you have offered. ment within power's limits to inflict has little terrors for me. I have offered now to prove the truth of all my statements. According to the law, I may be called a libeller; but if I had not offered my affidavits, I might be called a liar also. Since the Court does not choose to hear the truth of this averment, I proceed to another. Mr. Dixon's affidavit stated that he was a Yeoman in 1798; that he saw three peasants whipped and tortured without trial.- The COURT.-What does this prove? Mr. FINNERTY.-It goes on to state that these cruelties were committed with Cas-tlereagh's sanction and privity. The COURT.-You have been often toki these things were irrelevant. Do not compel us to send you back to prison till next Term, in order that you may come here to receive our judgment in a becoming manner. Mr. FINNERTY.I have been at very great trouble and expence to procure those affidavits. I went to Ireland for the purpose, and I now offer them again, with the observation, that they do not contain one hundredth part of the atrocities which I could prove against this man. I have, however, sufficient for my purpose. Here they are, sworn before the judges of Ireland by honest men. I press them upon the Court neither with presumption nor pertinacity, and I quote the case of Colonel Draper to support me. Not one word has been said to overthrow that case. Colonel Draper was allowed to prove every word, and he was held to bail. Colonel Draper offered false affidavits, yet they were heard; he offered irrelevant affidavits, yet they were not interrupted. I here offer true and relevant affidavits, and I demand equal justice. I refer your lordships to no statute which you may construe at your discretion. I produce to you no dicta of those who have preceded you, and by whom you are not bound; but I quote to you your own wise, modern, uncontradicted act, in a case which occurred not two years since. If any thing were wanting to prove the vile malignity with which my enemy has persecuted me, I have merely to mention, that on the very day when this Court Mr. FINNERTY.-I wish to offer none. I were protracting my appearance on acstand here, not to repel your judgment, count of ill-health, the Attorney of my but to vindicate my character. Reputa- prosecutor was seeking me out, loading me tion is dearer to me than life; anlin com- with the foulest, falsest obloquy, and endea. parison with the loss of that, any punish-vouring to drag me from my bed of sick Mr. FINNERTY.-I shall, then, state the purport of a few; and then your Lordship can receive or reject them as they proceed. I have here an affidavit of, under his government, a father and son tortured side by side. Will you read that? The COURT.-No. Mr. FINNERTY.-Here is another from Mr. Hughes, whom Lord Castlereagh saw after the torture had been inflicted: his back was raw with the scourge, and his shirt one mass of blood loosely flung around him. The COURT-Why, this is contumacy to the Court! ness to my dungeon. Since my affidavits cannot be read, let this fact prove the persecution I have suffered. The COURT.--Since you have no proper affidavits to produce, you may now speak on any topics you think relevant. Mr. FINNERTY.No; let the AttorneyGeneral begin: I choose to have the privilege of replying to him. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL -No; in the case of the King against Budd, it was ruled that where no affidavits were produced either on the part of the prosecution or defence, the defendant was first to speak in mitigation and the prosecutor to answer him. Mr. FINNERTY.-Certainly, Lord Kenyon ruled it so; but I should suppose that your Lordships will prefer the precedent which you have yourselves established. I allude to the case of Draper, where Mr. Garrow and Mr. Nolan, I believe, spoke first for the prosecution, and then Mr. Serjeant Best rose for the defence, in reply, when the business ended by Draper's being held to bail. I shall rest on Draper's case until it be controverted. will but follow the example of the noble Lord himself, who openly declared in his place in parliament, that there was no torture inflicted in Ireland. Such an effect had this hardy and unblushing declaration, that I well remember, when Mr. Dallas was defending the tortures of Picton in Trinidad, on the precedent of those inflicted in Ireland, the Judge stopped him by the assertion, that there was no punishment inflicted in that country but by Court-martial. It is not for me, however, to anticipate what may be his defence: sufficient will it be for me if I repel his accusation. What are the crimes of which I am accused? I am accused of being oppressed, and not submitting-of being slandered, and opposing him who traduced me-of acting on the first law, which God and nature have implanted in the heart of man, that of self-preservation ! Is this to be deemed a crime? Good God, are we come to such a crisis, that in this land of freedom, the tyrant may torture us, and we are not to turn-the slanderer may assail us, and we are not to opposethe persecutor may pursue us, and we are not to resist him! Are we, when oppressed, and spurned, and trampled on, to be denied the last refuge of misery-complaint? I ask this day no indulgence-I supplicate no mercy. Give me an im• partial hearing, a patient attention, pure and unmixed justice. Justice, my Lords, is consistent and compatible with freedom: mild, tolerant and unbiassed, she seeks but the clear and candid truth to produce a decision consonant to her character. Give me to-day that justice, and I shall have little apprehension. You see me here oppressed, but innocent-respectful, but undaunted-reverential to this Court, but not regardless of my character-and supported, under all my difficulties, by the conviction, that a British Hall of Justice is the last place where apprehension Mr. FINNERTY.-I am well aware, my should enter. It may be asked me, why, Lords, of the many disadvantages under if I am innocent, did I withdraw my plea? which I stand this day; but of none am II will tell your lordships: Very early in more sensible of than having unhappily squared my conduct by a decision, which until now acted on, has been so suddenly rejected. I have also the misfortune to have that sworn testimony which I have offered, refused; and to hear charges made against me, which it is not allowed to me to rebut. I cannot, indeed, devise what the Attorney General may offer for his client. Perhaps, fertile in expedients, he may declare his innocence. In this he Mr. GARROW. As there is nothing for the prosecutor to speak upon but the information, of course it must follow that the defendant should first speak, or else what can the prosecutor have to reply to? The COURT.As to Draper's case, some irregularity may have crept in, perhaps from the indifference of the Counsel, or some other cause; but we cannot suffer that irregularity to contravene established usage. Mr. CLIFFORD.-My Lord, the rule, as quoted by the Attorney-General, only applies to cases where affidavits were produced. Here two, those of Power and Lipscombe, have been read. The COURT.-No, none on the part of the prosecution. Mr. Finnerty, now proceed. this prosecution I heard the Bench declare, that any evidence of the truth which I should offer could not extenuate my guilt. That, they said, was law. Here then, I was, an innocent man, without the right to prove my innocence. What was I to do? Surely, not to oppose the authority of this Court, and trust to the simple statement of an unlettered individual like myself, to combat it with a jury. No, I had no such presumption. Innocent, then, as I was, I allowed judgment to go by default, in, it seems, the vain hope, that that truth which could not ward off a verdict might still mitigate a punishment. I supplicate no mercy-I confess no guilt. I know Lord Castlereagh too well, and respect myself too much, to supplicate his clemency. If I had traduced him, I should apologise; and even still in the prison to which I shall be sent, if it can be proved to me that I have uttered one sylfable of falsehood, I shall make atonement; for I dislike no human being so much as to disregard the truth. But I have little idea of ever being undeceived. Here are before me the horrid testimonies of his atrocities-here are the speaking proofs which sullied him in Ireland-here are the records, which, if read this day, would present such cruelties as never before branded the barbarism of the most uncivilised nations. The Court here interfered, and told the defendant he was proceeding irregu. larly. Mr. FINNERTY.—I do not come here uninformed on this subject. I have examined and digested it. I have traced it from its vicious author, who hoped, vainly hoped, by its invention to shield his memory from the obloquy it merited. The result of my research has been, that the law of libel is the will of the judge. If the Attorney-General presented a book for prosecution, and the Bench once said it was a libel, under the present law the Jury must find it so. No matter whether the person libelled be innocent or guilty, he who accuses him must be convicted In the words of Sir Thomas Mallett, "libelling against a common strumpet is as great an offence as against an honest woman, and perhaps more dangerous to the breach of the peace; for as the woman said, she should never grieve to be told of her red nose if she had not one in reality." Lord Castlereagh has pretended a most violent regard for his character. But how ludicrous is this delicacy! See, if he had proceeded against me by information, he might have sworn my statement was false; if he had proceeded by action, I might have sworn it was true: but no, he chooses to proceed criminally, where neither can take place; and this he calls a vindication of his character! Tell me, my Lords, does such a course proceed from solicitude or resentment? Sir SIMON LE BLANC.-You are travelling quite out of the road. Mr. FINNERTY. I am not deviating from the law. Lord ELLENBOROUGH.-Sir, unless you take the warning which has been so repeatedly given you, the Court must let its justice overcome its compassion. Mr. FINNERTY. If you think this prosecution has been instituted to clear Lord Castlereagh, of course you will allow me to clear myself by proving his guilt. Lord ELLENBOROUGH.-No: the prosecution has been brought to satisfy the justice of the country by the prevention of libels. Mr. FINNERTY.-Lord Castlereagh is anxious for his character, and so am I for mine. Is he to escape, and am I to be libelled with impunity? I know well some have been even rewarded for it but the calumnies of bad men "piss by me as the idle wind which I regard not."-I have never spoke against the truth, but I have opposed oppression ;-there is my crime. I have advocated reform-the principle which gave Chatham immortality, and his son power which has given Whitbread, Sheridan, and Burdett the confi ience of the nation-which makes that na ion look up to the Prince for measures, in which I trust and hope he may not disappoint them. I have advocated innocence, and in so doing I have transgressed a law which no human being can ascertain. No man can charge me with a sinister view in doing so. I trust I shall hear no accusation of " base lucre" made against me, as it was against another individual in this Court; a strange accusation to come from him, forsooth, who never opens his month without a fee. I know a prejudice is excited against those who attack men in power: but do not they sometimes deserve it? Do you not remember how James, Coke, and that wicked Bacon, then Attorney-General, conspired against an innocent individual? Do you not remember the monster Jefferies? But, thank God, the record of his punishment has accompanied the record of his guilt; let it be a sacred admonition to all who are weak or wicked enough to prefer the transient favour of a Court to the pure and beauteous permanency of virtue! Yet what was Jefferies to-But, my Lords, I check myself. Lord Kenyon says, a libeller has no right to complain when libelled; as sound doctrine as ever he promulgated. You will not deny it, my Lords: if so, then you will not punish me, for you cannot punish the censor of him who has wasted the treasure Lord ELLENBOROUGH did not know what Mr. Gilbert Wakefield might have uttered during those 3 hours, but if it was as irrelevant as what the defendant was now uttering, he hoped the Court interfered to suppress it. of the people, and the blood of his species. | the same indulgence which was given to When this man was sending out the great- Mr. Wakefield? est expedition which ever sailed from England, how was he employed?--Why, in watching me. Better would it have been if he had been sending bark to the fine soldiery he sent to perish, and whom I saw dying for the want of it. But why did I go to Walcheren? Simply at the request of Sir Home Popham; whose letter I have in my hand, requesting me to give a narrative of the expedition. Castlereagh prevented me; and, besides my personal injuries, occasioned me a pecuniary loss of near 600l. The Attorney-General chose ་ to say I was unfit. "Unfit!" this phrase is something in the style of Sterne's inuendo; any man may fill it up as he pleases. Why was I unfit? I defy the Attorney-General to answer me in any other way, than that he wanted to prejudice the public mind against me. The COURT. Why, you are hardly uttering a syllable which is not libelous. We shall certainly remand you. Mr. FINNERTY.-I was in this Court when Gilbert Wakefield was heard, without interruption, for three hours; but if you do not choose to hear me, of course I must desist. The COURT.-We wish to hear you, if you are not indecorous. Mr. FINNERTY.Well, then, since this topic is displeasing, I shall have recourse to another which may prove more palatable. I have sworn in my affidavits that every thing with which I have charged Castlereagh in Ireland is true. The COURT.-That is not in evidence. Mr. FINNERTY.-See to what a state your Lordships have reduced me. You first say, when I offer you evidence, you will not receive it; and then, when I refer to a point, you turn round and tell me, it is not in evidence! Shall I be at liberty to proceed? The COURT.-Not in this way. Mr. FINNERTY. Every thing I have stated is true. I had no other way of proceeding. An action against Castlereagh, I was told, could not succeed; and so, in order to shield myself from his cool and cautious calumny, I could only have recourse to the press. I now come to the case of Orr. The Attorney-General has said that Lord Yelverton refused to recommend Mr. Orr to mercy The COURT. You cannot proceed on that topic. Mr. FINNERTY.-I suppose, I shall have Mr. FINNERTY asked to what other vindication of his character he could have resorted, than the one which he adopted? He applied to Counsel, on the subject of bringing an action against Lord Castle. reagh, who advised him from the measure. But, after the publication of the order for his return home, he was asked by every person he met, whether he meant to submit to have imputed to him the treasonable views which that order suggested? He therefore wrote his Appeal to the Public. Was it possible that that order could originate in any thing but the ill-will of Lord Castlereagh? and was the defendant to sacrifice his own feelings to preserve his Lordship's? A libel was a misdemeanour, inasmuch as it tended to a breach of the peace; the defendant hoped, therefore, that it would not be visited with more severity than a duel or a manslaughter, which were actually breaches of the peace. The defendant alluded to a statute of the reign of Philip and Mary, by which, libel was punished by a fine of 1001. and an imprisonment of a month; and to another statute of Elizabeth, in which a similar light punishment was inflicted upon libel. He was aware, however, that there were precedents of punishing libel by slitting the nose, and even by death. But there was one precedent established by the present Court, upon which he particularly stood. It was the case of Mr. Heriot, who was found guilty of a libel in the Sun newspaper upon Lord St. Vincent, accusing him of having neglected to send intelligence of the commencement of war to our colonial possessions. That was a seditious libel; the present defendant's was not-that libel was false, his was true; Lord St. Vincent had never given Mr. Heriot any offence-Lord Castlereagh had bent the whole force of his hostility on the defendant; the person libelled there was a man, the brilliancy of whose naval character, splendid as it was, was thrown comparatively into the shade by the transcendant excellence of his political character-the person alleged to be libelled here was Lord Castlereagh! And yet Mr. Heriot was punished with only six |