English and Foreign.

Lyttelton Times, Volume X, Issue 618, 9 October 1858, Page 4

English and Foreign.

-THE STATE PRESS PROSECUTIONS. (From the ' Standard,' June 23.)

Court of Queen's Bench, June 22. Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, betbre Lord Campbell and a special jury, in the " Queen v. Truelove." . This being the day fixed for the trials of the "indictments preferred against Edward Truelove, -the bookseller and publisher in the Strand, and against Stanislaus Tchorzewski, bookseller, of -39, Rupert street, H&ymarket, for publishing ■r*' false, scandalous, and seditious libels concerning the Emperor of the French, with the intent to incite divers persons to assassinate his Ma.•jesty," the Court was densely crowded, and the greatest interest and anxiety appeared to be -.manifested to hear the proceedings. The Attorney-General, Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., Mr. Bodkin, anil Mr. Clarke conducted the prosecution; Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Simon, and Mr. Sleigh were counsel for the defendant, instructed by Mr. Leveson. Ten special jurymen having answered to their names, the Attorney-General prayed a tales, to -which no objection was made by the counsel for the defendant. The foreman of the jury was Mr. Henry Bruce, one of the directors of the Eastern Counties Railway.

The jury having been sworn, The Attorney-General rose and said—May it ■please your lordship and gentleman of the jury, I rejoice that I have to announce to you that .you are not to be called upon to try this indictment. This prosecution was instituted by the Attorney-General against the defendant Truelove, by reason of the publication of a pamphlet containing certain passages, tending, as it was thought, to incite evil-minded men to ttie crime -of assassination and murder. When I succeeded to the office which I have the honour to hold, I felt it to be my duty to adopt the act of my learned predecessor, and to carry out this prose -cution. I felt it my duty, by submitting this -case to a jury of English gentlemen, to endeavour to prove the law of England, which you -sit here to assist in administering for the people •of England, of whom you form a part, will never endure the dissemination of doctrines -which ought to be rejected and denounced with disapprobation and horror by every true patriot in every country, and by every honest man throughout the world; and to endeavour also to to prove that the Sovereign of the French Empire, the firm and faithful ally of England, is as well entitled to the protection of our laws as an English gentleman or an English prince. But, gentlemen, I learn with great satisfaction from my learned friend, Mr. James, the counsel for the defence, that his client, who, as I am informed, and I have no reason at all to doubt it, is a respectable Englisli tradesman, and the father of a large family, is ready to deny, iv terms unqualified and without reserve, that he <ever intended or desired, directly or indirectly, -to countenance or encourage the crime of assassination, and that he is ready to express his Tegret that any such construction should be put on any publication to which he has been a party. ■ Gentlemen, I think that does him honour and - credit. I understand my learned friend is ready "to offer to your lordship, to the jury, and to the -- country, an assurance likewise that the publica- : tion of this pamphlet has ceased, and will no ■ longer be sold by him. On these assurances, -gentlemen, it only remains for.me to perform : a duty.'Which I do perform most freely and wil- ; lingly, viz^ that of at once assenting, on the ' part of the Crown, to your pronouncing a r verdict of not guilty.

• Mr= James—l have not the least hesitation in representing that my client disavows on his part—and indeed it would have been the defence which he would have taken if the case had proceeded—that there was any intention, either by the writer of the pamphlet or by him, as the publisher, to incite to assassination. As far as he was concerned, as publisher of the pamphlet, he believed it would be a disquisition on an abstract question, and he never did in any way -sanction, ormtend to sanction, anything to incite or instigate-to assassination. With reference, my lord, to the other part of the case, as to not publishing or selling any more of these books, it is right to state, in the first instance, that when the matter was represented to myself and to my learned friends, Mr. Serjeant Parry and Mr. Hawkins, the defendant feared he would be surrendering some of the dearest and most valuable privileges of the Press if, believing the work to be a mere disquisition and treatise on a abstract question, he entered into an engagement to publish no more; but we took upon ourselves the responsibility of representing to Ivm that this pamphlet was probably liable to a3 it was published at a time

--.ic-n a-'eelingof irritation existed between two great nations, between whom every right-minded person trusts there will be harmony and everlasting peace, and that if he acted under our advice not to publish or circulate any more of these pamphlets, he would not be surrendering those privileges and that freedom of the Press which we so much value, and which reflects so much honour on this country. Lord Campbell—Gentlemen of the jury will have the satisfaction of finding a verdict of not KU.Hty, no evidence having been offered. Had Tlie trial preceded, I should have told you that there was the utmost liberty for comment on the contlu.it-not only of our own Government, liut of the Governments of foreign nations, if it were made in good faith. I should have told i you that a publication having a tendency to ■incite to assassination is a libel, aud that the publication of it is punishable by the law of this kingdom. If you had come to the conclusion that this publication, of which I will say nothing now, ha-1 such a tendency, you would not have hesitated, I am sure, in doing your duty by Ending a,verdict of guilty. It would be a .reproach to the law of this or any other civilized country if publications inciting to assassination could not be made the subject of a criminal prosecution. The liberty of the Press required no su *h license. I have no doubt the AttorneyGeneral has acted with perfect propriety "in • taking the course he has done. I believe also that the learned gentleman who represents the defendant has'acted with perfect propriety in „the remarks he has made, and in entering into

an engagement on the part of his client that this i publication shall no longer be sold in any part of the United Kingdom. I will give no opinion on the pamphlet other than to say it is a publication which ought not any longer to be circulated. A verdict of not guilty was then returned, and the jury retired from the box. THE ATTORNEY-GEKEKAL V. STANISLAUS TCHORZEWSKI. A special jury having also been empanelled in this case. The Attorney-General said—This is a.lso an indictment preferred on the part of her Majesty's Attorney-General against the defendant, charging him with the publication of a pamphlet. Itis unnecessary, gentlemen, that I should repeat to you the observations which you heard me address to the jury empanelled iv the last case. It is enough for me to say that the defendant is a foreigner residing here under the protection of the law of England, and that that law, while it permits, I am bound to admit, unrestrained comments on public men, and all subjects of public interest, will not permit —and I trust never will suffer or tolerate— ' the publication of any matter tending to Jcountenance or incite to the commission of any criminal offence. I understand the defendant, who has placed himself wisely in the hands of his counsel, is ready, as in the last case, to pledge himself before a British jury and the British public that there was no intention by the publication in question to incite any person to the commission of any crime; that he regrets that the paper, to the publication of which he has become a party, should bear a construction which has subjected "him to this prosecution; and that he undertakes, as in the last case, that the publication of any copies of it shall altogether cease. I shall, therefore, gentlemen, trouble you no more than to say that I accept that assurance in perfect good faith and sincerity, and at once agree to a verdict of not guilty being entered. Mr. James: Gentlemen of the Jury, the pamphlet which is the subject of this prosecution, is a letter addressed to "Parliament and the Press," bearing the names of Felix Pyat, Besson, and A. Tallandiere. who are well-known exiles in this country. The publication is in the French language, but it has been translated. On the part of the defendant I make the same statement I did in the last case, namely, that as far as any act of his went in publishing the pamphlet, there was no intention to incite to assassination or the crime of murder. Acting on the advice of his counsel, given under the same circumstances which I mentioued in the last case, he readily and at once agrees that there shall not be any further publication or sale of the letter. Lord Campbell: Gentlemen of the jury, the counsel for the defendant in this case have given very sound and discreet advice, and the defendant has acted very wisely in acceding to their proposition. The defendant being a foreigner, I would only add what I before observed, that it is the glory of this country that it affords an asylum to "the persecuted from all parts of the world, but those who find an asylum here must ever bear in mind that while they have the protection of the law of England they are bound to obey that law, and that they are equally as liable as any of her Majesty's subjects to punishment for any crime which, they may commit while they are resident within this realm. I hope that will be borne in mind by them, and that they will understand it is a crime on the part either of a native born subject or a foreigner, owing temporary allegiance to the Crown of England, to conspire for the commission of a crime in a foreign country as for the commission of a crime in this country.

A verdict of not guilty was also returned in this case.