Newspaper Page Text
t MIRROR OF THE TIMES-
[VOL. I.j
~ ■ ■ ~
BY DANIEL STARNES & Co. WEST END OF BUG AD-STREET,
PROPOSALS
B y DANIEL STARNES & CO.
- fafitbinf h a wtU l &"•*** '
* [ un-HK CITY of AUGUSTA.
TO Bfc ENTITLED
Mirror of the limes.
THF universal promulgation of
-.j a nd the general deflribution of know-
JlL’are object of the firft importance m
Srountry where liberty ha. lelt trace.
I her footfteps, under every government
*hich contain the happiness ot Mjm.-
. knowledge,"faid the Great I.ord Bacon
»koo«r.” unittd w,tb v,r,ue U certa,n y
• liberty Where ignorance reigns there
vice mnmph. and ddpot.fra governs. A.
m „ fl become* enlightened authority will be
limited & morality restored.-Knowledge &
wte ,re the bases of freedom-the one
iollnd*us in our rights, the other teaches
eur duties; the firft shews us how to
conftrudk the best pofhWe forth of govern
meat, .he lad require* us to obey it when eon
(traded. It is therefore advantageous every
v here, hut in a htfublu it is abfolutdy oe
.rlTjrv, that corrttft information should he
w ,df'y diffufed and easily obtained : For
fat ris the feofl* who govern. ‘They never
intentionally ciioofe bad leaders or approve
wrong measures, yet they are liable to error
—give them true details and they will judge
enrre^iv—for on plain grounds the people al
wy* form jujl opinions ; whenever they rnif
take (heir own intertft ‘tis owing entirely to
Waat of information in the many or want of
fconefty in the fiw. But exten/ivr political in
formaton is not to be acquired without much
In ur, at ci few have leisure \o fludy the
f,a»ms,compare the opinions, & perule the
Locke, Sydney .Gibbon, Hume &
Vittel. If an arquaiutance with the true
prmciple»ofg verument flt duties of a citizen
ciuld tie inquired inly from huge folios
Itdiffufe treatises, it would be fcldom fought
rr if fi light, the plough, the hatchet, and
t l l saw must stand (till Some cheaper and
(.her means of falisfying curioficy and
procuring information must therefore be
looked for; and where is intelligence
eti jpnefs and convenience sfnited with more
advantage, than in the closely printed col
umns of the humble News-paper ? Our
cuumrymcu appear so well convinced of
ti e nfrtuliefs of periodical prints, and have
lo v/rjliberally encour. ged them, that we
detm it unneceflary to ii fift on their merit i
jndaJmyll hvfitate to request public pat
tiiiisg. for another News-paper eftabliflr
mint.
‘V» can promise little except what atten
tion, ionefty & industry can perform. The |
pnu./plfs o! our Paper, like our own, will be |
Republican, “ but the fame freedom of opin- '
ton w,' ich we claim for ourselves, we with !
all others to enjoy." Civil and Religious'
b k erty is the birh right of evry man, and
h« who will not trend the fame indulgence
Jo all parties, and all feift, which he withe*
for huowa, n already or deserves to be a
Have.
lofupport Religion and morality will
be cur pride—to encourage literature our
tntoy.r-no communications calculated to '
Wl! , 1 bc refufi;d s no ,! >nt will be !
J. ded ,' V free enmtt r il *» necelTary
1 tftelaw fliould be neither vague nor
fi 8 *" alll public ads of the Sute ie£
‘™ctohTnd thereforebepUbliflled “*‘ hey j
Jn'lTE° ROF Tnc ™FS will he
'e corv a-° CaDVaf * l n,b -'c measure with
iodivid,,*; ” sr ,n, "r the condu * of 1
vil r ’ a r “ Ict| a of government—it I
rv.
CONDITION^.
L I“ R OFT HE TIMES will be
fl:«t Os eVfr i’, MoDda y» 0,1 a royal
Typ„ an e*ccilem quality, and good :
Volll PriCetofubfcrb *r s wi,, b « three
advance** 1, aUDU “'’ P a,d balf yearly >*»
tcr adv ertising will be fifty
* 'irtv f 4UarC,or firU »•*«««
*ru h S €Venin<la half for each con-
Euhfcri^r^ Cr be de ’* v «red to Town
£fct7h a : ,hpirp,ac^ - d
in pjci,,. " C ; un,r T will be dine up
dice' ‘ dC ‘ ivertd « the Pole- ,
NI v P wi-ice.
>rpi to E ,h moD t, hsalter<late 1 5,,a11
the i*onorab! e the
to s u K° lu,nb,a cou,,t y tor
®fU ndl * , J ,hre « “"d a half acre,
the 13( , e .* e Coun| y ot Richmond,
of e.*
,tl(i sor J t :t B,Uart dece ased, and
creditors l,le h«»u anti
'’Wl, t S j" I ;Ii RUDER > Ad“’r
-1805, ir]9m
°0 Cents Cash
Wr*"** W«gM,
t« f fo r ,i. P S,ve " b y d.e Subscri-
Jfdried SUMAC 1 T.‘‘
® lf - htx\ -r L> delivered at
Vilest r n 4 a<i >' <ir d. Also the
4,. l ' r,ce for Coau
Mij 22. * vi - WILt) E & Co.
CONGRESS.
House of Pcpresentatives,
Thursday, Mav 25.
Doctrine ot libfls.
Mr. R&ndilph said that among
the various topics of difference
between the two great contending
i parties in the U. Stales, during
i the existence of the adminisira
. tion ot Mr. Adams, there had been
none perhapsoi greater magnitude
in the public estimation than acel
ebrated act commonly called the
sedition act ; and there had been
none perhaps which had more
tended to the downfall and over
; throw of the administration under
which it was enacted. The ques
tion then made by the people of
the United States was not whe«
thcr that law coutained a good law
of libel or not, but whether Con.
gress had power to enact any | aw
of libel or not; whether that
clause of the constitution contain
ed in one of its amendments, de
claring that congress should make
no law respecting an establish
ment of religion, or prohibiting
th* free exercise thereof, or abrid
ging the freedom of speech or of
the pfesa, did not completely
foreclose Congress, and preclude
them from legislating on ihe sub
ject at a!!. And (said he) by a
very great b°dy of the American
people, as l understand a verdict
has been given that Congress do
not possess the right of passing
an v acton this subject whatever;
and I trust and believe that there
will never exist another Congress
which will have ths terneritv and
hardihood to middle with the
rights of the people and states on
this point. The»e are some of
us, Sir, who were members of
the Mouse of Representatives at
I the time that the law in question
! eX pired. I well recollect, and
• probably you do also, Mr. Speak
er, the very splendid and beauti
ful d e clamation with which a mem
ber at that time from South Caro
lina (Mr Harper) exhorted the in*.
I joritv of this house to re-enact that
j law, on the ground that it would
’ be a shield and protection to them,
• as going out of power, against
their adversaries, into whose hands
power wa3 about to be transferred,
j as the sedition law would allow
l them to give the truth in evidence,
and the common law does not."—
! And he then foretold, what I con
i less l listened to with the most
perfect incrccltilitv, that prosecu
tions for libel would be commen
ced and carried on in the courts of
the Uuited States at common law.
Sir, I was not only incredulous
myself at that momeut, but had
the uncharitableness to think that
«he gentleman himself did not he.
lievc in the opinion which he ad.
vauecd. I believed it impossible
for an administration coming into
power on the terms on which the
last did, ever to sanction a proa;-
, cation at common law for a libel
where the truth could not he given
in evidence. The doctrine con
! tended for by the federal party
j and ably supported by a member
i (Mr. Hayatd) who is aow trans
lated to the othtr House, that the
common law of England is jhe
j law of the U. States, was a doc
trine more abhorent, if possible to
the feelings of the republican par
; tv in the United States, than the
1 9cduion law itself. For if the sedi
( tiou law wa« objectionable because
i it established a law of libel which
I permitted the truth to be given
! m evidence, a fortio) i x the com
) mou law doctriuc, was more so,
| which not only established a law
ot libel the more hideous, be
! cause the truth was not permitted
to be given in evidence, but es
tablished the whole system ot pen
; ai laws in the bi ithsh books which
: might be found in relation to the
1 subject, accordingly the beat, pens
; au'4 me ab.cst ir.iuUs iu the patty
44 HOLD THE MIRROR UP TO NATURE.”— Shakesptare.
to which you and I had the hoiK.
to belong, were employed in a'
tempting to refute the heresy am
against the sedition law. it t
unnecessary to call to your recol
lection the writing* of Hortensiu
the resolutions of col. John Taylo
of Caroline, and the still more it.
lustrious report of the present
chief magistrate, going to explode
the doctrine by irresistible aigu
ments. To this succeeded a tract
by a gentleman of no obscure
fame, who has rendered himself
somewhat conspicuous as a law
character, by his commentaries
on that great commentator Sir,
Wm. Blackstone, still going to
shew that the common law of Eng
land was not ihe law of the Uni
ted States i that although it has
been adopted by the several states
with various modifications, it is
no further law than as they have
adopted it, and under the limita
tions made to it by each state—
but that as a law of lire United
States in their federal capacity, it
has no validity. Since, if it had,
of the ditferent common laws m
the United States, which should
we adopt ? Or should we take the
common iaw of England, of a
monarchy, founded upon an here
duary nobility and a great, hierar
chy, unsuited to tile genius of a
republican government i But, Sir,
such unhappily Mile difference be
tween men out of power, and uieu
in power, that, ii we are to believe
the representations made at th c
last session of Congress, by a
member from Connecticut, (Air.
Dana) the correctness of whu h
f presume no man would have the
hardihood to doubt, prosecutions
for libels at common law have
been entertained in the courts of
the United States, against citi
zens, aud consequently have been
carried on b> the attorneys lor th e
districts wherein such prosecu
tions commenced. Yes Sir, such
is the difference between men in
power and men out of power;
such the difference between pro.
tession and practice ; and yet, to
my infinite surprise, this awful
truth, this fact, which never came
to iny knowledge before appeared
scarcely to excite a scusatiun ci
ther iu this assembly or th c public
in the men who were most clamor
ous against the sedition iaw. Yes
dir, we did cxeuaic, and most
justly execrate, the sedition law.
i for one bad as thorough a
coutempt for some of those who
led under it* penalties, as the
judge who indicted ihcm. The
question was not whether James
1 hompson Callender v;as not an
iulamous libeller, any more than
the famous tdeddJeacx question
was whether John Wilkes was an
ln.'ainous character ; but it was
a question as to the deprivation of
the birthright ol the citizen in one
case, and me subject in the oilier
—aud the people wisely discrim
inated betweeu the persons who
weic the subjects of prosecution
and iheirown best and dearest in
terests. We said that Congress
had no right to pass any law at all
on the subject. It cannot be denied
that if we are to have a federal law
oi libel, that which permits the truth
to be given in evidence is as good
as any. It was not to the nature
ol the law that we objected, but to
tbe having a federal law of libel at
ail j though indeed, Sir, the per
mission to give the truth m evidence
is but an idle mockery when we
consider that the officer, whose du
ty it is to provide an impartial ju
ry, is but the breath ot tbe nostrils
of the prosecutor. You ought to
recollect that in all cases w here the
government becomes a party, wh«-
u\mx pro or con, you too often have
an aurainisiraiion ot politics instead
ol an administration of law and
juauce. It it true, that tuc con
stitution does declare that Con
gress shall make no iaw abridging
tbe freedom of speccli or ol tbe
press ; but it Congress, or the
•>aits below, can at once saddle
h with the common law of Eng
ine!, there is no necessity for pro.
"biting the abridgement of the
ceeiJmn of speech or of the press,
-W know what the common law of
England is—an unlimited licence
o pint, and an almost equally un
united licence to punish. This
restriction of the constitution there
fore is wholly nugatory, if the
courts aro permitted to entertain
prosecutions lor libels. Sir, that
Hie present chief magistrate of the
U. & should permit an attorney
of the United States to hold his
office one second after having com -
menced a prosecution in a court of
common law for a libel, is what
I will not believe —for he could
uot do it without libelling by that
act of omission the fairest page of
the history of his own life, to wit,
his celebrated roport made in the
session of the Virginia assembly,
which commenced in December,
1799. But lam wilhing to haVe
some better security than the dis
position of any Executive, tor what
I conceive one of the highest,
proudest attributes of American
freemen. I know it may be said,
as it once was, when the writ ol
habeas corpus was tet at defiance,
that for as much as the right is
contained in the constitution aud
supported bv it, si I legislative pro.
vision on that subject would be
mere woik of supererogation —and
yet, Sir, who has heard of any
recovery under the constitution
for the violation of the best,
est, moat invaluable right of a c*t- *
izen ? In fact take away the writ
of habeas corpus tQ-morrow, and
I would not give a prtvih of snutl
for our constitution ’> tor without
it, every mao may be imprisoned
at pleasure. Government might
nosaibly demand » forced loan,
with which, if the citizen did not
comply, he might be carried lo
jail. There is no free government
where this wondertul contrivance,
this best hope of man* this sheet
anchor of freedom the writ of iia
beas corpus is not found* And
vet we may be told that, a* the
freedom ot the speech and press is
secured by the constitution, ah tc *
gislaiive provisiou on the subject
is uot merely supcittuiiy, but not
respectful to the constitution i And
•o our citizens arc to go on to be
prosecuted at common law j &
when they g -t no remedy, they are
told their rignts are guaranteed by
the constitution —but receive no
satisfaction.
I therefore think it would be a
very wise provision on our part,
at this time, to prevent a recur
rence, of similar cases, guarding
against thc future by wociui expe
rience, a school in which it is s-id
a iool himself must learn, although
he will learn in no other—*tnd, as
far as that epithet may be consider
ed as applying to myself, 1 do most
candidly conlcss that I have been
compelled to learn from this school
—for when the gentleman lrom
S. Carolina uttered that brilliant
declamation iu order to induce
juis house to re-enact the seditiou
hang it over their heads
as a shield from prosecution, i real
ly thought it a mere speech for Me
people, lor 1 had no conception
that a court of the United Stales
would ever entertain a prosecution
for libel at common law. 1 there
fore submit to you the following
resolution, premising, before 1
conclude, that my object will be,
finding the constitution iuert on
Hus subject, as it only contains an
acknowledgement of the right, to
administer wholsoure true aud im
prisonment to loose who shad here
after uuucrtakc to carry ou such
prosecutions.
“ Resolved, That a committee
be appointed to enquire whether
| any and what prosecutions have
been entertained by tbe courts of
the United Slates for libels at
common law, and to report such
provisions as in their opinion may
[,No, XXXVI.]
MONDAY'. June ;9 ( 1809.
be necessary for securing the free
dom of speech and of rhr press.’*
Mr Dana said perhaps that the
resolution, an now expressed, did
not go to the whole extent to which
the gentleman intended. That pro
secutions had been instituted fop
supposed slanders or for supposed
seditious words, was unqucsiiona*
ble. Tor two, three or four years
past, prosecutions of this character
had been pending in the circuit
court of the United State* in th*
diet, of Connecticut, That some
of the prosecutions attempted to
establish the imputation of crime
against individuals, and in cases
not comprehended under the pro.
visions of the statute so much re-
Irobated under the name of the
edition act, was unquestionable.
Prior to the institution of the»o
prosecutions, however, from an
apprehension of what might be
done by men who had professed
much zeal for liberty, but not in
practice given stronger instance*
oi regard for it than those who
professed less in the state of Con
necticut, a bill was introduced in
to the legislature for |ecunng the
freedom of the press. That bill
confuted of one section, which
w»ji copied from the reprobated
sedition act—that very section
wtticn provided that the tiutlt
should Uc given in evidence; fc u
was called an act for securing the
freedom of the p.ess. And bclore
any prosecution* were instituted,
wheu only a district judge pr e,i*-
ded i* the court, tita, judge declar
ed iliiHi He should consider tue acC
oi the state ot Connecticut itta.ivc
to g»4 lo « me truth in evidence, a*
bind»og on tn c federal court in that
slate. 1 ins was the opinion of
one judge * there was some (j tes*
Itou now it should be ultimately
decided bclore a full tou* t. Sued
a law formed a mure abundant pro
tection against any persecution
which ratgnt be directed against
individuals under ihe iuim of*
prosecution, than any profession#
wnatever. Xu the Oouucc.
ticut (said Mr. DannJ there is oi.e
further security—that our juror*
arc ucstgnated b ; lot. The names
ot freeholder* selected by certain
oliiccri in tne towns are put into a
box, and then *ciccted oy lot,—
lucre nave been seven or eight
prosecutious commenced, 1 suuc c .
1/ know lor What, whether t ot
libellous or seditious words—.a
gamst clergy men, ot public pf f4c h*
ers lor Wordr uttered by them *
and very considerable cap.
have been incurred by them, due
1 cannot say that any muu ever
sufieicd any farther than this ;
that they were at a very great ex-*
psacc in defending themselves.—
1 hey had a great security ta on*
respect : that the laleots of tn*
oar were against these prosecuu* 4
ous j & there was *uch a peculiar
talent of going backward, j u t he
prosecution, that the suits general
ly Went out of court with a nolle
prosequi* hom some error in too
indtcuneot, some defect in profes
sional skill, or some error m clerk
ship. The only case in which
there seemed to be any possibility
of conviction, was one in which a
question was made as to the power
of the court to take cognizance of
the subject. Th* question was
on the prosecution of a printer
there for publishing what had ap.
peared witn perfect safety in ano
ther state. The judge* declared
thcmselvc* divided in opinion o*
the question of jurisdiction* Thai
diversity of opinion was certified
and the question expected to be
brought bclore the supreme court
laat February. On applying to
ihc judge 1 found that the tierls
of the circuit court had not for
warded the certificate, and of
courlc the case did not come
up here as expected. 1 iupp*(e
that the whole thing will die
without any nolle. Another
rcatOA why the per font ia Coa-