Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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-