the attorney-general had a right to reply, if he chofe it; that it had been often exercifed, and might be exercifed again. Mr. Horne complained that his Jordfhip, by taking upon himself the duty of the attorney-general, had deprived him of hearing from that officer fuch arguments as he doubted not the attorney was able to have offered, and which he would have endeavoured to have refuted; he obferved, that at all hazards his fituation was a very difadvantageous one, but that he was particularly unfortunately circumftanced, if the judge, who was to try him, took upon himfelf to do the bufinefs of the attorneygeneral; for between the two he fhould find it extremely difficult to obtain a verdict in his favour. Lord Mansfield defired the trial might go on, and that, if there was any informality in the proceeding on the trial, or if he thought either the judge or counfel did him injustice, Mr. Horne had a remedy by a fubfequent appeal to the court, who would fet afide any verdict obtained irregularly. Mr. Horne warmly faid, Oh my lord, my lord, let me not hear of remedies of your lordship's pointing out; that poifon is the most baneful of all, which poifons the phyfic; your lordship's remedies are worfe than the difeafes of the patients who apply them; and it is but a poor fatisfaction for a man who receives a wound, to receive a plaifter from the fame hand. At Guildford your lordship talked to me of a remedy, I fubmitted and tried it; it is true I fet afide the verdict, but it cost me 200l. The verdict was but for 400l. and the remedy coft half as much; it was therefore a pretty dear remedy!' Mr. Horne, in this part of the trial, was fo hafty in his animadverfions on the conduct of the judge and the attorney-general, treating each with a degree of unexampled feverity and rudeness, that Lord Mansfield was provoked to a declaration, that, if he did not behave more decently, he fhould be under a neceflity of committing him. The attorney-general then rofe to open the cafe fully to the jury,, and began with expreffing his contempt of the imputations caft on his character by the defendant, in what he had juft urged; and declared, that he would not condefcend to ftoop low enough to offer an anfwer to fuch groundless, fuch ridiculous affertions. It was neceffary, however, to fpeak to one part of what had been faid, and that he did by denying the charge made against him by Mr. Horne, that he came prepared to take all advantages, fair and unfair; and that his view was at any rate to obtain a verdict. He folemnly protefted that he had no other motive for his conduct on the prefent occafion, than a faithful difcharge of his duty; that, as an officer of the crown, it behooved him to take notice of every thing tending to alienate the minds of the people from the king and his government, and to bring every public delinquent to punishment; that there never was a more fimple, plain, and obvious cafe, than the prefent, fubmitted to a jury; that the advertisement, pretendedly fetting forth a meeting of the Conftitutional Society, and their refolution to fubfcribe one hundred pounds towards the fupport of the widows and orphans of the Ame ricans, ricans, faid to be barbarously mur dered by the king's troops at Lexington and Concord, was a molt impudent and malignant libel. That in point of compofition it was below notice; it contained no argument, nor was it founded on any rational plea; that he knew not the author, nor had he ever had fo great a proof of his talents and abilities as on the prefent occafion; but that, if he could at all judge from what he had just heard, the defendant muft have purpofely drawn it up in fo ftupid and balderdash manner to fit it to the vile occafion it was intended to ferve. That it was evidently meant as a defiance to the laws of the kingdom, and a teft how far libellers might proceed with impunity. That the author's figning his name to it was an impudent attempt to laugh at profecution, for that he was as infcrutable, while he fkulked behind the bulwark of the printer, as an anonymous writer poffibly could be. That the age teemed with libels, no perfon was now fafe from flander; that he was determined, if poffible, to check the licentioufnefs of the prefs, and therefore he had filed the information now before the court. The witneffes were then examined. The firft was Wilfon, who proved the three copies of advertisements, produced by the follicitor to the treafury, to be the hand-writing of the defendant. H. S. Woodfall, printer of the Public Advertifer, proved that Mr. Horne delivered to him one of the copies produced, paid him for the infertion of it in his paper, and commiffioned him to fend round copies of the fame to most of the other papers, which commiffion he executed, and Mr. Horne defrayed the expence. This being all the evidence called in fupport of the information, the defendant rofe, and addreffed the jury in a speech, which took him up four hours in delivery, to the following purport: [Mr. Horne, when he began his fpeech, produced a pile of manufcripts, written on fome quires of paper, folded in the form of a note-book, which he laid before him; and, after having spoken for about an hour, he adverted to his written text.] His exordium went chiefly upon a reply to what had now fallen from the attorneygeneral, which he declared by no means full enough for the occafion; he afferted, that the learned gentleman had not produced a tittle of evidence in fupport of the charge made against him in the information, that he had refted his argument chiefly upon abufing the advertisement, and that above half of his fpeech had been merely an eulogium on his own immaculate character. As he had talked fo much of his honour, his confcience, and his integrity, he would, he declared, juft fhew how far the honour, the confcience, and the integrity of an attorney-general extended. He then proceeded to trace the power of that officer from the tines of our forefathers, fhewed what privileges he had enjoyed in different reigns, and went into a very long difcuffion of the nature and confequences of profecutions and informations filed ex officio bỷ the attorney-general, pointing out to the jury both the fimple and applied meaning of the words ex officio, fhewing that the different technical terms of information, in dictment, diament, and declaration, were fynonymous, and meant nothing more than accufation, urging the more equitable mode of proceeding by applying to a grand jury by bill of indictment, and contrafting the different benefits deduced by the fubject, under the different modes of procefs, proving that they could acquire none when proceeded againft on ex officio informations, and inferring from the whole of his argument on this head that their origin was oppreffion, and their end injuftice. He afferted, that, armed with this illegal power, an attorney-general might deftroy the liberty, and attack the property of any fubject, obnoxious, either to himself, or to the minifter, whofe fervant and creature the attorney-general might properly be deemed, as he held his office merely during pleasure, and was liable to difmiffion whenever the minifter was himself difmiffed, or whenever the minister was difpleafed with him. He complained of oppreffion in every ftage of the bufinefs, and particularly urged that the ftriking of a fpecial jury was a mere farce; that an attorney-general could try by what jury he pleafed; and that from what he had feen on his own attendance at the Crown-office, it might rather be faid, that his was a picked jury than one fairly and promifcuously chofen. He inftanced what had paffed there, but declared he acquitted the mafter of any unfair conduct, laying the blame on the shoulders of the follicitor to the treasury, and of the officers of the sheriffs, who attended on the occafion. He treated Lord Mansfield frequently in a manner equally cava lier and extraordinary, nor was he a whit more complaifant to the jury, declaring he afked them for no favour, that he only defired them to discharge their confciences, and do their duty as honeft men, confidering fully the intention, which was the effence of all criminality, and abiding by their own feelings, without fuffering themfelves either to be threatened, or wheedled out of their privileges. He avowed being the author of the advertisement in question, afferted it was no libel, and affigned his motive for publishing it, which was to oppose oppreffion: that he had always acted on the fame principles; that he advertifed, and caufed to be profecuted, the murderers in St. George's-fields, in 1768, who were alfo foldiers. That he had, in fact, as the advertisement was worded, made no charge, neither had he accused the king's troops of murder; but that he did not mean to take advantage of a trifling fubterfuge: he did now make the charge; that he had before deemed the affair at Lexington a murder, did then, and would tomorrow, call it by no other name. He told the jury, that, like certain people mentioned in hiftory, who dreffed up their victims for flaughter, fo the attorney-general had dreffed him up in the character of a wild beaft, and wanted them to worry him; that his aim was to fhut him out from fociety, and lock him up like a mad dog; but that he defied his malice, and feared not the judges, as he was well aware they would not venture to punish him as they might with, even if the jury were to deliver him over to their mercy, but that he was prepared to meet more than they they dared to inflict in the prefent caufe. With regard to the attorneygeneral's complaint about the quantity of libels daily published, he begged him to put himself in the balance against him, and confider which had been moft libelled? For his part, no man had been more fo; his picture had been stuck up in the print-fhops, with the words, • The Atheist Parfon,' fubfcribed in capitals. He had been made the fubject of ballads, and the fingers had borne the figure of a fpruce parfon in miniature, on a tick, with a label, on which was written, The Atheist and Macaroni Parfon.' His very clothes had furnished wit for the theatre, and he had even once been prefent, and feen himself burnt in effigy. He offered fome few legal authorities, and quoted many parts of the State Trials in fupport of them. In his attack on the attorney-general, he shewed no fort of refpect to perfon or place; at one time he declared the Houfe of Commons to be the most corrupt body in any ftate, and faid they were the minifter's house, who fat between his two brazen pillars, the attorney and follicitor-general, like Jachin and Boaz, to guard the treasurybench. As foon as Mr. Horne had finished his fpeech, he defired the crier to call Lord Germaine and General Gage; but neither of them, though fubpoenaed, attended. He then defired the attorney general to be fworn, but the court defired him first to state the question he meant to ask, as the attorneygeneral had a right to demur to being fworn. Mr. Horne then pro pofed fome queftions relative to the origin of the cause, and the conduct of it, which Mr. Attorney faid were, too impertinent for him to anfwer; he would not therefore be fworn. Alderman Oliver was then called, and fworn as a witness for the defendant. The alderman proved that the advertisement in queftion was fo far founded in fact, that a meeting of the Conftitutional Society was held, that the fubfcription alfo was raised, and the money paid to Mr. Horne." Mr. Lacy, clerk to Henton and· Co. proved that Mr. Horne paid the money to their fhop on Dr. Franklin's account. Lieutenant Gould was examined refpecting an affidavit made by him about the affair at Lexington, and published in one of the Public Advertisers, produced by the defendant. He acknowledged it to be his affidavit, and fwore to its contents, giving at the fame time a viva voce account of the action. Whence it clearly appeared, that the rebels were armed ready to receive the king's troops, and that the latter heard the alarm-guns firing, whilft they were on their march. The attorney-general obferved, that the defendant, from what he had thrown out, feemed rather to have wished to be ftopped, in order to have given birth to a popular tumult, than to have aimed either at difproving the charge, or evincing the innocence of his own intention. He afcribed its delay folely to the defendant, and answered fuch part of Mr. Horne's fpeech as went to the fubject before the court; afferting, that the advertisement charged in 1 in the information was most clearly a grofs and feditious libel, deferving every epithet he had bestowed on it; and told the jury that, if he had failed in proof, the defendant had fupplied the defect, for that the whole of the defence went to an admiffion and aggravation of the libel. Before he fat down, the attorney-general spoke to the other parts of Mr. Horne's fpeech, which he declared was wholly made up of the abufe of the judge, abufe of the jury, abufe of himself, and abufe of the mafter of the Crown-office, the follicitor of the treafury, and even of the fheriff's officers. Lord Mansfield remarked, that, of all cafes he had ever known, this lay in the finalleft compafs. There were but two points for the jury to confider; the proof of the publication, and the proof of the charge in the information. The difficulty of the firft was removed, for that was fully admitted by the defendant; with regard to the fecond, they would take out the paper, read the advertifement, and judge' for themfelves. His lordfhip lamented the prefent unhappy war, and enlarged a little on the nature of the charge made againft the king's troops, in the advertisement: particularly explaining the application of the phrafe wellbeloved.' He faid the jury would readily fee why he paffed over a great deal which had been faid on the occafion, and which ought not to have been faid; but that he could not let them, or the audience, go away without inabling them to contradict any mifreprefentation refpecting one point. His lordship then explained his conduct on the trial ef one of the printers, and, after Ο N Wednesday morning, November 19, between ten and eleven o'clock, the Rev. Mr. Horne attended the court of King'sbench, agreeable to a notice issued by the attorney-general. The feveral documents being read neceffary to fubftantiate the charge against him, and the grounds of his conviction being then stated to the court, the attorney-general prayed judgment in behalf of the crown. Lord Mansfield was about to pronounce the fentence, when Mr. Horne intreated the attention of the court to a matter which he fhould urge, in arreft of judgment. He grounded his motion on the following arguments: Firft, That the information, on which he had been tried, did not fpecifically charge him with any crime. That the whole of the charge was of a conftructive nature. But it was an established maxim in law, that indi&ments and informations fhould fo exprefsly fet forth the nature of the crime, as not to leave any thing to the conftruction of the court. In the prefent cafe, Mr. Horne contended that there had not been any thing averred in the |