Security for recovery of them? In this Cafe it is true, the Outcry would be great and general, from the Character of the Perfon thus treated; His ancient Family; His extenfive; though concealed Generofity, and his Popularity in that large, manufacturing, and wealthy County, which He reprefents with fuch entire Satisfaction to His Conftituents, and fo much Reputation to Himfelf. But, on the other Hand, what would not Lord Halifax have to fay in His Defence? It would now be alleged in His Favour, not only that there are num berlefs Precedents upon the File of Office, in Juftification of this Practice, and that, if it be not legal by the written Letter of the Statute Law,it is Lawgrown out of long ufage, "but that the House of Commons, in the very laft Winter, thought it fo neceffary a Power in Magiftracy, that they refused to condemn or to abrogate it." It would be confidently afked, "whether their Acquiefcence in the Exercife of it, upon an exprefs Motion, and after long Debate, does not prove, that they thought the Power itfelf neither illegal nor dangerous? Whether, after this Sanction. given to it by the Indecifion and Reference of the Houfe of Commons, it is not to be confidered as Law, until the Courts of Judicature have pronounced it is not? It is the

Duty of Magiftrates fully to exert whatever Authority is vested in them, for the Neglect of which They are accountable, as well as for the Abuse: And, however Lord Halifax might have hesitated upon the Legality of general Warrants before the Question came under Confideration of the Commons laft Year, from his own Doubts of the Validity of Precedents of Office, to conftitute Law against the Temper of the Conftitution and the Freedom of the Subject; yet at this Time, a Secretary of State ftands obliged to confider this Practice of Office as authorised by the Confent and Sanction of the two Houfes of Parliament given to the Continuance of it, until it fhall be annihilated judicially." This would certainly be his Vindication, and, I think, a very plaufible, if not a fufficient one. Befide, the Rank of the Perfon makes no Difference in the Outrage, though it would in the public Reception of it. The Law is not Refpector of Perfons; the Libel of a Man of Parts, of Rank and Efteem, is more dangerous, than that of an inferior; the fame Reafoning and the fame Precedents, that juftified one, must be admitted in Juftification of the other; and this may be done upon every Reafon, upon which that was done, as the Law now ftands, and fufpended as the De

tmination

termination is now unhappily left. To prevent this Uncertainty in fo fundamental an Article of our Conftitution, in which, in their Judgment, to be in Doubt is to be in Danger, the 220 calumniated Members of the Minotity honourably, tho' ineffectually contended. And let the impartial Public now decide, whether they are most indebted to thofe, who laboured to bring this Their great Interest to an immediate Determination, or to the 234 Members of the Majority of that Day, who prevailed in having it referred to a future Trial at Law: A method of Decifion, which, it seems neither the Importance of the Queftion, nor the Recollection of the most folemn Affurances, given in full Senate, nor the utmoft Endeavours of the Party injured, nor the ordinary Jurifdiction of the Court of Common Pleas, nor the Authority of the illuftrious and truly Patriot Judge prefiding in that Court, have, as yet, been fufficient to bring on.

FINI S.

TRI A L

O F

JOHN PETER ZENGER, OF NEW-YORK, PRINTER:

Who was charged with having printed and published la LIBEL against the Government and acquitted. YTAN namozi on ¶иway TIL 1909 70 8-tom od ned Hits of

A NARRATIVE OF HIS CASE.

A JAKOITU?

To which is now added, beng never printed before, nitr (otal stood god (sondo) procs carit gid T I 20 Els forTAA ORE) I JA PonLnf +2 full open pour dorid

O F

MR. WILLIAM OWEN,

BOOKSELLER, near TEMPLE-BAR,

Who was alfo Charged with the Publication of a LIBEL against the GOVERNMENT; of which he was honourably acquitted by a Jury of Free-born Englishmen, Citizens of London.

LONDON:

Printed for J. ALMON, oppofite Burlington-Houfe, Piccadilly.

MDCC LXV.

[Price One Shilling.]

IN an age of perfecution, when few people dare to write, and fewer ftill to print, these Trials ought to be univerfally read by every TRUE FRIEND TO ENGLISH LIBERTY; who will here fee two of the most noble stands which have been made fince the Revolution, in DEFENCE of CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM. As meriting that Notice, Zenger's Trial (of which this is a new Edition, it having been for Some time very scarce) has been lately recommended, in the Strongest terms, by fome of the most able, as well as the most boneft men now living.