the names of the witnesses, and what was expected they would prove, and the court could not judge from the affidavit whether they were material witnesses "We will indulge you, Mr. Cooper," said the judge," with permitting you to file an additional affidavit; this indulgence we grant because you have no counsel. We wish you had thought proper to have employed counsel, individuals are not supposed to be acquainted with law; therefore we permit your filing an additional affidavit."

While Mr. Dallas was assisting the defendant in drawing the additional affidavit, the witnesses required by him appeared in court, and the defen dant said he was ready to proceed to trial.

The Judge's Charge to the Jury.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

When men are found rash enough to commit an offence such as the traverser is charged with, it becomes the duty of government, as it is the law of the land, that they should not pass with impunity. The traverser is charged with having published a false, scandalous and malicious libel on the President of the United States, in his official character as President. I know of no civilized I know of no civilized country that does not punish similar offences, and it is peculiarly necessary to the peace and happiness of this country, that such offences should meet with their proper punishment, as our government is a government founded on the opinions and confidence of the PEOPLE-it is their government-created by them, and if an improper law is enacted, the people have it in their power to obtain the repeal of such law, or even the constitution, if found defective, provision is made for its amendment-therefore our government is truly republican-a GOVERNMENT OF REPRESENTA

TION AND RESPONSABILITY. All officers of the government are liable to be removed, or their duration in office limited by elections at certain fixed periods, except the judiciary, who are restricted by the constitution, which declares they "shall hold their offices during good behaviour," and therefore may be removed for misbehaviour in that office.

All governments punish libels upon government; and it is my opinion that there is nothing we should more dread than the licentiousness of the press. A republican government can only be destroyed by the introduction of luxury and the licentiousness of the press. If you destroy the confidence of the people in their supreme magistrate and the legislature, you effectually sap and undermine the government. The licentiousness of the press is the slow but sure and certain means of destroying the confidence of the people; when that confidence, which is the support of the government, ceases, the government must fall. The government of this country has thought proper to pass a law to check the licentiousness of the press, and prescribing the punishment for the violation of the law.

The Judge read the act of Congress upon which the defendant was indicted, and proceeded to observe, that the intent to defame, to bring into contempt and disrepute and to excite the hatred of the people, were important words in the law; for if there is no such intent, there is no offence created by the law.

THOMAS COOPER, then, stands indicted with publishing a false, scandalous and malicious libel upon the President of the United States, with intent to defame the President, to bring him into contempt and disrepute; and to excite against him the hatred of the people of the United States.

In making up your verdict, gentlemen, you will consider two things, the publication, and the

intent

intent of the publisher; for the intent is as much a fact as any other, must be proved in the same manner as other facts, and must be proved as stated in the law of Congress-to defame the President, to bring him into contempt and disrepute, and to excite against him the hatred of the people. The mere publication is no offence, and though you consider them separately the offence is created by the two coupled together.

First, then, as to the PUBLICATION

The publication is proved, and with very aggravated circumstances. It appears from the testimony that the traverser went to the house of a justice of the peace with this paper, whom of all other characters he ought to have avoided, for it appears indecent and outrageous to deliver such a paper to a justice of the peace, and the manner in which it was delivered was yet more indecent. "This is my name, and I am the author of this handbill," was pronounced with the same solemnity as if the traverser was about to part with an estate. This conduct shews a disposition in the traverser to dare to defy the government, and his subsequent conduct proves to my mind such to have been his disposition, for he justifies his publication in all its parts.

The Judge observed, that the jury ought to take the publication and the intent together, and consider the whole when taken together. The traverser states, that he does not arraign the motives of the President, but he has boldly asserted in his defence, that he intended this publication as a censure on the President, which his conduct deserved. Now, gentlemen, the motives of the President,in his official conduct is not a subject of enquiry with you. It is no apology to say that the President is honest, but he has done acts which prove him unworthy the confidence reposed in him by the people of the United

States,

States, incapable of executing the duties of his station, and renders him unworthy of being appointed to that important office which he holds. The motive or intent of the traverser and not of the President is the matter to be enquired into by you.

The Judge then divided the libel and made observations on its several parts, and first he considered that part which relates to the President in the following words: "Even those who doubted his CAPACITY, thought well of his intentions." The Judge thought that in this compliment, as to the "intentions" of the President, there was contained a sting, which was intended should be felt, for it was in substance to say of the President: "You may have good intentions, but I doubt your capacity, your capacity is doubted."-But the traverser goes on to say: "Nor were we yet saddled with the expense of a permanent Navy, nor threatened, under his (the President's) auspices with the existence of a STANDING ARMY. Our credit was not yet reduced so low as to borrow money at 8 per cent IN TIME OF PEACE." Judge Chase asked, if these things were true, what effect would they have on the public mind? If the people believed those things, what would be the consequence? If true, ask yourselves, gentlemen, what would be your opinion of the President of the United States ? Those charges are no less against the President, than against the Congress; for these acts cannot be done without Congress. But the President is further charged, for that "the unnecessary violence of his official expressions might JUSTLY have provoked a WAR." A serious charge, indeed! By his violence, not only PROVOKED a war, but provoked a JUST WAR against his country. If you believe he has done this, again, gentlemen, ask yourselves, What would be your opinion of him? Surely the worst you could form of any man, You would,

most

most certainly consider him as very unfit and unworthy the high station which he has so honourably filled, and with so much usefulness to his country.

As to the expressions of the President, the Judge observed, that when the great body of the people, in their addresses, expressed to him their sentiments of personal attachment and confidence, he replied. to them in answers which generally echoed those sentiments, and his expressions were as general, as the nature of answers would admit. The Marine Society of Boston, in their address, as old seamen, attached to the navy, speak in favour of a navy, the President, in his reply, thinks a `navy a good measure of defence, and there can be no offence in publishing this as his opinion, without coupling it with the malicious intent.

66

The traverser asserts, that under the auspices of the President, we have a standing army. This is not true; the traverser ought to know that it is not true-No standing army can be raised in this country, without a violation of the constitution of the United States, which declares, that Congress shall have power to raise and support armies; but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years." And there can be no permanent or standing army. The Judge stated, that government had thought proper to raise two armies, the one the western army, whose enlist-1 ment was limited to five years, and the other whose enlistment was also limited; that is, during the existence of the differences with the French republic, so that neither can, with truth or propriety, be termed a standing army; and the publication is calculated to alarm and mislead the most ignorant, for there is nothing which the people of this country more dread than the existence of a standing

army.

The