Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

R v Wilkes

State Trials Cited authorities 6 Cited in 16 Precedent Map Related
JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1770
Date01 January 1770
Docket Number542
CourtState Trial Proceedings
542
542. Proceedings in the Case of JOHN WILKES, esq. on two In. formations for Libels, Kings-Bench and House of Lords ; 4 GEORGE GEORGE III. A. D. 1763-1770. [This Case is wholly extracted from sir James Burrows Reports, 4 Burr. 2527.] Wednesday, February 7, 1770. As this cause, in the several branches of it, came several times before the Court, it seemed better to reserve a general account of it till a final conclusion of the whole, than to report the particular parts of it disjointedly, in order of time as they were respectively argued and determined. In Michaelmas Term 1763, the 4th year of his present majesty king George the 3d, sir Fletcher Norton, then his majestys solicitor-general, (the office of attorney-general being then vacant,) exhibited an information against Mr. Wilkes, for having published, and caused to be printed and published a seditious and scandalous libel (the North Briton, N 45.) And soon after, he exhibited another information against him, (the office of attorney-general still remaining vacant,) for having printed and published, and caused to be printed and published, an obscene and impious libel (an Essay on Woman, &c.) Mr. Wilkes having pleaded Not. Guilty to both these informations, and the records being made up and sealed, and the causes* ready for trial, the counsel for the crown thought it expedient to amend them, by striking out the word purport, and in its place inserting the word tenor. The proposed amendments were in all those parts of the information where the * They were tried on the 21st of February, $764.charge was, that the libel printed and published by Mr. Wilkes contained matters to the pun. port and effect following, to wit : which the counsel for the crown thought it advisable to alter into words importing that such libel contained matters to the tenor and effect following, to wit. Sir Fletcher Norton (then become himself attorney-general) directed Mr. Barlow, clerk in court for the crown, to apply to a judge for such an order ; apprehending it (as he afterwards publicly declared) to be a matter of course. Mr. Barlow, in pursuance of these directions, applied to lord Mansfield, for a summons to skew cause why such amendment should not he made. And his lordship issued a summons in each cause, dated lath of February, 1764, for the defendants clerk in court, agent, attorney or solicitor, to attend him at his house in Bloomsbury, square on Monday the 20th of February at eight oclock in the morning ; to skew cause why the information should not be amended, by striking out the word purport, in the several places where it is mentioned in the said information, and inserting instead thereof the wordtenor. N. B. he summons in the cause relating to the seditious libel excepted the first place except in the first place. On notice of this summons, Mr. Philips, agent and solicitor for Mr. Wilkes, and Mr. Hughes his clerk in court, and attorney fur him upon the record, both attended his lordship, at his own house, upon the said 20th of February 1764, accordingly, (being now vacation time, and no court sitting;) and did not 1077] on two Informations for Libels A. D. 1763-1770. [1078 object to the proposed amendment : on the contrary, Mr. Hughes, upon being asked as a fair practicer, candidly acknowledged that it was amendable ; and Mr. Philips acquiesced in it, though he said he could not consent to it. Lord Mansfield having, in the presence of these gentlemen, consulted and produced many precedents, and being fully satisfied that the amendment might he made. and that it might be made by a single judge at his house or chambers, told Mr. Philips, that there was no need of his consent ; and immediately made the following order " Upon hearing the clerks in court on both sides, I do order that the information in this cause be amended ; by striking out the word purport in the several places where it is mentioned, in the said information, and by inserting instead thereof the word tenor. Dated this 20th day of February 1764." The orders in both causes were exactly alike ; only that the words except in the first place were added in that of the information for the seditious libel. Mr. Wilkes was at this time in France ; whither he had voluntarily retired some time before, and from whence he did not return till towards the election of members for the new parliament (into which he was afterwards chosen.) The trial came on at the appointed time, and proceeded in the usual manner ; Mr. Wilkess counsel and agents making no objection there. to, nor declining to enter into his defence. Verdicts were found against him, upon both informations: after which, judgment was duly signed against him, in each cause ; and writs of Capias were awarded and issued against him, as in ordinary cases of convictions upon informations for misdemeanours. Upon his non-appearance, the proceedings were carried on to proclamation and exigents : and upon his not appearing on the fifth time of being exacted, he was, by the judgment of the coroners of the county of Middlesex, according to the law and custom of the realm, outlawed. On Wednesday the 20th of April 1768, (being the 1st (lay of Easter Term 17680 soon after the sitting of the Court, and before any process had issued on this outlawry, Mr. Wilkes voluntarily made his personal appearance in it ; accompanied by three or four friends, who probably meant to become his bail, in case of his being now admitted to bail. He opened with a speech, which is already in print,* and therefore needs not be here re- * It was printed in the public papers of the ^ext day, 21st of April 1768. Burrow. It is also inserted in the Annual Register for the year 1768, Chronicle p. 93, and is as follows: " My lords ; according to the voluntary promise I made to the public, I now appear before this sovereign court of justice, to submit myself in every thing to the laws of mypeated. He took notice, in it, that the record was altered, before the trial, by lord Mansfields order: so that he was tried upon altered facts. This he particularly complained of, as country. Two verdicts have been Mond against me, one is for the republication of the North Briton, N 45, the other for the publication of a ludicrous poem. As to the republication of the number (Attie North Briton, I cannot yet see that there is the smallest degree of guilt. I have often read and examined that famous paper. I know that it is in every part founded on the strongest evidence of facts. I find it full of duty and respect to the person of the king, although it arraigns, in the severest manner, the conduct of his majestys then ministers, and brings very heavy charges home to them. I am persuaded that they were well grounded, because every one of those ministers has since been removed. No one instance of falsehood has yet been pointed out in that pretended libel, nor was the word false in the information before this Court. I am therefore perfectly easy under every imputation respecting a paper, in which truth has guided the pen of the writer, whoever he was, in every single line ; and it is this circumstance which has drawn on me as the supposed author, all the cruelties of ministerial vengeance. As to the other charge against me, for the publication of a poem which has given just offence, I will assert that such tut idea never entered my. mind. I blush again at the recollection that it has been at any nine, and in any way, brought to the public eye, and drawn from the obscurity in which it remained under my roof. Twelve Copies of a small part of it had been printed in my house, at my own private press : I had carefully locked them up, and I never gave one to the most intimate friend. Government, after the affair of the North Briton, bribed one of my servants to rob me of the copy, which was produced in the House of Peers, and after- wards before this honourable Court. The nation was justly offended, but not" ith me, for it is evident that I have not been guilty of the least offence to the public. I pray God to forgive, as I do, the jury who have found me guilty of publishing a poem I concealed with care,. and which is not even yet published, if any precise meaning can be affixed to any word in our language. But, my lords, neither of the two verdicts could have been found against me, if the records had not been materially altered without my consent, and, as I urn informed, contrary to law. On the evening only before the two trials, the Lord Chief Justice caused the records to be altered at Ids own house, against the consent of my solicitor, and without my knowledge ; for a dangerous illness, arising from an affair of honour, detained me at that time abroad. The alterations were of the utmost importance ; and I was in consequence tried the very next day on two new charges, of which I could know nothing : I will venture to declare this proceeding uncon- 1079] 4-10 GEORGE III. being unconstitutional and illegal ; and was advised, be said, that it rendered both the verdicts absolutely void. Mr. Attorney General (Mr. De Grey) prayed that Mr. Wilkes might stand committed ; as be had been convicted of printing and publishing one of these libels, and of publishing the other ; and had now avowed himself to be the person so convicted. Mr. Serjeaut Glynn, of counsel for Mr. Wilkes, opposed this. He said, he had several objections to the outlawry ; and that, till last night, they had expected a Fiat for a writ of error : but that, last night, Mr. Attorney General declined granting one, because he doubted whether it belonged to his office to grant it, or whether it ought not to be granted by the lord chief justice." He said, Mr. Attorney General did not refuse his Fiat, from any doubt about the propriety of the application for it, or the sufficiency of the objections to the outlawry ; but merely from a doubt to whom it belonged to allow the writ of error. He said, he would propose some errors, which he hoped would satisfy the Court that a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Verrier v DPP
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 20 October 1966
    ...showing that the length of the term of imprisonment was at large and in the discretion of the court. In the case of Wilkes (1763-70) 19 State Trials 1075, 1127, 1132, the third question put to the judges was: "Whether a judgment of imprisonment against a defendant, to commence from and afte......
  • Leung Kwok Hung And Others v Hksar
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 8 July 2005
    ...painted by Lord Mansfield CJ in the Court of King’s Bench when speaking about outlawry in the forensic saga of R v. Wilkes (1763-70) 19 State Trials 1075. Giving judgment on 8 June 1768, he said (at p.1102, column 1) that “[t]he rules and method of proceeding are wisely calculated to preven......
  • Leung Kwok Hung And Others v Hksar
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 8 July 2005
    ...painted by Lord Mansfield CJ in the Court of King’s Bench when speaking about outlawry in the forensic saga of R v. Wilkes (1763-70) 19 State Trials 1075. Giving judgment on 8 June 1768, he said (at p.1102, column 1) that “[t]he rules and method of proceeding are wisely calculated to preven......
  • Leung Kwok Hung And Others v Hksar
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 8 July 2005
    ...painted by Lord Mansfield CJ in the Court of King’s Bench when speaking about outlawry in the forensic saga of R v. Wilkes (1763-70) 19 State Trials 1075. Giving judgment on 8 June 1768, he said (at p.1102, column 1) that “[t]he rules and method of proceeding are wisely calculated to preven......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT