THE BRISTOIiXAN MEMOIRS and CORRESPONDENCE of JAMES ACL AND, Proprietor and Editor- writt in by Himtilf. « / LIKE HONESTY IN ALL PLACES."— Judge Bayley. Printed aad PablUhed by JAMES ACL AND ( SOLE P « OP « IETOR HI Eoiroaj at No. 4, All Saiuis' street, Bristol. VOL. III.— No. VI. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 1830. [ PRICE 1J. MZM:— The disgracefullv ptriertcd report of my trial, put forth in the Mercury of this • week, renders it imperative on me to record my efforts in resistance of a heartless conspiracy to drive me from the City AT RVLL, and I shall do so. If Mr. Somerton, has allotted a man of the name of Bingham, carrying OH business in tlrnrd- Street, ., r any one tisc le' inakt us Journal the histrumcnt of personal spite and unmanly attack, 1 feel convinctd he has done so in ignorance of the real character of hit reporter, whose v> ilful misrepresentation ( the kicking of the ass at ihe linn he supposed to be dying) shall not be suffered to escape. All other subjects shall now be made secondary to the catise o) truth— viz. a full and accurate report of thf whole of the proceedings— to which end I invite such communications from those who were present, and desire that justice shall prevail, as may assist mt in the discharge of my duty, tsptcially with referente to the vitu- perative attack of Mr. Palmer, and the hypo- critical cant of the Town Clerk on passing sentence, J. A. To Mr. H. ACLAND, London. Brittol, April 26, 1830. My dear Father, Agreeably to my promise I now transmit you the following particulars of my trial on the 23d Instant:— The Indictment set forth that James Aciand had on the 23d of December, last, published n ih* BRHTOLIAN a certain false, scnndalous 7 > and nalicisui libel of and concerning one ROSE A MOORE, in the words and form fol- lowing :— " If Roger Moon will rob the pcor, To a pott secure, nail the ear of said Stoore." " If a ptrjur'd tie bt brought home to this Roger 1M Governor tfyztph U • - We nu more lodger." It alio set forth, by way of innuendo, that the meaning of these lines were, that the said Roger Moore had robked the poor, and had told a perjured lie, for which he ought to be punished and imprisoned, & c. & c. This indictment having been read, the defen- dant on being called upon, pleaded " not guilty." He then moved to shew cause why the in- dictment should not be quashed, but was inform- ed by the learned Town Clerk, that he was too late, the formi of the Court requiring thal such motion should have been made prior to his pleading. The following Jurymen were than sworn, se- veral challenges having been made onboth sideii T. CHANDLER, Cabinet Maker, Jledellft- hill. W. fRAYNE, Fishmonger, Redeliff- street. J. DAVIS, Tinplate WoHier, Redoliff street. W. JONES, Tobacconist, Bridewell- lane. F. SMITH, Hair Manufacturer, Merchant tt. \ V PEARCE, Bookseller) Corn- sireei. G. TOM KINS, Tinman, Nicholas- street. J. O. CULL1S, Painter. Montague street, J. BARRETT, Tallow Chandler, Earl street. W CRAZE, Shoemaker, Sitnms'Alley. J. VICKERY, Shoemaker, Simms' All?*. J. PALMER, Carver. Upper Arcade. Sergeant Ludlow—" Mr. Smith— it is not unusual in such cases as this— at lsait I hare often seen it doiie by th « Cbunsel for the prosecution— to abstain from the prosecution on the admission of the defendant, fo' ! r s~ T. ce, in this case, that he did not intend to sa » or insinuate that the prosecutor had robbed the poor." Mr. Smith— a If the Court thinks iuclt course proper, 1 shall not offer arty objection.'' Mr. Acland—" I have ao hesitation iti stating that 1 have not asserted that which seems to be the construction put upon th< S language used; and I submit to the Court that more cannot be expected from me." Mr. Smith—" Then we must go on." Mr. Palmer having stated the pleadings; Mr. Smith opened the case by observing that the Pro* secutor was Mr. Roger Moore, a respectable Soap- Boiler and Tallow- Chandler, residing and carrying on business in Redcliff- Street, in this City ; andthat the defendant, Mr. Aclar. d had lately established himself in Bristol as the Edi- tor and publisher of a Periodical work, which came out^ wice a week, called the" Bristolian.'' He beggtd to impress on the Jury that the law gave protection to all persons, when their cha* racters were attacked and themselves held up to public ridicule and contempt; and the reason it did so, was, because such conduct had a ten* j 7 der. cv to provoke a breach of the peace* Tb* 4- 2 < , . Defendant had, in the Periodical work, to which [ he had alluded, published a grossly false, and malicious libel against his client, whereby his character had been slandered, and h* held up o public hatred, ridicule, and contempt. To shew this he had only to read the libel to them. ( Thelearned Counsel then read the alleged libel, which was followed by a general laugh from the auditory by which the Court was crowded) Mr. Smith appealed to the Jury, whether this circumstance was not a proof of all ha said, whether it did not shew them what an object of laughter and ridicule his client was rendeied by the publication of the libel, and asked if any of them would relish being made the objects of scorn and contempt of the public. He then pro- ceeded to slate that no other meaning could pos- 1 sibly be given to the lines than that set forth in the Indictment. It might be said that his client ought to have adopted another course, and proceeded by civil aciioa, w hich would have given the Defendant the opportunity of proving the truth of the charge contained in the libel. It might be asked why he did r. ot thus bring to issue the truth or falsehood, and the defendant would probably complain of this, and assume as has sometimes been done in similar cases, that the prosecutor dare not meet the truth. But if it were true that his client had robbed the poor, or had perjured himself, was not the law open to the defendant ? Could he not have proceeded against him 011 these chaiges, and would he not have been convicted ? How then conld he say that he was precluded from proving ihe trulh ? lie has not thought fit to pursue cuch course, and that fact, was, he thought, sufficient answer to any such argument as he bad anticipated. The learned Counsel then concluded his addres » by calling upon the Jury to put a check io the libellous proceedings of the Defendant, by their \ srdict that he might not go on with impunity against his client or others, lie should only further observe that the trade of libeling was a very profilable one— which circumstance was rather for ihe consideration of the Court lhan for that of the Jury. THE BRISTOL AN Henry Mill was then put in the witness' box, and the Bristolian containing tha alleged ibel being handed to him, he deposed that he purchased it at Mr. Acland's office, in All Saints'- street, on the 23d December last,— that he was the servant of Philip Rose, of Broadmead— that he was sent to purchase it by his master— that Roger Moore was pre- sent at the time, and told him to be parti- cular in marking the paper as he would be called upon to swear to it. Mr. Acland—" May it please the Court— Gentlemen of the Jury.— On Tuesday lait, in a conversation I had with the Learned Counsel on the subject of these prosecutions he observed, that he held himself bound to take any brief that might be offered to him. And it would seem to be so. How else could his advocacy of so pitiful a prosecution as the present be explained— the prostration of his name, character, and talents, which you have just witnessed, be accounted for. The present is but one of two indictments at the instance of Roger Moore, and who, you should bear in mind, has also procured the satisfaction of having bound me over in re cognizances to be of good behaviour. What does this man want? Why were not the two indictments comprehended in one bill ? I submit to jou that the method— the unusual method by which he has been pleased to vin- dicate himself, savours strongly of the spirit of persecution, and I appeal to you whether you will consent to be made the unworthy instruments of so unmanly and so ignoble a purpose. Gentlemen, you have been correctly told by his leading Counsel that this description of prosecution by indictment, is not the only one by which this question might have been brought before you. The prosecutor might have preferred a Civil Action— but then it would have been open to me to have pleaded a justification, by which course, the question for trial would have been of the truth or falsehood of the matter alleged to be libellous. He might, if he had pleased, have proceeded against me by Information— but then it would have been necessary for him to have sworn that he was not guilty of the offence or offences charged againstj him by the libels. For these reasons he has rejected the only ather methods of proiecution which were at his option ; and by preferring this, he has shifted your consideration from that of " truth or falsehood" to that of " libel and publication." But I trust that you will not sanction so objectionable, because 90 unjust, a course of procedure. I do hope that you will teach him a lesson which he will remember for the rest of his life, and that you wdl vin- dicate the right vou are about to escerciie by that manly independence which will at once protect the lib: rty of the press, the rights of the poor, and the influence of thit divine principle " TRUTH." Gentlemen, in the progress of the present Sessions 1 heard the Learned Chairman make the following observation :—" In every case which affects the liberty of the subject, it is important that the Jury should be put in possesion of all the facts, in order to their arriving at a correct decision on its merits;'' and I have no doubt it will be within your recollection that he very properly interposed between the prisoner and the verdict urM* » an important witness could be fetched, sworn, and examined. I ask then, if my case is to be without the pale of an equal dispen. sation of impartial justice. I ask whether, because my prosecutor does not dare to apply the test of truth to my alleged conduct— you are called upon to convict me in the absence of all knowledge of those facts essential to a perfect estimate of my guilt or innocence, which in any other description of prosecution would be deemed indispensable ? Is such a state of things consistent with your ideas of justice ? Ought you to be expected to decide the question at issue, in the dark.' Nay, is not the light of truth even intercepted in iis progress from me to you by the unnatural interposition of a legal advantage, at the in- stance of the very man who comes before you, demanding at your hands that I shall b « punished for aspersing his character, and that THE BR1ST0IJAN 23 you shall to such end convict me without! being enabled to decide upon the circum> stance* under which he supposes it to have bean questioned ! The Learned Counsel, gentlemen, has read to you the alleged libel— and having acquitted himself of that portion of his duty in as comical a tone and with as comical a manner as he could command— his hearers laughed ! And well they might. What then ? Why the modest gentleman disowns the merit of having excited the laughter, and calls upon you to observe how evidently I had brought the character of his client into ridicule. Now, really, gentlemen, this is too bad ! Am I answerable for the ludicrous ability of a Barrister ? Am I indicted for the offence of making a Learned Counsel funny? Is it because Mr. Smith can be jocose that I am to be imprisoned f A pretty argument truly ! Mr. Smith has made the auditory merry— and therefore you are to return a verdict that shall send me to a gaol! But, to be serious— can it be suspected of you that you will so far forget yourselves as to become the sub- servient tools of any trickster that may pleasa to play upon you ? I will not— I do not believe it. Your situation is one of great responsibility— and I trust you will not be induced by prejudice, partiality or affection to swerTe from the fearless and faithful dis- charge of the momentous duties of your high office. You have to bear in mind, gentlemen, that 1 am on my trial for the publication of a false and malicious libel— charging the prosecutor with acts < rf criminality for which on pro. secution and conviction, he would be liable to punishment. Let us see how it is pro- posed to induce jou to find a verdict of " Guilty" against me. I am precluded from offering you evidence of ( he facts it is my duty to state, to ynu as shewing the circumstances under which I penned the articles complained of— but that is a condi- tion which the prosecutor has imposed 011 me, and I ha\ e no choice but to submit. In stating those facts to you, I beg however to assure you that I am able and even now prepared to call witnesses who would fully substantiate my state- ment, il I were permitted to do to' And in your investigation of this case, I am bound to entreat that you stand aloof between both parties, ending yourselves to neither, and remembering that you are trying at well my character as that of the prosecutor, who charges me with false- hood and malice. I will only further observe on this head that it appears to me nothing can justify you in convicting roe of these offences, but evidence on those points, and of which you have not had submitted to you, one tittle. The motive which prompted me to write, print, and publish the alleged libel may best be ascertained by a knowledge of the events to which its subject matter had referense. They were shortly these, In August last, I originated the Bristolian Bread Association, and ( he prosecutnr was one of the Committee of Management. Upwards of two thousand five hundred individuals embarked in that attempt to procure for their families a full weight loaf of pure bread at cost price— and the great majority of these were poor people who had with much difficulty and at a consider sacrifice paid np their instalments. Gentlemen, I can look back on the once promising antici pations wh'ch were enttrtaind with respect to the Association in que » tion without shame and to my zealous efforts in its behalf with pride ; for however its failure may be matter of deed regret— that failure is attributable to others- and, at the worst, there will ever be in this City some of the wholesome shoots from the parent stick and its inhabitants will continue to ' enjoy many, if net all, of the advantages origi- j nally proposed by me, as a consequence of my ! labors in the cause oi " pure bread.'' Be that ! as it may, however, it unfortunately happened • that a difference of opir. ion arose in the Com- mittee ; whereupon cera. n of its members, and among them my prosecutor, Roger Moore, in my absence look the books of the Association [ from the office, and assembling at an unusual hour, in an unusual place, and without appri- sirg the opposite party cf such meeting, drew up and signed ' a cheque for ^ 1900 011 the Bankers of the Association and placed that sum — the Shareholders knew not where— arid which to this moment is withheld from those to whom it belongs! Gentlemen, was it natural to expect that I should countenance this dishonesty either by my junction or by my silence? The shareholders looked to me for the protection of their property; they had a right to look to me for my most stren uous exertions for its recovery, and I should have been not less culpable than they who took the money if I had not strenuously exerted my- self to obtain restitution from these dishonest Commillee- men, for the robbed and insulted shareholders? I did so— and that I did so tin- successfully it my misfortune ; but is it to be suffered that a man who can lend himself to an act of dishonesty is to come before a jury to pray conviction for falsehood and malice against him whose only crime is the having exerted him- self to bring the delinquent to a « cnse of his in- justice, and to obtain for the wronged that of which . they have been, with so barefaced an impudence, deprived ? That is a question for your decision, and I will not so far calttmn n ate you a? to imagine that you can lend your- selves to so iniquitious an attempt. Such, gentlemen, were the circumstances un- der which the aileged libel wat written— and to the consideration of the nature and sense of that libel, I now beg to direct your attention. The witness who has b< en called to prove the publi- caticn has piotluced a copy of the Briitolian of the 19th December, last, in which number the libel in question is contained. But pethaps you imagine that the couplets for which I am now prosecuted, stand disconnected from all other matter— yet such is nut the fact, for they form but two of seven specimens of Doggrel versifica- ( jon— the other five having reference to five of the unprincipled coadjutors of Roger Moore, in his iniqunious withdrawal of the £ 1800 from the Bankers account of the Association. The en'ire article 1 shall now read to you for, as you will presently ptrceive, the consideration of j the whol<-, is csential to your tccuraie pcreep 4- 2 THE BRISTOL AN ion of the « x: ent of the part charged ai libelous, ' i he article is headed ' DOOGKELIATCA" and runs thus : — Jf Salter refuses his plan to alter— Theu what but philter would suit Dick Salter' Jf Roger Moore will rob the poor, To a post secure, nail the ear of said Moore. If a perjured lie be brought home to this Roger, Let Governor Humphries bave one more logger. Essex frreateus a blue pill, hungry Shareholders to kill. And keep Wheat trom their new Mill. Isn't this too lilt Tompous Hamley, the Exciseman, Will ever carry off the prize, man, For forging the checques, aud telling lies, man. Of Hypocrisy's scrip, the great holder is Tripp, Who steals bread from the poor, and mocks God with the lip? And shall he not wince under honesty's whip You will perceive, gentlemen, that these ' rhymes directly charge the majority of those to whom they allude with distinct and cri- minal offanceg. Yet not one of those indi* viduals it my prosscutor. That enviable office— that msthod of seeking to obtain a • character at your hands under false pre tenses, was reserved for Roger Moore— and if I may give a reasonable guest why it was so I should say, becauie no positive allegation of crime is contained in the couplets which would seem to be hit especial property. You cannot fail to observe that the sense of the libel set forth in the indictment is qualified by the word with which each of the couplets commences. I allude to the word " lr," which, according to my plain interpretation of the language used, removes it as far from an assertion as could have been effected by me had I diligently sought to secure my own safety by disarming the prosecutor of any and every pretence for the institution of such a proceeding as the present. Would it not have beeft just as easy for me to have made a positive accusation against Roger Moore as against any of his coadjutors? the term of qualification and the expression Why then did I not— or why, because I j of uncertainty. But the indictment is that avoided doing so, are you to convict me, as of the prosecutor, and if by such indictment for having so committed myself? Gentlemen,; he in point of fact convicts himself of a criae if, on this occasion, my liberty i » endangered , the liberty of no man who writes is safe. If any language in the alleged libel will not protect me as against this vindictive prose- cution, there isno safety in any words I could have commanded, You ate men of common sense, and I appeal to you with confidence, whether the word " if" can be interpreted by the words " it is » " If not, as honest men, you must acquit me of this malevolent accu- sation, I am charged with falsehood. In a qualified proposition the only possibility of falsehood must lie in the conclusion ; and unless you should be of opinion that robbery dots not deserve punishment, and that a rob- bery of the poor does not merit condign punishment, you cannot consistently with youroaths convict me of this infamous charge. Am I too severe in my estimate of the puuish* ment which 1 have allotted to one who should rob the poor ? 1 am quite lure' that 1 am not, for the perforation of the ear with a nail instead of more polished instrument cannot be supposed to constitute a disproportionate adjustication as between a lady whose vanily is venial, and a man who under the guise of ho- nesty can lend himself to the criminally disgrace- ful purpose of taking the property of poor hardworking people— whether for the pur- pose of withholding it from them or that of applying it to his own us; is immaterial. I concede to the Learned Counsel that he, with th e assistance of his Learned Client might have rounded to couplet with more care or have elevated my doggrel into po » try„ but I may safely defy him to have steered more clear of a distinct accusation than I have pur- posely done in the couplet in question. The matter is alleged to be false. Now, as each couplet is governed by the qualifying term " if— and the proposition in each re- fers to a future contingency as a matter of uncertainty I can only interpret the effect of this charge of falsehood as in effect removing not charged by me in the libel in question, that is hit affair and not mine. The word " if," is certainly negative in its nature, and Roger Moore charges me with false- hood. Now, as two negatives make an affir- mative, the charge of Roger Moore that my negative proposition is false dettroys its negative sense by the removal of the qualifying term " if" and leaves the evident admission that he has robbed the poor and deserves to have his ear nailed loa door post. But it is not on this libel that you have to try me. I have written no such tiling. My Poggrels are absolutely innox- ious— and it is only in the indictment itself that the prosecutor is charged with this infamy ! [ MEM,— TV be resumed on Saturday. J Mm.— As soon as my report is closed Messrs. Smith, Palmer, Cornish, Moore and Ludlow shall hear from me. J. A. BRISTOL IAN B R E j& JO ASSOCIATION BOARD ROOM, 2G, April, 1830. Mr. WEBB in the Chair, Messrs. Windsor, Nicliolls, Vernum, Spickett, Carling and Price. Moved by Mr. Windsor— saconded by Mr. Nicholls. Resolved Unanimously, That this Board most deeply sympathize with the Noble Founder of this A « so » iation, and abla de- fender of its rights under the suffering inflicted on him for his manly and persevering opposition to tite base and dishonest conduct of the tucmies of this Association. That they most aordially approva the praise- worthy feeling which influenced his friends lo step forward so promptly to testify their sense of his meritorious exertions, by subscribing to pay the fine aud expeuces, and pledge themselves to use their utmost endeavor to promote su « h subscription. Moved by Mr. Spiekett— Seconded by Mr. Nieholls That Messrs. Webb, Cave, and Vernum, do form a Board of Enquiry, to take the affairs of the Bris- toiian Bread Association, into their serious conside- ration and to deviso such measures as they in their wisdom shall think fit to the , obtainment of justice for the shareholders, and report the sama to this Board. Printed a « d Pablished by JAMKS ACLAND, ( sole Proprietor and Editor,) at the BmsToUAif- OFFicE,, • No. 4, All Saints- Street, Bristol.