“I suppose they have all read it years ago”
In defending himself against the Crown’s charge of seditious libel in July 1777, the Rev. John Horne wanted to show it was reasonable of him to write two years before that Americans had been “inhumanly murdered by the king’s troops at Lexington and Concord.”
As a radical political activist, Horne probably also wanted to get the evidence behind that belief out to the public.
The Crown authorities, meanwhile, wanted to squelch Horne and his message.
One of Horne’s sources was a deposition signed in April 1775 by Lt. Edward Thoroton Gould, then a wounded prisoner in American hands. The trial record shows Horne’s struggle to get Gould’s words out in court over the obstacles of his prosecutor, Attorney General Edward Thurlow (shown here), and the presiding judge, Lord Chief Justice Mansfield.
Horne’s questioning of Gould continued like this:
The former lieutenant agreed that the published text was accurate, but he reminded the jury he had said those things “at the time I was wounded and taken prisoner.”
Gould then went on to testify about how he and other officers marching to Lexington could see and hear the Middlesex County militia mobilizing around them. He talked about hearing “alarm guns,” even “cannon.” (“Did you say cannon?” asked Lord Mansfield.)
A juryman asked for clarification: “Pray who did the alarm guns belong to; to the Americans or our corps?” Gould affirmed those were signals from the provincials to each other.
The testimony that Horne elicited thus portrayed the Massachusetts populace as turning out for a military fight. He decided not to call Lord Percy, then in the courtroom, to add any details and rested his case.
Attorney General Thurlow then delivered a long legal argument, calling no witnesses. Chief Justice Mansfield summed up the case, particularly citing Gould’s testimony.
The jury took ninety minutes to decide the Rev. John Horne was guilty of seditious libel. He spent the next year in prison.
As a radical political activist, Horne probably also wanted to get the evidence behind that belief out to the public.
The Crown authorities, meanwhile, wanted to squelch Horne and his message.
One of Horne’s sources was a deposition signed in April 1775 by Lt. Edward Thoroton Gould, then a wounded prisoner in American hands. The trial record shows Horne’s struggle to get Gould’s words out in court over the obstacles of his prosecutor, Attorney General Edward Thurlow (shown here), and the presiding judge, Lord Chief Justice Mansfield.
Horne’s questioning of Gould continued like this:
I shall ask you no questions that you dislike; give me a hint if there is any one you wish to decline—Did you make any affidavit?Gould’s deposition still wasn’t included in the published trial record.
Yes, I did.
Will you please to read that? [Giving the witness the Public Advertiser, May 31, 1775.] I believe that to be the exact substance of the affidavit that I made.
Lord Mansfield. It cannot be read without the Attorney-General consents to it.
Attorney General. I don’t consent.
Lord Mansfield. If he consents to it, I have no objection.
Mr. Horne. May I give it to the jury?
Lord Mansfield. No; I suppose they have all read it years ago.
Mr. Horne. My lord, that is my misfortune that it is so long ago. [Mr. Horne begins to read it.]
Lord Mansfield. You must not read it.
Mr. Home. I have proved the publication by the printer.
Lord Mansfield. It will have a different consequence, if you only mean to prove that there was such an affidavit published. If you mean to make that use of it, then you may produce the affidavit, or have it read.—If you mean to prove the contents of it, they must come from the witness, and then you will have a right to have it read.
Mr. Horne. I mean both to prove the contents true, and the publication of the affidavit: that indeed, I have already proved.
Lord Mansfield. Then you may read the affidavit, if you make use of the publication of it.
Mr. Horne. I make use of both; that it was so published, and charged, and that it is true. “The Public Advertiser, Wednesday, May 31st, 1775.” [The affidavit read.]
The former lieutenant agreed that the published text was accurate, but he reminded the jury he had said those things “at the time I was wounded and taken prisoner.”
Gould then went on to testify about how he and other officers marching to Lexington could see and hear the Middlesex County militia mobilizing around them. He talked about hearing “alarm guns,” even “cannon.” (“Did you say cannon?” asked Lord Mansfield.)
A juryman asked for clarification: “Pray who did the alarm guns belong to; to the Americans or our corps?” Gould affirmed those were signals from the provincials to each other.
The testimony that Horne elicited thus portrayed the Massachusetts populace as turning out for a military fight. He decided not to call Lord Percy, then in the courtroom, to add any details and rested his case.
Attorney General Thurlow then delivered a long legal argument, calling no witnesses. Chief Justice Mansfield summed up the case, particularly citing Gould’s testimony.
The jury took ninety minutes to decide the Rev. John Horne was guilty of seditious libel. He spent the next year in prison.
No comments:
Post a Comment