If the Solicitor-General’s doctrine were established, see what oppressive consequences might result. At some future period, some man may attain the first place on the bench, by the reputation which is so easily acquired by a certain degree of churchwardening piety, added to a great gravity, and maidenly decorum of manners. Such a man _may_ reach the bench--for I am putting a mere imaginary case--_he_ may be a man without _passions_, and _therefore_ without _vices_; he may, my lord, be a man superfluously _rich_, and, therefore, not to be _bribed_ with _money_, but rendered _partial_ by his _bigotry_, and _corrupted_ by his _prejudices_; such a man, _inflated_ by _flattery_, and _bloated_ in his dignity, may hereafter use that character for _sanctity_ which has served to promote him, as a sword to hew down the struggling liberties of his country; such a judge may interfere before trial! and at the trial be a _partisan_! Gentlemen, should an honest jury--could an honest jury (if an honest jury were again found) listen with safety to the dictates of such a judge? I repeat it, therefore, that the Solicitor-General is mistaken--that the law does not, and cannot, require such a submission as he preached; and at all events, gentlemen, it cannot be controverted, that in the present instance, that of an alleged libel, the decision of all law and fact belongs to _you_. I am then warranted in directing to you some _observations_ on the _law of libel_, and in doing so, I disclaim any apology for the consumption of the time necessary for my purpose. Gentlemen, my intention is to lay before you a short and rapid view of the causes which have introduced into courts the monstrous assertion--_that truth is crime!_ It is to be deeply lamented that the art of printing was unknown at the earlier periods of our history. If at the time the barons wrung the simple but sublime charter of liberty from a timid, perfidious sovereign, from a violator of his word, from a man covered with disgrace, and sunk in infamy--if at the time when that charter was confirmed and renewed, the Press had existed, it would, I think, have been the first care of those friends of freedom to have established a principle of liberty for it to rest upon which might resist every future assault. Their simple and unsophisticated understandings could never be brought to comprehend the legal subtleties by which it is now argued that falsehood is useful and innocent, and truth, the emanation and the type of heaven, a crime. They would have cut with their swords the cobweb links of sophistry in which truth is entangled; and they would have rendered it impossible to re-establish this injustice without violating the principle of the constitution.