The National Intelligencer And Washington Advertiser

WASHINGTON CITY.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1801.

LIBELS.

It was the intention of the Editor to have presented on an earlier day a statement of the proceedings of the District Court on the late presentment of the Grand Jury, for an alleged libel on the Judiciary of the United States. But he has been prevented from doing this by indisposition, and a desire to state nothing whose correctness had not been previously ascertained.

He had thoughts of subjoining to the statement the piece charged as libellous. But as it has had an extensive circulation through the Union, the re-insertion of it has been thought unnecessary.

As the doctrine of libels must always in a free Country be interesting to the community, it is proposed in the next paper to publish animadversions, occasioned by this charge, but which will be equally applicable to all discussions of political principles, and the measures of public men.

On the 22d June last, at the first meeting of the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia held at Washington, Judges Marshall and Cranch, contrary to the opinion of Chief Justice Key, called to the bench the Attorney for the District, and directed him to take measures to institute a prosecution against the Editor of the National Intelligencer for a publication in his paper of the 12th, entitled, "Appointments by the President." Judge Cranch took from his pocket the paper, which contained the publication. Judge Marshall observed that he was a friend to the freedom, but an enemy to the licentiousness of the press. That the printers in this country on both sides of the political questions which agitated the public mind, had taken most unwarranted liberties, and descended to the most shameful scurrility and abuse: it was difficult to say on which side of the question they had been most abusive. That so long as he remained upon the bench it should be his particular care to restrain these abuses as long on the one side as on the other. The Attorney declined having anything to do with the business, further than as the officer of the court to hand the paper in question to the Grand Jury, to express the sentiments of the different members of the court, and his own to the Grand Jury, which he then informed the court were like those of the chief justice, inimical to any interposition of the court. This was done, and the Grand Jury presented the Editor for printing and publishing a libel against the Judiciary of the United States. Upon the return of the Presentment, the Court ordered a Bench Warrant against the Editor, returnable immediately. Upon the service of this warrant the Editor immediately appeared. The court ordered him to enter into a recognizance in the sum of 1000 dollars, for his appearance at the next court, and for his good behaviour in the meantime: and further ordered that he should receive a rule, to be laid upon him by the Attorney, to shew cause at the next court why an information should not be filed against him. The former part of this order was executed, the latter was not.

The Attorney stated to the court that the spirit of the laws of Maryland discountenanced informations, that he saw no reason for departing in this instance from the usual mode of proceeding by indictment, and declined laying the Editor under any rule.

Judge Cranch concurred with the Attorney that it was proper in this case to proceed in the ordinary way by indictment, which mode was adopted. Judge Marshall declared himself in favour of proceeding by way of information in this case, and all others of a similar nature, and declared himself in favor of making a rule of court to that effect: but the other judges neither of them concurring, no such measure was adopted. Judge Marshall urged as a reason that induced him to wish to see this mode adopted, his desire in all cases to give the accused an opportunity to prove the truth of what he had published; he doubted whether upon an indictment he could be permitted to do so: but there was no doubt that upon a rule to shew cause he might give the truth in evidence, and that upon doing so the court would discharge the rule. At September Term a bill of indictment against the Editor, was by the Attorney sent to the Grand Jury, who returned it ignoramus.