jury to say whether in their minds it conveys the idea imputed. 2 T. R. 206, per Buller J. Therefore where one man said of another that his "character was infamous; that delicacy forbade him from bringing a direct charge, but it was a male child who complained to him :" such words were understood to mean a charge of unnatural practices, and to be sufficiently certain in themselves, without the aid of an innuendo. Woolnoth v. Meadows, 5 East, 463. So, if a man were to write or say of J. N., "there is a vast difference between my character and his; I never robbed my master,' " or the like: it would be the same as if he had directly charged J. N. with having robbed his master. See 2 Lev. 150. 1 Vent. 276. Com. Dig. Action on the case for defamation, E. 8. And the same, where the imputation is conveyed obliquely, Id. E. 1, or indirectly, Id. E. 7, or by way of question, Id. E. 2, conjecture, Id. E. 3, or exclamation, Id. E. 6, or by irony, 1 Hawk. c. 73, s. 4, or the like. So, a defamatory writing, expressing one or two letters only of a name, is as much a libel, and punishable as such, as if it expressed the name in full, if it appear evident upon the face of the libel, from context, &c., what name was meant, 1 Hawk. c. 73. s. 5, or if it appear from the evidence of persons acquainted with the parties, what person was meant, by such initials or letters.

As to the form of the indictment for libel generally, see ante, v. 287-289.

Evidence.

Prove the offence, in the same manner as directed ante, p. 289-292. If the libel reflect on the character of a public officer or professional man, as such, it is not in general necessary to prove his appointment to the office, or admission to the profession, because that is almost in all cases either directly or impliedly admitted by the libel itself; See 4 T. R. 366. 1 New. Rep. 196, 208; proof that he was in the habit of acting as such officer or professional man, would in that case be sufficient: but if the effect of the libel be to charge the prosecutor with having acted as such officer or professional man without a legal appointment, as, for instance, if a man libel a physician by calling him a quack, it seems necessary to prove the appointment or admission. See Smith v. Taylor, 1 New Rep. 196.

In addition to what has already been mentioned, as to evidence upon-the part of the defendant, in cases of libel (ante, p. 292, 293), the defendant, in the case of a libel against an individual, may prove that the alleged publication of the matter complained of as libellous, was merely a communication in confidence, and without malice: as, where a master gives a correct character of a servant, Bul, N. P. 8. 4 Bur. 2425.

1 T. R. 110, where a neighbour gives what he conceives to be a correct character of the credit and solvency of a tradesman, Bul. N. P. 8, or where a client makes confidential representations injurious to an attorney's professional character, in the management of certain concerns, to other persons who are jointly interested in them with the client, 1 Camp. 227, or the like. Also, if a writing, although injurious to another's character, be published, not maliciously or with intent to injure his character, but bond fide for the purpose of investigating a fact in which the party making it is interested, it is not libellous. See Delany v. Jones, 4 Esp. 191. Brown v. Croom, 2 Stark. N. P. C. 297. R. v. Bayley, Andr. 229.

The defendant, however, cannot set up the truth of the libel, as a defence to the indictment; ante, p. 293. 5 Co. 125 b. R. v. Burks, 7 T. R. 4. 1 Hawk. c. 73. s. 6; nor will he be permitted to allege it even in mitigation of punishment. Ante, p. 293.

Indictment for a libel upon an attorney.

Middlesex, to wit: The jurors for our lord the King upon their oath present, that J. N. gentleman, at the time of publishing the false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel hereinafter mentioned, was, and long before and from thence hitherto hath been, and still is, one of the attornies of the court of our lord the King before the King himself, and in the office, practice, and business of an attorney, hath been during all that time retained and employed by divers subjects of this realm, to prosecute and defend for them, as their attorney, agent, and solicitor, divers suits and businesses in the said court, and in other his Majesty's courts at Westminster and elsewhere, and also to do and negotiate other affairs and business as such attorney, to wit, at the parish of B. in the county of M.; and the said J. N., during all that time, hath acted in the most fair and honourable manner in the exercise of his said profession, to wit, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid. And that also before the publishing of the said false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel hereinafter mentioned, to wit, on the third day of May, in the third year of the reign of our sovereign lord George the fourth, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, the said J. N., was, in his business and profession of an attorney, employed and retained by one A. C. to commence and prosecute a certain suit and action at law upon the behalf of the said A. C. against one J. S. for the recovery of a certain sum of money then and long before due and owing to the said A. C. from and by the said J. S., and then remaining unpaid; and the said J. N., in pursuance of the instructions he then and there received from the said A. C. in that behalf, and of his retainer as aforesaid, did

then and there commence and prosecute the said action against the said J. S., as in duty he was bound to do; but the said J, N., in the prosecution of the said action, so far from acting with any unnecessary severity towards the said J. S., on the contrary thereof, then and there acted towards him the said J. S. in as lenient a manner as was consistent with his duty as attorney to the said A. C. as aforesaid. And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present, that the said J. S., late of the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, grocer, well knowing the premises, but contriving, and wickedly, maliciously, and unlawfully intending to aggrieve and vilify the said J.N., and to injure him in his good name, fame, and credit, and to bring him into public scandal, infamy, and disgrace, with and amongst all his clients and neighbours, and other good and worthy subjects of this kingdom, and also to injure the said J. N. in his said business and profession of an attorney, and to cause him to be esteemed and taken to be a negligent and corrupt practiser in his said profession, and to be a person not fit to be intrusted and employed therein, afterwards, to wit, on the tenth day of May, in the year last aforesaid, with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, falsely, wickedly, and maliciously did write and publish, and cause and procure to be written and published, in the form of a letter directed to the said A. C., a certain false, wicked, malicious and scandalous libel of and concerning the said J. N., and of and concerning his conduct in his business and profession of attorney, and of and concerning the said action so commenced and prosecuted against the said J. S. by the said J. N. for and as the attorney of the said A. C. as aforesaid, and of and concerning the conduct of the said J. N. as attorney in the said action, according to the tenor and effect following; that is to say [here set out the libel, with such innuendos as may be necessary; see ante, p. 288, 289]: to the great scandal, infamy, and disgrace of the said J. N., to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace of our lord the King, his crown and dignity.

As to the evidence, see ante, p. 346, 289–292.

Indictment for hanging a man in effigy.

Commencement, as ante, p. 343.] in the county aforesaid, falsely, wickedly, and maliciously did make, and cause and procure to be made, a certain gibbet and gallows, and also a certain effigy or figure intended to represent the said J. N.; and then and there unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously did erect, set up and fix, and cause and procure to be erected, set up and fixed, the said gibbet and gallows, in a certain yard and place near unto a certain common highway there situate, called and near to a certain ferry called The Horse Ferry,

where the said J. N. was used and accustomed to ply in the way of his trade and business of a waterman; and then and there unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously did hang up and suspend, and cause and procure to be hung up and suspended, the said effigy and figure to and upon the said gibbet and gallows, with the name of the said J. N. inscribed on a piece of wood affixed to the said effigy and figure, together with divers scandalous inscriptions and devices affixed upon and about the same, reflecting on the character of the said J. N.; and did then and there keep and continue, and cause and procure to be kept and continued, the said gibbet and gallows so erected and set up as aforesaid, with the said effigy and figure hung up and suspended to and from the same, as aforesaid, together with the several inscriptions and devices aforesaid, so affixed as aforesaid, for a long space of time, to wit, for the space of four days then next following, and during all that time unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously did then and there publish and expose the said gibbet and gallows, with the said effigy and figure thereon, to the sight and view of divers good and worthy subjects of our said lord the King, passing and repassing in and along the highway aforesaid: to the great scandal, infamy, and disgrace of the said J. N., to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace of our lord the King, his crown and dignity.

Evidence.

Prove the hanging in effigy, as described in the indictment; and prove that the figure was intended to represent the prosecutor. Give also, if necessary, evidence of circumstances, from which the jury may presume malice upon the part of the defendant. See ante, p. 290. 65.

350

CHAPTER IV.

Offences against Public Trade.

SECT. 1. Smuggling.

2. Forestalling, regrating, engrossing.

3. Seducing artists to leave the kingdom.

SECT. 1.

Smuggling.

Indictment for being armed and assembled for the purpose of assisting in running uncustomed goods, &c.

Kent, to wit: The jurors for our lord the King upon their oath present, that J. S. late of the parish of B. in the county of K., labourer, J. W. late of the same, mariner, and E. W. late of the same, labourer, together with divers other evil disposed persons to the jurors aforesaid unknown, to the number of three or more, on the third day of May in the third year of the reign of our sovereign lord George the fourth, within Great Britain, to wit, at the parish aforesaid in the county aforesaid, being armed with fire arms, and other offensive weapons, to wit, with guns, pistols, swords, and daggers, then and there feloniously and unlawfully were assembled and gathered together, in order to be aiding and assisting *in the illegal running, landing, and carrying away of certain uncustomed goods [or certain prohibited goods, or certain goods liable to pay certain duties, and which said duties were not then paid or secured]: against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace of our lord the King, his crown and dignity.

Felony, death. 52 G. 3. c. 143. s. 11. The venue may be laid in any county. Id. Indictments for being armed and assembled in order to be aiding and assisting in doing other acts mentioned in the statute, may readily be framed from the above precedent, by stating such act immediately after the above *.

Evidence.

Prove that the defendants, or some of them, together with