yers, be charged with many crimes, which from his very soul he abhors; and consequently may be ruined in his fortunes, and left to rot among thieves in some stinking jail, merely for mistaking the purlieus of the law. I have known, in my lifetime, a printer prosecuted and convicted for publishing a pamphlet[1], where the author's intentions, I am confident, were as good and innocent, as those of a martyr at his last prayers. I did very lately, as I thought it my duty, preach to the people under my inspection upon the subject of Mr. Wood's coin; and although I never heard that my sermon gave the least offence, as I am sure none was intended, yet, if it were now printed and published, I cannot say, I would ensure it from the hands of the common hangman, or my own person from those of a messenger.
I have heard the late chief justice Holt affirm,, that in all criminal cases, the most favourable interpretation should be put upon words, that they can possibly bear. You meet the same position asserted in many trials for the greatest crimes; though often very ill practised by the perpetual corruption of judges. And I remember at a trial in Kent, where sir George Rook was indicted for calling a gentleman knave and villain, the lawyer for the defendant, brought off his client, by alleging that the words were not injurious; for knave in the old and true signification imported only a servant; and villain in Latin is villicus, which is no more than a man employed in country labour, or rather a bailif.
If sir John Holt's opinion were a standard maxim
- ↑ Supposed to be, A Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures, written by the author.
