Romulus Mitchell Saunders (1791-1867) won an 1814 libel suit with respect to a piece he authored using the pseudonym "Gracchus" that, among other things, supported his political friend Bartlett Yancey (1785-1828). The jury rendered a verdict of not guilty.
Raleigh, Oct. 28.
A Political Libel. -- On Friday last came on to be heard at the Superior Court of Stokes County, in this state, the trial of a libel, on an indictment found at October term, 1813, against Romulus Sanders [Saunders] of Caswell County for having written and published in this paper of the 23 of April preceding, a libel on James Martin, Jun. Esq. Councellor at Law, of Stokes County, at that time a Candidate for a seat in the present Congress, in a letter addressed to him, under the signature of "Gracchus."
The prosecution was conducted in [on] behalf of the state, by Edward Jones, Esq. Solicitor, and Thomas Ruffin, Esq. was Counsel for the Defendant.
Mr. Jones proved by sufficient evidence that Mr. Sanders [Saunders] was the author of the piece in question; but failed in fully establishing the publication by Mr. Saunders, or his agent the Editor of the Register, in the County of Stokes. A paper was produced which was found in the possession of a citizen of that county; but it did not appear that it was bro't or sent there by either the writer or the printer.
One passage in the piece which was charged as libelous, was set aside because it was not published precisely as written.
Mr. Ruffin on the part of the defendant, produced a Circular written by Mr. Martin just before the election, to which Gracchus was intended as an answer, and contended, in an animated and eloquent address, that though the piece was spirited and somewhat severe, it was not more so than the Circular warranted; that the publication was altogether levelled at the political and not at the private character of Mr. Martin, and that so far from being written with malicious intent, the parties were unknown to each other.
That the writer had undertaken, as he had a right to do, to support Mr. Yancey, Mr. Martin's successful opponent, to defend the present administration and the present war, against the attacks of Mr. Martin; and to encourage the people to support both, notwithstanding the taxes with which they were told by the Prosecutor they would be oppressed.
Judge Seawell laid down the law on the subject of Libels to the Jury in a clear and perspicuous manner; said that malicious intent was a necessary ingredient in every libel; and if that was ascertained, it must also appear that the libel was published by the author or his agent, the printer, in the County of Stokes, in order to bring the matter within the cognizance of the court. If these facts were satisfactorily proved, the Jury would find the defendant guilty; but, if on the contrary, they believe the writer to have done no more than exercised a right which every citizen enjoys, of examining the qualifications and pretensions of a candidate for a seat in Congress, free from malicious intent, or personal slander, then they would find the defendant Not Guilty.
He directed the Jury to carry with them, when they retired, not only the bill of indictment, but the newspaper containing the piece signed Gracchus, compare them together, and form their own judgement of the correctness of the innuendoes contained in the indictment, and of the whole matter, and return a verdict accordingly.
The Jury retired, and in a few minutes, returned a verdict of "Not Guilty."
Richmond Enquirer (Richmond, VA), 4 November 1814.
.jpg)
