[ 49 ]
the instance, that a Jury have nought to do with the operation of a fine, or the question of murder or no murder, he admitted they had a right to find a general verdict. By the former, it is very plain they join law and fact together, when the law is explained to them, and by the latter, they judge of that criminality, which he said at Shrewsbury they had nothing to do with.
Having then seen that law and fact are inseparable in all cases, and that Juries, of right, determine on both, when connected together to constitute an offence or crime, the view of the simple Dialogue that Mr. Jones, the Attorney, thought fit, under the influence of some over-ruling power, to attack as a libel, will be enough to convince us that the criminal court must have deemed it harmless, either on a demurrer, or an arrest of judgment, before or after trial.
But supposing, by the way, that in every prosecution for a libel, the writing, or publishing, were unquestionable, and the sense
of
