" even if mistakenly upon the proceedings of parliament and the courts of "justice." (1)

In regard to the irrelevancy of the truth of the matter complained of in the case of a libel, considered as a criminal offence, the law according to the original theory of libel fell into two main classes, namely, i, the class in which written blame was cast upon the institutions of the country and the general conduct of the government, and, 2, the class consisting of attacks upon individuals whether public men or not. As to the first of these classes the principle was that no one should be allowed to attempt to bring into discredit the institutions of his country, and that their defects should be matter for representation to parliament by means of petition; but this principle has been superseded by the exception that, when criticism of existing institutions is made in good faith with the view of bringing about improvements and of removing defects, it is lawful, even if mistaken. With regard to criticism of this kind it may still be said that, when it is the subject of a prosecution for seditious libel its truth is immaterial; because the question at issue is not the truth or falsity of the assertions made, but what was the writer's object. Was it to procure a remedy by peaceable and lawful means, or was it to promote disaffection and bring about riots?

With regard to attacks made, by a newspaper or a pamphlet or any other written or printed publication, upon an individual holding a pub ic position, such attacks do not, in general, charge him with anything for which he could be made responsible criminally but only with misconduct for which public discussion is practically the only available remedy. If the truth of such charges were not allowed to be proved by way of justification for making them much official misconduct and incapacity would be practically altogether unchecked, For cases of this kind provision has been made in two separate ways, namely,— I, by the establishment of the rule that it is lawful to make fair comment upon matters of public interest,—a rule established in a number of civil cases for libel but equally applicable to criminal prosecutions, and, 2, by the passing of Lord Campbell's Act, (2) duly re-enacted in Canada, (3) by which it was provided that it should be competent for a defendant on an indictment or information for defamatory libel to plead the truth of the matters charged and that it was for the public benefit that such matters should be published.

With regard to seditious words they have on some few occasions been made the subject of prosecution,—the charge however being that of unlawful assembly or of seditions conspiracy, of which violent speeches were regarded as overt acts. In 1795, one Redhead Yorke was prosecuted and convicted on a charge of conspiracy to traduce and vilify the House of Commons and the government and to excite disaffection and sedition; and as overt acts of the conspiracy it was alleged that meetings were held to make and listen to seditious and inflammatory speeches (4).

In 1820 Hunt was prosecuted for a conspiracy of which the holding, of the meeting dispersed in 1819 at Manchester was the principal overt act; and in 1814 O'Connell and others were tried for seditious conspiracy, with intent to stir up hatred and strife between the Queen's English and Irish subjects of which conspiracy the meetings held and the speeches made in connection with the agitation for repeal of the union between England and Ireland were overt acts.

That case shews how wide the legal notion of seditious conspiracy is. It seems to include every sort of attempt,-by violent language, either spoken or written, or by shew of force calculated to produce fear,-to effect any public object of an evil character; and no precise or complete definition has ever been given of objects which are to be regarded as evil.

(1) 2 Steph. Hist. Cr. L. 376.

(2) 6 and 7 Vic., c. 96.

(3) R. S. C., c. 163; 37 Vic., c. 38.

(4) 25 St. Tr. 1003; 2 Steph, Hist. Cr. L. 379.

At the present day, when the right of forming political organizations, of holding political meetings, and of giving,-through the press, or on the public platform,-free expression to our thoughts upon and criticisms of public men and affairs, is so well recognized, a written or printed publication, a public speech, or an assembly, meeting, convention or combination would have to be of an extremely vicious, inflammatory, and dangerous character to form the basis of a successful prosecution for a seditious libel, a seditious speech, or a seditious conspiracy.

125. Libels on foreign sovereigns.-Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment who, without lawful justification, publishes any libel tending to degrade, revile or expose to hatred and contempt in the estimation of the people of any foreign state, any prince or person exercising sovereign authority over any such state. (1)

126. Spreading false news.—Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment who wilfully and knowingly publishes any false news or tale whereby injury or mischief is or is likely to be occasioned to any public interest.

This is an old common law offence, prosecutions for which seem to have long since fallen out of practice. In 1778 there was a case of this kind in which the defendant was indicted for having unlawfully wickedly and maliciously published false news,-whereby discord might grow between the king and his subjects or the great men of the realm,-by publishing and placarding a printed paper or notice falsely announcing that an order in council had been made by the king proclaiming war with France (2).

127. Piracy by the law of nations. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence who does any act which amounts to piracy by the law of nations, and is liable to the following punishment:

(a.) To death, if in committing or attempting to commit such crime the offender murders, attempts to murder or wounds any person, or does any act by which the life of any person is likely to be endangered;

(b.) To imprisonment for life in all othe cases.

Piracy at common law or by the law of nations. In reference to piracy the Royal Commissioners in their report on the English Draft Code say,

"The Bill contained a definition of Piracy by the law of Nations. We have thought it better to leave this offence undefined, as no definition of it would be "satisfactory which is not recognized as such by other nations; and after

(1) See Most's case, cited ante p. 70.

(2) Scott's case, 5 New Newgate Calendar, 284; 1 Bish. New Cr. L. Com. s. 477.

"

"careful consideration of the subject we have not been able to discover a • definition fulfilling such a condition. We may observe as to this that the subject has been much discussed in the Courts of the United States, and the result appears to justify the course we have adopted. We do not think it will lead to practical inconvenience."

Sir James F. Stephen says in relation to this subject, "Piracy at common law "or by the law of nations, is the only one of the offences mentioned" [piracy, slave trading. etc.]" which is not created by statute. There are singularities "connected with the offence which I do not think it necessary to go into. The

most authoritative definition of piracy in English law is robbery at sea,' but "I think it is easy to show that this is too wide in one direction and too narrow "in another. If a foreign sailor on a foreign ship were to rob another sailor of "the same nation on the same ship it would be absurd to call him a pirate, yet "such an act would be robbery sea, and if a piratical vessel were to attempt to capture a lawful ship and to be captured herself, it would be strange to "describe her crew as anything but pirates, yet they would have committed, not what on shore would have been a robbery, but what would have been an "assault with intent to rob." (1)

Robbery on the high seas in order to constitute piracy must be without authority from any prince or state. If a party making a capture at sea do so by the authority of any prince or state it cannot be considered piracy: for a nation can never be deemed pirates. Fixed domain, public revenue and a certain form of government exempt a people from that character. (2)

If the subjects of the same state, being in separate vessels, commit robbery upon each other upon the high sea, it is piracy. If the subjects of different states commit robbery upon each other upon the high sea, if their respective states be in amity, it is piracy; if at enmity it is not; for it is a general rule that enemies can never commit piracy upon each other, their depredations being deemed mere acts of hostility. (3)

Piracy by statute.-The principal Imperial statutes relating to and making certain actions piracy are 28 Hen. 8, c. 15; 11 Will. 3, c. 7, s. 7; 8 Geo. I, c. 24, s. 1; 18 Geo. 2, c. 30, 7 Will. 4 and 1 Vic. c. 88, s. 2; 37 & 38 Vic., c. 35.

128. Piratical acts.-Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life who, within Canada, does any of the following piratical acts, or who, having done any of the following piratical acts, comes or is brought within Canada without having been tried therefor :

(a.) Being a British subject, on the sea, or in any place within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England, under colour of any commission from any foreign prince or state, whether such prince or sate is at war with Her Majesty or not, or under pretence of authority from any person whomsoever commits any act of hostility or robbery against other British subjects, or during any war is in any way adherent to or gives aid to Her Majesty's enemies;

(b.) Whether a British subject or not, on the sea or in any place within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England, enters into any British ship, and throws overboard, or destroys, any part of the goods belonging to such ship, or laden on board the same;

(c) Being on board any British ship on the sea or in any place within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England—

(1) Steph. Gen. V. Cr. L. 91, 92.

(2) Grot. 2, c. 18, s. 2.

(3) 4 Inst. 154; Arch. Cr. Pl. & Ev. 21 Ed. 494.

(i.) turns enemy or rebel, and piratically runs away with the ship, or any boat, ordnance, ammunition or goods;

(ii.) yields them up voluntarily to any pirate:

(iii) brings any seducing message from any pirate, enemy or rebel;

(iv.) counsels or procures any persons to yield up or run away with any ship, goods or merchandise, or to turn pirate or to go over to pirates;

(v.) lays violent hands on the commander of any such ship in order to prevent him from fighting in defence of his ship and goods;

(vi.) confines the master or commander of any such ship;

(vii.) makes or endeavours to make a revolt in the ship; or

(d.) Being a British subject in any part of the world, or (whether a British subject or not) being in any part of Her Majesty's dominions or on board a British ship, knowingly

(i.) furnishes any pirate with any ammunition or stores of any

kind;

(ii) fits out any ship or vessel with a design to trade with or supply or correspond with any pirate ;

(iii.) conspires or corresponds with any pirate.

129. Piratical acts with violence endangering life.-Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to suffer death who, in committing or attempting to commit any piratical act, assaults with intent to murder, or wounds, any person, or does any act likely to endanger the life of any person.

A foreigner charged with committing an offence within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England cannot be tried and punished in any Canadian Court without the leave of the Governor-General. (1)

130. Not fighting pirates.-Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to six months' imprisonment, and to forfeit to the owner of the ship all wages then due to him, who, being a master, officer or seaman of any merchant ship which carries guns and arms, does not, when attacked by any pirate, fight and endeavour to defend himself and his vessel from being taken by such pirate, or who discourages others from defending the ship, if by reason thereof the ship falls into the hands of such pirate.

(1) See article 542, post.

FORMS OF INDICTMENT UNDER TITLE II.

HEADING OF INDICTMENT

In the (name of Court in which the indictment is found).

The Jurors for our Lady the Queen present that (Where there are more Counts than one, add at the beginning of each Count):

"The Jurors further present that

STATEMENTS OF OFFENCES.

TREASON.

at

On within Her Majesty's Dominions, A, with divers other false traitors to the Jurors aforesaid unknown, and armed arrayed and assembled together in warlike manner, did unlawfully and traitorously levy and make war against our said Lady the Queen, with intent thereby to depose Her Majesty from the style honor and royal name of the Imperial Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of Her other Dominions.

ASSAULT ON THE QUEEN.

at

À, on a certain pistol which he the said A in his right hand then had and held, unlawfully and wilfully did point aim and present at (" at or near to ") the person of our Lady the Queen, with intent thereby then and there to alarm our said Lady the Queen.

INCITING TO MUTINY.

A, on

at

unlawfully and for a traitorous and mutinious purpose did endeavour to seduce one B, he the said B then being a person serving in Her Majesty forces on land, from his duty and allegiance to Her Majesty.

RIOT.

On

A, B, and C, with divers other persons to the Jurors aforesaid unknown, unlawfully riotously and in a manner causing reasonable fear of a tumultuous disturbance of the peace, did assemble together,

at