The Trial of
John Peter Zenger
A Play in Four Scenes
by
Michael E. Tigar
Thomas Watt Gregory Professor of Law
The University of Texas at Austin
Copyright (C) 1986, Michael E. Tigar
All Rights Reserved
[reprinted here by permission of the author,
taken from the original typewritten ms. 8/5/1986]
Written for Initial Performance at the
Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association
New York, New York, August 10, 1986
Cast of Characters, in Order of Appearance
(With Names of Actors at Initial Performance)
John Peter Zenger, a Printer (Scott Armstrong)
Chief Justice James Delancey (Tim Miller)
James Alexander, a Lawyer (David Keyser)
Richard Bradley, Attorney General of New York (Mac Williams)
John Chambers, a Lawyer (Rick Froom)
Andrew Hamilton, a Lawyer (Michael E. Tigar)
Margaret Hamilton, His Daughter (Katherine Tigar)
Peter Zenger, Zenger's Son (Steve Cummins)
Thomas Hunt, Foreman of the Jury (G. William Birrell)
Scene I: Supreme Court, New York City, April 1735
Scene II: Andrew Hamilton's Home in Philadelphia, August 1735
Scene III: The Black Horse Tavern, New York City, August 1735
Scene IV: Supreme Court, New York City, August 1735
[1]
Program Notes
The libel trial of John Peter Zenger was a
celebrated event in American colonial history: it fueled the dispute over
freedom of the press in New York for decades thereafter.
Briefly, Zenger was arrested and charged
with libelling the Colonial Governor, William Cosby. The Chief Justice,
James Delancey, who presided at the trial, was a wealthy adherent to Cosby's
cause, and was only 32 years old at the time of the trial. Cosby appointed
Delancey to be Chief Justice when the former Chief Justice ruled against
Cosby in a celebrated suit. But he kept Delancey on a tight rein, and appointed
him to serve during Cosby's "will and pleasure." Zenger's paper protested
these arbitrary actions.
Zenger was initially represented by James
Alexander, a young lawyer who was a financial supporter of Zenger's paper
and probably author of some of its more controversial material. When, as
we will see, Chief Justice Delancey disbarred Alexander in reprisal for
his moving to unseat him, the defense was left in a quandary. Zenger moved
for appointed counsel, and John Chambers was appointed. Chambers, however,
was a known supporter of Governor Cosby, and Zenger's friends feared to
let him conduct the defense alone. (Zenger was also represented by William
Smith, who was also disbarred for joining in the motion. For purposes of
this dramatization, we have left Mr. Smith in the wings.)
Enter Andrew Hamilton. Hamilton, born
in Scotland in 1676 (1656 according to one source), was a renowned trial
lawyer who in 1735 lived in Philadelphia. He was (according to some sources)
the only American of his time who had been admitted to practice in the
Inns of Court in London. He was counsel to the family of William Penn in
a celebrated case that spawned legal proceedings on both sides of the Atlantic.
He was a friend of Benjamin Franklin, who was at that time a printer in
Philadelphia. Hamilton held many public offices in Pennsylvania, and was
Speaker of the Assembly from 1729 until he retired in 1739 (with the exception
of one year).
Zenger was a German immigrant, born in
1697. He came to America in 1710. Zenger did an apprenticeship and thereafter
ran a printing business in various locations until he was financed in business
by the opponents of Governor Cosby in 1734. His New York Weekly Journal,
the subject of this prosecution, first appeared in November 1733. Governor
Cosby finally became sufficiently upset by Zenger's paper that he began
proceedings against it in October 1734.
[2]
The script of this play is based in part
upon the transcript of the trial authored by Hamilton and Alexander, and
upon other contemporary records. Much dialogue has been recreated, and
the proceedings have been heavily edited. However, the attitudes and thoughts
expressed by the parties are well-documented. This play faithfully recreates
the role of advocates in 18th Century libel cases, of which Zenger's was
the most celebrated. For further reading, See 5. Katz, ed., A Brief Narrative
of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger, Printer of the New York Weekly
Journal, by James Alexander (2d ed. 1972); V. Buranelli, ed., Notes on
the Trial of Peter Zenger (1957); L. Rutherfurd, John Peter Zenger: His
Press, His Trial (1904).
Hamilton's arguments in Zenger's case
represented a considerable stretching of the rigorous law of libel as it
stood in 1735. He had concluded that he could not convince the judges of
his position, and was really speaking to the jury. Indeed, Professor Katz's
book reprints some rejoinders to Hamilton that appeared in print in New
York two years after the trial. However, Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1738
that an English lawyer said of Hamilton's argument: "If it is not law,
it is better than law, it ought to be law, and it will always be law wherever
justice prevails." Governeur Morris said much later that "The trial of
Zenger in 1735 was the morning star of that Liberty which subsequently
revolutionized America."
Acknowledgements
Special thanks must go to Elizabeth B.
Ulmer, Class of 1987, University of Texas School of Law, for valuable research
assistance. Dr. Kendall, formerly of the University of Texas and now at
Smith College, consulted, coached, and provided several critical readings
of the manuscript. Richard Runkel of the University of Texas directed the
initial performance. He, and the actors listed above, played a valuable
role in shaping this version of the play. Steve Parks, also of UT, was
technical director.
[3]
SCENE I
The courtroom in New York. Alexander is at counsel table. The Attorney
General is at his table. Chambers is seated in the audience. Zenger is
in the dock.
| Voice off: |
Be upstanding in court. |
(The Chief Justice enters. He takes his place. He nods to everyone to
be seated.)
Chief J:
|
The cause is the Attorney General against John Peter Zenger, on information
for a misdemeanor. Is the prisoner in court? |
| Alexander: |
He is, Your Honor. |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Attorney General? |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Your Honor, I have filed the information with Mr. Clerk. In brief,
I charge that John Peter Zenger, of the city of New York, being a seditious
person; and a frequent publisher of false and seditious libels, and wickedly
and maliciously devising to traduce, scandalize and vilify the government
of our Lord the King under the administration of Governor William Cosby
and his ministers and officers, did upon two named days print and publish
and cause to be printed and published certain false, malicious and scandalous
libels. |
| Chief J: |
This is not an indictment, then? |
| Alexander:
|
As Your Honor well knows, for your honor was unable to persuade the
grand jury to return an indictment. So it is that Mr. Attorney comes to
court with his information. |
Chief J:
|
That will be enough, Mr. Alexander. The court knows the state of these
proceedings. And what, has that to do with the application you bring before
me? |
| Alexander:
|
Everything, your honor. From the grand jury refusing to indict, to
the order in council to burn Mr. Zenger's papers, to the excessive bail,
to the application of today, it is all woven from the same cloth. |
[4]
Chief J:
|
You have a care, Mr. Alexander. The court is not accustomed to these
liberties. What is your application? |
Alexander:
|
May it please the court. On the 15th of October last, being the year
1734, Your Honor charged the grand jury in terms that suggested that Zenger
should be indicted for felony for publishing certain seditious libels,
allegedly criticizing the Governor and his officers. The grand jury declined
to indict.
Two days later, on the 17th of October, the Governor
and his council, which Governor had appointed your honor, ordered the assembly
to meet and inquire into Zenger and those who wrote the words that gave
the Governor offense. When the Assembly refused to do any such thing, and
so reported on the 22d of October, the council took matters into its hands.
At a meeting of the council at which you, Mr. Chief
Justice, were present, it was determined to order Zenger's papers burnt
by the public hangman.
When the Court of Quarter Sessions refused to carry
out this order, because it was clearly unlawful, the Sheriff ordered his
own slave to light the fire.
That was November 6. On November 17, the Sabbath,
the prisoner Zenger was arrested in his home. Was this upon a judicial
warrant? No, Your Honor, it was upon another of these orders of the council,
at a session presided over by the Governor himself.
So Zenger was held until the grand jury's term ended
without it returning an indictment. If Zenger then had a hope of his freedom,
it was dashed by the Attorney General, who filed this information on the
very day the grand jury adjourned without day, the 28th of January 1735. |
| Chief J: |
You omit to say, Mr. Alexander, that I myself issued the writ of habeas
corpus to have Mr. Attorney general show cause why Zenger was held. |
| Alexander: |
And then again committed Zenger to jail for want of the four hundred
pounds bail. |
| Chief J: |
Enough of this. What is your application? |
[5]
| Alexander: |
We take exception, pleasing the Court, to the commission by which you
sit. |
Chief J:
|
You take exception to what, sir? Never was a Scotsman but knew the
sea, but you, sir, are closer to the wind than is safe for your craft. |
Alexander:
|
Your Honor's commission, and I have it here, recites that Governor
William Cosby, exercising the authority of King George the second, appoints
you to serve as Chief Justice in this province, and here are the words
upon which we found our exception "during our will and pleasure." |
| Chief J: |
And what moves you to take exception, as you put it, to my commission? |
Alexander:
|
My submission rests upon two points, the one in law and the other in
fact. By the statutes and the common law, judges are to be appointed and
serve during good behavior, and not at the will and pleasure of the Sovereign's
deputy. A judge who sits at the Governor's pleasure is no judge at all,
but only another arm of the executive. Nor does it appear that the commission
was granted with the advice and consent of the council, without which advice
and consent his excellency the Governor cannot issue a commission. That
is my first submission. |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Attorney General? |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Your Honor, Mr. Alexander is out of place. Not simply that he does
not, so far as one can see, know his place, but he does not know the law
of this place. Whatever Parliament may have done about the judges of England,
His Majesty's right to control matters in these, his colonies and dominions,
is not subject to such a question. And if His Majesty should wish his judges
in these colonies to serve at the will and pleasure of a Governor, that
is his prerogative. . . and the Governor's. |
| Chief J: |
I thought as much. Your second submission, sir. |
[6]
Alexander:
|
It follows from the first. You serve at the Governor's will and pleasure.
Now, this is the same Governor that sent to have Zenger arrested without
a judicial warrant, that had Zenger's newspapers burned, and that sent
your honor before the grand jury to charge them so that Zenger would be
indicted. If you sit at the will and pleasure of such a governor as Mr.
Cosby, then his cause is your cause, and my Lord Coke, (Nods at Attorney
General) who is authority on both sides of the ocean, says in Dr. Bonham's
case, that "it is an established maxim that no man can be judge in his
own case." |
Chief J:
|
That will be enough, sir. I see where this is going. You thought to
gain a great deal of applause and popularity by opposing this court, but
you have taken matters so far that either I must go from the Bench or you,
Mr. Alexander, from the Bar. Therefore, this court orders that you, having
been forewarned, having actually put these exceptions into court, your
name is ordered struck from the roll of attorneys. |
| Alexander: |
You order me disbarred? For filing a motion in court? |
Chief J:
|
Yes, sir, I do. I tell you Alexander, that the grand jury heard, as
did I before them, enough of your dealings with the prisoner Zenger that
I know, although perhaps I cannot prove, how this scandalous paper came
to be. Your money, Alexander, yours and others of your party. Your words,
Alexander. And now your insolence. I tell you straight, sir, that I would
as leave you stood in the dock with the prisoner, but I content myself
with the order I have given. |
| Zenger: |
Your Honor, does this mean Mr. Alexander cannot be my attorney? |
| Chief J: |
It means, sir, that he cannot be anyone's attorney, not in this court. |
| Zenger: |
Then, if I understand the law, this is a case of misdemeanor, because
the grand jury did not return a true bill. |
[7]
| Chief J: |
Sir, this point has been argued by Mr. Alexander. |
Zenger:
|
Not this point, I should hope. In cases of misdemeanor, I am by the
common law allowed counsel. Is this so? |
| Chief J: |
Ah. . . yes. |
Zenger:
|
Then I should wish that the court would appoint a counsel for me, to
conduct my defense. |
Chief J:
|
(After a look at the Attorney General.) Very well. I see Mr. Chambers
in court. He is appointed to act as your counsel. Mr. Chambers? |
| Chambers: |
(Comes forward.) Your Honor? |
| Chief J: |
You will act as the prisoner's counsel. |
| Zenger: |
But Mr. Chambers is a member of Governor Cosby's party. |
Chief J:
|
And perhaps the more likely to know the proper procedure in this court,
for all that. Mr. Chambers, have you an application? |
Chambers:
|
Only for a struck jury, selected from the book of freeholders, your
honor. (Zenger tries to get Chambers' attention.) |
| Chief J: |
Have you another application, sir? (Smiles.) |
| Chambers: |
No, sir. |
Chief J:
|
The court appreciates your service, Mr. Chambers. We stand adjourned
to the 4th of August of this year, three and one-half months hence. The
prisoner is remanded to jail. |
(Lights down.)
[8]
SCENE II
Library in Hamilton home, Philadelphia, August
1735. There is a large chair, in which Hamilton has fallen asleep, his
foot on a gout stool. This is right front. (The rest of the set is in darkness,
and this area is defined with a spotlight.) Margaret enters from left,
and stands in front of chair.
| Margaret: |
Father. Father.... |
Hamilton:
|
(Waking up.) Hmmmmm (Stretches, yawns.) Oh, Margaret. I must have drifted
off. (Pauses.) |
| Margaret: |
Father, the coach is here. Samuel has put the bags in, all but your
satchel. |
Hamilton:
|
Oh, good. Good. Margaret, please, help me gather these papers. (Rises,
with difficulty.) There, that one. (Margaret begins to collect books and
papers.) |
Margaret:
|
Father, are you sure you are well enough for this. All the way to New
York and then a trial? Your gout is so bad that it ... |
Hamilton:
|
(Interrupting.) Margaret, I'm quite well aware of my gout, thank you.
My gout is so bad that it threatens to take me like the forester takes
the tree. |
| Ham. & Mar.: |
(Together, it being obvious that this is a ritual between father and
daughter.) With broad ax blows at the base. |
Margaret:
|
But why you father. Why must you go? It is not as if Mr. Franklin were
being tried. He at least is here in Philadelphia, and a friend. You don't
even know this man Zenger. |
Hamilton:
|
Margaret, I am going because Alexander asked me to. He is an old friend
from many cases, and he is in trouble. I am not quite sure how much trouble.
Look ye here. Look at these articles. Do you think Zenger, with his background,
could have written them. Portraying the Governor as a dog. Dripping with
irony. |
| Margaret: |
If Zenger did not write them, who then? |
[9]
Hamilton:
|
Why Alexander, of course. Don't you see. That's why this case is so
important to him. If Zenger does not keep silent, Alexander is in the dock.
And Zenger has kept silent, and has spent eight months in jail when just
by telling the Governor who wrote those articles he could be free. Eight
months, from November last until now. |
Margaret:
|
But, father, why can't Zenger be on bail. You told me it was four hundred
pounds. Surely Alexander could raise that much, even if Zenger could not. |
Hamilton:
|
I don't know, Margaret. I don't know. Perhaps the plan is to gain public
sympathy for poor Zenger, so the jury will be more inclined to acquit. |
Margaret:
|
But that does not tell me why you must go. Surely there are other lawyers
in New York than Alexander. |
Hamilton:
|
Of course there are other lawyers. Just as William Penn could have
had other lawyers. But he did not. He sought me, and we went to London
and pleaded for him. And saved his inheritance. Of course there are other
lawyers, but there is not another in His Majesty's American colonies who
is a member of the Inns of Court in London. And not another one who is
speaker of the Assembly in Pennsylvania. (Pauses, grimaces.) And not another
who is a sixty-eight year old windbag with the gout. Oh, Margaret, I don't
know. |
| Margaret: |
Father, you are so stubborn. Mr. Franklin says it is because you are
a Scotsman. |
Hamilton:
|
Margaret, you stay away from Mr. Franklin. He can't restrain his tongue,
ahem, nor his other appetites. I have loaned five hundred pounds to young
Ben Franklin, to help him start his paper. I am not willing that he should
be wooing my daughter into the bargain. (Pauses.) As for me, I am stubborn
by birth, a dissenter by choice, and an advocate by profession. And we
are going to New York. |
| Margaret: |
Of course, father. And I know you have no equal as lawyer. I know that. |
[10]
Hamilton:
|
Not so, Margaret. Not I. Margaret, I tell you a story. These Quakers,
as they call themselves, come together in a meeting house. They sit in
straight chairs, in silence, and soon or late one of them speaks. They
claim, or so they say to believe, that the speaker voices not his own voice,
but that the spirit moves and calls out from that frail vessel of a body.
And I would hope to think that when I speak to a jury about liberty, I
only gave voice to a spirit, not God's but man's, that strives and struggles
to be free. (Pauses, tired.) Let's go. |
[11]
SCENE III
The Black Horse Tavern, with two tables. Alexander and Chambers are
discussing the case. Zenger's son is listening.
| Chambers: |
But what was I to do? |
| Alexander: |
Do? You were to have asked that the exceptions be made part of the
record. |
| Chambers: |
And join you, thrown out of court? |
(Hamilton and Margaret enter.)
| Hamilton: |
Alexander, my good friend. And you must be Chambers. (They shake hands.) |
| Chambers: |
An honor to meet you, sir. |
| Alexander: |
How are you, sir? |
Hamilton:
|
How I am, Alexander, is that I have an attack of gout that threatens
to fell me like a tree. |
| Margaret: |
I'm worried, Mr. Alexander. Can you reason with him? |
Hamilton:
|
Alexander, don't even try. What Margaret means is that I have been
so cross for the whole journey that she despairs whether I will ever speak
a civil word again. Just the mood one needs for a trial like this one.
(Turns, notices young Zenger.) And who is this? |
Zenger, Jr.:
|
Peter Zenger, sir. The son of John Peter. They say, sir, that I am
called to testify tomorrow against my father. |
| Hamilton: |
Who says? |
Chambers:
|
Young Zenger here has been subpoenaed by the Attorney General. We may
be able to interpose an objection. |
Hamilton:
|
And when you have done with that objection, I suppose you think to
argue to this Chief Justice Delancey the finer points of libel. |
| Chambers: |
I had prepared some authorities on that subject. |
| Hamilton: |
Oh, you are a fox, Chambers. |
| Chambers: |
Why, thank you, sir. |
[12]
Hamilton:
|
That is not a compliment. A fox knows many things, but they are little
things, clever things. For such a case as this, you must, like the hedgehog,
know one big thing. And that, young sir, is how to speak to a jury. |
Chambers:
|
I had only thought to look up the decisions and statutes, to be of
what assistance 1 might in this case. But, there has been a difficulty
with the jury. |
| Hamilton: |
Difficulty? |
Alexander:
|
The clerk of court was choosing a very particular sort of jury, to
consist exclusively of the governor's baker, tailor, shoemaker, candlemaker
and so on. |
Hamilton:
|
And young Chambers, did you have a thought to object to packing the
jurybox with these tradesmen, these men who might "crook the pregnant hinges
of the knee, when thrift may follow fawning"? |
Alexander:
|
(Breaking in). Oh, yes. Zenger passed a note, and Chambers objected.
Now we think the jury will be taken only from the list of freeholders. |
Zenger, Jr.:
|
That will mean that most of them will be inclined against the Governor
and in favor of my father. |
| Hamilton: |
How so? |
Zenger, Jr.:
|
Well, sir, father and Mr. Alexander have known since January that this
case would sometime come before a jury. And since there are only one thousand
men listed in the freeholder book and eligible to serve, we have each week
had an article in the newspaper about the duties, and the powers, of jurors
in libel cases. |
| Margaret: |
How did you know what to write in such an article? |
| Zenger, Jr.: |
Well, Mr. Alexander . . . . |
Hamilton:
|
(Interrupting) That will be enough. Margaret, there are some things
in this practice of law that best repose in confidences shared and kept.
Let us leave it that while Zenger is in prison, many talented writers have
done their part. (Turns to Chambers.) now, listen to me, Chambers. You
are, I hear, of Governor Cosby's party, and signed an address complimenting
him. |
[13]
| Chambers: |
But, sir . . . . |
Hamilton:
|
Please, I am only saying facts. I don't care a jot for your politics,
sir. You have sworn an oath, the same one as mine, and you will be faithful
to it by defending this client even if it means the ruin of your political
fortunes and perhaps of the governor himself. When we are done, you will
probably surprise even yourself at how far loyalty to our client can carry
you. I trust you, sir, to keep these confidences you have learned. Zenger
has chosen to be silent, and not to name the authors of these supposed
libels. We can but salute his courage. Young Zenger, I must go to the jail
and speak to your father this night. I cannot think what manner of man
would call a son to testify against his father, but, young man, this Attorney
General seems bent upon just that mischief. Chambers, come to my rooms
for dinner, you, too, Alexander, and bring your clever ideas. On tomorrow,
I will play hedgehog to your fox, and together we will deprive the Chief
Justice, that pompous periwig-pated hunter, of his intended quarry. Come
along, Margaret. |
[14]
SCENE IV
The courtroom. Zenger is in the dock. Chambers is alone at the defense
table. Attorney General at government table. Hamilton and Margaret are
in front row of audience. Jury foreman Thomas Hunt is in front row of audience.
| Voice off: |
Be upstanding in court. (Chief justice enters.) |
| Chief J: |
Is the prisoner in court? |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
Yes, your honor. |
| Chief J: |
The Attorney General against John Peter Zenger. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
This is an information for publishing a false, scandalous and seditious
libel, in which his Excellency the Governor of this province, who is the
King's immediate representative here, is greatly and unjustly scandalized,
as a person who has no regard to law nor justice. In particular, that Zenger
did liken the conditions of free subjects of these provinces to slavery
on account of proceedings taken by and under the authority of his Excellency
the Governor. Some of these libels, more particularly described in the
information, were written in a scoffing manner, but with the clearest innuendo
and overtones of sedition. Other libels appear in the papers to be placed
in evidence. All to the great disturbance of the peace of this province,
to the great scandal of our said Lord the King; of his Excellency the Governor
and all others concerned in the administration of the government of this
province. |
| Chief J: |
John Peter Zenger, you have seen the information against you. How do
you plead? |
| Zenger: |
I am not guilty, Your Honor. |
| Chief J: |
And how will you be tried? |
| Zenger: |
By God and my country Your Honor. |
| Chief J: |
Is the jury in court? |
(House lights up half. Spot on foreman Thomas Hunt.)
Hunt:
|
Thomas Hunt, foreman, Your Honor. (Motions to designate audience.)
And the other jurors. |
[15]
Chief J:
|
Members of the jury, you have heard the charge, and the prisoner's
plea of not guilty. And you have heard that he places himself upon the
country for trial, which country you are. Hearken to the evidence. (House
lights down.) |
Chambers:
|
First, may it please the Court, I have studied the authorities and
respectfully submit that proof of a libel requires that some particular
person be held up to ridicule, and that it must appear from the paper so
clearly who is meant that there is no room to doubt. We believe that when
the evidence is received, that Mr. Attorney will fail in his proof on this
point. That is, the innuendos referred to will not be made out by the proof,
so will show that Mr. Zenger did not mean to refer to the Governor. (Zenger
passes Chambers a note.) Your Honor, I have also an application. I introduce
Andrew Hamilton of the Bar of Gray's Inn, London, and of the city of Philadelphia,
as counsel for the prisoner. |
(Hamilton hobbles up.)
| Chief J: |
Your reputation precedes you, Mr. Hamilton. |
| Hamilton: |
As yours precedes you, Mr. Chief Justice. |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
We call Peter Zenger as our first witness. |
(Peter Zenger comes forward. Zenger passes Hamilton a note. Hamilton
leans back to confer. Hamilton rises.)
| Hamilton: |
What is the purpose of calling this young man. |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
To prove the publication, by the prisoner Zenger, of these libels.
(Hamilton looks queryingly at Zenger, Sr., who nods vigorously.) |
Hamilton:
|
Very well. I will say that while I agree with Mr. Chambers as to the
matters he spoke of, I cannot think it proper for, me to deny the publication
of a complaint, which I think it is the right of every freeborn subject
to make, when the matters so published can be supported with truth. Therefore,
I'll save Mr. Attorney the trouble of examining witnesses to that point. |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
Do I understand that he confesses publishing these papers? |
[16]
| Chief J: |
Is that how you wish to be understood, Mr. Hamilton? |
Hamilton:
|
Understood! I wish to be understood as seeing what is plain to everyone
in this court. If the boy speaks the truth, his father's liberty may be
imperilled. If he lies, he imperils his own. And if he should refuse to
give evidence, Your Honor would no doubt commit him for contempt. I wish
to be understood that we will have done with this business of calling a
child to bear witness against his father. And I, for my client, confess
that he printed and published the two newspapers set forth in the information. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Then, our witnesses may be discharged. We have no further occasion
for them. (There is about ten seconds of silence. Glances are exchanged
between Chief Justice and Attorney General.) |
| Chief J: |
Well, Mr. Attorney, will you proceed? |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Indeed, sir, as Mr. Hamilton has confessed printing and publishing
these libels, I think the jury must find a verdict for the King; for even
supposing, as Mr. Hamilton made so bold to suggest, that they were true,
the law says they are not the less libelous for that. Nay, indeed, the
law says, their being true is an aggravation of the crime. |
Hamilton:
|
Not so neither, Mr. Attorney, there are two words to that bargain.
I hope it is not our bare printing and publishing a paper that will make
it a libel. The words themselves must be libelous, that is, false, scandalous
and seditious, or else we are not guilty. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Mr. Hamilton misapprehends the nature of a libel. Government is a great
blessing for civilization. Hawkins says, in the pleas of the crown, the
following: "It is certain that it is a very high aggravation of a libel,
that it tends to scandalize the government, by reflecting on those who
are entrusted with the administration of public affairs. Such a libel has
a direct tendency to breed in the people a dislike of their government,
and incline them to faction and sedition." |
[17]
| |
This doctrine is so well-settled that we find
it in biblical teaching. Did not Paul say, "I wish not brethren, that he
was the high priest: For it is written, thou shalt not speak evil of the
ruler of the people."
We have set these libels out in the information.
Some of them do not in so many words speak of his Excellency the Governor
and of his magistrates, but the innuendo is clear. The innuendo is clear.
Moreover, the publisher of a libel, such as the
prisoner Zenger, is as much guilty as the author, who sometimes cannot
be discovered.
Zenger's paper has scandalized the Governor, the
King's immediate representative and the Supreme Magistrate of this province.
Nothing could have been more scandalous than to print, as the prisoner
did, and is now admitted, that the Governor, Council and Assembly threaten
the people of this province with slavery, that law is at and end, that
Judges are arbitrarily displaced and new courts erected without consent
of the Legislature, that trial by jury is threatened and men's liberties
taken away. All this is in these papers, all this passed out of Zenger's
hands into the public street.
If these are not libels, I do not know what one
is. Yet the liberality and humanity of his Excellency permitted these libels
to go on for some little time, before his Excellency at last directed this
prosecution to put a stop to this scandalous and wicked practice of libeling
and defaming His Majesty's government and disturbing His Majesty's peace.
That, if the Court please, is our submission. |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Hamilton. |
[18]
Hamilton:
|
May it please the Court. I agree with Mr. Attorney that government
is a sacred thing. I differ very widely from him when he insinuates that
the just complaints of a number of men who suffer under a bad administration,
is libeling that administration. Had I believed that to be the law, I should
not have given this Court the trouble of hearing anything I could say.
Now, I will say that when I read the information,
that I could not, with all my poor powers, determine that the Governor
was the person referred to in all these papers that Zenger published. I
thought that these papers were written by a person with an extraordinary
zeal for liberty, and that Mr. Attorney had reacted out of an extraordinary
zeal for power, to correct my client's indiscretion and to show to his
superiors that he had their interests in mind.
But that was not so. The innuendo by which
these words are said to refer to the Governor is not Mr. Attorney's alone.
This prosecution, we now hear, was directed by the Governor and Council.
I observe also in court the extraordinary appearance
of people in all conditions, and I have reason to think that those in the
administration have by this prosecution something more in view, and that
the people believe they have a great deal more at stake than I apprehended.
Therefore, it becomes my duty to be both plain and particular.
I begin with the authorities that Mr. Attorney brings
to court to support his cause. These are Star Chamber cases. Star chamber!
Whipping good men through the streets. Breaking dissenters on the rack.
I was in hopes that as that terrible court, where those dreadful judgments
were given, was long ago torn down as the most dangerous court to the liberties
of the people of England that ever was known in that Kingdom, that Mr.
Attorney would not have attempted to set up Star Chamber here, nor to make
their
judgments a precedent to us. It is well known, if Mr. Attorney does not
know it, I hope this Court does, that what would have been judged treason
in those days has since not only been practiced as lawful, but the contrary
doctrine has been held to be law.
And just as times have made very great changes in
the laws of England, so there is good reason that places should do so too. |
[19]
|
I speak of Governor Cosby. Is it not surprising
to see a subject, upon his receiving a commission from the King to be a
Governor of a colony in America, immediately imagining himself to be vested
with all the prerogatives belonging to the sacred person of his prince.
Is it so hard a matter to distinguish between the Majesty of our Sovereign
and the power of a Governor of these plantations. Yet in all the cases
that Mr. Attorney has cited, to show the duty and obedience we owe to the
Supreme Magistrate, it is the King that is meant, though Mr. Attorney is
pleased to urge them as authorities to prove the heinousness of Mr. Zenger's
offense against the Governor of New York. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
Your Honor, that is all beside the point. The case is whether Mr. Zenger
is guilty of libeling his Excellency, the Governor of New York and indeed
the whole administration of the government. Mr. Hamilton has confessed
the printing and publishing and nothing is plainer than that the words
Zenger used, which are cited in the information, are scandalous, and tend
to sedition, and to disquiet the minds of the people. If such papers are
not libels, at any time and place, there can be no such thing as a libel. |
Hamilton:
|
Of course there are such things as libels. But what Mr. Zenger published
is not one. Mr. Attorney just now used the words scandalous, seditious,
tending to disquiet. But, whether by design or not I will not say, he omitted
the word false. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
I think I did not omit the word false, but it has been said already
that it may be a libel, even if it be true. |
Hamilton:
|
No. We are to be tried upon this information now before the Court and
jury, to which we have pleaded not guilty. We are charged with printing
and publishing a certain false, malicious, seditious and scandalous libel.
The word false must have some meaning, or else how came it there? I hope
Mr. Attorney will not say he put it there by chance, and I submit the information
would not be valid without it. I put the case, suppose the information
had been for publishing a certain true libel, would that be the same thing?
Could Mr. Attorney support that by any precedent in English law? |
[20]
|
To show I am in earnest, and save the Court's
time, if Mr. Attorney can show us that what Mr. Zenger published about
the Governor is false, I will admit that what Mr. Zenger published was
scandalous, seditious and a libel. So now the work is shortened, and Mr.
Attorney has only to prove the words to be false, and we are guilty. |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
We have nothing to prove. The printing and publishing are confessed.
I hope some regard will be had to the authorities that have been produced,
and that even if all the words be true, that will not help them. Chief
Justice Holt, in his charge to the jury in Tutchin's Case, made no distinction
whether Tutchin's papers were false or true. And none ought to be made
here. In any case, Your Honor, if it was necessary, which I insist it is
not, how can we prove a negative? |
Hamilton:
|
"How can we prove a negative?" Very well, if it seem beyond his
powers, we will save Mr. Attorney the trouble of proving this negative.
We will prove that these papers, and every word in these papers said to
be libels, every word about the Governor and his administration to be true. |
Chief J:
|
(After the Attorney General looks at him appealingly.) You cannot be
admitted, Mr. Hamilton, to give the truth of a libel in evidence. A libel
is not to be justified, for it is nevertheless a libel that it is true. |
Hamilton:
|
I have not in all my reading met with an authority that says
we cannot give the truth in evidence upon an information for a libel. |
| Chief J: |
The law is clear, that you cannot justify a libel. |
Hamilton:
|
We are not "justifying" a libel, we are not guilty of any libel.
It is always admitted in any criminal case, that the prisoner may present
evidence of the truth of the matter, as going to his acquittal by the jury
summoned to hear the facts and decide where the truth lies. |
| Chief J: |
Give me a case that says you may give the truth of a libel in evidence. |
[21]
Hamilton:
|
I shall do so. But I beg to observe that the law of libel is a child,
if not born, yet nursed up and brought to full maturity in the Court of
Star Chamber. |
Chief J:
|
Mr. Hamilton, you'll find yourself mistaken, for in Coke's Institutes
you'll find informations for libels, long before the Court of Star Chamber. |
Hamilton:
|
I thank Your Honor. That is an authority I did propose to speak to
by and by. But as you have mentioned it, I turn to it now. I think it is
in the third volume of Coke's Institutes, under the title "libel." It is
the case of John de Northampton, for a letter to one of the King's advisors.
But the case of John de Northampton could not be
a greater, or at least a plainer, authority for us. By the judgment that
my Lord Coke sets out, as the latin text has it, qua littera continet
in se nullam veritatem. The libelous words were utterly false, and
the falsehood was the ground of the crime. And is that not what we contend
for? Do we not insist that the falsehood makes the scandal, and both make
the libel?
And how shall the jury know whether the words
in Zenger's paper are true or false but by admitting us to prove them true,
since Mr. Attorney will not prove them false?
I come to the case of the King against Tutchin,
which seems to be Mr. Attorney's chief authority. (Crosses, takes book
from the Attorney General's table. Mr. Attorney is twice mistaken. At his
trial Tutchin was asked by the King's Counsel, whether he would say the
papers were true, and he never pretended that they were. And, in summing
up, Chief Justice Holt turned to the jury and said "you" are to consider
the meaning of the words used. |
[22]
|
Again in Fuller's Case, the prisoner had made
a scandalous and infamous charge of bribery against the late King. Chief
Justice Holt said to Fuller, "can you make it appear these words are true?
You might have had subpoenas for your witnesses against this day. If you
write such things as you are charged with, it lies upon you to prove them,
at your peril." Thus said, and thus did, that great Chief Justice, Lord
Holt. And now we have acknowledged the printing and publishing of these
papers and, with the leave of the Court, we are ready to prove them to
be true, at our peril. |
Chief J:
|
Let me see the book. (Chambers crosses to the Chief Justice with book
and hands it up. There is a lengthy pause.) Mr. Attorney, you have heard
what Mr. Hamilton has said, and the cases he has cited, for having his
witnesses examined to prove the truth of the several facts contained in
Zenger's papers. What do you say? |
Att'y Gen'l:
|
The law in my opinion is very clear. They cannot be admitted to justify
a libel, for by the authorities I have already read to the Court, it is
not the less a libel because it is true. I think I need not trouble the
Court with reading the cases over again; the thing seems to be very plain,
and I submit it to the Court. (Begins to sit down, then reconsiders.) There
is another ground. I see now where Mr. Hamilton is going. He wants to turn
this trial into a contest of party and faction, and not a court of law.
He would have sedition and scandal paraded from the witness box before
this gallery of Zenger's supporters. That is his object, and to curtail
such an ambition is the right reason of the law. |
Chief J:
|
Well, Mr. Hamilton, the Court is of the opinion that you may not be
permitted to prove the facts in the papers. These are the words of the
book, "It is far from being a justification of a libel that the contents
thereof are true." |
| Hamilton: |
These are Star Chamber cases . . . . |
[23]
Chief J:
|
Mr. Hamilton, the Court has ruled. You are not permitted to argue against
the opinion of the Court. |
Hamilton:
|
I have seen the practice in very great courts, and never heard it deemed
unmannerly to . . . . |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Hamilton, it is not good manners to argue with the opinion of the
Court. |
Hamilton:
|
I will say no more at this time. The Court I see is against us in this
point, and that I hope I may be allowed to say. |
Chief J:
|
Use the Court with good manners, and you shall be allowed all the liberty
you can reasonably desire. |
Hamilton:
|
I thank Your Honor. (Turns, downstage, towards jury.) Then, gentlemen
of the jury, it is to you we must now appeal, for witnesses to the truth
of the facts we have offered, and are denied the liberty to prove. I am
warranted to apply to you by law and reason.
The law supposes you to be summoned, out of the
neighborhood where the fact is alleged to be committed; and the reason
of your being taken from the neighborhood is because you are supposed to
have the best knowledge of the fact that is to be tried.
To find my client guilty, you must take upon you
to say that these papers are false, scandalous and seditious.
I have no fear to put my client's liberty in your
hands. You are honest men. The facts we offer to prove were not committed
in a corner. They are notoriously known to be true, and therein lies our
safety.
And as we are denied the liberty of giving evidence,
to prove the truth of what we have published, I will beg leave to lay it
down as a standing rule in such cases, that the suppressing of evidence
ought always to be taken for the strongest evidence, and I hope it will
have that weight with you.
But I will seek to shorten the dispute with Mr.
Attorney, and to that end, will he favor us with some standard definition
of a libel by which it may be known whether a writing be a libel, yea or
not. |
[24]
Att'y Gen'l:
|
(Using a book from his table.) A libel is defined in the books: A malicious
defamation, expressed either in printing or in writing, tending to blacken
the memory of one who is dead, or the reputation of one who is alive. And
such a libel may be committed by saying things in a scoffing or ironical
manner, such as saying of one known to be a great scholar that he is a
good soldier but not a man of learning. |
Hamilton:
|
But how can we know, from reading your books, whether the words of
any particular paper, such as Zenger's, are malicious, or defamatory, or,
especially, spoken in a scoffing or ironical way. Suppose I said of you,
sir, that you are a very worthy gentleman. What rule have you to know if
I really mean to say you are a knave and a fool? |
Chief J:
|
Mr. Hamilton, do you think it so hard to know, when words are ironical,
or spoke in a scoffing manner? All words are libelous or not, as
they are understood. Those who are to judge of the words must judge
whether they are scandalous. There can be no doubt of it. |
| Hamilton:
|
I thank Your Honor. I am glad to find the Court of this opinion. Then
it follows that you twelve men, the jury, must understand the words in
this information against Zenger to be scandalous, that is to say that they
refer to the Governor and are false. |
| Chief J:
|
(Realizing his error.) No, Mr. Hamilton, the jury may find that Zenger
printed and published those papers, and leave it to the Court to judge
whether they are libelous. You know this is very common. It is in the nature
of a special verdict, where the jury leave the matter of law to the Court. |
[25]
Hamilton:
|
I know the jury may do so, pleasing Your Honor. But I do likewise
know that they may do otherwise. I know they have the right beyond all
dispute to determine the law and the fact, and where they do not doubt
of the law, they ought to do so.
And the fact is, these papers are true.
In times past it was a crime to speak truth, and
in that terrible Court of Star Chamber many worthy and brave men suffered
for so doing. And yet even in those bad times, a brave man durst say, "The
practice of informations for libels is a sword in the hands of a wicked
King, and an arrant coward, to cut down and destroy the innocent. Neither
one can revenge himself in another manner: The King cannot, because of
his High Station; and the coward dares not, because of his want of courage." |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
Have a care, Mr. Hamilton, what you say. I don't like those liberties. |
Hamilton:
|
Oh, no, Mr. Attorney. You surely won't be making any applications to
stop my speaking. |
| Chief J: |
Gentlemen! This is a court of law. |
Hamilton:
|
All men agree that we are governed by the best of Kings, and there
is no question in point of duty to my King.
But men in authority are not exempt from observing
the rules of common justice. And what are we subjects here to do about
Governors who refuse to tolerate complaints of any kind about their own
government. We are told that they will answer a suit in Westminster, in
London, for a wrong done here, but who among us can leave family and home
and to prosecute a Governor in London for an injury suffered here. |
[26]
| |
So what is a man to do, except to tell his
sufferings to his neighbor? And when he is prosecuted for libel, what safety
does he have except that a jury will follow the law and say, "not guilty"?
And by the law I do not mean old and discredited
doctrine. There is heresy in law, as well as in religion, and both have
changed very much. We well know that not two centuries ago, a man would
have been burnt as a heretic for expressing such opinions in matters of
religion as are publicly written and printed at this day. I presume that
even in New York, men take this freedom, yet I have heard of no information
brought by Mr. Attorney for any offences of this sort.
From which I think it is pretty clear that, in New
York, a man may make very free with his god, but he must take special care
what he says of his Governor.
Members of the jury, a glorious revolution pulled
down the Court of Star Chamber. And the reason assigned was that the proceedings
of that Court, even though the greatest men of the realm, nay and a Bishop,
too—holy man—sat upon it, had by experience been found to be an intolerable
burden.
The people of England clearly saw the danger of
entrusting it to these great men to say what was scandalous and seditious,
false or ironical. And if Parliament thought this power of judging was
too great to be trusted with men of the first rank in the Kingdom, without
the aid of a jury, I hope I can be excused for saying that the jury are
the proper judges in this case, of what is false at least, if not of what
is scandalous and seditious. |
| Att'y Gen'l: |
Where is it written that juries are to cut and tailor the law to the
fashion set by wandering advocates? What is the case for that? |
[27]
Hamilton:
|
Where? I may be pardoned for referring to the case of William Penn,
for whose family I was at one time counsel. It seems that Mr. Penn and
Mr. Mead, being Quakers, were shut out of their meeting house by official
order. They then preached in Gracechurch Street to people of their own
persuasion. The jury refused to convict them. The Court was so offended
that they fined the jurors forty marks apiece, and committed them till
paid. But Mr. Bushel, of that jury, valued the right of a juryman and the
liberty of his country more than his own, refused to pay the fine.
From whence we get the judgment in Bushel's Case,
by Chief Justice Vaughn, that judges, howsoever great they be, have no
right to punish a jury, for not finding a verdict according to the direction
of the Court. |
Chief J:
|
I remind you, Mr. Hamilton, that Bushel's Case limits not at all the
power of judges to punish lawyers--howsoever clever they be-- who tell
juries to take law into their own hands. |
Hamilton:
|
I thank Your Honor. I am doing all in my power to stay within
the bounds the Court has set.
Members of the jury, when you come to judge the
meaning of these words, you may watch out for what Mr. Attorney claims
to be the innuendos. Zenger's paper does not always call the Governor by
his name, nor does it do more than protest this or that exaction in general
terms. Yet Mr. Attorney has said that the forbidden reference to the Governor
may be supplied by innuendo, that is by Mr. Attorney's pretending to know
what is really meant. For example, Zenger's paper speaks of "the condition
of the people of New York," but Mr. Attorney charges in his information
that Zenger really meant the deplorable condition of the people
of New York. |
[28]
|
I sincerely believe that if some person were
to go through the streets of New York these days, and read a part of the
bible, if it was not known to be such, Mr. Attorney, with the help of his
innuendos,
would easily turn it into a libel. Suppose someone should repeat, in a
manner not pleasing to his betters, from the 56th chapter of Isaiah, "His
watchmen are blind, they are ignorant. . . Yea, they are greedy dogs which
can never have enough." But to make this a libel, there is, according to
Mr. Attorney's doctrine, not more wanting but the aid of his skill, in
the right adapting of his innuendos, as for instance, "His watchmen (innuendo,
the Governor's Council and Assembly) are all blind, they are ignorant (innuendo,
they will not see the dangerous designs of his Excellency). Yea, they (innuendo,
the Governor and Council) are greedy dogs, which can never have enough
(innuendo, enough of riches and power).
Such an instance is only fit to be laughed at, but
I may appeal to Mr. Attorney himself if this is no more than with some
of his innuendos.
Once you have disposed of this question of
meaning,
you confront the matter squarely: Have these papers been shown to be false.
I . . . |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Hamilton, the Court is watching you. |
Hamilton:
|
And Mr. Hamilton is watching the Court, Your Honor. Very carefully,
indeed.
Gentlemen, if you upon reading these papers be of
the opinion that there is no falsehood in them you ought to say so, because
you don't know whether others, and I mean the Court, will be of that opinion.
It is your right to do so, and there is much depending upon your resolution
and your integrity.
To a generous mind, the loss of liberty is worse
than death, yet we know there have been powerful men in all ages, who for
the sake of preferment, or some imaginary honor, have freely lent a helping
hand to oppress, nay to destroy, their country. |
[29]
|
Power, you see, may be compared to a great
river. If you keep it within its due bounds it is both beautiful and useful.
But when it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemmed.
It bears down all before it, and brings destruction and desolation wherever
it comes. If this is the nature of power, let us least do our duty, and
like wise men, who value freedom, use our utmost care to support liberty,
the only bulwark against lawless power, which in all ages has sacrificed
to its wild lust and boundless ambition, the blood of the best men that
ever lived.
I am not equal to this undertaking. As you can see,
I labor under the weight of many years, and am borne down with great infirmities
of body. Yet old and weak as I am, I should think it my duty if required
to go to the utmost part of the land, where my service could be of any
use.
The question before you, gentlemen of the jury,
is not of small or private concern. It is not the cause of the poor printer,
nor of New York alone. No! It may in its consequence affect every freeman
that lives under a British government on the main of America. It is the
best cause. It is the cause of liberty. (He sits down, exhausted.) |
| Chief J: |
Mr. Attorney? |
Att'y General:
|
May it please the Court. Mr. Hamilton has gone greatly out of his way,
more greatly even than the journey from Philadelphia to New York, to entertain
us. I see that he has made himself quite merry, and some other people as
well. But did you listen to the cases he chose to cite, and the parts of
them to which he clung? There is no Bushel's Case here, nor any case of
a Quaker rioting in Gracechurch Street. There is only the case of a printer,
the prisoner Zenger, that the jury has to consider. All you need for your
verdict, members of the jury, is to reflect that Zenger printed and published
not one but two scandalous libels, which very clearly reflected upon his
Excellency the Governor and the principal men concerned in the administration
of this government. And now, Zenger has confessed, through his counsel,
the printing and the publishing. This being confessed, and the scandalous
nature of these papers appearing beyond doubt, I have the greatest confidence
in referring you to the Court for your direction upon this case. |
[30]
|
His Majesty's Kingdom and dominions may be likened to
a house for all his subjects. The laws he makes in parliament are the nails,
pegs, joists and rafters of that house. If you take it upon yourselves,
as subjects, to pull up the nails, or break the rafters, I warn you that
you may be embarked upon a mischief that ends in tumult and disarray. If
you have a care, as loyal subjects, you will respect this structure of
laws that His Majesty has built. You will then return a verdict according
to the law and the evidence--a verdict of guilty. |
Chief J:
|
Gentlemen of the jury. There is not a man or woman in this room who
can doubt what Mr. Hamilton has tried to do upon this occasion. He has
taken great pains to show how little regard juries are to pay to the opinion
of judges. And his insisting so much upon the conduct of some judges in
trials of this kind is done no doubt with a design that you should take
but very little notice of what I might say upon this occasion. I shall
therefore only observe to you that, as the facts or words of the information
are confessed, the only thing that can come in question before you is,
whether the words set forth in the information make a libel. And that is
a matter of law, no doubt, and you may leave it to the Court. As Lord Chief
Justice Holt once told a jury, "To say that corrupt officers are appointed
to administer affairs is certainly a reflection on the government. If individuals
should not be called to account for possessing the people with an ill opinion
of the government, no government can subsist." You will consider your verdict. |
(House lights up half. Spot on foreman of jury. House lights down. Hunt
comes forward.)
| Chief J: |
Have you a verdict? |
| Thom. Hunt: |
We have, Your Honor. We find the defendant John Zenger "not guilty". |
[31]
| Chief J: |
The prisoner is discharged. This court is adjourned without day. |
(Reaction at counsel table. Judge and Attorney General exit. Lights
down on bench. Alexander, Margaret, Hunt and Peter Zenger come forward.
Zenger and Hamilton embrace. Margaret and Hamilton embrace. Handshaking
all around.)
Alexander:
|
You must come with us, sir. To the Black Horse tavern. They are going
to present you the liberty of New York. |
Hamilton:
|
Alexander, whoever "they" are, they do not have the "liberty of New
York." All we did was to free Zenger here. The liberty of New York will
have to be won on some other day, and perhaps in some other manner. |
| Alexander: |
They mean to toast your victory. |
| Margaret: |
Father should rest. You see how tired he is. |
Hamilton:
|
Now Margaret, it is bad manners not to raise a cup to a jury's verdict,
when it goes your way. Of course, if it doesn't go your way, it is the
usual practice to raise more than one cup. |
| Margaret: |
Perhaps for a little while . . . . |
Hamilton:
|
We'll join you presently. (All exit except Hamilton and Margaret. Hamilton
turns to Margaret.) There is a wind blowing, Margaret. |
| Margaret: |
(Puzzled.) But, father, it is a still August night. |
Hamilton:
|
(Laughs.) oh, I know that. But there is a wind blowing all the same.
It blows from the print shops of men like Zenger, and like young Franklin
in Philadelphia. It blows from the coffeehouses and philosophical societies,
in Philadelphia and New York, and I hear even in Boston. I do not know,
Margaret, what discomfort you younger people will endure before it has
blown itself out. |
| Margaret: |
I don't understand, father. |
[32]
Hamilton:
|
(Reaches for a book on counsel table.) It is here in this book. Lord
Coke, in Dr. Bonham's case, told us that there is a law, founded upon right
reason, that both the subject and the King must obey. When the King sends
us men like this Governor, this Attorney General and this Chief Justice,
who have no regard for that law, the subjects may decide that they, too,
are relieved of the obligation of obedience. That is when the wind begins
to blow in earnest. Enough of that. Let's join the others. |
(He takes her arm, and they exit as lights go down.)
[Curtain]
[33]
|
