e 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 bailiff.

[Footnote 14: Sir John Holt (1642-1710) held the recordership of London,
in 1685, and was appointed Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench in
1688. In the celebrated case, Ashby _v._. White, Holt strongly upheld
the rights of the voter as against the House of Commons. He was
distinguished, in his time, for the fair and impartial hearing he always
accorded a prisoner, and he even personally assisted the accused in
cases where the law did not allow him to be represented by counsel. Many
of Holt's opinions did become "standard maxims." [T.S.]]

[Footnote 15: Admiral Sir George Rooke (1650-1709), who, with
Rear-Admiral Byng, captured Gibraltar in 1704. [T.S.]]

If Sir John Holt's opinion were a standard maxim for all times and
circumstances, any writer, with a very small measure of discretion,
might easily be safe; but, I doubt, in practice it hath been frequently
controlled, at least before his time; for I take it to be an old rule in
law.

I have read, or heard, a passage of Signor Leti, an Italian; who being
in London, busying himself with writing the History of England, told
King Charles the Second, that he endeavoured as much as he could to
avoid giving offence, but found it a thing impossible; although he
should have been as wise as Solomon: The King answered, that if this
were the case, he had better employ his time in writing proverbs as
Solomon did: But Leti lay under no public necessity of writing; neither
would England have been one halfpenny the better, or the worse, whether
he writ or no.

This I mention, because I know it will readily be objected, "What have
private men to do with the public? What call had a Drapier to turn
politician, to meddle in matters of state? Would not his time have been
better employed in looking to his shop; or his pen in writing proverbs,
elegies, ballads, garlands, and wonders? He would then have been out of
all danger of proclamations, and prosecutions. Have we not able
magistrates and counsellors hourly watching over the public weal?" All
this may be true: And yet, when the addresses from both Houses of
Parliament, against Mr. Wood's halfpence, failed of success; if some pen