ouncils were henceforward held without the Chief
Justice, Lord Mansfield in his place in Parliament stood by the
Government, and vigorously defended them against a virulent Opposition.
Pitt, "blasting his character," according to Horace Walpole, "for the
sake of a paltry annuity and a long-necked peeress," had followed his
ancient rival into the House of Lords, and by this suicidal act given
Mansfield an immense advantage. Chatham, eager enough to tie his victim
to the stake, was doomed to bitter disappointment in an arena utterly
unfitted for the exercise of his peculiar powers. The atmosphere of the
House of Peers, admirably suited to the calm dignity and sublime
moderation of Mansfield, proved too often nipping frost to the burning
declamation of the man whose very look could rouse a more popular
assembly, and whose words oftener than once had inspired it with the
noblest sentiments. It was not in the House of Lords that at this period
of his history Lord Mansfield found his most dangerous opponent. A secret
enemy had arisen in the outside world amongst the people, one even more
unscrupulous than Chatham in his animosity: one who reveled in his
questionable privilege of striking in the dark, and who justified abuse
that knew no mercy, and acknowledged no law, by reiterated and fervid
appeals to God and his country. The moral courage of Murray had once
given way in the House of Commons, when Pitt, speaking daggers to him,
and suddenly exclaiming, "Judge Festus trembles, he shall hear me another
day," quietly sat down. But his sufferings were nothing compared with the
torture his weakness underwent beneath the repeated inflictions of the
unsparing Junius.

Toward the close of the year 1769 Junius sent forth his celebrated letter
to the King, for the publication of which criminal informations were laid
against Woodfall, as well as against Almon and Miller, who immediately
reprinted the libel. "Rex v. Almon" was the first case brought to trial,
and the jury found a general verdict of guilty. The defense set up in the
trial against Woodfall was, that the letter was not libellous. The part
which Lord Mansfield took is well known. He contended that

"All the jury had to consider was, whether the defendant had published
the letter set out in the information, and whether the inuendos, imputing
a particular meaning to particular words, as that 'the K----' meant His
Majesty King George III., but that they were not to consider w