" was awarded for " an offence so "outrageous" in the case Regina v. Pitman.
2. Having read the Attorney General's statement of his reasons for refusing to take steps for summoning a special jury upon Mr Nelson's application, and contents and the report of the proceedings as reported from the "China Mail" in the pamphlet enclosed in your despatch, I find do not see any sufficient ground for instituting an enquiry of the kind.
3. The proceedings appear to have been perfectly regular, Pitman having been convicted of libel. ... Nelson ... desired by ... Pitman ... 435 ... thing. Justice ... who appears to have been properly ... hid the ... right and perpetrator. ... the duty of ... Justice ... not ... Secretary of State to ... the convicted of a ... Can ... opening a Libel.
With view to judicial proceedings or to expound as to the adequacy of the sentence on Mr Nelson, N.B. The Judge adduced there was "justification" (see Lord Kimberley's minute) but professed might be urged in regard to the degree of provocation received by the conflict which might be argued in mitigation. ... regard to Mr Nelson's speech as a "provocation" which might be argued in mitigation of punishment. I fail to see how Mr Nelson's speech would ... cost ... upon the in the Chamber of Commerce on 23rd February 1880 any extenuation of the libel on others, adigmatised.