[1] American scholar Leonard W. Levy argues that seditious libel "has always been an accordion-like concept, expandable or contractible at the whim of judges".
Proving that the statement is true was not a defence but in the Trial of the Seven Bishops (1688), the seven Lords Spiritual including the Archbishop of Canterbury were acquitted of seditious libel because they had been exercising their right to petition.
[13] The crime of seditious libel was defined and established in England during the 1606 case De Libellis Famosis by the Star Chamber.
[15] The United States' Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 broke with the common law precedent of the time, in that it allowed for truth as a defense, though judges were not consistent in their rulings.
John Peter Zenger was arrested and imprisoned for seditious libel in 1734 after his newspaper criticized the colonial governor of New York.
[16] One hundred years later, Nova Scotia's Joseph Howe also won a jury acquittal on a charge of seditious libel after his newspaper printed allegations that local politicians and police were stealing from the people.
[17] Having severely censured the actions of the government in print with reference to the 1819 Peterloo Massacre, Sir Francis Burdett was prosecuted at Leicester assizes, fined £1,000, and committed to prison by Best, J. for three months for the crime of "composing, writing, and publishing a seditious libel" with explanation: My opinion of the liberty of the press is that every man ought to be permitted to instruct his fellow subjects; that every man may fearlessly advance any new doctrines, provided he does so with proper respect to the religion and government of the country; that he may point out errors in the measures of public men; but he must not impute criminal conduct to them.