{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022151898734177215, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006329113924050633, 'mean_word_length': 5.086538461538462, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Servants, Masters and Seditious Libel in Eighteenth-Century England

In the eighteenth-century English publishing trades, a master could be convicted of seditious libel even if a servant sold libelous items without the master's knowledge or consent. Several trials early in the century highlighted the injustice of this situation, and when coupled with changing views about the nature of servants' work, a debate ensued about a jury's right to consider fully the intent of individuals charged with selling seditious works. This ultimately laid the basis for Fox's Libel Act of 1792, allowing juries to determine law as well as fact.