The Sun. — London, England, 1827-10-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, OCT. 24. THE KING V. TAYLOR. (In our Paper of yesterday we were only able, from the.early hour of going-to-press, to give an imperfect abstract of Mr. Tay lot's defence. We now supply a more correct and full report.) DEFENCE. Mr. Taylor then stepped forward, and addressed t h e Jury as' follows Gentlemen of the Jury,—l shall not deny, nor .affect to conceal, thy deep sense of the pecidiar ficidties of the situation in which lam placed. 111 : all o tli er cases an accused person may confidently rely on the impartiality of a British Jury; btu where religious animosities, the very strongest • that can misguide the judgments of men, have originated the proceedings, the chances are fearfully against a , defendant, though ," his righteousness were as clear as the light, and his just dealing as the noon-day." For iri ouch a case the defendant has not to fear 'merely that his mode of defence may.not be the most judicious.:--hiS proofs of .innocence not the clearest —his arguments not the most cogent that ever car ried conviction to the understandings, and impres sion to the hearts of. rational men ; but he trembles on the far more perilous hazard that he may per chance be offering those proofs and arguments to minds barricadoed by .prejudice—cased in 'adamant against conviction, that but beholding the avowed enemy of their faith,. - will consider it . (as religious Per= sons age's of the world have ever done)as an obli gation of consciencelo be unjust, and their duty to be cruel. The interests of religion will forbid the exercise of humanity, and faith stand sentinel over captive rea son: I need only hint at the perfect parallel of the cir cumstances in which this prosecution places me, to those in which the wisest and best men the world ever hadinit have fallen sacrifices to the mistaken interests or misguided zeal of those who " verily believed that they ought to do such things, and that Avhen they p e r s ecuted God's creatures they did God ser vice.' • I mean not to compare myself to the mar tyrs, nor my prosecutors to the persecutors in those cases; but should it be my misfortune on the pre sent ()Cession to address persons of similar senti ments, or of congenial feelings to those of 'the in tolerant :faction with whom this prosecution origi nated, God knows the cases would be parallel in deed. With them '1 am sure that no defence which I could urge would avail ; and I am entitled to say, after the language of the learned opener, by whom it is conducted—for when I hear such words ap plied, even in hypothesis, to any human being, as that he is a nuisance, and his friends a nest of ver min, I ask not if that be the language of charity, I only inquire if it be that of justice—l am entitled to say that if such - be the character of the persons 1 address,,then- God knows the cases are parallel in deed. With them I am sure no defence that I - could urge would avail. Gentlemen, the difficulty of pur suing such a line as shall be absolutely unexception able, is beyond my ability. I can only pledge my self—and I do so most cheerfully—not to intend to offend—not to 'deserve to be interrupted. I will not, if I can possibly avoid it, utter a single senti ment Which any conscientious and honourably minded man, however different his religious persua sions may%e from mine, can reasonably deem excep tionable; and, in return for this pledge, allow me, gentlemen, to expect from you such a measure of patience, and, if need should occur, of for giveness too, for any word of mine which may not be the best, as you would feel your need of, if you stood in my situation, and would most cer tainly receive were I in yours. Dismiss from your minds, I entreat you, all those absurd slanders which my theological, and, mayliap, my legal enemies have circulated, that I must needs be a something which they are not—a monster of iniquity, an Atheist, a sot, a madman, every thing which malice could devise, when nothing of the kind could ,be proved. Gentlemen, lam no such character; lam not an Atheist, tam not a Christian ; neither am I a hypocrite, . I am .in my heart and soul a Deist. In the cause of Deism I . have siiffered what in any other cause would be accounted a real martyrdom. For Deism I have incurred the loss of natural rela tions and friends, of property, of liberty itself, and have' held my life and my life's comfort, of inferior consideration to the great duty of .inculcating just and worthy notions of the Supreme Being on an insulted and priest-ridden people. I sincerely be lieve.in God, in the common God and Father of us all, I believe also that lam bound by the most sacred obligations that can bind a man to conduct myself in life, in every respect, just exactly as I have done," constantly to speak- the truth, boldly to rebuke vice, and patiently. to suffer for the truth's sake." I have not brought myself into this unen viable situation from a fanatical heroism of character, nor from an irrational appetite for notoriety; for though I have confidence enough in this, cause, and fortitude enough in this heart, to be led once more to prison, or even unto death, I can not deny my fear of air adverse verdict; because, I could not but regard it arian omen of worse oppres sions to mankind, a divot* of the sacred wedlock which - God bath Consecrated between the heart and tongue of man—fatal to virtue and to liberty. By such a 'verdict you will indeed crush me, and put down the noble institutions which I have founded ; but, in doing so, you will also crush liberty of con science, and set up Popish tyranny and arbitrary power; (tr, which is the same thing under another name, methodistical tyranny and arbitrary power. Gentlemen, you are, I presume, aware that this prosecution has been instituted under the auspices of the Lord Mayor (himself - a dissenter from the Establisha&l Church, claiming and enjoying . that very liberty which he denies to me), chiefly with a view to the suppression of the Areopagus, of which I have been the public orator, and of the Christian Evidence Society, and the Society of Universal Benevolence, of both of which I am the founder, and which have been regularly held—the one for the free and public discussion of the various treatises which learned men have 'written upon the evidences of the Christian religion; the other for the inculcation of moral duties, in that Areopagus. My defence, therefore; in its first priposlium, obliges ins to speak of both these institutions; because, if I can show that they are innocent, it.will follow that I am so too, and that the Lord Mayor and:.the city of London have bad no reason for the measures they hare adopted against me. The Society of Universal Benevolence was first in stituted in Dublin, on the 14th of March, 1824, and patronised and supported by some of the most l'e• spectable and opulent persons in that city, for the public worship of Almighty God and inculcation of the moral duties, which man, under all circum stances, owes to his fellow man , without respect or reference to the dogmas of a, barbarous antiquity or eredenda of any faith whatever. This society has been since continued in London in the chapel which my friends had purchased of the disciples of Dr. Collyer, 86, Cannon - stre et, and since called th e Areopagus of the Christian Evidence Society. There, or at .Founder's Hall-chapel, Lothbury,which the society previously oc cupied, Divine Service has been regularly performed since the month of July, 1826, up to the commencement of my most unjust captivity in June last, as a victim (under pretext of a fraudulently pretended debt, which the Almighty knows I never , owed) to the persecuting sect of Quakers, the service of boththese places being per . formed according to this Holy Liturgy, which lan y -• self compiled from the Liturgy of the Church of England—a compilation of which the congregation of the Areopagus hold to be more agreeable to, the dictates of their consciences and more acceptable to the Deity than any other. The Christian Evi dence Society was first instituted in London, on the 12th of November, 1824, for the purpose (as the name expressos) of investigating the evidences of the Christian religion. On that day I delivered, and have s in c e published and extensively circu lated, this Inaugural Lecture, the e cture, bearing a motto, as o you see, declarativeprinciple of my proceed ings, from first to last • a pledge and guarantee to you that it was discussion, and di scuss ion only, - that I instituted; and therefore no attack on Christianity can have:been com m i tte d by Selves' shall think that ne, unless you Christianity your- is sane of the things that will not bear discussion, and that an in quiry into its evidences must necessarily be fatal to its pretensions. I opposed it, indeed but I opposed it only with the_ most noble and ingenuous challenge that Was ever proposed to rational men. Nunkfingo : num mentior? Cnpio refelli, quid enim laboro, nisi zct veritas in omni qucestione illustretur. I beg leave, gentlemen, to hand you a copy of this discourse. Lord TENTsaisEN—You cannot ask the Jury to read any thing which is not proved. It must be put in evidence, or they cannot read it. Mr. Taylor—Gentlemen, this oration fully ex plains the principles on which our Society . was founded, the rules by which it was conducted, and the end at which it aims. On that day I waited on the then Lord Mayor, in person, to request not merely his allowance, but his patronage and support of so unexceptionable and useful an institution. His allowance, at least, and that of his successor, sanc tioned the known and publicly advertised continu ance of our meetings through two whole years, in the course of which I ,have delivered upwards of a hundred popular orations in exposure of the fallacies and sophisms which abound in the writings of Chris tian divines, and have achieved the conviction of many thousands of 'persons, without incurring any menace of intended magisterial interference, without any apprehension, on my part, that I had ever sub jected myself to such interference. You will ob serve, gentlemen, upon how candid a principle the disctissions of the Christian Evidence Society have been conducted from the very first, and you will calculate as you please the chances whether they could possibly have continued so long, would have been patronised as they were; or oppoSed as they have been, had they been conducted on any other principles. Ministers, preachers, and competently learned persons of all religious persuasions, were earnestly invited to become the advocates of the faith which they profess, before assemblies of intelligent and respectable persons convened to hear both sides, and who only required to be reasoned with as men. Of the intellectual competence of the persons by whom they were thus invited to the lists of contro versy, it becomes not me to speak, further than in assurance that it is-not the very highest order of educa tion that England can confer upon hersons that could guarantee that competence, if it were not to be encoun tered in the Areopagus. Of the part I held in these discussions I claim no further consideration, gentle men, than your observance, that had my orations been no better than my enemies would have them thought to be, I should not have been here this day ; for it was not till I had acquired a considerable popularity —till the society had bei:ome possessed of a real property, and the zeal and attachment of its Members had given assurance to the public of the probability of its permanent continuance, that our enemies discovered the impotence of an affected contempt. It will not bear telling to rational men that such an edifice•as the Areopagus had been pur chased by voluntary subscription, and the ninety third oration attracted to that Areopagus a crowded and intelligent audience, to listen to an orator whose declamations had been destitute of argument; whose style had been characterised by coarseness, or whose language had been tainted with obscenity.-- Must I tell you, gentlemen, that the language of the Old Testament, and certain passages of the New, were, for any reason you may please to guess at, never allowed to be quoted in the Areopagus ? It has also been a standing rule of the Society, that the being and attributes of the Almighty should never be brought in question ; and that, not merely with a view to confine the range of argument to the pre scribed topic, but to prevent the possibility of the least approximation to any thing that could be deem ed profane, atheistical, or wicked; and I can confi dently appeal to the ladies of the Areopagus,—of character as far above the breath of calumny to taint, as the wife or daughter of any individual in this Court,—that from my lips they never heard an unpolished period, never any other than the very chastest of language, and the noblest and • best of sentiments. But the gravamen of the charge against these philosophical institutions, it seems, is their ap prehensien of " mischievous influence upon the minds of young persons especially." Now, how regard ye, gentlemen, this audacious frontispiece of hypocrisy ?—that influencing the minds of young persons should be held to be so capitally criminal in us by those who never made a convert to their own opinions of any adult rational person in all the world, whose ascendancy over the human understanding is achieved only in the nurseries of infancy and in the chambers of decrepitude, and who have instituted their gospel-propagating and missionary bubbles for the avowed purpose of preachiag to barbarians and savages—to Caffres; Caribbees, and Hottentots—or the fetid Samoeid and the fierce Lascar, the doc trines which they see secretly despised, or publicly abjured, by the most intelligent and ♦irtuous men in civilized society. Lord TENTERDEN—No Sir, that is not so. The wisest and best men of society are far from abjuring those doctrines. Mr. Taylor proceeded—But, Gentlemen, above all things, I claim your very special consideration to the characteristic feature of the Christian Evidence Society, that the mode of argument adopted in fhe Areopagus happens to be precisely that which ob tains in the Divinity Schools in Camtoridge, of which I have the honour of being a member, and where, as a necessary , discipline to the obtaining of their Bachelor of Arts' degree, the students dispute in Latin, both for and against the Christian religion; and I have won high honour there for doing the very thing for which my enemies would have me disgraced and ruined here.. I leave it then, with sufficient satisfaction of my own mind, to the conclusion of any man who has a mind, whether it be any thing like justice or fairness to make it a distinCtion, that a thing may be spoken in Latin, which may not be spoken in English; that that which is orthodoxy in Cambridge, should become blasphenny in London; or whether it be I, or they . whom•l oppose, who re flect the greater dishonour on Christianity; I bring it forth to the light, which every thing that is true would seek to be set in; they, by their conduct, be traying their conviction that Christianity will not bear the light, that public discussion will be danger ous, that ridicule and sarcasm will be fatal to it. upon my honour, think that they will be so; but surely it is barbarous to punish me for this, in the teeth Of so strong a presumption that they think so too; the only difference between us being, that I am an unbeliever, and an honest one ; they are un believers, but as honest as you may, reckon them to be. Allow me, Gentlemen, theindulgence of letting a friend read for me a few passages from the inaugural oration, and the manifesto of the Christian Evidence Society; and if you shall afterwards think that a society founded on the principles there avowed ought not to be tolerated, I shall complain of no verdict you may please to agree on, but resign myself to the fate of all good men,who have made their calculation that it is better to suffer wrong than to do it ; and that man cannot suffer in a better cause than to un deceive and disabuse a priest-ridden pe6ple- 7 to re cover them from the insanity of a barbarous super stition—to reclaim their minds to reason, and their hearts to virtue. _ . AlrrWY SY I.,t,axapi an'4locEsr, cp.,05':, 3 7;! Hare I your Lordship's permission to have some quotations read to the Jury ? Lord TRITERDEN—NOU may read them as part of your address; but the Jury cannot receive them as any thing else than as part of your speech unless put in and proved. !Mr. Taylor—Will your Lordship allow me the favour of letting them be read by a friend—my attorney ? Lord TENTERDEN—NO ; I . cannot allow that ; I 'am in no burry. Any time for rest, any accommo dation—refreshment, you want, shall be given to you ; but you do not seem to stand in need of assist ance. You are very well able to proceed. I must do in this as in other cases. Mr. Taylor then proceeded—Gentlemen, I slial take the liberty of reading a passage from this ]his. course. It is as follows : " The importance of theological discussions, even to those who might think it but equivocally established in the recorded practice and positive injunctions of the first twit- ers of the Christian Religion, admits of the dearest demon stration of rational argument. Christianity itself was not established, and ,never could have been, by that sort of preaching in which one speaker only is exalted like a Deity above the listening crowd, and invested with the stupen dous prerogative of delivering dogmas which no man may question, and putting questions which no man may answer. He who appeared on earth with at least as good a right, as any of his followers to claim authority and dic tation, yet suffered himself to be answered again, and stood before the people, not as. the sole speaker, but as in, turn hearing them and asking them questions. His immediate followers .held public discussions; and to the disputations which were held for two years in the school of one Tyrau nus, the sacred Scriptures ascribe the fact, " that all Asia heard the Word of God." Nor could any persons have respected those positive injunctions to " prove all things," and to " take heed that no man deceived them," who should prove nothing, or should allow any man to address th'em without a liability to be cross-examined, and ques tioned as to the validity of his assertions on those things which, as they concern all men, all men are equally con cerned to know. It is from this truth, however, and not from authority, example, or positive injunction of any sort (although I have shown that the highest and best that call be, or be pretended, are all on this side), that I proceed in the demonstration of the importance of theological dis cussions, " If they who are said to have possessed credentials of a Divine Mission ',(which certainly none on earth can now pretend to), if they who, whether they did or (lid not work miracles, are said to have done so, did yet appeal to men's reason, and invite and exhort them ,to look for themselves into the evidence of those things which they propounded to them, theological discussion must have been the first of Christian exercises—theological disputation the first of Christian duties." Now,.Gentlemen„ let me call your attention to the evidence, if I must be obliged to give that name to the incompetent, garbled trash which the witness has sworn to. That poor man, as you saw it elicited by the questions proposed .to him, was hired and suborned to carry back a report of my ora tions, in which there must have been something to give colour to the intended prosecution, or he would have lost the guerdon of his iniquity; his testimony was purchased for its cheapness, and put up with for lack of that of better and honester men, who would not have acted as this man has acteil for ten times the price that the crapulous barbarians in the back .ground hare paid him for it. For, look ye, gentlemen, are ye to be told that persons of no better education than the witness would have entered an assembly of literary men, into the like of which, in all probability, he had never entered be fore, and take notes, forsooth, being a fellow of no note at all, from spontaneous good intention ? From persons who had been competent to have reported my orations, I had nothing to fear. If his Lordship, —if the gentlemen of the bar, or any of yourselves had heard the orations quoted in the indictments as I delivered them, I persuade myself you would be hugely astonished at the wholly different complexion which the ignorance and bigotry of the witness has given to the expressions charged against me. Without having the whole context before you, it is impossible that an adverse verdict should be just; and that context(you will recollect) comprehends not only every thing that I delivered,but every thing, also, that was urged by the advocates of Christianity, of which I was the the virtual author—l having called them to discussion—l having engaged public attention to their arguments, and mine standing but as the prole gomena and introduction to theirs—as a challenge to, provoke, or an illustration to adorn them : and I ap peal to the sincerest Christians in the world—to those who have the very highest respect for Chris tianity, and the deepest conviction of the sufficiency of its evidences—whether those evidences could pos sibly have come down to us, or would have been so ample as they esteem them to be, had the inquiries of sceptics, and the objections of infidels, been an swered only as my opponents answer me, with ha tred for their persons, with such foul language as that of " nuisance " applied to them, and " a nest of vermin " to their friends, and with a severe punish ment for their honesty. If you yourselves are Chris tians, and believe yourselves to have " a reason for the *hope which is in you," you owe that reason to the conduct of persons who acted in every respect as I have done ; who, objecting to the evidences of your lirith as I object to them, and as an immediate Apostle of Christ himself is said to have done, did not conceal nor suppress their objections, but gave them the strongest language, the utmost publicity, and the widest circulation— • " Unless I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my anger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." John, xx. 25. --- --- Such was the language of an infidel ; but if Chris tianity be true, it was the language of Divine in spiration. To punish me for using the like—and stronger no infidel on earth could possibly have used —would be to return evil for good, and to pay fOr that which you account your greatest blessing, with the greatest ingratitude. For you should recollect, gentlemen, that that which was never called in ques tion, could never have been proved; that which no man had liberty to deny, no man could have reason to believe. A religion, therefore, which punishes an infidel hath every mark of imposture upon it that imposture possibly could have, and must as certainly and necessarily be false as God is true. To reflect on Christianity this dishonour by punishing me, would be to do the very act which Christianity for bids, and which its consecrated text denounces, as " crucifying the Son of God afresh, and putting him to an open shame." But is it for any strength of language I have used ? Take the most admired orations of antiquity—the Olynthiacs of Demos thenes, or the Philippics of Cicero, and subject them to the same temper and criticism as has been arrayed against mine—let them be garbled, dispersed, and scattered : and then, too, those illustrious orators would sink to the level to which my enemies would reduce me. But surely, gentlemen, it would not be a monstrous stretch of vanity, Should an orator claim from such men as the witness, or as the bigotted fanatics who set him on, the considerations which Euripides is said to have challenged from an Athen ian auditory, when he remonstrated against their in competent criticism—" I spake to teach the people, not to be taught by them." And surely, gentlemen, I ought not to be made the victim, because persons who had no right, bat by my allowance, obtruded themselves on our assemblies—because a barbarous horde of Goths and Vandals have broken in upon the sacred seat of science and philosophy. Am I to be guilty of blasphemy because these men are in nocent of reason ? Remember only the specimen you have had of the ability and disposition of the street-keeper, Thomas Collins, and ask your own honourable hearts, if .it became the justice of the British metropolis, that your Lord Mayor should have incarcerated me for five days on the felon's side of the meanest prison in his jurisdiction —re fusing to accept hail when offered upon the spot, and declaring, that be " must see that humanity to me might not be inhumanity to the public," because the street-keeper had given him such a report as so illiterate, so ignorant, so stupid a man, was likely t o give of an hypothetical apostrophe in my oration which he.did not understand. I will give it you as it was. [Mr. Taylor here repeated from his oration the following passage.] But this it was, and of this hypothetical character have all my orations been— " Ask the .Jew, the proprietor and the depositary of what you call the Old Testament. Will he consent that the invidious name should be applied to what he calls the lively oracles of God ? Will he consent to the cashiering and superannuation of that sacred volume which God gave to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant ?—(Psalm iv. cv. 10.) And of which by his holiness he swore (Psalm lxxxix. v. 85), that it should be as the sun before him, and as the faithful witness in heaven. The Jew will answer, An oath, an oath, I have an oath in heaven. Shall God lay perjury to his soul No, not for Jesus ! If, then, your New Testament be of God, your God himself is perjured, and fie upon his laws." -Lord TENTERDEN (mildly).—l wish you would not utter such things. Mr. Taylor proceeded--" I answer only for him as the Son of Israel would answer for himself, and k in demonstration to you that your Jew-converting Societies, as well as your Missionary and Bible Asso ciations, do not proceed one step off the safe ground of keeping the prerogative of speech exclusively to themselves, but would sooner meet the devil himself, than suffer themselves to be addressed in turn by an honest man, who could confute their fallacies, con front their falsehood; and confound their folly--92d oration." Such was the general character of my orations. I ask only, was not the witness likely to misunderstand them ? Has lie not misunderstood them ? And is there any law or power on earth to punish me for not bringing my language down to the level of his comprehension ? God bless him ! I could not do it ! As to the charge of my having treated certain portions of Scripture with indecent levity —I answer, I have treated no passages of Scripture with levity, but such as the soundest theo logians and most learned critics in,Europe have ad mitted to be most flagrantly and flagitiously apo cryphal. I am still as orthodox as the majority of our bench of Bishops, and when I first became clergyman was much more so than any of them — much more so, to my own certain knowledge, may I say, than my diocesan himself, who told me .that heaven and hell was all a fable ; that the romances of the crucified God was a version of the Pro metheus 'Vinctus of lEschylus ; that the articles of the Church of England were a nose of wax, and that if he thought I. had a better opinion of them, he would not ordain me, " because there were fools enough in the Churc h' already?' You will observe too, that the writings of that very Doctor which have been so learnedly quoteelo you —that Dr. Paley, who declared he could not afford to keep a conscience ; and in the writings of . Watson, Leslie, Doddridge, Belsliam, Portens, Addison, and Chalmers, upon the evidences of the Christian reli gios—all of which have been publicly read, and fairly discussed in our meetings—the objections of infidels are largely and extensively, quoted. Might you not, therefore ; as fairly quote those quotations, and charge them upon those Christian writers them selves, as charge me upon the testimony of this wit ness, who will not pretend to a sufficient extent of reading to ascertain whether the language he takes to have been mine, was that of quotation or not ? Gentlemen, I would not borrow any sort of favour from your judgment upon this consideration, for it would really be the keenest sarcasm on Christianity to make the distinction, that the objections of infidels may be quoted, but the infidels themselves must never be allowed to stand by their objections.— Brave champions of a cause, might it be exclaimed, who would defeat in effigy, an adversary whom they dared not look in the face—who would 'gather up his arrows after he had left the field, and then go boast the triumphs they have won ! I appeal, then, to your good sense, whether the evidence adduced is such as would be held sufficient to establish any historical fact whatever. I appeal to your know ledge of the human heart, whether such a person as the witness has shown himself to be, would not be likely; not only purposely to omit many things which he is conscious that I said, and which if he had had conscience enough to have given them in his report, would have removed all ground of complaint : but whether he would not be likely also purposely to set down many things which he could not imagine that I. did say. I - appeal to the gentlemen of the press, who are in the habit of report ing public declamations, whether their noble art which costs them an education of the highest order to qualify them to pursue, and the laborious practice of many years to acquire a perfection in, was to be picked up out of the very kennel, at the first try at it by a parish beadle ? Shall a court of justice re ceive as competent evidence of truth a species of testimony which the meanest journal in the kingdom would reject, as insufficient to make up the decent verisimilitude of a well-told falsehood ? If it is to be so with me, the apparatus of judicature, and the formality of a trial, are but a gossamer veil over the grim features of predetermined cruelty and oppres sion ; and it never could have been otherwise in tended, from first to last, but that. I should be their victim, and any dirty faggot would have done for fuel to the sacrifice. But where, I ask, where are the men who shoal have been my accusers, bad a regard for the moral interests of society called for this prosecution ? Where are the clergy, the scho lars and accomplished men, whose testimony would have given respeciability to this charge ? They are all in the back ground, all standing aloof, and, if you can suppose them wicked enough to wish for my conviction, they at least were not wicked enough to lend a hand to the foul play by which alone I can be convicted. But so blind and stupid is the genius of religious intolerance, that it happens that 'every one of, the sentences sworn to as blasphemous in my oration, not excepting one that was delivered 'didac tically, and with a view to produce an impression that it was true, is either a direct quotation from the writings of our best English divines, or is the best translation my learning could produce from the Greek and Latin fathers, or from divines of Ger many, France, and Holland, of no less name than Mosheim, Michaelis, Bretchneider, Beausobre, and Griesbach. And surely, gentlemen, it was a little like persecution that your Lord Mayor should sacri fice Me to his own ignorance, and commit me to a prison for my use of the critical learning which raised another to a bishopric—for quoting in a public ora tion the very words which he might have found in the 315th page of the German Miehaelis's Intro duction to the New Testament, as translated by Herbert Marsh, Lord Bishop of Peterborough. Ille crucem sceleris pretium tulit—hic diaderna , But after all, Gentlemen, even as set forth in the in dictment, and read them as you will, there is no blasphemy in them; but there are, instead, the most express protests and caveats against any illegitimate acceptation of the hypothetical language there used. I was maintaining, even as it there appears, the di vinity of Christ in opposition to the Unitarian heresy, which would degrade that incomprehensible hypos tasis to the level of a man. I therefore delivered the strongest assertions which are charged against me, according to the Euclidian logic of the reductio ad absurdum, as consequences merely that would fol low upon denial of the assumed hypothesis. And who, I ask, could deliver a learned and critical dis quisition upon any subject whatever, or venture one step beyond the puling arrant nonsense of Methodism, if the sentiments which Occupy nine-tenths of both the indictments are such as must subject a man to be treated as I have been ? Are orators and public lecturers to be held in a state of subjugation, as to what they deliver; are they to be ruled with a rod of iron in the hands of babies with beards, of yeller- able fools, and holy idiots ? Must we all become as innocent and as stupid as Whittington and his cat, and never be allowed to deliver, or to hear any thing, better than the Methodistical canting balder dash which they tell us is so necessary to keep the lower orders in subjection—to' teach them to order themselves lowly and reverently to all their betters, and to be content with rags and righteousness—with broken victuals and salvation ? Gentlemen, the evi dence which has been brought before you is as incomt. petent as idiotcy, and as false as it is incompetent. For, view the question as you are bound to view it, on rational grounds only, not as priests or religionists, but as jurymen and citizens of the world,—not as sitting there to be the umpires of theological con trovcrsy, but as administering impartial justice be tween man and man, with equal indifference whe ther it be to Jew, Turk, Infidel, or Christian, —view ing nothing in a man but a man, and rendering unto Cesar the things that are Caesar's, but unto God the things that are God's ; and then say what is it but next a-kin to downright idiotcy to suffer one man to be indicted for reviling the figment of another man's conceit—for defaming a person of whom the com plainants cannot show who he is, nor where ho lives, nor what injury lie bath sustained, nor why he can not appear for himself, nor what business they have to appear for him. But they believe : why then let diem believe, and let me have liberty, if you please, not to believe, and the'matter is settled for ever. For if it be a matter of faith and credence merely, it is, from that very predicament, out of the cognizance of this Court. Will man, whose sole purpose and intend you turn this sacred seat of justic e between man and Qn is to deal with nothing but facts and certainties--with nothing but what can be known, and may be proved,—into a Popish chapel ? Will you turn your jury-box into. a confessional, dub yourselves a conclave of holy friars, and sit there to hear these wiseacres offer their prayers and . belief as evidence ? But, gentlemen, whatiVerimpression the garbled extracts from my orations, derived from the venal report of that booby, might for a moment make upon you, must in all fairness yield to the unpurchased testimony of thousands, who can attest that the great aim of all my orations has been the promotion of universal be nevolence, of extended knowledge, and of exalted virtue. Now, gentlemen, ere we proceed, if it is to be the inexorable fiat of law that shall plant its cannon against me, in proportion as it shall be peremptorily ruled that that law shall be brought to bear upon me, are you bound to see that the evi dence upon which it proceeds is the best and clearest that it possibly can be, which I am sure' you must see it is not, for these six unanswerable reasons : Ist, Becaise it is really too much' to trust to the memory of even clever and good men, to the extent of punishing a man for words spoken a long while ago; and no clever or good men in the world would think it right to do so. I call that a reason. 2dly, Because the witness in the present case, is neither a clever nor a good man: 3dly, Because. this man has not come forward,upon his own spontaneity to bear his testimony, but has been bribed by other_persons to do so. I call that a reason. 4thly, Because this matter being of a religious character, from the in firmity of human reason in the wisest, and the strength of human prejudice in the best of men, any evidence whatever in such a case must be in the highest degree suspicious. IlMaxime habenda in suspicione suet qua pendent quo modo cunque a religione! It hath been held to be so—even to " The wisest, greatest, meane3t of mankind." I call that a reason. sthly, Because the evidence in the present case really is a sad farrago of absurdi ties and contradictions. 6thly, Because this prose cution has originated in corrupt and wicked motives, and been conducted in envy, hatred, and malice, and all uncharitableness. I call that a reason—and reason enough, I am sure it will be with all honour ably-minded men, to insure my acquittal, even if the evidence were ten thousand times more than it is pretended to be. Gentlemen, I shall trouble you with no further arguments in proof of the-incompe tence of the evidence, but shall proceed to show you, that even if that evidence were respectable (which it is not), this prosecution is untenable; which it is on Christian grounds; for, if it be a maxim " that Christianity is part and parcel of the law of the land"—a maxim which must somewhat startle those who have been so much deceived as to be led it.to a belief that Christianity was of divine origin —then, as part and parcel of the law of the land, I quote it as I have a right to de, to serve my turn, and call upon you, gentlemen, to quash this prosecution in pursuance of its express enact ments, exactly for such.a case as this made and pro videsl. Punish me not for doing the very thing which your law either allows or commands to be done, and trample not on its authority yourselves, for the poor satisfaction of trampling on me, who am so far from wishing to interfere with your Chris tianity, that the Almighty knows, that after the most intimate knowledge of its doctrines, and the most laborious investigation of its evidences, of which he bath made me capable, my nature shudders at it, my understanding despises, and my heart abhors it. You may destroy that understanding with vexation, and bieak that heart with sorrow, but you cannot reconcile me—l cannot reconcile myself—to Christianity. The weapons of your warfare, saith your holy text—your part and parcel of the law, are not carnal, but spiritual, and mighty through God. Then, for God's sake, gentlemen, let me not have to find your spiritual weapons so vastly like the bolts and bars of a prison, that there shall be no knowing the one from the other. " The men of God," saith your part and parcel of the law of the land, must.not strive, but be patient towards all men, apt to teach in meekness, instructing them that oppose themselves." Now, gentlemen, that was all I ever did. I opposed myself ; but where is the instruction ? where is the meekness ? What effect they might have upon me I cannot tell, because they have never . been tried. " Judge not, that ye be not judged; for with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." And surely, gen tlemen, you would not think it just measure, should Deists one day become possessed of the power now in your hands, and persecute and punish you for the conscientious maintenance of your faith in revela tion. If the pretence of such a thing is not an in sult upon us, your 7th Matthew, 12th verse, has in terpolated the 24th maxim of Confucius,: " hatso ever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law;" and if it be the law, let it be administered, and that which is a law to you shall be a shield to me. I shall not tres pass on your time, gentlemen, by adducing corrobo rative quotations from the writings of Christian di vines, who have borne their testimony against pro secutions on the score of religion under any pretext whatever; for who can count the stars of heaven, or number the leaves of the forest ? The difficulty would be to find a single Christian writer, above the level of an evangelical journalist, who wonld not blush to be convicted of a sentence which could keep such a prosecution in countenance. But if against the clearest demonstration that Christianity for bids such a prosecution as this, and that all Christians are agreed as to that forbiddance, it shall be set up, that when it is asserted that Chris. tianity is part and parcel of the law of the land, it is to be understood to be se, not with respect to any necessity that it binds upon the administrators of the law to respect its doctrines or obey its precepts, but abstractedly, in the mass and total of it as Christia nity. I then beg leave, with deference to his Lord ship, to assure you that this, though a popular and r prevalent conceit, is an absolute falsehood, a dictum on no valid authority whatever, but originat ing in a mistake which arose from a case of Quare inipedit, in the Year Book of the 34th Henry VI., folio 38, anno Domini 1458, in which case Prisot uses the , words Ancient Scripture, as being 'part and parcel of the law of the land; which words were afterwards mis-translated by Finch, Holy Scripture, instead of ancient writings, and the mistake has been adopted by successive judges down to the present times. It nevertheless is a mistake, and it will be incumbent on his Lordship, if he shall countenance and what that foundation whichsure, that there 'will not be foun d a sincere b etter its availing to my prejudice , both to show you that it Ifoaumndsautiroen he cannot do. Of ies in the world, who will admit that Christianity is or could be made t o b e part or parce l of t he h as law sot Christian 0 f the land, or who would no t c o ns ider t d l a a tmi alsoim the maintaining it to be so the most caustic sarcasm that could be levelled against it, a complete surren i der of its divine pretensions, a direct admission of its absolute falsehood ; for the law of the land is, and ever y man in it knows it to be, of merely human authority. To say that Christianity is part and parcel of that law, is to say that Christianity is no better than an old coin, venerable for its anti- quity, but contemptible for its value. Allow me, now, to insist on the untenableness of this prosevu tion on moral grounds. A prosecution of this cha racter is morally wicked, because it is, in principle, manifestly repugnant to that great and immutable law of everlasting righteousness which God, the Creator and Judge of all men, bath marked out and implanted in the moral constitution of man's nature itself. That law is—that " that all that man bath a right to claim from man is, an interchange of kind offices and of affectionate feelings." Th at c l a i m satisfied, there is no man that bath a right to con sider his brother as a,bad man, or to treat him as such; there is no man that bath a right to say to another " You sha ll think a s I think—you shall as I speak, if . your sentiments accord with mine; if not, you shall keep you r sen tim en ts toelied up in your own bosom, and . I a l one w ill s p ea k. speak Thus far shall intellectual liberty extend, but her e shall its proud waves be stayed." " Look round and see How Providence bestows on all alike Suushino and rain, to bless the fruitful year Of different nations, all of Ilifferent faiths; And though by several names and titles worship'd, r Heaven takes the various tribute of their praise; Since all agree to own—at least to mean, One best, our greatest only Lord of all." But, gentlemen, what are we to think—what has persecuted innocence to hope—when, at the VI time that this prosecution was pending against in e in the teeth of the barbarous usage which I h ave already suffered, and have still to fear, from th e civic authorities, here are the resolutions of the Common Council, passed on the 9th day of gar last : " There is nothing (say they) more unreasonable, O re inconsistent with the rights of human nature, more els" trary to the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion" more iniquitous and unjust—more impolitic, than Pe w cation. It is against natural religion, against revealed re" ligion, and sound policy." Why, yes, it is • God knows it is. Yet, for all t h , the city is prodigal of reward to its vindictive a n° fanatical Solicitor, who commenced this prosecutil by grinning at me from the very seat of justice, a n lampooning the title of reverence which the o °' blished courtesy of society affixeYto my name, und er countenance of the Lord Mayor himself, when iw made me stand at the felon's bar at the Mansion' house, as the place (as he zaiEl) proper for persons ' like me, charged with capital offences. Thus, in" deed, is the city itself in the dilemma of sauctioniag in its officers what it reprobates in its councils, fe l ''' . fying in its proceeding what bath appeared in i t ' professions—imitating the intolerance but wanti n g the honesty of Pope Clement V., when lie issue d his bull for the suppression of the Knights Templa r= ' with the preamble, " Albeit that of right we caneo t, yet by the fellness of our power, we do !" I ell from you, gentlemen, no more than that d e gree, n t , toleration which your Christian missionaries OP' in all parts of the world. I ask only to be h ea rd, at they ask to be heard; and I look up to as high a t power as they can look up to for the final triumph 0' Deism over Christianity, and over all the super', stitions of the earth. It is the , religion of Go,' himself, it is the religion of reason, and of nature , Lt is the science of the universe; and to have a inift` i capable of perceiving the demonstrations on w hich it rests, is infallibly to become its convert. To punish me for what I have done in this great cause, is to declare Christianity tobe the most intolerant religion on the face of the earth,—a religion that dares o' 4 trust itself here to the fair-play which itself exPe" riences in Canton and Constantinople—from Spit e i Bergen, t o P atagon i a ,—f rom t h e f rozen reg ions 0. 1 ; the North, to the bu rn i ng san d s o f Af r i ca . But wi ll it be pretended that it is not for havingdisseminat ed deistical principles merely that I am prosecuted, but for having assailed Christianity with abuse, v itupr ration, and sarcasm only ? Why, look ye, gentleme n ' if it were so, so much the more feeble was the 95 : sault, and so much the less ocrasion to have calico in your assistance. Ajax was not wont to lift 1119 shield to crush a butterfly. But imagine ever , ' thing my vanity may have taken for cogent and tire' fragable argument to be frivolous and insignifian t ' let the proofs I have offered to the world of the baseless condition of the main pillars of the syster n ' of the forgery of the celebrated passage of Joseph ° 9 j pf the interpolation of that of Tasitus, be to prove nothing, yet show me, gentlemen, in th e whole compass of your reading, a single instance I n which Protestants have assailed what they call tbe superstitions of the Church Ronne by any other & 111 that self-same mode of argument which I am or braided with ? When were those so punct ilious'Y delicate in their choice of an epithet for that seal let invested Lady who is the mother of all church when were their impious sneers at holy -water, a n d their blasphemous jibes at transubstantiation an powder pimperlimpimp, bounded by any ot her limits than the limits of their wits ? And if I hav e outwitted them (which I assure you it was Yeti easy to dol l with what show of fairness can that be punished as a fault in me, which is ,accotmted tlie sin gular merit of my adversaries? The cause which I oppose, is one that dare not trust itsel f in the fair field of national controversy ; its defences, like th e armour of Achilles, are wrought in Vulcan's for g e• Is it against God that I have of fended ? Where, then, are their credentials for a ctin g in hiss name and, forgive me, Gentlemen, wh ere are yours ? Is it against society that I have offended ? lam covered with the approbation of society ; the robe, I wear was presented to me by the Ladies of the Areopagus , in testimony of their conviction that my indefatigabl e labours were devoted to the promotion of universa l benevolence, of good feLling, and good conduct in society. But on moral grounds, on the broad basis of that everlasting law of, righteousness, whose voice is the harmony of all rational minds, whose seat it the bosom of the Almighty, eternal as his existence , and immutable as his will, I ask what shadow o f right is there for these proceedings ? Do the Chris' tians say that I have injured them ? No, 'ti s I who am injured by them. Have I taken away aught which is theirs ? No, they have taken away 01 which is mine. Have I shaken their faith ? Ab' no, let them have it all. lam neither hungry o , A °r thirsty to be a Christian, and I on l y w i s h I cow' see any body on earth the better for being one. °,.. 1 11 moral grounds then, th at eterna l and mat h ema ti"" parallel of right, that where there hath been no injurf there can be no redress ; where there hath been 11 ° crime committed, there can be no just punishment i n " flirted; I demand the acquittal to which every.ho. nest man is entitled, however different his religious opinions may be from those of his Judges, or what ever means of eloquence and reason he hatli used t 0 induce other men to adopt the same. Had that elo quence been of a mean and scurrilous character, thatd reason weak and futile, its proper punishment votil have been the contempt it merited; but tlittt... lt o w ,, as not so, you yourgelves are my ho ne this d r to, if my arguments had been for never would your authority with " conscience void God and towards man."- -- that - of tyranny itself--gaily c onsciousness that if my adversaries had not felt a b e st argument being, theirs were so, their very Fero ratione potestasi I throw myself on your I stand before you this r i o ff dn e sg r — none. Gentlemen, I have no law at this day existing in Eng' c o been tm p t p b e e , al y e o j o lt si o tmi ff ev e ee n , c t e dh , oa both o el t h mn o t a o y w ws a ri gel:eini:no law of these realms, by the pro' land. offended T scribing provisions or manifest 'spirit and intention of which I can be punished. I have been actuated through the whole course of an innocent and virtuou s life, by as high a respect for the laws of my country' and have paid as dutiful an allegiance to them; ° 5 ever characterized a' -British subject. Gentlemen' forgive,-if it seem instruction to you, that I should state that the law of England is of two kinds only; Ist, the Lex non Seripta, that is, the unwritten or common law; 2dly, The Lex Scripta, that is, the written or statute law. Besides these, there is non e ,other. If then I can show to you clearer than t his light that I have offended against neither of these , an adverse verdict against me may be as charitable and as evangelical as my enemies would have it, hu e 'he is a better Ch r istian than a lawyer, whoever 11 , be, that shall pretend that it is legal. The commo n law in England is, at its highest source, traced up t Ethelbert, the first Christian King of this n ation; about 600 years from the era of Augustus ; 300 yea r 9 f after Ethelbert, bringing us to the ninth centurY. what is vulgarly called the Christian era, Ki's Alfred collected the laws of Ethelbert with great illy provement into one volume, and commanded t hen' to be observed through the whole kingdom, wher e before they had only affected certain jurisdiction s. From this universality of application, as being made common to the whole nation, it Ws called the Common Law, and soon after the folc-right—tbat is, the people's right ; and King Alfred was termed Leguni Anglicarum Colr ditor—that is, the Founder of t he En g lis h Laws.--'' In establishment of this common law, and of the 5 1 : cred supremacy of juries as the judges thereof, th'' renowned Saxon ICieg is said to have caused fortY , and four Judges to be hanged in one year, for theig ,6v tal ,t i yfieeht:i s hue, e :innitrti; j t.tits t uti l y d ego.s g e,:pie m nufedtfoc e tyo n iifirrfi t elete s tk:it l i is, for (:hancer burning t , 'upon he forfeited neith€ ceedings again s t I was to be borne, tante aninice—t] This writ de here for burning the II still in force by tl , execu tion upon 1 " the year of Q ueen I 9th year of li mighty King Ja for ce with respeci ale, and you shou Writ de h eretic° c Smithfield g of Christiaht (nity. Lord TRNTETtI the state of the la Mr. Tiylor--.111 Lordship's misspp bill please to dist tach 4 thitl g as t kW contained in Itatutes of th e re bl:i e l 4: . °9: lurn i c r: i elBt:r i t :t' la:I: C ie:I I n ab t teto l °' T itilCil if t Yl 11 t r°ll:lle o tgeletot b d: lie marlrie‘tl:PrceoeattneipetBle'yrPtlierile.a:°vitsmb slidat i vel e a s '°iae:leif 4etirilii " I tti of tdward I. he soul. Th at c l izable in this C icting rhe gi: o t ter olisfied, there C ,n shed, law of a en under anol 'tialties; or, that toreto leasure of burr still to be n( 491ngd lock , a n Tia true, we nil k i , 5 4 1 te s :, ik, tx li 1) :i ti hear 0) ,: 114. ittrt ~ 1 eeie n uol itt a4ttai nor ,t it it o y‘ t iTrv:t 1 : ittt t ,i (1. . . . . . 1 jfnub, ri ohltrore, an, II lerietsoo a l ielslni, ,it,i n agn, it ii: g ejobhi .11 andl yyr noiniuyu.io. tied t ascieat r ii h dytetibilsesli e nt.eerle,l i Ire our spite out ', then, ou any paretly sanctior 14 Which unrightei "ould be Unrighte, f say former Judg eutdry's lawa---it °4 )oughts r i of m an. h i i... the *hart*; hi4.s statute law, P' 60, constitutin 8114iiig a right, tile glorious All el l 5 8 of th e fac tieitiaL a doubt *ll not suscieut kur particular art kbdge himself will e-reftited legal Ales, Solkitor• itained in 4 p [ /,`"? palpable a L''2' ~eould not I 4'4 t ad not Is indictment nited, for that , tfLeat qQodbe i-e devil, did t 4dlY, with int , honour of .A. 101,11 i;i ; horseback, kt ( hat, or rriaklit ; and where] hat should you erebys and rth4 lio 'York, s' ~o t the laW is a finer not run must Aldgat '11).11t* beast thi .I,t better than Itt/uld suffer t tY of the su e, il'retext ( i„' Nigations ; try ;" v% eiltl do the far; b are 4ot orkeer t IN to do v 4 s° kescribe tl ::eter of justic (i l '', if it be 11 Y°tlrs al one a Or 14 e l ate - oPPressed ttiielbe fairly Por iredrell iOth of kill O, entitled it preSgi n 414tter g Of 111 of bla ) o ut of the le , and renederii et Act of th ler or heresy that 41i ectlesia )1, RFeat rnathern, tiliet minus, er e %trillion law, °' 1414% became ~ ter-in that i i 1 it' Nil Inust eve( sophisn 41t thi s cl eat 'del'Y it riv e d fte bool is, b ut i „ ut is p ret ,', 1h of Willi, 114th wi th re ,c at en Mulati vi ,et libt You fo r OL ' l erti q horrihl es' 8 ! It e con PunialinlE eti t t, lot :_i thinq.g,— lid 44vIng it pt q .i land' li t ,, / g . , loping, l oo t he . of , ~ i a.i a (7,1'4 4 venom it'lstOte of tl !)°,.k tile matt th e t he jilnent Act„, Ali Act 'ettine of tl ° Principle---i :.iO4 o6rogou *'l))Yerec