The Sun.
London, England, 1822-10-24 00:00:00

PANCTIAS.

This was an indictment against the inhabitants of St. Pancras,
for not repairing a road situate within the Parish, near the Re-
gent's Park.
The prosecution was conducted at the instance of the Crown,
by the SOLICITOR GENERAL, Mr. GURNEY, Mr. LITTLE-
DALE, and Mn SHEPHERD • and the defence, by Mr. SCAR-
LETT, Mr. GASELEE, and MT. ADOLPHUS.
By the Acts of Parliament, for enclosing and beautifying the
Regent's Park, several roads are directed to be made, and when
made, are thereby declared to be public roads for the use of the
King's subjects, their carriages, and horses, &c., with certain
exceptions therein mentioned. The road in question, which is
a continuation of Great Portland road (crossing the new road),
leads along the East side of the Regent's Park, and thence
round the North side, into the Edgware road, and was con-
structed under the authority of the Statutes referred to, at the
expence of the Crown ; aria the question Was, whether the Sta-
tutes having declared such-a road to be public, the liability to
keep it in repair devolved upon the inhabitants of the Parish
within which it happened! to .be situated ? It was proved that
the road, at the time of the indictment, was in a most deplorable
state of irrepair, and was absolutely impassable, except in very
dry weather, and then at the imminent risk of the passenger,
whether on foot or in carriage. Two Government Surveyors
and Architects proved that the road had been foimed under the
auspices of Mr. Nash, by removing the green sward and putt-
ing on the maiden earth, about ten inches of gravel, without
the substratum usually. employed in making new roads. Soc.a
after it was formed, it was almost destroyed by the passage of
! carts, waggons, and other carriages, in conveying building ma-
terials for the erection of the Royal Horse Guards new Barracks,
and the Ophthalmia Hospital (both situate on the side of the
road), under the sanction of Government. There was no dis-
tinct evidence that the public had ever used it as a highway;
and under these circumstances the defendants were indicted for
not keeping it in repair.
The LORD •CHIEF JUSTICE, upon hearing the whole of
the case for the Crown, intimated cousiderable doubt, whether
by any construction of the Acts of Parliament, relating to the
Regent's Park, the liability to repair the road in question could
be thrown upon the inhabitant; of the Parish ; but at all events
he thought this indictment was premature, considering that
though the road had been formed by Government, still it had
got into a state of irrepair, by the use of it for Government
purposes almost immediately after it had been formed. He
could not help thinking that undet such circumstances the pro-
secution was rather ungracious, and therefore recommended
that the Jury should be discharged from giving any Vercliet
upon this indictment.
It was agreed, accordingly, that, a Juror should be with-
drawn.

BLASPHEMY.
THE KING V. SAMUEL WADDINGTON%
This was an information filed by his Majesty's Attorney-
General, against the defendant, for publishing. and causing
and procuring to be published, a blasphemous libel, concern-
ing the Holy Scriptures, and the Christian Religion, contained
in " Palmer': Principle: of Nature." When the case was
called on, only eight special jurors were in attendance, upon
which the Counsel for the Crown prayed a tales, before the
Juror, last called, was sworn.
The defendant, in person, abruptly interposed, and claimed
the right to be tried by a petit Jury, insisting (upon the autho-
rity of Mr. Justice Blackstone, in the 4th vol. of his Commen-
taries on the Law of England, page 104), that this was the
only legal and proper mode of obtaining a trial in such cases.
The defendant produced a box of considerable size, which he
deliberately unlocked, and searched for the authority, but not
finding it, he beckoned to one of his attendants, who produced
a parcel of books, contained in a pocket handkerchief (much
the worse for wear), from which he extracted a volume of
Blackstone, and proceeded to read some pages of it.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE listened to him with patience
for some time, and at length interposed, and said he knew of
no law which prohibited the trial of the information by a special
Jury. At present the trial must proceed; but if the defendant
could satisfy the Court above, that the case ought not to have
been tried by a special Jury, he might have a new trial. On
the present occasion the special Jury had been appointed by a
rule of Court, and sitting at Nisi Prime, his Lordship had no
alternative, but to proceed.
The defendant, whose language, gestures, and demeanour, it
is impossible to describe, seemed much dissatisfied with the re-
sult of his objection.
Mr. SHEPHERD then opened the information; and
Mr. SOLICITOR-GENERAL (with whom were Mr. GUI!,
NET and Mr. LITTLEDALE) stated the case for the Crown.—
The defendant stood to take his trial, upon a charge of having
published and caused to be published a blasphemous libel con-
cerning the Holy Scriptures, and he (the -Learned Solicitor)
would not insult the understandings or disgust the ears of the
Jury by repeating the particular terms and expressions of the
libel. It was enough that the libel should be read once when
it was produced in evidence. Suffice it for the present to say,
that it was a libel upon the Old and New Testament, upon the
character of our Saviour, and upon the principles of the Chris,
tian Religion, expressed in such terms as must even be offen-
sive to those who were disposed to question the truth of Reve-
lation. The only question for the Jury was, whether the de-
fendant had been guilty of publishing and circulating the libel
in question ? The libel, for which the defendant was now pro-
secuted, had been before made the Subject of information in
this Court, and the publishers had been convicted anti punished.
Many attempts had been made to prevent the farther circula-
tion of it. An information had been prosecuted against a eer-
son named. Carlile, for the publication of the same libel. I hat
person had been convicted, and the Crown had seized all the
prof erty belonging to him which was to be found in his house
in Ileet-street. In short, no pains were spared to put a stop to
the circulation of this and other works of a similar tendency.—
To counteract these efforts, it would appear in evidence that the
defendant took a house and shop nearly opposite St. Clement's
Church, in the Strand (one of the most public situations in all
London,) and commenced the trade of a pamphlet seller. The
shop was divided into two by a partition, one of which, together
with the second floor of the house,was let to Mr. Poole, a tobac-
conist ; and the remainder of the premises were occupied by the
defendant. The defendant inscribed his name in large letters
over the door, and commenced the business of a pamphlet seller.
Soon after lie came into the shop, the utmost attention was ex-
cited by placards exhibited in the shop window. One of them
was couched in the following terms :---` Payne's Age of Reason
and Palmer's Principles of Nature, are now selling behind the
curtain, price ss. each. No connection with Waddington, the
fanatic." It was perfectly well known, that Payne's Age of
Reason had then been prosecuted, and declared by successive
Juries to be blasphemous. Of this the defendant could not, he
ignorant. Another placard was expressed in the following
terms:.—it To the forces of the Bridge-street and Essex-street
Gangs. Samnel Waddington having seen them roaming about
his shop, like roaring lions, seeking whom they may devour ;
this. is to give notice, that Samuel 'Waddington does not sell
ahy thing seditious or blasphemous ; but has a strong. suspicion
that somebody under this roof does." It was evident from
this,' that the defendant bad pronounced his own
for
upon the character of the works which he exhibited for sale.—
This mode resorted to of carrying on his trade was this
Within side the shop on the wall were posted the titles—
" Payne's Age of Reason"—" Palmer's Principles of Na-
ture," and the names of other similar works. Against each of
these was a hook suspended from a rope, which had
.communi-
cation with the first floor of the house, and any person wishing
to purchase any of these works had only to pull a rink, when a
person above dropt a bag odown a spout or trunk, which coin-,'
municated through the ceiling to the room above, and the pur-
chaser putting his money into the bag, the work wanted was
immediately dropt down through the spout. The defendant, it
should seem, had supposed that by this ridiculous contrivance,
and machinery, he might protect himself against the conse-
quences of his acts. Butin this he was mistaken. By law,.
he was responsible for the acts of his servants, and if he
kept the shop, though he did not, vend_ blasphemy or sedition
with his own hands, yet he was still responsible, as ,the per_
son having the controul and managementa of the business.—
This conduct of' the defendant- good deal of public
attention. Mobs were collected about the door, and the neigh-.
hours made complaints that they were interrupted in their
lawful avocations. At length steps were taken to put a stop to,
this public nuisance. Two or three persons were employed to
obtain the formal evidence of the. defendants conduct, requi:
site in a Court of Justice. In this Mr. Poole, the • next door'
neighbOur, lent his assistance. An officer was introduced into

his shop, and thence to the staircase, which was common to all
the inmates of the house, and he stationed himself so that he
could have a complete view of nearly all that passed in the de-
fendant's first floor room through the keyhole of the door.—
After waiting for some time, he saw the defendant himself and
a youth enter the room, no other person being present. He
saw the defendant standing at the aperture which communi-
cated with the shop below. In the mean time another officer
went into the shop, and pulling the ring opposite " Palmer's
.Principles (if Nature," a bag was let down, into which he put
two half crowns, which were drawn up by the defendant, who
immediately went down stairs chinking the money in his hands,
and handed the officer a chair, and in a minute or two a
copy of the blasphemous work, now under prosecution, was
dropt to the officer, and he took it up, and left the shop.—
Under these circumstances, the Jury could have no doubt
whatever that the defendant was the publisher of the book in
question. He was engaged in the very transaction ; he was
seen in the room taking the money, was heard to chink it,
as he was going down stairs, and afterwards. was present when
the book was delivered to the witness. Both in law, as well as
in fact, the defendant was clearly the publisher, and if they
were of this opinion, they would have no difficulty in finding
him Guilty.
Murton, a Bow-street Officer, proved that in Max last the
defendant occupied a shop and premises, No. 200 A, in the
Strand. His name was over the door. He saw two placards
in the defendant's window, of which he took copies.
Mre Elijah lmpey, Clerk to the Treasury Solicitors, proved
Service of notice upon the defendant to, produce the original
placards. • • . • •
The defendant admitted notice, and said the Counsel for the
prosecution might go on.
The CIIIEV Jutericu said, it was not to be taken for grant-
ed that notice to produce was necessary in such a case as this.
Tlle SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that notice had been served
only for greater caution, and not from any conviction of its ne-
cessity:
The Officer then tiroduced the copies Of the placards, which
he had made at the defendant's window, and which were read.
They were as stated by the Solicitor 'General, in his opening,
The witness then stated, that on the 4th of May, in company,
with Smith and Duke, two other Officers, he went to the de-
fendant's shop. Ile described the machinery and contrivance
by which the defendant carried on his business, as mentioned
by the Solicitor General, and proved the purchase of a copy
-of. "Palmer's Principles of Nature," in the manner already
stated.
The defendant then proceeded to cross-examine the Witnesses.
His language and deportment were such as to call for the in-
terpositien of
. The CHIEF JUSTICE, who said to the Counsel for the Crown,
there is something in the mannor of this man which appears to
me to import derangement.
. Mr. GURNEY—Your Lordship's suspicion has no founda-
tion whatever.
The cross-examination proceeded, the defendant endeavour-
ing to shake the credit of the witness, who stated that he had
often been in the defendant's shop before. On one occasion he
bought at the shop, the defendant's Letter to the Editor of The
Traveller. The defendant was present. He did not serve him ;
but desired him to put, down his money, and take up the
pamphlet from .the counter, which he did, and the defendant
took up the Money. lie was positive that lie saw the defend-
ant in the room above the shop at the time the money was drawn
up through the spout. Denied dust there was any thing in the
structure of the lock which impeded his view. The defendant
'never refused to hell him blasphemous or seditious works. He
never assaulted or struck the defendant in his own shop. Could
not be positive that the pamphlet lie bought at the defendant's
shop was the letter to-the Editor of The Traveller. On one oc-
casion, when he was in the shop, the defendant abused him and
called him names. Did say to the defendant, that if he was a
prisoner of his, and the mob endeavoured, to rescue him, he
would blow their brains or his Out. The copies of the placards
which he produced now were in the handewnting of Duke, but
he had first made copies himself with a pencil,,
The defendant complained in a violent manner that he had
been surrounded by a-host of incendiaries.
Mr. GURNEY called upon the Court to restrain the defend-
ant from using this sort of language.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—It really strikes me that themes,
something wrong in this man. There is another mode of doing
something with him. The Statute prescribes what is to be
done in such castes.
The defendant said he was glad that the Learned Judge ap-
pealed to the Statute, and he would abide by the law. Looking
to the Jury, he said, lie would abide by their judgment. He
was determined to expose the parties.' Ile would be judged by
their verdict, and if, as in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah,
there was only one righteous man amongst them, he should
be saved.
The CHIEF JCSTICE-1 really feel a difficulty in proceed-
in* in this man's case.
rite Juliet seemed to intimate a doubt that the defendant
was not rightin his senses.
The Cu lEF.JusT CE—There is a course which the law has
pointed out, which, if it becomes necessary, I shall adopt. The
Jury seem to agree with me that all is not right.
Mr. GUltlit)i—From all the information we have received,
we have no reason whatever to believe that there is any ground
for supposing that he is insane—certainly not. We certainly
have no notion that that is the case.
The CHIEF Ju STICE—I am speaking of the man's con-
duct and appearance which have very strong indications of
what I have alluded to. I shill let him go on in any course of
examination that at all bears upon his case ; but he must con-
form himself to the law.
What aid you say to me ?—I said I would be a friend to
you.
Waddington—A very good friend indeed. Did you not strike
me and threaten to blow my brains oat ?—No ; I said if you
were my prisoner I would not suffer you to escape, and that I
would blow your brains or any other person's, rather than allow
you to be rescued. . .
Did I not call you a common informer, and that you would
swear away the blOod of any mart fora few shillings ?—You

abused me.
Were you not drinking at the White Hart with notorious
pick-pockets ?—No ; there were some persons there.
Waddington—Persons ! were they not men ?—They were
not Bishops.
Well go down. I care not what you swear. .
'%Vin. Smith was next produced--He remembered going with
the'last witness to the defendant's ; Mr. Poole who occupied a
part of the premises, allowed them to go into his parlour during
the day ; Purton watched on the staircase ; in consequence of
what Mr. Poole's daughter said, witness went out of the shop
-and entered 'Waddington's shop ; the defendant was not then
there ; saw the names of books on the wall, and the hooks at-
._ tached to them ; a cord with a ring, communicated from the
room above ; witness pulled it down and put the hook on the
book he wanted ; it was Palmer's Principles of Nature ; there
was a tube and a speaking trumpet in the shop ; witness cried
out through it—" Have you got that ?" meaning the book to
which the hook was attached • he spoke aloud, and put the
money in a hag ; it was five shillings ; the defendant was not
in the shop, then ; he came in soon afterwards, and offered wit-
ness a chair to sit down ; shortly after a book came down ; it
fell out of the spout on the floor ; witness took it, and went out
of the shop, and marked it before it went out of his hands.
Cross-examined by NVaddington—lle had never asked to
btiy any. other 1-,ublications of the defendant, except the Univer-
sal Prayer. Never had been refused any, work by him.
Waddington—Did you not swear at Bow-street that you had
purchased the Secret Book of ine.
The Co tril'—Were these examinations in writing?
Waddington—Yes.. •
The Con wr—Then you must produce them. The rules of
evidence do tot allow, you to put such a question.
Wadddington—The rules of evidence—if they will not allow
me to examine the witness as to what he has before sworn, may
send me innocently to . a prison. What can I do ? I have not
his examinations—how then produce them ? Your Lordship is
• here the representative of the King, but from the greatest man
of you all, whirling even.Serjeant Copley, the Solicitor-Gene-
ral, down to the Crier of the Court, you receive the wages of the
public, and I contribute to them.
Robert Duke was next called—lle is a Bow-street officer,
and accompanied Smith and Purton to the house of Poole. On
•the 4th of May, after Poole's daughter had said something,
Smith and Purton went out, and witness went up stairs ; he
looked throughthe key-hole of the door of the front-room on the
' first pair.; saw a little boy and the defendant within ; there was
a candle burning near the key-hole, heard Smith say from the
shop below " Have you got that ?" saw Waddington after-
' welds come out with money jingling in his hand.
NOthing occurred in the cross-examination of this witness..
John Poole, tobacconist, 201, Strand, proved that Wadding-
ton occupied a part of the premises ; saw him there every day

till he went to prison ; his name was paintedin large letters on
the outside ; the officers came a week before they succeeded in
taking him; they were in his_ parlour; the apartments occu-
pied by Waddington were before held by one Clarke, a book.,
seller.

Cross.,exßmined by Waddington—They lived near each
other ; witness was a tobacconist. • It was not to entrap him
that he had the Bow-street Officers in his parlour. From the
nature of the-placard in the defendant's w:nclow, persons consi-
dered, him as the publisher of blaspheinous publications, and
applications had been made to him to sell them.
Jane Poole, the daughter of the fonner witness, proved that
Waddington went into the front room the evening the Officers
went down, which they did as soon as she told them that he
had gone in. Defendant, before he went in, looked both up
and down stairs. From the position she was in, a little above
the landings-place, Waddington could net see'ller.
Cross-examined by Waddington—There were two rooms
on the first floor, in one of which she believed, Waddington
slept.
The libelous paragraphs were then read, and the book hand-
ed to the Jury.
The defendant then addressed the Jury. He-commenced with
telling the Jury that it was needless for him to state to them that
he was the defendant; but he asked them also to ber in mind by
whom he was brought before them. He was brought there by
the Diavolus Regi. He was called there at the prosecution of the
King, for publishing a book, although the informer, on whose
evidence the prosecution was founded, had himself sworn
that he, the defendant, had neither given Juni the book, or
that he received the money. He had never read a line of the
book until it became necessary, in order to prepare for his de-
fence. Even allowing, for argument's sake, that it was a
libel, why did they not prove that some persons had been in-
jured by reading its doctrines? 'Why, as good Christians,
was he not advised by them that ,he was selling a work that
blasphemed the Bible, and that, was calculated to divert the
public from the path moral rectitude ? Was the design only
to entrap him ?—And what would the Jury think of this witness
Poole, a neighbour, with whom he had no quarrel, whom
he would have served rather than injure; and who admitted
Bow-street Officers into his parlour for the purpose of entrap.
ping the man who occupied an apartment in the same house
with him ?" He, the defendant, had been cruelly harrassed, he
had been thrown into prison, brottF,ht thence into that Court by
Habeas Corpus, to answer an intormation filed by the Attor-
ney-General—that odious relic of the Star Chamber. What
was his case that day might be the case of' the Jury hereafter.
They could not fail to recollect what police officers were capable
of—what was brought home to them in the case of Brock and
Pelham, and that blood-money conspiracy. How. was it that it
was only labor men that were the objects of their prosecution ?
Why did they not prosecute the Bishop of Clogher ? Why was
he allowed to escape ? ror, will any man deny that the
Bishop by his conduct did not render the Christian religion
a greater injury than could be effected by all the writers and
advocates of infidelity that ever existed. It was not his
business that day to defend the publication said to be a libel.
He was there to t'• fend his own conduct, and, as St. Paul
said- to King Agrippa, most happy was{ he to stand there in
his defence ? If those who prosecuted him spare really anxious
to put down such publications, they would not have taken the
course they had.—The prosecution would give a greater sale to
such a work. Such were the opinions of the greatest writers,
even Christian. The defendant proceeded to read from some
work in the.controversy between Mr.. Whiston and Di.. Clarke,
a number of pages tending, as he argued, to she" the impoliCy
of the church calling in the aid of the civil Magistrate..
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE attended with 'great patience,
until at length he felt called upon to .interrupt the defendant,
observing, that he could not allow a person charged with a
libel, to read in the line of his defence the libel of a third party
on any class of his Majesty's subjects.
A Juror expressed his coincidence in that opinion. The
line the defendant was taking was wholly irrelevant.
The defendant resumed. The Jury woe his judges; he
was in their hands, and he had a right to put a blush on the
cheeks of those who assisted in prosecuting him. What would
be the consequence if he, prevented front making his own
defence, was convicted ? would.be that his Lordship would
go down to posterity thpttonical. Judge of the day. Ile
again resumed to read,:_ 4f the. CoUrt • would have a
little .patienee he won -e...• .xlfiectly to the point.—
The book had never • c feed a libel. If it was
one, out of the numerous. ." Clergymen in the diocese
of London, not one as they were in dtity bound, came to
admonish him that he was publishing a book against that
religion which they were bound to defend. No ;it was
their business to entrap him—to throw him into prison, and
to deprive hitn, as they had, of every shilling of Ills capital.—
The prosecutors were themselves weak in faith. If they be-
lieved what they pretended, they would not persecute opi-
nion, but leave men on these points to the solemn Judgment
of the Last Day, when they would all have to answer for their
deeds. If the faith they professed was sincere, would the
gi eat Powers of Europe, the Holy Alliance, allow their fellow-
creatures, the Greeks, to be massacred by the Turks ? What was
the statement of Lord Liverpool when he imputed the agriCulitt-
ral distress to an over produce, but blasphemy on the goodness of
God for diffusing blessings ? A rich man, whatever he did, was
rarely prosecuted, unless sometimes, and for the purpose of feed-
ing the voracious mouths of lawyers. The present prosecution
had been first brought against him by the Society for.the Sup-
pression of Vice, of which the Bishop of Clogher was a Member.
He should call no evidence, as these produced on the part of the
prosecution answered his purpose, they showed that he neither
gave nor received money for the work. The innocent little girl
proved that he slept in one of those rooms out of which he can e,
and what would be the condition of every man in the country if
he were made responsible for the acts of others, who may have
access to the apartments of a house in which he dwelt.
The CHIEF JusTlcE summed up the evidence. There was
no doubt as to the paragraphs being libellous ; it was for them
to say whether, the defendant published it. , .
A JURYMAN asked, whether a publication denying the
Divinity of our Saviour was illegal ?
The LORD CHIEF JUSTlCE—Undoubtedly it is; in thoie
words to deny the Divinity of Christ, and call him an im-
postor is a libel, for Christianity is a part of the law of, the
land.
The Jury, without leaving the box, found the defendant
Guilt y.

Sittings appointed in Middlesex. and London, before the
Right Hon. Sir ROBERT DALLAS, Knight, Lord Chief Jus-
tice of his Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, at Westminster,
in and after Michaelmas Term, 1822 :

MIDDLESEX.

Thursday .
Thursday -
Thursday .

IN TERM.

LONDON.

Nor. 7
14
21
AFTER
- Nov. 29

Friday -
Friday -
Friday
TERM.
Saturday -

Nov. 3

Friday • .

Nov. 30

SCOTCH BEQUESTRATIONS.
MEETINGS, &C.
Robert Arthur 114`Laws, spirit-dealer, Glasgow, to be exa-
mined in the Sheriff-clerk's Office there, 31st October and 14th
November, at eleven.
States of the affairs of John Stewart and Co. manufacturers,
Paisley, lie with the trustee—No dividend.
John Spence, partner of the company of James and George
Spence, manufacturers, Dumfermline, has applied for a
discharge.

The Packet question is decided, and in favour
of Falmouth. We are enabled from very high authority to
state positively, that the PacketS will not be removed to Ply-
mouth. In common consistency, the project for transferring
them to the Admiralty falls to the ground under this decision,
as the placing of an Admiral and suite at Falmouth would but
heighten the expenditure.—( Western Luminary.)
Yesterday the quarterly inspection. of the Po-
lice dismounted Horse Patrole, with their arms, Ste- took place
in the Treasury Avenue, Whitehall, by Sir R11111.131E, Chief
Magistrate, and Mr. DAY, the conductor of the Horse Patrole
Establishment, attended by •the inspectors and other Officers of
the Patrole. Several men who have been recently appointed
were afterwards sworn in before the Chief Magistrate, conform-
ably to the provisions of the Police Act.
On Saturday last, the St.Andrew'sCross,given
to the Royal Company of Archers, by Sir Geo. S. Mackenzie,
I3art. was shot for In Hope Park, at 200 yards distance, and
gained by John .Maxton, Esq. merchant, Leith.—( Edinburgh
Courant, Oct. 21.)