The Sun.
London, England, 1859-11-22 00:00:00

r. TIO•
THE LAW OF BLASPHEMOUS

The Lord Chancellor, last night, as Presidentbei.
the Juridical Society, presided at its usual a
monthly meeting, when Mr. Lewis, Q.C., read
paper upon the Law Regulating the Proecution
Blasphemous Libel; after which a discussion door.
than ordinary interest took place. the
Mr. LEWIS, in his paper, after referring t°
delicacy of the inquiry, apoligised for introducing
it to the society, on the ground that the law in feo:
ference to it had been assailed by able men? viof
lent terms as incompatible with that freeuarn
opinion which ought to prevail in a free counll'
Having given examples of the kind of specked
which the law held to be blasphemous, he rein'.
the
that such blasphemy was indictable, under both
00
common and the statute law, the malice of the 11sent
uttering it being assumed as an essential ingre"' od •
of the offence. Formerly, nonconformity
ad
heresy were indictable by statute, but that law o:it,
been repealed, and that being the case he was re.„adr.
to maintain that there was not anything pre its
cial to free opinion in the State exercising ribald
power to protect the Christian religion from rvito
and scurrilous attacks. On the contrary, it the
under a twofold obligation to do so, first Afoot
sake of protecting society from the public
creedevil be
would ensue should the sanctions of that
weakened; and secondly, for the preservatiostel
the law, which is based upon it. Having clync)nd
the dicta of Chief Justices Hale and ItaYT,o°rd;
Mr. Justice Asburst, Chief Justice 13
llardwicke, and Eldon, in references to cases wbe
had been brought judicially before th!,m'layr
gathered from them that the reason of ti°
mak.ng blasphemy an indictable offence 'l,:reel
first, that Christianity was part and P-ked
of the law, so that when Christianity was because
the law itself was attacked; secondly', bee. ;
soeleid,
blasphemy endangered government and
Best,
thirdly, that it was prejudicial to morality' 11.010,.
fourthly, that it interfered with the due adnil lea
tration of justice, inasmuch as a denial of revell,e,
religion implied a disbelief in a state of future 'was
wards and punishments, the belief in which of '
courtos es
the basis of the oath administered in the
justice. Now, there were three classes of ,° ie,
which came before the tribunals of the conntrYn're.
the decision of which the judges had, as theere,fiet-
sentatives of the State, either to connive at th,,-The
once of blasphemy or openly discountenance I.',ltteis
first class consisted of such cases as were In"-oril.-
_0! police; as the prosecution of Carlisle and, Bev
hams for the publication of Paine's " Age cations
son."f The second set or class related to fenne'Thadi
or unchristian objects, as in the case °'•
Headley's Charity. The third class cenll3„ the
all those in which the Court of Chance °,7nt of
doctrine "parens patricr," deprived the p.
the guardianship of his children, when his Prt—cese
were in antagonism to religion, as it did in,trjeha •
of the poet Shelley. After defending 01,r ,
Coleridge from the attack made upon referenceu to
John Stuart Mill and Mr. Buckle, in h./Ting
his conduct at the Bodmin Assizes, when W •
Thomas Podley, he proceeded at some leeb„„
show that it was not the -right of free dise—sthe
which was interfered with, as it was clear fro -the
case of " the Attorney-General v. Pearson" an' will
giving utterance to blasphemous expresei°l:ll,B,o it
not in itself an offence, but was only se
had a tendency to lead to practical results. .0 he
The Lord Chancellor observed that wi`with
agreed with a great deal he did not agree
roej
everything which had fallen from the le_,a to it
reader. There could be no doubt that it tern's
very grave offence to speak scornfully or and
of ridicule or insult of the Christian religiou,nior
he hoped it would ever continue to be one Of gr.
able by the law of England ; but the views ° were •
Lewis went further, for he would direct the Pre
ins,
of the State to the prosecution, not onlyr ef .tibut,
but also against men like Gibbon and }burbe
as had been the case with himself at the ices
held the office of Attorney-General, the law, °ote
of the Crown had to consider not only the aidn'at to
of the offence, but also whether it was Pra e good
prosecute it; in fact, whether more harm thauia
might not result ;from the proceedings. Ile Sir
net but think the defence of his late colleagnethira
John Coleridge, unnecessary, for all who kaeWeeted
felt convinced that in the case referred to he
with the purest and most honourable inotives'arga-
Mr. L. G. Phillimore characterised the oetlfe
ments of Mr. Lewis as being those most freq.
used in the cause of error, for, pushed to thetveotr
timate conclusion, they would justify the r-aeena
tion of the Edict of Nantes. The doctrine "li.,cerf,
patrice," as acted upon by the Court of Ch°t"o the
was a gross usurpation ; and with regard .01 aa
Shelley case, although he would not select 1110 he
the tutor of his children, the very. last Peirs° ge
would select to fill that office was Lord EliuTtlded
thought Christianity ought to spurn being I'e,„- eurf
by weapons which were taken from the ars-
of error. ewV
Mr. Baron Bramwell complained that
had made use of negative terms, suchas iniaeuthing
and heresy, which were correlative of slrhat
positive, which he had omitted to define. "
Consta
considered truth and orthodoxy would estate sees
tinople be held as blasphemy, which thor hie'
wider an obligation to repress and punish.
eorelf
own part, he would, as a general principle.; s oat or
punish any one who would indulge in 1110 oat'
ribald attacks upon the religion of any sect,
_A
ter how few might be its members. nb erre;
Mr. T. Chambers, the Common Sermon 11 and-6
that Mr. Lewis's views were mismiderstood, ._O4
instead of being at variance with those eil3r
bhe learned faxen, were identical with tlicie- ;0001
The Attorney-General, in moving the,aJidnot
rent of the discussion, said that MrfLOW. but
intend to give his paper a general ai) pleb Bard
to
confined it to thelaw of England. irith re of
matters of religiyn, the duties of the state Nolo
it could neirth
a completely negative character, as l.
teach religion nor enforce morality!. 1 .oapplr
regard to the Toleration Act, it w fallen int°
cable in practice, and as such had who.
desuetude, for it related only to theaeion,
had been educated in the Christian relig etiee,
limitation which rendered it a nullity in Pr° urt Of
With regard to the interference of the -° there
Chancery in the case of Shelley's children was 00$
was a great deal of misunderstanding. Chris'
because their father was an unbeliever 11;1,104 to
tianity, but because he violated and
acknowledge the ordinary rules of moralitY:.oko of
The motion having been agreed to, the teliven-
the society were, on the motion of Bar°/1 oted to.
tte
well, seconded by Vice-Chancellor Stuart, %dingo
the Lord Chancellor, for his kindness in a
and the proceedings terminated.

IVlliell
MADAME GRIST.—The brutal treatraont , bigh-
Madame Grisi has experienced at the hands of th which
born, well-bred, potato-hurling, howling audiencete mob
frequents the Italian Opera, Madrid, has given use a theel
recrimination. Signor Mario has naturally resente 001(1
gross and brutal insults on a lady whose former fen° But
it
have secured her an immunity at leaSt from inault.,,4,, the'
his remonstrances ho has been met by the reron,i dir
during the hey-day of her prosperity, Madame Ell,(„drii
dained to accept any of the brilliant offers of the ;eked
ritnianagoers, and that she only does so now when her ~narltst:
The principals Madnbr ken voice fails to procure any place in te""od IP
and both combatantspals
last they have discussions have arisen on this niattebterdo:
Nvere
have resulted in a duel, which came Off Ye 9 • IA
n gig •
the Director of the Principe Theatre. After several Ye the
SlivgnereorNvluknirdioedanthde Soie::oirn_Stab
the
f,
a_contirre;
other in the arm, the seconds interfered, and the henseriousli
both was declared scot free. Neither has been ;ri
hurt, indeed, Mario would bo able to sing again 116' to
were his services required, but he will decline ever gig ,
sing in Madrid. 00
c Ti•cilV.'" 0
THE SMITHFIELD CLUB CATTLE ka.--- I roll-
Saturday the galleries for the reception of the i1n13,...,50ing
and agricultural produce to be exhibited at thealor the
Smithfield Club Cattle Show were being prePare noll.i.
allotments of space, the demands being "router algrloali
Messrs. Gibbs and Co , the seedsmen of the IteYeli a • AP-
tural Society of England, will occupy their old p lace Aole,
the Royal Dublin Society will again, under al A; vroai
of its curator, Mr. Corrigan, exhibit specimens %joie° te
derful produce of the sister country. Messrs. S. oda
Liverpool, and othcr seedsme' 1 o exhibit r otit
n, will a s .
__ Jois
fore
from Scotland. By the rules of the club, all ill!lfa ,_
roots, seeds. &c., are required to be in the Thursday for:
three o'clock on the Ist of December, the Thureu eveg,
the show, so as to prevent confusion, and to haven 00 6
stand properly arranged before the private view . .