The Sun.
London, England, 1819-10-14 00:00:00

preferred against it, and to prove that Mr. Paine
lad no bad object iu view when be wrote it.
lie contended the present proceedings were not
fL:unded on the la.:• of. the land. When the At.
torney•Geueral talked of the.law applicable to this
case, he Would wish to know what law it.was
The Chief Justice=" I will state it to *pin—
the common law of the land.-1 state to you that
the Christian Religion is a part of the law of the
land, and a most, important part too=—that part on
which all our civil institutions are founded, for all
of them have a reference to that Religion. I speak
of the Christian -Religion generally. One parti-
cular I►„rtion of the followers of the Christian
Religion constitute what is called the Established
Church ; but the law of England pennt's every
class of Christi:►ns to enjoy their religions opi-
ttif'ins., by worEhipping the Almighty according to
th.e pht 7m9de.orthe;r faith. It permits all
to act, ,but the law of . the lawl allows no war► to
impugn the Cbristiiin Religion generally, and treat-
the holy Scripttares•which contain its tenets as
books toll of lies and fables." - -
Mr. cannot subscribe to this.

The Chief 3i►stice--Whether you can sub-
scribe to it or not, I state it to he the law of the
land. lam to give the law here, and not you. It
is not tor an individual under prosecution in this
Court to say what is and what is not the law. 1
speak in the presence of Gentlemen of respects=
bility and experience, who are not 'infrequently
here, and they will bear testimony to the truth of
troy assertion, that though 1 am in the habit of
hying the law down, as it is toy duty to do, on
any disputed- point, every •question of fact 1 a►
anxious to leave open to their Dullest considera-
tion, But here I cannot sir as Judge to si.ffer the
Holy Scriptures to he reviled in lily prer,enee.
Mr. Csrlilc•--i wish to ►'k, what proof we have
that the 'Scriptures are•of divine o►ight ?

Ti e Chief Justice--1 ill not answer that
question, Sir. We are not here to inquire into tiie
Origin of the Christ lass reiigion, but to decide on
the character of a work, charged as having.been
w :Suet, to revile anti c4lumnia!l that
is a pit of the law of the land Ate we
to suppose that the law of England, while it pro-
tects every individual in it, has no power to pro-
tect itself and its own establishments ? Are we to
soppose that it C4ll afford 110 protection to, those,
who, from their tender age, or from ignorance,
are exposed, from not being sufficiently confirmed
to their faith, to he misled, not by the reasoning,
'but by the ealonmies directed against the Chris-
tian tel ?
Mr.. Cathie said, he had the same object as his
Lot dship----to ',sevent otners from, being misled—
but they differed as to the means by which this
Wai to be accomplished:
The Chief Justice again declared, he could
not sufferJhe Scriptures to be reviled,
Mr. Carlile contended, that if the work, were.
of divine authority, no injury cc.)tild be sustained
fiom its being submitted to the Most sigorosis'
examination. -He proposed going into this in-
quiry„ as withoot doing so, be could not defend
the climiacti* of the work which was the subject
•of.this prosecution.
The Chief Justice remaiked,• it would soon
be seen in what way be p'roposed. to conduct the-
iuquisy.
Mr. Carlile then stated to the Jury, that many
books were in 'exisfetsce that were supposed to
he of divine , One of, (hens he held .in his
hand, the Koran, in which as many millions of
tutii believed as 'could be found to believe in the
B:ble. He then read froM the Ewan the ac-
count given by Malsotnet of the manner its which
that hook was communicated to mankind, and the
object of such communication being; Made. The
lc,,ran he stated to be filled rip With histories of
mrilly of the prersossages of whom. we read in the
Bible. He then proceeded to read part_ of the
work referred to, in order to spew the charaCier
and dogmas of the Mahomedan Religion. This,
lit said, was one specimen of religion ; but he con-
tended, that it failed to give so sublime an idea of
the Deity as was tube found io the works of l'aine.
Out of the variety of books i;rid ttibetrf divine ori-
gin, how were ,men to determine which were
best entitled to belief, it the freestyxamination of
all of thefts' were not permitted ? Koran con•
tattled some gOodieSsoa--some fine morality, but
much trash was mixed up with it,. Which ,spoiled
the whole. He next
,proceeded to .shew that
Pattie was not the only 'mail who had written
against the Bible. A Gentleman higli in
_office,
Who had been Ambassador:lrons this couotry to
Naples, and who wits now a Member of the .Privy
Council—Sir W.Drommond—had written a work,
though lie 'had slot published it, Which made
against the -Scriptures. From that work lie made
souse extracts, which went to spew that the writer
was of opinion that the ancient Jews, like many
other people of former tithes, had recorded snitch
of their hiStirrY in'inetapisorical laognage, which
had been. literally understood by those. Isho had
in latter days expounded the Bible ; and having
given at large, his reasons for Dirt padishing his
opinions, the Writer expressed regret that philo-
sophy should be considered at'variance with
, Some comments on the. Bible, followed.
[While.Mr. was'reading from this work
•Mr. Hunt came into-COW, rand Wok 'a seat by
his side.] .

The
~4ttorney-General again objected to the
cour'e which the defendant was pursuing, by
reacting the passages he was from the
'work he bad•refer red to.

Alr..CarlUe n►aiataiued that he had a tight to'
proceed.
The ChierJuitice confessed that: he felt his si
tuation to be one of great difficulty.: On the one;
hand, he was'anxious to give the defendant every:
opportunity of defending hin►self, but, on the other,.
be,could'Oot sit there to bear the Christian itch.;
'give reviled.' * • • ••

Mr. •Carlde asserted, that the only way by
which it could
_be ascertained whether or not the
work which he had phbliihed might-ti.) be prose-
cated, svasi. extiwitiing that book to' which
referred. ••, • .
•

The Attorp.ey-General repeated that no such,
examination could he gone into there.
• Mr. Carrde then urged, that there•was•no law
tipplicable to his case.

The Chief Jitstice--1 say there is.
Mr. Ca,i!l—"lllett I t%,1 to know where it it
to bt touildi •

The Attnrncy•General said, if there were in-
:lced no law, for the punishment of that with
which the defendant was charged, he would have
'all the benefit of such deficiency, as he could
appeal to that Court from which the record ema-
nated—the Court of King's Bench—and, as his
Learned Friend near him had suggested-, he might
also go to the highest Court known in this coun-
try—the House of Lords. On this subject there
could be no question raised at present. The defend-
ant was charged with reviling the Christian reli-
gion, and all that the Court and Jury had to try was,
whether he was guilty or not.
Mr. Carlile said, his intentions were good, and
to prove this, lie was disposed to show what had
been written on the subject by another person, a
prison of high character.

The Chief Justice remarked, t4►is would he ut-
terly useless, as one libel could be no justification
of another.

Cariile—lt has not been yet proved to be
a libel.

Vie Chief Justice—l only make the remark,
that one libel can be no justification of another.
Air. Carlile—Then it' would be quite time
enough to call it a libel, when it has been proved
to be such.

The Chief Justice said, l►e should call it what
he pleased. It would he for the Jury to deter-
mine the real character of the publication before
them.

Mr. Carlile said, he must expect that his Lord-
ship would can it by the name given to is in the
information.
The Chief Justice wished to afford him every
opportunity for dertmding himself, but could not
admit one libel to be produced as the defence of
another.

111 r. CarWe answered, that lie knew he had no-
thing to expect from his LurOship. He siood
there alon'e, and must defend-hhuself, ab he per 7
crived the whole area was against , He then
resumed the retiring in winch he had been inter-
rupted. On colui!ig to a passage which mention-
eu the Deity to have been desclibed in the,Bible
—as Hying in a box of shittim wooo—

Mr. Gurney obj,•cted to the course pursued.
The Chief Justice repealed the remark that this
could be iiu defence.

Mr Carlile—lf it were
.not true that the Deity
had been so t epresented—
The Chiet Justice replied—No.
Mr Carlile said, then he should only injure
himself by stating it to the Jury, and might thete-
fore be suffered to proceed. lie then attempted
to pursue the ,same:eourse ; and though admo-
nished by the Chiet Justice to abstain from act-
ing such a part, and opposed by the Attorney-
General, tt.r Solicitor-General, and Mr. Gurney,
who contended to 'do so was illegal, and a viola,
tion of the statute of William and Mary, he. per-
sisted to defend himself in the way he had first
proposed, sheltered, as be contended he was, by
a statute passed since Eaton was tried, which
_in
-effect repealed the Statute referred to.
The Chief Justice denied that the late statute
had such an effect, it repealed certain penalties
affecting one particular body of dissenters, but
kit untouched all the otlier provisions of that
Act.

11r. Carlile—l hold in my hand the statute
'which relieves persons from the i.lonserprences of
;impugning the doctrine of the Trinity—a statute
which l submit mnkes Deism the law of the laud.

The Chief Justicc—lt does no such thing ; and
.1 will not suffer any man to say so in my pre-
sence.

Mr. Carlile—l say it does. I stand here alone.
I am the bestjudge of what is essential to my de-
fence.
The Chief Justice--.—You may be in' rim. own
,opinion ; but I am to judge of what. can legally
be received.

Mr. Carlile—lt is impossible that I can submit.
The Chief Justice—lf you cannot ,defend your-
self without impugning -the doctrines of Chris-
tianity, you cannot defend you'r3elf at :all:
Mr. Carhle then proceeded to contend, that,
acceding to ihe terms of the. statute to 'which he
last. 'referred," he was justified in defending his
deistical Principles.
The Chief. Justice--If yore will conduct your
defence with decorum, and ",!,)Stain
against the law, I will hear, you.
Mr: Carlile—l am not sensible .that I have yet
done wrong: Your. Lordship' cannot po'ssibly
refuse my appealing to the Bible, to, ascertain
whether. Christianity is not founded on the- doc-
trine of the Trinity.
The Chief Justice,—l cannot listen W any dis-
cossiohs ton this.Subjecr. ,The historical part of
the QM Testament is the history of as sinful peo-
ple, which exhibits many offences against:the
Al-
mighty.
Mr. Carlile—l dos not believe the troth of that

history.
[lleve a Gentleman behind tarlile uttered, an
"ex,:hiniation of horror.,':iiibiclEdi-e* the animad-
version of Orator Hunt.] ,

Air. Carlile was 'then proceeding• again to read
Drtimmond's pablieation—*hen
The Solicitor-General addressed his Lordship,
and said—The defendant is pursuing the same
course.

The Chief Justice—l cannrit•suffer this. ne
defendant is mistaken if he thinks'ite can defend
one error by committing another. I cannot sit
here and suffer any man to I. evile anti•caluMniate
the Holy Scriptures.
Carlile—l have no intention to revile; I
-only intend to examine.

The Chief Justice—Exannination does not con-
sist
in a repetition of the offence with which yon
ate charged.

Mr. Carlile—l find it contrary to mason to be
compelled to believe.

The Chief Justice—No man is-answerable for
his belief, if lie keeps it to himself.
Mr. Carlile— Your Lordship's 'observation
argues nothing but the absurdity of- legislating
upon religious opinions.
The defendant recurred to his reading, and the
Solicitor-General again interfered.
The Chief Justice--1 will not sit in this Court
to-hear the writings of those read, who impugn
the Holy, Scriptures.
Mr.',Carlile—For what norp.ose do these Gen-
aemen (the Bat) quote authorities cut to support
•tbeir opiniovis ? 1. am doing no more,

The Chief Justice—l have told you my deter*..
mination, and hare laid down the rule for your
conduct.

Mr. Carlile—l must conduct my defeu4 e io my
own way.

The Chief Justice—Not if it is in opposi►ioti
to IHW.

Mr. Carlile—lf my defence is improper, I shall
be the only person injured.
The Chief Justice—Yes, you may commit a
great misdemeanour, and an offence which 1 will
not countenance.

Mr. Carli!e—My object is to defend.nly.,eli
from the imputation of malicious intenti,,o.
the e9mmon practice of the Gentlemen behind•me
to quote authorities in favour of their clients-';
I quote Sir William Drummond upon the same'
inciple.
The Chief Justice—Sir William Drummond!s
opinion of the Holy Scriptures is totally it3a4l!—'
missible.

Mr. Carlile—lt is as good as "Lord Ellenbo---.
rough's in my opinion.
The Chief Justice—l wish not to act with-.
harshness. Do not mistake me ; I have had great
forbearance ; but the time may come when for
bearance will cease.

. _
Mr. Carlik-1 do not ask for favour or for•
bearance. 1 .slt for justice only.
The Chiet Justice—Justice you shall have; but
not contrary to 'law.

Mr. Carrile-1 cannot justify, my own conduct
unless I bring forward the nntborities of men ca-
pable of judging of these things, and who have
deeply considered the subje't.

The Chief Justice-1 tell you it can he no jus-
tificadon of one offence to quote the opinion of
a pet son who has committed another.

111 r. Carlile-1 have pleaded or guilty. I do
not admit 1 have committed any offence.
The Chief Justice---I used the term offence by-.
potheticaliy, and not with al view of intimating
any opinion of my own.

rlr. Carllle-1 think I hare satisfactorily shown
that there is nothing in Paine's writings wiiich
not instifiable in a search after malt, Sir
Drummond again says—

The Solici►or-Gehcril—l must regliest that the
defendant may he prevented from proceeding ia
this course.

The Chief Justice—lt extremely difficult to
judge at the commencement of a sentence of tae
naturee-of what will follow.

The Solicitor-General—The aefendaut sayp lts
is quoting Sir Win. Drumniond to justify the li
bel which lie is charged with publishing.
The Chief Justice-1 say that is no juStiliefaion •
at ail, I will not, however, prevent- hts readiu4
()pillions which are not Offensive to the Court.
Mr. Cerlile then read on till he came to another
most offensive passage, when
Mr. Gurney interfered, with great warmth. '
The Foreman of the Jury—My Lord, it is quire
unnecessary that the defendant should continue
reading this book. -

The Chief Justice—You hear what the Jury, say,
and will judge for yourself.
Mr. Carlile—Am 1 to understand that that is
the sentiment of all the Jury
Another Juryman, at the further end of the.
box—Most certainly, that is the universal semi.-
went of the Jury mound me.

. Mr. Carlile—To what am Ito anneal, if not tt7.
reason ? is reason. to beset aside ? •
, The Chief Justice—You are charged with hay..
log published a work which reviles 'the ChriStiark
religion. if any reason can be adduced to justify
that offence, I am ready to hear you.
Mr. will ,pass Qver those passageo
which may be 'objectionable. The defendant agaits
went on, but being again interrupted, he alms"'
doned the Work, with an, observation, that
believed .he had read' all that was material. .144
then took up a copy of 'the Bible, which appei"
ed to he-bound up with mabuscript obserVatiO*
between each leaf, and said, " I shall now go 10
the Bible ; and I here he leave to state, that' .l
examining and reading this work, I considen:irrs
self:entitled to state toy. own opinions, in jklari.h".
cation of the Libel with -which I am charged'
He then went on to read the first chapter, of Cie'
nesis, and to observe up th
o.r,r-re contrariety
opinions which- had .:,-,1-isted as to the motet.
therein ....00:aitied being allegorical or literal.
Some believed it to be allegorical, and it was 0
believed by the first founders of the Christiaiii
Church, While others belieVed it •to be a true dc'
scription of the origin of the. world. Ile next
entered into an argument to prove the impossibif
bility of any human being, being able to trace 'di
existence of a first cause; and hence the absurdilt
of the hypothesis which the history had attempt,d.
to establish.
The Attorney-General submitted, that the
Court could not listen to the inquiry into which
the defendant now proposed to go.
The Chief Justice said, that :he stood in a situ'.
ation of great difficulty ; 'nevertheless, be Was
willing to allow to'a person placed in the situation
which the defendant was, all tbt latitude whiCS,
the law could possibly justify.
The Attorney-General—The whole tenor 0(011
defendant's observations proves, that his inteull •
is to inquire into the probability of the wet" „,
religion.
The Chief Just ice--I have repeatedly said. 0,2-11,:
we are not here to try the truth of the Cltrila
Mr. Gurney—The defendant bas' avowed Os
all he is doing is for that purpose.
The Chief•Justicel asn unwilling to interlPt,
'
where the defendant conducts himself with tile
cornm and moderation, hot I cannot permit
introduction of illegal and irrelevant matter. hot
Mr. Carlile—The information charges,
the book which I have pnblisbed describes
.(4,
Old Testament to be u hook of obscene `stbrifii
voluptuous debaucheries, and cruel and torturuo,
executions, I want to sinew the troth of ivto
allegation, which I can only do by a reference
the book • itself.
The Chief Justice—l repeat, we are not.. •
to try•the truth of ;he Holy Scriptures,Mr. Caride-1 ant sensible that it js an lirc°;' f.
per question for examination in a Court'ot Jll5
and think the Attorney-General will show hisivrou,
good sense by withdrawing thisAtthirmation ' •
your Lordship's consideration.
bOr
The Chief Justice repeated that he Si."'