The Sun.
London, England, 1827-10-24 00:00:00

their hearts to virtue. With the permission of the
Court, he would now ask a friend to read an extract
from the speech delivered by him at the opening of
the Christian Evidence Society.

Lord TENTERDEN.—Ar. Taylor may read the
speeches part of his address, but it cannot be read
by the officers of the court, unless proved..
Mr. Taylor asked if a friend might read it for
him ?
Lord TENTERDEN.—You must read it yourself :
there is nothing to prevent you. YOu can have a
glass of •water if you like.
Mr. Taylor then read a long extract from his
speech; after xvhich he adverted inure particularly
:o the nature of the evidence adduced for the prose-
attion. If the report of such is person as Collins
was to be taken, no public orator would be safe ;
without the context it was impossible to understand
chose isolated expressions, and it would be impossible
for the Jury justly to return an adverse verdict. What
reliance could be placed on such a report as was fur-
nished by the malice and ignorance of the witness?
gr. Taylor then dwelt on the advantages which
Christianity had sustained by the opposition it had
met with, and asked whether the truth of the Gospel
was not considered more firmly established by the
relation given in it, of him who would not believe
that Jesus was crucified, unless he put his hands in
his side. If the Jury returned an adverse verdict
against him for his conscientious opinions, they
would crucify Jesus' again. Was it because
a barbarous horde of Goths and Vandals broke

into the scat of learning - and science, , that
he was to be charged with blasphemy on the
evidence of a man who had shown himself a dance
and an ignoramus. He had been thrown into the
meanest prison of the metropolis for five days,
and treated worse than, a burglar and assasssin ;
though as 'orthodox as many of the Bench of
Bishops. He was no more orthodox than his own
Diocesan, who told him on his Ordination that the
romance of the CrucXxion was taken from the
Prometheus Desmotes of lEschylus, and that
if he believed in miracles, he would not
ordain him, for that there were fools enough
in the Church already, That Doctor Paley
too, whom the Attorney-General had so cunningly
introduced, admitted that he could not afford to keep
a conscience. Mr. Taylor next stated that the lan-
guage of infidels was extensively quoted by Christian
divines; and what grave champions of Christianity
they must be who refuse to bear the infidels
when they appeared,they would defeat their adversa-
ries in effigy, but retreat as soon as lie took the field.
He called upon the jury in conclusion, to say, wile-
titer the evidence they had that day heard, was suffi-
cient to establish any historical fact. Was
it not" probable that such a witness pur-
posely omitted many things that were said, and
also put doWn two or three things which he only
imagined. He appealed to the gentlemen of the
Press, whose noble art required education and many
years to perfect, whether it could be picked up at
first trial by the Parish Beadle. Why were not
accomplished,
.and literary men produced against
him, or was it intended that he should be
made ;the victim, and thOught that any dirty
faggot would . serve to destroy him. Hs
strongest expressions were according to strict
logic, examples of the reductio ad absurdum ; were
public lecturers to be ruled with a rod of iron, or to
teach nothing, but that the poor should be taught to
demean themselves before their betters,_ and teach
nothing but rags and righteousness ? Were we for
ever to be confined to discourses as stupid as Whit-

tingham and his cat ? He called upon the Jury, not
as priests and religionists, but as Jurymen,
and citizens of the world, to do impartial justice.—
They were asked to convict him on garbled expres-
sions, Was it to become a precedent in England,
that a man of learning was to be convicted
for an oratorical discourse on the evidence of the
beadle ? Mr. Taylor admitted that many of the
principles propounded and acted upon by thnse'who
professed Christianity, his understanding despised,
his heart abhorred, and his nature revolted at.—
They may, he said, break that heart, and destroy
that understanding, but they could never reconcile
him to the system of Christianity. These were his
sentiments.

" Dum memor ipse mci, dum Spiritus hos regit artus."
Mr' T. concluded by strongly contending, after
taking an extensive survey of the law, that the pro-
secution was untenable on Christian grounds, on mo-
ral grounds, on legal grounds, and on every ground
whatever, but those of ascendancy of might over right,
of rancoured hypocrisy, over prostrate virtue, and

therefore he called on the Jury to return
such a verdict as would reflect immortal
honour on themselves, and wipe off from
England the stain and reproach of such
disgraceful proEecutions, and establish that which he
contended for, namely, a right of free-thinking, and
of freely discussing, every man his own sentiments.
And now, Gentlemen of the Jury, not denying—
not compromising—not qualifying, a single senti-
ment that I ever entertained, or a single expression.
that I ever uttered, I call the GOD ALMIGHTY—
the GOD of truth and of justice, to witness
that of this indictment, I am 'not Guilty. The
Reverend Gentlemen then sat down, evidently
much exhausted, and for some moments there was a

partial expression of applause throughout the Court.
Lord TENTERDEN then proceeded to charge the
Jury. After reading over and commenting on the
expressions, charged as blasphemous, his Lordship
said, that if these were intended to to be propositions
which the defendant was about to refute, then he
certainly was entitled to an acquital ; bur, if, on the
other hand, they were uttered for the purpose of
procuring the assent and admiration of those to whom
they:were addressed, then the defendant was guilty of
that with which he was charged. His Lordship said
said that he would ill discharge his duty if he did
not tell the Jury that the Christian Religion was to
be protected by the laws of this Country as much as
any of our civil rights. In conclusion, he trusted
that the Jury would decide according to the sound
dictates of their own reason, and not from any/thing
they had heard to-day.
The Jury then retired, at half-past three o'clock,
and, after an absence of half an hour, returned ; their
names were then called over, and nothing could ex-
ceed the anxiety which prevailed throughout the
Court whilst this was being done ; when it was con-
cluded, the officer asked whether they had agreed
to their verdict ?
The FOREMAN.--Yes.
Officen—How say you—is Robert Taylor guilty,
or not guilty ?
FOREMAN.--GUILTY.
The announcement of the Verdict excited an in-
tense sensation through the largest auditory we ever
recollect to have seen assembled in that Court.