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

of Christ,' as published by the Society for promoting
Christian Knowledge. The Rev. Orator will deliver a
Philippic in exposure of the atrocious villinies that
characterise the Jewish Vampire,
vampire--Gentlemen, who is the Jewish Vam-
pire,? You will find from the sequel that he deno-
minates the author and founder ,of our holy re-
ligion, under that appellation—.
and in respectful challenge of his Ministers to come forward
and shew if they theta selves are not ashamed of him.
th" The HOLY LITURGY, as performed every Sunday, and
e Ninetieth Oration del' red by the Rev. Orator, in irre-
Futahle demonstration of It'll: Forgery and Imposture of the
c°7ol"P!ls, are to be had of the Printer, J. Brooks, 421,
a-street, and at the .Areopagus every Tuesday even-
ing, 86, Cannon-street.
ur en tietnel
" `r,kyLoa, 17, Carey-street, Lincoln's Inn."
sense of ,if the. Reverend Orator had the least
decency or- regard to the laws of his
CotiPtry, which have hitherto protected him, he
would
ii;l be aware that the very use of the term
PiPPic, in the advertisement, is inconsistent
with the subject of discussion. A philippic is a
:°rd borrowed from certain orations by a'cele-
rated author of antiquity, in which he attacks,
by every Power and acuteness he could possess,
jle
for conduct of the King of Macedon. It
or
tos a term either for the highest praise,
the
shperate severest censure ; not for that
discussion with which religion
sould be reviewed, so that in the very advertise-
ment, he commences bis t .
that enees y stating, that his object
U c°l*nrneece a ferocious attack, not to pursue
rational
meeting, discussion becoming a Christian
shall
Gentlemen, I shall say no more, nor
O I -bite to you a single word this Reverend
motor has written,—you will hear it• read
t°,
Y°Ll,--and when you have heard it, I
snail do no more than appeal to you to say,
whether the Magistrates of the
_city of London
t°l
-11 d have done otherwise than take this'last
'node ; all reasoning, all persuasion, having
been thrown away—nay, whether they could have
en justified in forbearing to take this course,
the purpose of removing a nuisance so detes-
table
and of getting rid -rof an individual from
their jurisdietion—an individual who was sur-
rounding himself with nests of vermin, for the
purpose of 891)6, and destroying the very foun-
dation b
3 of all our best hopes and happiness.
Thoma,.
Collins was then called and examined by
t.h "
e SOLICITOR-GENERAL.—I am a beadle, residing
Wallbrook. On Saturday, February 3d, I went
t 0
Place-in Cannon-street, and saw what appeared
bto
a bill against the door : it was the late Salter's
Hall ahg
Meeting House, then called the " Areo-
pang
-°r ' the Christian Evidence Society." I took
tril bill down. Afterwards I conversed with
th grilaYlor on the subject of that bill. At
o'clock e I took it down, it was about twelve
I in the day, and after pasting it on paper,
-°' it to the Alderman of the Ward. In the
4fte
called of the same day, the Rev. Mr. Taylor
beetle' 1. O n rile, and after asking my name, said, he had
door, -14rnled that I had taken a paper from off his
de,t' I replied that I had ; he then said, why did you
woit:lY:ny property ? If you had wanted one, I
Osyhn '''/Ve given it you with pleasure. The bill in
d ja the same bill.
The
bil SOLICITOR. GENERAL here requested that the
to ~"'lght be read. •
tiord
TENTERDEN asked the defendant if he wished
:Pt any questions to 'this witness.
411(,4114in-OR—I am very anxious that the bill
be read
11 . •
e :
bill was then read as follows
4111rESTO OF THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE
SOCIETY,

To ESTABLISHED, NW:EMBER 12, 1827.
all Protestant; and Members of Protestant Con gregations.
"IT aND BRETURRN,
. °ll
are he brinvited to attend the Discussions of the
Nen re •' • which are held every
Teaet4 of the Christian Religion,
si,,etf,Y tvening, in the Society's Areopagus, 86, Cannon-
of the' ":„„itLom which all respectable persons, upon observancel
"4,pete„ary regulations, are admissible : and where al
inteAti --:
TlB-4i; upon a previous. notification of their
tftPie of discus meowed to deliver their sentiments upon the
Ilia thsetic'aima. the Pra pion,
_s only to promote the love .of Truth,
Pevoie c -88 of Virtue, and the influence of
.Universal Be-
,f
reii n.e, a,
,„ opposed to foolish and contradictory sy. stems
ages !--43 faith..—derived from the ignorance of bat barons
(ii,en% d craftily imposed upon the many, for he agagwi.atnr-e
of th.ent 01 the Power and influence of a few,who, you'," Buspicious origination of their pretended Divme
_Re-
inaiteo., have shown themselves afraid and ashamed to
1,1 tam the same, where they might 'be answered by
hbtietd and able men, andmight have their accuracy esta-
'tam
O-, or their errors corrected.
n,. iin •
(lain - REVEREND ORAroR, a reg
,illecl clergyman of the Established *Church, bath publicly
ular and canonically 0r-
th,,414,21ged all Ministers and Preachers (and hereby repeats
to'litcnsoenge )_-to come forward and show, if they can, the
%e•%IT of the FOUR GRAND Pitorosrrioxs, which in the
D 'etril Alanifesto, " To all Clergymen, Ministers, and
, c' "ners of the Gospel," are declared to have been, as far
e 8 appeared, fully and unanswerably demonstrated.
THIS PROPOSITIONS are

,r
~,tt "AT THE SCRIPTURES OF T
N% THE NEW TESTAMENT,
AE,,,, "T WRITTEN BY THE PERSONS nosr. NAMES THEY
Will' THAT THEY DID NOT APPEAR IN THE TIMES To
lit
1:141. REFER.
)(14..ttb. HAT THE PERSONS OF WHoit THEY TREAT, NEVER
IV. ~,,
hAptt (RAT THE EVENTS WHICH THEY RELATE, NEVER
l'Ill"."."-Of these Propositions,
I. 1.
T WERE NOT
,
r
evidence, that
!..-c----tiell4l 7" SCRIPTURES OF OFIS' are,Til N. _ . . ,
~'"ey tvt.,,et4%, it cannot be shown by any
nesr;' .-e `` Written by the persons whose names
externaill,beca.use it can be shewn by evidence
Persons n''' internal, that they were written by
acts and
--- evidence external, In the formal
ediet,,
of y
other
for 4 t• Christian Emperors, Bishops, and Council 9 liaini;
vatic, 11,ife tat time, for the general alteration, or total re
(Q) a inratlrle Scriptures, according to their own capriced
Divines -`n ththe admissions of the most learned Critics an
lon'
time
sttoo .
_e alterations which the Scriptures have
the immortaire uaderg"e
(b).—Byevidence internal,0o,ao
Pktaages tnerein rernai ll*l,ll.ose onl'y drift' isvictoi°ll4eismtina• k d wic e .
nd by the liner i . .
tendencytn of of many
lit,sts (c).
~.... THAT nifty DID hence the power of Kings and
Thteß - '''D NOT APPEAR IN THE TIMES TO
!ale)", THEY REFER; is demonstrable,—By evidence
ti,,.:a4 In the express admissions of Ecclesiastical Histo-
; of their uinability to shew WHEN, or WHERE/
7 Ivßom this collection of writings was first made (d.)
111(eao)d44..c_b 'were
.those of the Emperors Constantine and
Ate,,ala "If and this of the Emperor Anastasio!. " When
ton,b, Was consul (that is in the year of Christ, 506) at
lisly ilini"ple, by order of the Emperor A NASTASIUS, the
rkaiti,lePel4, as bein written by illiterate Evangelists are
1340-'" and corrected!" Victor 7'ununensis, an African
.
,ktitPof".°ted by Lardner, vol. 3, p. 67. See also at-
-4,,1„..; " general alteration' of these Scriptures, 'to cm-
'it,,,,,i'ctge them to the faith of the orthodox,"
byby
__LA.Nu--
Pkbre; Archbishop of Canterbury, as recorded Be (0 Ristoire de Manichee, vol. 1. p. 343.
15t. ' AbMISSIONS OF THE MOST LEARNED CRITICuS--N.
tkt:,rAhe" Were in the MSS. of the N. T. 9, NE
,H.t.a
"ty, 7.,,nu TIHRTy THOUSAND various readings. . LAI; r.
Ithi,), version, p. 22. 2d. " The Manuscripts
.rom
V„klit, -a„tl',,e received text was taken, were stolen by the libra-
'lrbert-'" sold to a sky-rocket maker, in the year 1749."-
4e.
porkarsh, Bishop of Peterborough, vol. 2. p. 411—
(44rele,1,1,:atitahlle, bbouotk,,oßf
rtentveulaetlieonro,tethietre was no original
himself in Switzer-
(e) ;tile year 1516." Bishop Marsh, vol. 1, p. 3.„20..,
d° (e)
\I ;",IKssoitaL, &c. See Romans, iii. 7.—LPls.t'.
. 10...-Heb. xii. 29—Heb. xiii. 17—Romans, 1111 (4eter, ii. 13—Luke xiv. 26, Ste. 2,.e.
Ike: ' Sett Alosheim's Eccles. Hist.--Jones on the Canon,
Passim.

(e) Rxcalvan TEXT, &c. " The Received Text rests
on the authority of no more than twenty or thirty manu-
scripts, meet of which are of little note." Unitar. Version,
Introd. 10. "It was completed by the Elzevir edition of
1624." ib. Mark well 1 the retaining therein, and cir-
culating as the Word of God, with consent or connivance
of all parties, several passages known and admitted by all
to be Forgeries and Lies. 1 John, v. 7.-1 Tim. iii.
16. —Excellent Morality this! !
(.0 COMPARATIVELY MODERN, Ike. See 2 Epistle of
John, 9.-1 Tim. iii. 3.--James, v. 14.—Matth. xviii.
17.-1 Corinth. xv. 7, 32.-1 Peter, iv. 6.
(g) HOBGOBLINS. See Acts xix. 15.
(h ) VISIONARY HYPOSTASIS. See Luke, ix. 2.anu-
-9.—
Mark, ix. 2.—Luke xxiv. n
81.-1 John, v. 6. and
merable other Passages, in perfect accordance with xx!E
TRUE AND GENUINE GOSPELS of the most primitive Chris-
tians, which taught that he was ninety-eight miles tall,
and twenty-four miles broad ; that he was not crucified at
all ; and that he was never born at all; that by faith only
are wo saved, &c. &c. ; all equally indicative that Christi-
anity had no evidence at all, but was a matter of mere
conceit, fancy, or superstition, from first to last.

journ the meeting to Tuesday next, when there will
be a discussion, the subject to be taken from
a new work, and advertise& in the Examiner
of next Sunday. The company, upon this an-
nouncement, retired.
The examination in chief having, concluded,
Lord TENTERDEN, addressing the defendant, said.
—Do you wish to put any questions to the witness ?
Mr. Taylor. " Certainly." . (Tt 'ming to the wit-
ness.) " What book were you sworn on ?"
Lord TENTERDEN.—The New 'Testament, to be
sure. _ _ _

Mr. Taylor—Do you believe in Lila book ?
Lord TENTERDEN-I'll not allow that question to
be put.
Mr. Taylor—lt has been asked on other occa-
sions, and very invidiously.
Lord TENTERDEN—I can't allow it to be put—
we must conduct this trial in the same manner as
others. Indeed, I think, I heard the witness say
that he does believe it. (The witness had said so
in an under tone.)

Mr. Taylor—Had you any acquaintance with me
before the occasion to which you alluded? Wit-
ness.—Yes, I saw you on the subject of taxes, and
you said that you were a servant of the Society.
Who has employed you ?—Alderman John Atkins
employed me as the superintendent of the Police.
Has he ever attended at the Areopagus ?
Not
to my knowledge.
Did you not tell certain persons that your's was a
bad job, and that you wished you had not been em-
ployed on it ?—Often : I thought it hard to be
obliged to attend for four or five months on Sundays
and other days.
Upon your oath, Thomas Collins, what are you
?"—Nothing, be paid for this " bad job ?"ZNothing, and I
have no promise of anything.
What, honest Thomas Collins, have you got no
sort of encouragement to support you in the pro-
gress of this bad-job ?—None ; I merely obeyed the
command of my superior officer.
When you first went to the Areopagus, was it out
of mere curiosity, not knowing the subject matter of
the entertainment ?--I went there to take down all
I heard, without reference to the subject-matter; I
was ordered there in consequence of having showed
the manifesto to the Alderman.

Did you take notes the first time you went there ?
—I believe so.

Upon your solemn oath, did you, Thomas Collins,
ever, in the course of your life, before, take notes of
any discourse ?—I was never similarly employed ;
indeed, I don't recollect that I ever did.
What induced you to come prepared to take
notes P—The command of Alderman Atkins.
In what part Ormtbe Areopagus did you place your-
self P—ln the body of the chapel ; about twelve feet
from you.

Was there any noise or shouting in the Areopa-
gus that could have distracted your attention ?
None after you began.
After some other question, of no importance, the
defendant asked.—Are you sure you heard all I ut-
tered ?—I have already sworn so.—You spoke this
distinctly, and I am certain of what I took down.
Was there any part of it in Greek or Latin ?
You said that it was Greek.
Do you know the difference between Greek and
Latin P—No—Yes, if I saw them written (a laugh).
The notes which I now read from are the same
which I produced at the Manion-house.
Were you not shocked at the things you heard ?
I was.
Frightened out of your wits, perhaps ?—Not

quite—no.
Upon your oath, how great a portion of my dis-
course is contained in your notes ?—You spoke
about an hour, and I can read all that I have written
down in five minutes.

Then you have only a twelfth part ; there was a
great portion which you omitted, what guided you
in your selection ?--I took down those parts, which,
in my judgment, were the worst.
I understood that you took down only the shock-
ing parts ; was there nothing of a (Efferent character
to c.,plain thi.t portion which shocked you ?—There
was nothing to c:.plain, nothing which appeared to
me to do away the meaning.
If you heard any thing calculated to explain what
was shocking, would you also have put down that ?
—Certainly.
Did you not hear me utter a single just. or vir-
tuous sentiment in the whole course of my oration ?
—I can't say; it did not attract my attention.
You were taken up with the shocking, and of
course had no taste for the good and the virtuous ?
—I can't recollect; I may have heard some such
thing, but there was, in my opinion, nothing to ex-
plain what I have now read.
Did I make any quotations from infidels P—l
can't say; I heard you so many times.
From the Christians! eh P—l cannot possibly
say.
Now, on your oath, Thomas Collins, could you
ascertain when I made quotations, or when I spoke
in my own person ?—Certainly.
You are a learned man. Do you understand the
principles of ratiocinative argumentation ? Loud
laughter, during which the witness appeared not in
a very slight degree puzzled—after a pause he
answered " No—l don't understand you."
The defendant—All was so plain and intelligent
to you before, bow comes it that you are so dull
now ? 'Was my discourse hypothetical or dogma-
tical ?—Part of it was very learned, I know, and
above my comprehension.
Are you sure that these most shocking words
which I delivered were in propria persona, or hy-
pothetically, as the words of another ?—I know that
the words which I took down were all delivered by
you; and I believe they were positive.
Am I to understand, Thomas Collins, that the
general style of my argumentation was above your
comprehension ?—No.
What ! not parts of it ?—Certainly, some parts
of it were in Greek and Latin, which you afterwards
explained.
Come, show those notes of your's to the Jury,
that they may have a specimen of your scholarship.
Lord TENTERDEN—When the Jury are consider-
ing their verdict—that will be the time for their
seeing the documents, unless you have a particular
object for their inspecting them now.
Mr. Taylor.—No; I merely wish that they should
know what sort of witness they had in the box. He
then proceeded with the cross-examination.
When had you read the Manifesto ? was it before
yon tore it down ?—I read the four propositions.
Are you a member of the Church of England ?
I am.
Are you in the habit of attending to the discipline
of it ?—I am.
Do you remember the 34th verse of the sth chap.
of St. Matthew ?—Yes ; I have read the New Tes-
tament through.
Then repeat the words.--(A laugh.)—Witness
(after some hesitation)--I—l—know I have read all
the Testament through.
Do you remember the words ?—No.
Are they not " Swear not at all; neitherby heaven,
for it is God's throne ; nor by the earth, for it is his
footstool ?"—I believe so.
Then I have no more questions to ask you.
Mr. Taylor then sat down.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Had you not the
full opportunity of taking down distinctly what
you had heard?—Yes.
But no other part of the discourse explained or
qualified those passages which you have read to us ?
—Certainly not.
What was the general scope and tendency of the
discourse ?—lt went to state that the whole of the
New Testament was false.

Lord TENTERDEN.--DO you call any other wit
nesses ?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.---NO, my Lord.
Mr. TAYLOR then proceeded to address the Jury.
He would not deny that he felt peculiar difficulties
in his present situation. In almost any other case
but the present, a defendant coming into this Court,
might expect justice with certainty; but in the
present ease, he knew he had much to gar. He had
not only to fear that the rode of defence he should

adopt, would not be the most judicious—that the ar-
guments he should use, would not be the most
palatable—that the reasons he should adduce would
not be the strongest ; but he had also to tremble for
the character of those whoM he addressed. He had
to fear that their minds were barricadoed by preju-
dice, and cased in adamant against the progress of
conviction. At different periods the supposed
interests of religion had forbid the exercise of impar-
tiality, and' the wisest and best men had fallen
victims-to misguided zeal. In all ages, there had
been men, and good men too, who were 'perverse
enough to think it a duty to injure others,and thought
by persecuting God's creatures, they did God a ser-
vice. He did not compare himself with those to
whom he referred, nor his prosecutors to their perse-'
cutors ; but if he addressed persons of congenial
minds—men with minds congenial to his prosecu-
tors, and he might add, to that of the Learned
Counsel, who had characterised him ag a nuisance,
and his friends as a nest of vermin. This was not
respectful nor decent language, perhaps; but be that
as it might, if he addressed persons of congenial
character, he knew that any defence he could make
would be of no avail. If he proceeded to prove that
the language he had used was innocent in itself,
that, probably, would lead him into a mode of
defence which the Court would not endure, and by
persisting in which, he would aggravate his punish-
ment. He could assure .the Jury that he would not
utter a single sentiment which any conscientious man
could feel offended with. If any offensive expression
should fall from him unintentionally, he hoped for
patience and forgiveness.. He-called upon .the Jury
to dismiss from their minds the disgraceful and ab-
surd slanders which his theological, and it might be
his legal, enemies had propagated against him. He
had been called a monster, an Atheist, a sot, and a
madman; that was'not his character. lie was not an
Atheist, he was not a Christian, he was not a hypo-
crite, but he was a Deist; and for his devotion to
Deism he had suffered what in another cause would
be considered martyrdom. He had lost his natural
friends, his fortune, and his liberty, for his belief in
the common God of nature, and his desire to
rescue the name of God from the foul and dis-
gusting calumnies with which it was too often
associated; and to enlighten a priest-ridden and
fanatical people, lie had suffered every descrip-
tion of contumely, cruelty, and inhumanitt,—
He was not brought into his present, not at .all en-
viable situation—by any foolish heroism of character.
Though he could bear with fortitude punishment the
severest,—nay, even death, if such were to be his
lot. He cared not for the result of this trial, so
much for himself, as for the principle which it would

destroy. His conviction, he feared, would be fatal
to the exercise of free speech, and free discussion,
and if the jury lent themselves to the wishes
of his enemies they would ratify by their
verdict, the deeds of sanguinary persecution
which had been perpetrated in former ages,
and would sanction like persecutions for the future.
That verdict might crush him and the noble insti-
tution •he had founded, but it would also crush
liberty of conscience, and give great influence to
Popery and arbitrary power, or, what was the same
thing, to Methodistical tyranny and arbitrary power.
—The present prosecution was got up under the
auspices of the Lord Mayor, who was himself a
Dissenter from the Established Church, and now
claimed and ianjoyed that liberty of conscience he
(larded to others. He hoped to be able to prove
that there was no reason suggested by the law,
of the land, or the customs of the City of London
for the measures adopted against him. He
should trespass on their attention for a short period
whilst he stated to them the nature and objects of the
institutions he had founded, for if these were inno-
cent, he was innocent. The Society of universal
benevolence was instituted the Ist March 1824, and
he present building since called the " Areopagus,"
was taken the 26th July : since when Divine Service
was regularly continued until the period of his unjust
capture. He had formed at some expence and
labour a compilation from the Liturgy of the
Established Church, which was read in that place of
worship, and which his friends conceived, and he
had a right to assert, was more consonant to the
principles of true religion, and more grateful to the
Almighty, than any other form of prayer. Upon the
establishment of the Christian Evidence Society,
which, as its name imported, was founded for the
purpose of religious discussion, lie delivered an
inaugural address, which was published and widely
circulated. (Mr. Taylor was here about to hand the
Jury copies of the address, but was informed by Lord
Tenterden that the Jury could not be permitted to see
any papers which were not proved). Mr. Taylor
continued, two years ago he waited on the then Lord
Mayor and requested, not his allowal for the school,
for that most important object—the discussion of re-
ligious topics, but for his Lordship's patronage and
sanction. During two successive Mayoralties he
had delivered discourses to thousands of persons
without any interruption—without knowing, or con-
ceiving that he was ofiending against any law—
and without any of that persuasion, advice,
and remonstrance, to desist, which the Learned
Counsel stated had been unsuccessfully em-
ployed towards him. The Attorney--Ge-
neral had also stated that his discouises were dia-
racterized by ribaldry and grossness : but amongst
the numbers who had visited his Chapel for the in-
dulgence of curiosity, he defied any of them to say
that they had ever heard any sentiments fall from
him which could bear the interpretations put on
them by the Attorney-General. If those who
visited his Chapel were Christians, they must
blush for that cause in which it had been
found necessary to resort to such means to
convict him. He appealed to the ladies who had
been in the habit of visiting tho Areopagus, and
who, he was confident, were as pure and as much
above suspicion as the wife or daughter of any maul
in that Court—he appealed to those ladies to say,l
whether they had ever heard a word of grossness,
which could offend the most chaste and delicate ear,
fall from him. On the contrary, those passages of
the Old and New Testament which could bear a
coarse interpretation, were carefully excluded.—
Indeed it was unreasonable—it was libellous
on the public, to say, that a Society
should take a house, and assemble con-
stantly to hear the discourses of a man which were
destitute of argument and reason, and, as described
by the Learned Counsel, abounded in grosnesS and
ribaldry. He came now to the gravamen of the
charge against him, which was the mischievous
effect of such discourses on the minds of the young.
This charge against him came badly from those who
propagated their principles in the nurseries of in-
fancy,„„ or the chambers of debility, and who sent_
Missionaries amongst barbarous nations, amongst
vdothreesppaClsga aed,
ritbe a system eesand Catabaucs, and the Hottentots, to
of religion which was secretly
or publicly abjured, by the most virtuous
and intelligent men in civilised society.
Lord TENTERDEN indignantly.—lt is not so, Sir.
You must not assume it.
A
Taylor continued—The head and front of his
offending was, that lie desired discussion on religious
subjects. Discussion on religion was not an offence
against religion, except in the minds of those who
considered that religion would not bear discussion.
In the Universiity of Cambridge, of which he had
the honour of being a member, the students were
accustomed to dispute in the Latin tongues for
and against the doctrines of the Christian re-
ligion. This was just what he had done, and
it surely could not be said that it was right
to speak truths in Latin, but not in Eng-
lish ;—for what was orthodoxy at Cambridge, was
blasphemy in London. By this prosecution, the
nominal friends of Christianity did more injury to
the cause, anti offended more against it, than he had
done; for they admitted by this prosecution, that
Christianity would not bear the light of reason ; that
public discussion was dangerous to it, and sarcasm
, and ridicule fatal. He was an honest unbeliever; he was
willing to suffer, for he thought no man could suffer
1 in a better cause, than in generous exertion to re-
[ claim the minds of his fellow-creatures to reason, and