Star.
London, England, 1827-12-20 00:00:00

" TO rat vanes dr Tlllll-nitt&

Sia—Your sense of justice and of duty to the public would
Induce:five to recall, or greatly modify. the severity of your remake
upon the moral conduct of the unhappy persons confined in this
prison, had you given a due consideration to the (acts, which a day's
inquiry would ascertain. There are, indeed, petsons of all de.
mriptions cooßned here, and among them some as far as any of
your readeis from being of the character which you assume to be
the general one—whose cases present the strongest Illustration, not, -
as you suppose, of the want of moral feeling in themselves, but of
the total absence of justice and humanity in those who have coo.
lined them. Of this number am I, a prisoner, to gratify the blgot.
ted maliciousness and intolerance of persecuting Quakers: but,'
neither a criminal, nor, in any just. sense of the word, a debtor to
any man: For an accommodating acceptance, (redolently obtained
front roe seven years ago, at the instigation of Hiytitorne and
Wright, of the Bristol City Rank,who knew of the fraud.by Whisk
It was obtained, as they took it from notorious swindlersoodi tweet
gave any value to me or to any one elm nn its account, I have teen
aagested, and likely to remain here for three months, cot a front
the means of procuring any subsistence, thi Retaining creditors
well knowing that I had no hope of power to pay them, and re.
mainiog inexorable to alt intreaties for my discharge, from no other
inducement than the difference of their religious sentiments front
mine, and the pious wish to throw. all possible discouragement its
the way of my defence from the two indictments for blasphemy,
and one for conspiracy, now pending over me.
kam, Sir, your obedient Servant,
ROBERT TAYLOR."'

" King's Bench Prison, July 20."
Could there be any thing blacker, more atrocious,
than the accusation urged in that leuer against his re'
spectable clients? Mr. Wright belonged to the reli-
gloat. Society of Friends, usually dehomanated Quakes',
and to him, therefore, in particular, the venom of the
applied. To both the plaintiffs, however, bigotry,
into!erance, persecution, and malignity were ascribed,
and all these• abominable feelings tl ey were alleged
to entertain against the writer of the letter, merely
:because he differed from them in religion. The ,author
of that letter was, at the date of writing it, wider prose-
cution for blasphemy, and in the Jetta she, it itnated
that the plaintiffs had been instigated in their conduct
towards. him by a desire to deprive him of the means of
making an available defence against these preseentious.
This chatge then did, in effect, impute to the plaintiffs
a baseness of the blackest .kind, and such as lef;...him
totally at a .loss to conjecture what sort of defence the
Editor of the :rinses could set up against it. Snrelysthe
Editor, on seeing.-the atrocious nature of the charge,
might have taken even a day's time to consider apd
quire into the character of the persons to whom tisk
violent degree of intolerance was ascribed, and who wear,
held out to the world at men capable of taking # biY
from a set of swindlers for the purpose of persecutibri.
Against such foul and venomous accusations, there was
no protection for private character, except by an appeal!
to a Jury of the country. When such an attack, -so
published, appeared on the-breakfast table of the frier*
of the party attacked, what was the consequence'.
Why, that with all their desire to suppose his innocence,
they could not convince themselves whether he was, ist
truth, innocent or guilty of the facts alleged. The ores*
was wed in former times, to confine its attacks to public
charactert ; it was only in recent years that it pt esumed
to take a' wider range—to enter the sacred circles of
private tocieth pnd outrage private feeling. The only
remedy to which the plaintiffs could resort against this
unjustifiable outrage, was an appeal to a Court of Justice;
and to the Gentlemen then empannalled on the Julyet
they appealed with-confidence for protection aphis' the
slander published by the defendani:
The publication of the libel was admitted bj
Counsel for the defence.
M. John Wear examined---Is-vaehier to the Chi
Bank at Bristol; Mebsr,.. Hay 'borne and Wriattatitthe
proprietors, and Mr.Wright•is Quaker ;itis at flic.
able a ban 44 k as any one; from Ito 18Yrit lap

• ~~