Star.
London, England, 1820-02-28 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEBRUARY
BLASPHEMY.
THE ZING V. IROSZRT WIDDIRDURWIL
This was an indictment against the defendant for
uttering certainblasphemous expressions, with intent
to excite impiety in the minds of his Majesty's sub-
jects, and to scandalize, revile, and vilify the Holy
Striptures, and the Christian Religion.
It appeared, in evidence, that the defendant, who,
according to his own representation, was the sen of a
Christian by a Negress, was a licensed Unitarian
Preacher, in the practice of preaching and speaking
on religious subjects, to a congregation of persons in
the inferior clan of secietp, at a Chapel in Hopkin-
street, Berwick-street, Soho. Cettain Magistrates
being informed that the doctrines professed- by the
defendant were of a blasphemous tendency, two per-1
sons, named Plush, a Parish Constable, and Matthew
Matthewson, a journeyman tailor, formerly a seaman
for ten years in the King's service, were employed to
watch' the defendant's proceedings, with a view to
prosecution. On the 25th of October last, in the
evening, an assembly of persons, to the number of
forty or fifty, was congregated' at the defendant's
ChapeVfor the purpose of discussing, as matter of
debate, the question--,, Whether Lord Chief Justice
Abbot's refusal to permit Mr. Richard Carlile (who
Was then recently prosecuted for blasphemy), to read
the Bible in his defence, was to be attributed to that
Learned Judges respect for the Sacred Writings, or
for fear that the absurdities and falsehoods contained
therein, • should be exposed ?" On that occasion the
defendant, who was one of several disputants upon
this question, entered into a very free discussion upon
the Character, Mission, and Conduct, of our SAvrone,
the particulars of which we forbear detailing, as it was
stated in the evidence of the above-mentioned two
witnesses.
The defendant,, whose demeanour throughout • the
trial was extremely respectful, addressed the Jury
with a few prefatory remarks, alluding to the unfor-
tunate and neglected circumstances et his early life,
having been born of a Negro woman by a Christian,
who had abandoned him to the unhappy condition of
a slave ; and, after adverting to the circumstance of
a residence of forty years in this country. during
which time, although in the humble trade of a tailor,
he had endeavoured to inform his mind of the know-
ledge of true Religion, and at length( became a
licensed teacher of Unitarianism, he delivered is a
written defence, which he acknoWledged to have been
composed by a friend, but expressive of his own
feelings aad sentiments as to what he thought proper
for his defence, gn the present occasion. The paper
put in, which was extremely well written, both in
matter and in style, was read by the,Clerk at Nisi
Prins, and it contained a very ingenious discourse in
favour of the right of free discussion upon all reli-
gious questions. Several venerable and enlightened
authorities were quoted, to shew the inhumanity and
futility of persecuting 'men for prognulgating ab-
stract opinions upon such subjects. Tl:e defence
contained, or touched upon, almost every topic, that
could be advanced upon such a subject, and con-
cluded with an appeal to the tolerant disposition of
the Jury, who were besought not to give countenance
to a spirit of persecution for mere religious opinion
and to rescue the defendant from the horrors of a
dungeon. No attempt was made to impeach the ve-
racity or accuracy of the evidence given by the wit-
uesses
for the prosecution.
The SOLICITOR- GILNIRAL replied very shortly.
The CHM/ hone; summed up the case, and the
Jury, after retiring for about half an hour, returned
with a
,verdict of Guilty ; but they strongly recom-
mended the defendant to mercy, on account of the
apparent zealous, though erroneous view of the sub-
ject on which he had descanted.