The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-10-24 00:00:00

• . ir • *J..
• • .

LAW th:

,LIGEvY CB.

cellitT OF KING'S ,ENCII, I'ILMILLi, Om QS.
Lai ism Actioerned innings, after Michaelmas Tens, be(ors
Ntr. Justice Hest and Special Juries.

--- ------- -3 PUBLICATIONS. i
The Knee ti. Taos. Davison.—This was an indict.
tuent at the instance of the Society for the Suppree- '
sion of Vice, tor nalawittlly and wickedly selling and
publishing two scamlalone, impious and profane libels,
concerning the Holy Scripturee and the Christian Re-
ligion ; the one in a periodical publiratine smiled The
Repr6liego, No. 9, and the other in a little work,
called The Deist's Magssise, No. 1.
The Spe. ial Jury Pannel being called over. only
tour gentlemen named therein appeared ; and a tales
having been prayed by the Counsel for the prosecu-
tion, they were immediately sworn.
'l he defendant put in a written request that he i
might challenge the Special Juror.. by asking them
whether they were members of the Society for the
Sappression of Vice ?
Mr. Justice Bs-r said, that it was quite not of the
ordinary course to challenge Special Jurors at Nisi
J'rius. 'lle proper place and period of challenge was
iu the Sheriff's Office, when the Special Jury Pannel
wa. struck. The defendant, however, was at liberty
t.) challenge any of the Taleamen, when they came to
the book to be sworn, and before they were sworn.—
The Learned Judge nevertheless, as matter of hotel-
genee, asked each of the gentlemen who appeared
whether they were members of the Society mentioned,
and receiving an answer in the negative, his Lordship
otiereed, that he had yielded to the defendant's re-
quest as matter of favour, and not as of right, for the
reason assigned.
The Talesss.'n, eight in number, were aleo asked the
same question, and severally answered in the nega-
tive. and the ;thole Jury being sworn, the case pro-
ceeded. '
Mr. H. MARRIOTT stated the matters alleged in the
indiettwieit, 'and Mr. Orange opened the case in his
usual impressive manner, stating that the
w' um the prosecution was ii.litutea, had felt it their
duty to prefer this indictment, in order, if possible, to
put a step to the circulation of publications which
were calculated to revile and scandalise the religion id
the country, and sap the foundation of its morals.
The defendant kept a pamphlet and bookseller's shop
in Duke-street, Smittfiehl, and, it would appear, hail
become the successor of M r. Carlile as wholesale dealer
in blasphemous and impious works. The first libel
Set out ig the iadicunent was contained in No. 9, of
TLr Repsh%ir'as, printed by Mr. Carlile on Friday,
Oct. V, 14ln, and purported to be a letter addressed
to that person, signed by J. B. Smith, 'hued West-
gate, Peterborough, Oft. 10, Ihl9. and contained,
among other offensive pas,age., the following : 1
" Before the people ran he blest AN Ph, and cordiallz
receive,* perfect tiovernment, and a pure and equitehfil,
code of laws, they most reject the Bible as being the
word of the true dod, and also totally disbelieve the di-
vinity of Christ. For while they art inflexible in the
Christian faith, there is no •possibility of estaHishing .
equitable laws, or even !acting in a private way justly
towards each other; for by. the doctrines of the Bible
and New‘ Testament, tenure is subverted, and where
nature I. destroyed, imperfection can possibly violin."
" It is the Ittbleranti such hooks, that have degraded
and made men far worse than the most hateful part of
the brisk creation." so'. •
The second libel set ont in the indictment was con-
gained in the first number of The Ileitis ..iliegszine,
published in March, 1819, and purported totte a letter
addressed by a Deist to a Christian, and setting.forth
Leaner of • like tendency to that above set forth. -
The publication of tfie libels in question was probed
by Andrew Thomas Fraley and John BraiscOnsh, agents
*I the Society, haring respectively purchased the Works
at the shop of the defendant.
The defendant, in a long written defence, addressed
the Jury in 3uetification of Isis conduct, contending that
the liberty of the press, sod the right of free discussion,
jestißed him in the publication of such works as thine
3or which be was called upon to answer. The defend=
set, After a variety of observations. enforcing this at-
kneneet, was pinceeding to indulge himself in a tirade
Omen* the English Bar, whose assistance -on such an
occasion as this, he ron•iilered as utterly useless, because
they could do no +nose for him than offer a sham and so-
phistii-al defence, from their dependance upon, and ser-
Vile sishinlesion to, the presiding Judge.
Mr. Justice Bear hrenediately interposed, and said he
would not suffer such a scandaYons libel to be tittered in-'
his presence.
The Defendant—You must not interrupt me in my
defence.
Mr. Justice Afar—(With considerable energy)—No-
thing would make me more unhappy than to be obliged
lo use the authority I have. Ton may fancy that the
Only authority I have is that which will remove you
from this place. I state that that is net the only autho-
rity I have. I have thepower„ besides that of removing
you, of fitting you as often as you trespass upon the (le-
t:arum of a Court of Justice, end I. tell you I will fine
lin as often as you dare either to offer to repeat the in-
salt you hays new oared to me, or to wake any inde-
relit sitaek upon those who ate not deem present to de-
fend theletelves.
. The Illatearlant--If you have yourdengeon,•l will give
you tfie key, and you may stied me to it it you will.
Mr. Justice Herr-1 now fine you Twenty Pounds for
rue .oreempt. .
The Defendant.—l now stand here in my defence, and
t 4(11 not he restrained. The defendant went on with
Ms defence, and complained of the injustice of calling
Iffmtiltle and miserable on Hire him to account at-the
bar of crisaisal justice for.a supposed offence, is the be.
dal epee of free discussion, whilst noble Week's's**
ad *led deadreps were permitted to ream at lerge.with
Impunity in the indulgence of practie,anmpiety and pro-
M lrate wickedness. lk contended that the question now
bsgre the Jury was not a matter of law, hut a mai*.
2:::, at subject to flaftgations as the doeoration of a
y idioms, or .as tin hatastical• varieties d.a
Id pavilion, flees warnanortaisto is Oat.
OM' 4 cencte of Jodie, up statters4 , mat,
iite.caos.of Mr. Mono, stlo was prosecuted
libel, u Independent London Jury.
toeseistrdtet of Not (kitty, whilst for the
tel.,
itbid; * ierillabod 'submissive Country *bp SW
«tad_ 4 pronounce a verdict of tiniltraga:nstleneefikee
'ennst3lrbe waanitatied to Ili atoutataniorlinwatted• a
iposaita., . Thai lwao &clued iient l`hriatianiip .wise
,repi4 0a law 91. Ow lad were{ a set of biggest& old
women, v Atte., d 'a cOnsifkribla time pun topics
of . , Abe * - Vim' tolisvolte theAnty
• . • tor as &frond ad ii -
\
' 1411 Nolte Miter Wormer isterimosd. I sob lan rai
ANL rapt liestillkiiptirri igealw of pietalifirtillAir ON
warming yoa bare toward. It is absolution!, aqqpnary
. .
. V.:.
• 0:•:• ..

that the dignity of a Court of Justice shall not be
insulted. I trill not give way to this indecency 01
conduct.
The I iefendant—Then I leave my defence In the handl

of the Jury.
Mr. Justice BEST-1 Rill sit with patience to be my-
self insulted, but I wilt not suffer the Nery sanctuary of
I justice to be insulted, still less will I sit to hear the tell-
. gion of the country stoned at.
The Defenilant—Theo I must leave off my defence if
I cannot conduct Bin the manner I wish.
Mr. Justice liss•r—You have a right to make your
defence, and I do not wish to interrupt yoU, nor do I'
wish to interfere with your opinions; hut you must not
introduce into your defence what I believe, and whit I
believe the Gentlemen of the Jury believe, to be an WO-
! ous attack upon the Christian religioa. 1 cannot suffer
the religion of Government, and that religion under the:
sanction of n hieh this t'ourt sits to administer justice, to
be so insulted. If von think you ran offer any thing in
your defence which may with propriety be received, I
will hear you.
The defendant then proceeded to read some theolo-
gical tracts in defence of Christianity, for the purpose of
spewing that the periodical work called The Deist was
open to free discussion upon matters of religion, and
went on in furtherance of the previous part of his argu-
ment, to contend that the higher orders of society, both
spiritual and temporal, including the whole legislature,
were infidels and sceptics in matters of religion.
Mr. Justice BEST interposed.—Yon will remember
the consequences of this conduct. It is not fit that those
Reverend persona, who are not before the Court, should
he so attacked. It would he unjust in me to suffer thew
to he so attacked. I therefore add 401. more to the other
fines I have already imposed upon you. These fines shall
he paid. lam determined to put down this audacity.
The Defendant—lt is impossible for me to pay the
tines. My body must suffer. I must trust to thellen-
tlemen ut the Jury, for I cannot wake any defence my
own way.
Mr. Justice BEPT —lt is my duty by the law of the
laud, under which I am sworn, to take care that you do
not avail yourself of the opportunity you now have to
villify persons who are not here to depend themselves.
If you profess to act upon principles of justice, you must
know that yon have no right to attack those *lin are not
here to answer for themselves. It is an infamous libel to
say that the Bishops are infidels and sceptics.
The Defendant—l only said, for the most part.
Mr. Justice BEST—That is a gross libel.
The Defendant said he did not mean to offend the.
Lemurs! Judge.
Mr. Justice Barr—lt is no offence to me. It is too
contemptible to be offended at.
The defendant then proceriirtl to insist that Lord (kit-
inghrulte. Lord Shaftesbury. Gibbon, Borne sail other
eminent u riters had made more mischievous attacks upon
religion than any thing contained in the works iu ques-
tion.

.Ir. Justice BEIsT denied that those eminent persons'
could he justly charged nub such infamous libels upon
the doctrines of Christianity. They might deny their
divinity, but their nior.dity and purity were themes of
their praise.
The defendant then rt.-limed his defence, and read
several passages from the works of eminent authors, in •
favour of free discussion and inquiry upon religious
inhjects, and contended that a Deist bad as much right
to the public profession of his doctrines, as Cuitarians,
Independents, and oilier sects, afro were tolerated by
law. Religion, he insisted, could never sustain any
injury from such a privilege, because the truth of it
coned only be elicited by free discussion. After dilating
upon this topic- to a eonahlerable length, he concluded
by complaining of Its grievous fines which had been
imposed upon -him by the Judge, for merely availing
himself of what he conceived to he the right to make
his defence in his own way. The Jury weir to decide
upon his case, and not the Judge, who was merely to
preside fur the purpose of receiving the verdict, and
pcLserving order.
Mr. Justice BEST charged the Jury, and said, no
man could be more convinced than himself, that it was
absolutely necessary for a Judge to preserve his tem-
per during the discussion of a case brought under the
notice of a Court of Justice but if it were necessary
that he should Amp down all irritation, and prevent
any expreseion of Warmth from escaping bum, when
the law was directly and cpenly insulted, and when
religion was scoffed at, before these who appealed to
its truth for the verdict that they were to give, and
expected its rewards and its punishments seem-ding as
they should do justice or injustice, and he should
evince feelings of irritation, or betray any expression
of warmth', he should be very unfit for his situation t
but he hoped, notwithstanding what he had felt dur-
ing the address that was made to them by the defend-1
ant, he should convince that person, that whatever
might he his -Lordship's feelings upon the subject,
they should have ro effect epos his fate. When a
person thought proper to defend himself, he was cer-
tainly placed In a very delicate situation ; but what-
ever course talkiest* he took, It was the duty of the
presiding Judge to take care that the dignity of the
law, and the sanctuary of the Court of Justice, should
be preserved, became* there would be an end of all law
and justice if the solemnity of the proceedings of the
Court was net maintained. A Judge in seek a situa-
tion was bound to exercise his authority, het in d 011...!
ll...! so he was placed in this delicate predicament—if'
he exercised the power of eensmitmeat, aid the per-
wrireownefteed was this pretreated from nuoiting hie
fnll defence, it might be said that if he were permit-
ted to remain he might have stated cirsurnstances to
the Court and Jury which might hare an effect upon
their verdict. The Judge had the double power of
tine and imprisonment, when a man, in the face of the !
Court, presumed to Insult the established religion of
the country, te insult the Uovernmietet of the country,
and traduce the filloisters of the fievernment,- when
their conduct was not in issue before the Court. Ihe
law, however, had empowered the Judge, in each cases,
to remit tht fine and imprisonment, if he saw analcient
reason. Ilisiiordelsip bad thought it to be hie dusty '
to inflict three semed floes on this defendant, who
would be boinid to pry -those fines, if the Judge bad
'hot the power to remit them. The fines, however,
having bad the effect of preventing tiss istrudectiou
of- that delete of blasphemy whkh the defendant
seemed disposed to iodide, sad having stated that he '
IPA icier owns, he was disposed to esesuiee that power
with whirl the law bed invested Mara power which
was exercised by all Magistrate*, freas &village down-
wards, neatly. • ter atlease palace- M merry. • Car
triviog *sample lute sitlietrat es -establish
the authority of the art.' sod Mt Mob 'mono. in
the sitnaden of 'the delleoilaat that the Couttwas sot
to be teesent iritk aw lr 7~ likeltOrler.teualt the'
Aim he, hat
, The Si par Leg-
ship 7 •• It t. mssLi p• le pus
Justin 101111461 41, hry ,

klqi.

the natate df the Charge *plait the defendant, And de-
clared that the libils which had beta read in evidence
welre Impious and blaiphemons attacks upon the Bible
and upon Christianity. The defendant was mistakes in.
supposing that the Judge presided in that Court merely
fee the purpose of receiving the.verdict of the Jary, and
hreserving order. lie had a higher duty to perform;
e bad to expound the law, and to take care that the
Jinx acted according to law. Undoubtedly, by Mr.
Fox s Bill, the Jury were at liberty to return a general
verdict upon the law as well is the fact. No man had
a greeter reverence for the memory of that enlightenni
Statesman who was the author of that measure, which.
had removed a strange anomaly is the law of libel ; bit
though the Jury were made the Judges.of the law, they
were not to act wording to their arbitrary wills, but
under the dictates of their consciences, their good
sense, and their plain Understanding, when applied to
the question they were called upon to decide.
The Jury deliberated a few moments and returned a
verdict of Uuilty.

Oti the :notion of Mr. OURNZT the defendant was
ordered to be committed.

The defendant applied to be discharged on bail until
next term, but Mr. Justice Bear having told him that
lie would require him also to give security, himself in
NU and two sureties in 1001. each, to be of good be-
haviour in the mean time, he declined the benefit he
prayed.

, \
1 i
. (
li
1 1 i
.
...
ki I
i I 1 11
11
‘ '
l' A t
i •
,
/
I .
f‘
‘•
:1
,
i
I .;
1
I '
1 '
i (61
d
Ms f.
, \
t,
• •
, 4