Old Bailey New Court, Fri...
The Times, 1824-06-12T00:00:00

-'txheu ior puuiisiing a otaspnemous libel. lr- ErNARD~ oPotied the case for the prosecution. The libel 'ass contained in the21st number of the ninth volume of the Rec publian, in which the existence of Jesus Christ was denied; the EciDturc and the Christian rcligion asserted to be fabulou$s nd' the Delble designated a mpost wicked and blasphemous vork. The learned counsel argued from a comparison of the state Of morals in the old world, particularly in Greece and Rome at the time of the birth of our Saviour, with thtat of the modern world, that sthe establishment of the Christian religion was favourable to the general cause of morality. George Leadb:tter, p roved that he ptsebhased the work in quest'o of the defendant OD the 27th of May, at Carlile's shop, No. 84, Fleee.atreet. The defendant at first said that the work was'probibit-. ed; but upon witns telling him that le had been at the shop be- fore, and that the people he saw there lhed promised to sed it to bim at his adclreca, hz gave him the work, for which he charged Gd. The libel having been read by the officer of the Court B1r. Fnznc2 addressed the Jury for the defendant. Ie had ex- prerset tis deter-ninationthedaybeforeyesterday todefend no more c-ea of this kind: for his heart sickened at the constant repetition of 2he word blasphemy, to nbich his ears had never been accustomed either in private or public life; bi.it he had boen sincereminded of a promise he had madse which he had then forgotten. The leamed counsel, afterobserving that the constant re.ehoing of tlese sounds ef blanphernv, occasioned by the present prosecutions, must be mnore injurious to tbe Christian religion than the wozks themselves, If Un- noticed, contended at great -length that so long as unitarianism was cancuoned by the law, it was-unjust to punish deism; one beng as mnuch calculated an the other to subvert the religion of the landAAsen et late King was implored to pardon Dr. Dodd, he replied that if he did, the Pereaus were murdered: let not the jury murder the bappino-a of the moan at the bar; whilst the more elegant blas. phiemens, the IJnitarians, were suffered to go unpunished. Besides, the ideas and definitions of blasphemy were so various and conflict- ing, that it was imp osible for any man, particularly an illiterate roan li1re the dafeDnnt, to .know7 vwhat actuaUy constituted the of- fence of blanpheny4 for nmany learcd- p relates of the Established Chuch accuned the Cettohica of blasphemy and idiolatry, whilst atberta rcnired in their faith principlen very nearlv tho same aa ?hzirowa. Th leansed conzDl -alto nargued, thgt the defcida!nt Iot knowing The contents of the worklbe sold, couta not beeosaer- ed geiltv of blasphemy. 'rhe RECQWRDER, in charging the jury, inforied them, that whether otber persons were or were not guilty of. crines,-was not the question they had to try.. They were to Inquire whe. ther or not the defendant had committed th- oftince laid to bis charge; and if he bad sold the work, he was equally respon. sible tor the contents, whether he had read it or not. He would have been glad if the defendant had throwva himself on the mercy of thc Court, and stated who were his paymasters, for it vas impossible that Carlile coula havae found means to carry on the sale of these works: one would, therefoke, have been glad to know who were at the bottom of all this. After the jury had been in deliberation for half an hour, one of them stated to the Court that they were not likely to agree, as some of them had doubts as to whether or not the defendant knew the contents of the libel. The RECORDER was going again to lay down the law upon that rubject, when another juror said, that thev had already been told what the law was, and did not want his charge over again. They then retired, and after an absence of about an hour and ahaif, returned with averdictof Guilty. In the mean time, another jury had been sworn. Win. Hanley was indicted for publishing the same work. The defendant asked the jury before thiey were sworn, if any of them had served upon any of these trials ? One of them answered, that lie had been on CarElo's trial, about five years ago. The defendant then objected to him. The RECORDER said, the objection was not a legal one; but he darcd say the counzel for the Crown would admit it. The defendant said, he would reject every thing in the shape of a favour. He had made the objection ns a matter of right ; but since the CouTt. had ruled that it was illegal, he waved it. George Leadbitter, the witness in the preceding ease. stated that on the 22dl of May he went into the rhop, 84, Fleet.strect, Asked for the last numiber of the Repblicean, and received it from the defend- ant, who was behind the counter, and to whomn he paid 6d. for it. On his cross-examiination by the defendant, he said that he also asked for the M1foralist but rot for Paine's Age of Renton, or Pal- *ner's PrinciplesefNXature The defendantinquiretl of witness how a person of his office BNw-street) was ? and directed him to tell that person that lie (defendant) would call that evening andt pay him 3s. whic he owed him ; andI would give both him and wiDness infor- nition which they would be glad of. Upon which witness told bim not to tell the other person that he (witness) had bought this work. Witness is not pairt for doing this; he intends to ask for his expenses, but he does not know what they will amount to. The libel was then read; and tlte case for the prosecution closed. The defendantr before he would begin to read hir derence, wished to make one observation. It had been asserted by the leadiig journal of the dav, that there were some persons in the back ground, whlo left them (the shopmen) to bear the consequences. 1le begged it to be understood, that so far as he was concerned, he alone was blanieable for the sirtation in which he stood. He then pro- ceeded to read his defence, which consisted principally.of ar- gunients against Christianity, to prove the truth of the libel. Persecution, he said, never would stop the march of inquiry. Wrhy did not the pious divines come forward and refute his ar- guments, instead of filling magisterial offices for which they were unfit ? But they preferred their cups and good living, to " the feast of reason and the flow of soul." Instead of fair ar- wument, they resorted to the arm of power, assisted by the scurri- lity of the foulest part of the press, which took every opportuity of abusing them, when they were not in a situation to reply to it. Those writers slandered them, and endeavoured to prejudice their juries against them; and whilst they pretended to perecct purity of prin- ciple. they did not hesitate, although they knew that the papers would be upon the breakfast table of every respectable fami- ly, to insert, for a paltry half-gujnea, the beastiy advertise- ment ef a GQss or an Eady. The present prosecutions would only tend to strengthen andi disseminate more widely the princi- ples ag7ainst which they were directed: he knew they were in- debted for these pror,cccauons to one testy and bigotted individual, vho, high in power, had been endeavouring for a quarter of a cen. ttiry with his bigotry and superstition to prevent the enlargement of the human understanding, and to fbrce down the throats of others, vi et arirs, opinions in which it was evident he did not believe him. self; thut 5ountcracting the liberal policy of his colleagues. But nOw a prey to spleen and old age, he must soon go down to his u5tter earth; when a death-bed repentance, accompanied with omne solemn foolerr,would tot sufficc to atone for along life of hypo- crisy and crinme. It was quitedegradingto the Governnentto assuime the station vacated by the Constitutional Assoeiation; and what was trorse than all was, that they (the shopmen) were abused by the press, wvho did not see that a blow was aimed through them at the liberty of the press If any one thing was more base than ano. ther, it ais that part of the press which assumed to itself the title of "independent;" it was infinitely worse than that part which avowed itself to be ministerial; and he trusted that the jury would reiLher suffer it, nor a hired advocate2 nor a. bribed witness, to per- suade theni by their verdict to consign him to imprisonment. If they did, the onlv ef'ect it would have would be to make teem (the defendants) pitied for the persecution they endured, and give a tinal triuimph to their principles. When this witness cime into the shop, he knew well who he was, for he had an accurate description of all the spies of Govcrnment. He told hini he knew himn; anld he was determined. not to be humbugged by his stqry about going into the countrv. It was not that he was afraid of being brought here, but he wished to give the fellow trouble, and to bring him mito discredit with his Christian employers; and therefore be sold him the Al oralist and this number of the Republican, which had no, been prosecuted. The defendant here read extracts from the 'IforrNist to show that it was a moral work. It was for the jury to say whietler these people were to come to a shop and beg and entreat for thlse works, and then send them (defendants) to prison, session after sessiOn. Seven trials had already taken place in that Court within the last three days; if the eighty.four men who had sat in that box before the present jury were either dishonest enough or ignorant erough to find a verdict of guilty. let them, at least, find a jst. verdict, and set him at libertv. If thev found a verdict that wo.1ld restore him to his liberty, he would still contirnue aTn opponent, but an opponent ooen to conviction; if tbey found a verdict consigning hin to prison, thev would make him a decided and inveterate fo>e. He was not afraid of a prison; he heard it said, that some severer law ought to be enacted to put down these publica- tions. Let them make death the punishment, and men would be founrl ready to nieet it. Ile concluded by begging of the jury to pay particular attention to the summing up, and to inalize it as well as they could. 'I'he RECORDtElt charged the jury in nearly thesame words as in each of the former cases. The Jury in a minute or two returned a verdict of gutilty The Defendant, when brought up for judgment, asked if hecoul.d not appeal to any higher Court? The RECORDER told him he coultI not. His lordship then pronounced judgment upon him. Only that he was no more than 21 years of age, and that it was evident that his vanity, of which lie had Riven abundant proof to-day, had misled him, the Ceurt would have been i11duced, in consequence of the hardihood he had evinced, and the aggravated nature of his defence, to have sentencedhim to a lo;;ger pehiod of confinement than any of those who had-been tried before him. But taking theabovecircumstances into consideration, the sentence of the Court was, that he be imprisoned in his Ia)esty's gaol of Newgate for a period of three years; and at the expiration of that perio(i enter into his own recognizanccs in the sum of 1001. for his good behasiour during life. The Court respited judgment until next session upon O'Connor, who pleaded guilty to one indictment, and was acquitted of another. CocF raue, in consideration of his not having aggravated his case b5 his defence, and its being proved that he at first declined to sell the work, saying it was prohibited, was only sentenced to six months' impnrionment, and to give his own security in 1001. for good beha- viour for life. OLD BAILEY NEW COURT, FPrzAY, Juvz 11. A CAULlE'a SHOPMEN.