Francis Place.
This gentleman was often spoken of by his friends as a second
Benjamin Franklin. With an intellect of the highest order he combined
extraordinary business ability, and rose to an enviable position solely
by the combination of these rarely united qualities. He built for
himself a snug fortune, and had at his house a large and commodious
library filled with well-selected works of every description suitable
for reference and study.
To this library came many of the members of the House of Commons, and
the room being quiet and commodious and always at their service, it
grew to be a favorite place for committee meetings, more especially for
secret councils. In this way and through his intimacy with so many of
the members of the House, he came to know of all the secret projects
which were afoot. He was frequently solicited for his advice or opinion,
and stood very high in the estimation of most of the public men. He had
often been urged to accept office, but preferred not to do so. In this
position he was able to be of great service to Carlile, whom he greatly
admired, and he kept Carlile informed of all the plots that were
hatching for his destruction.
Place kept up a correspondence with Carlile, and may be said to have
been his tutor in many things during the long years of his imprisonment.
He loaned or otherwise procured many valuable works, and argued and
discussed with him all their points of difference, his interest in his
pupil never flagging for the best part of their lives. There is no doubt
that Place saved Carlile's life more than once by warning him in time,
and rendered him invaluable service in more directions than that. Not
holding any office or being pledged to any secrecy, he was free to do
so without violating any confidence. He certainly was a most valuable
friend and coadjutor. It is pleasant to read over their letters and see
their regard for each other showing through their pleasant banter. Here
is an extract from one of the earlier letters written to Carlile in
Dorchester:--
"Excuse me suggesting to you how necessary it is to keep by you an
emetic; get about four ounces of antimony wine, and should you be
attacked by sickness or pain in the region of the stomach or any
uncommon symptoms after eating, be sure to take a tablespoonful of the
wine frequently, until the vomiting clears the stomach of its contents.
State prisoners frequently expire of anomalous disorders. You should
very carefully examine everything before you eat. Be sure to take
nothing that has a harsh or astringent taste or that edges your teeth.
You ought to have such tests by you as would enable you to analyse your
water, milk, or other fluids. Although you and I discard anything but
natural agency, yet some supernatural power for all that might drop
something into your food. What was the death of Napoleon? What become of
Peter Annett, can you tell me? What was the disease of Queen Caroline?
Act with suspicion and you will act with caution. The Christians become
daily more exasperated against you as you foil one after another.
"The efficiency of your view affords a beautiful reflection.
It is far more mighty than the sceptre or the crozier. The pen is
levelling both with the dust. Really you have gained a proud triumph!
The Christian ruffians, by resorting to force, have acknowledged their
defeat, they have in fact confessed that they can no longer fight you
with the pen, they have resorted to brute force--the horse and the steam
engine. In the empire of reason you reign; you may be said now to have
conquered 20,000 regular tithe eaters, all the ultra-quacks, and all the
silly people they have succeeded in poisoning with their prejudice and
superstition, which may be rated at some millions. Congratulate yourself
upon your efforts, and be proud of your individual and single-handed
success. Millions of unborn men will repeat your name, and as the age
of ignorance is dispelled, you will be still more applauded. From your
correspondent,
"Regulator" (Francis Place.)
Julian Hibbert. "_Now bow the head and betid the knee._" This most
remarkable man, so good, so generous, and so noble, was so universally
beloved and appreciated by those who knew him, that it became customary
among his friends when about to mention him in their letters to each
other, to use the above words in reverential recognition of his great
goodness and manifold virtues. Yet he was a man of the most retiring
disposition and disliked notoriety of any description. His lovely
character and sweet disposition were clearly displayed in his beautiful
features. His remarkable intellect, combined with his great benevolence
and modest sweet demeanor, lent to his presence that quality which might
be imagined of Deity itself. Fortunately for himself and others he was
possessed of an ample fortune, which enabled him to live in a way that
sheltered him from the storms as well as the battles of life. Thus
he was able to devote his life to study, to writing, and to acts of
benevolence. His health was of the frailest, it could not endure the
least strain. The ordinary friction and annoyances of everyday life were
torture to him. In his immediate circle all must be peace and goodwill.
He separated himself from his family at an early age, and never spoke of
them or of his birth to anyone as far as known. His family affairs were
a secret to his most intimate friends. There was no doubt that he came
of some fine family, but of that or of any other part of his past, or
youth, he never spoke. At his death he laid the embargo of silence on
all his friends as to himself, and begged them as they loved him to
burn all his letters and to cease to speak of him. This was done,
unfortunately for posterity, too faithfully by his friends, yet much
against their own feelings. It prevents the biographer from giving
as full a record of his beautiful life as would make it as perfect an
example for all succeeding generations as could be desired.
Notwithstanding this over-weening sensitiveness in private matters, he
wielded one of the boldest pens, and encouraged others to greater and
more free expression of their opinions than they otherwise would have
dared to declare. This very quality in Carlile was what first attracted
Julian Hibbert to him, and a friendship was formed between them founded
on the mutual appreciation of each other's talents and virtues, which
continued uninterruptedly till Julian Hibbert's death in 1834.
Their acquaintance began during the imprisonment in Dorchester. As soon
as the public subscription was started, or very soon after, there were
some very handsome sums subscribed by one signing himself "An Enemy to
Persecution". The frequency and amounts of these contributions aroused
the curiosity as well as the gratitude of Carlile, and he begged for the
honor of an introduction. This started a correspondence. Julian Hibbert
contributed many articles to the _Republican_, and later publications
of Carlile's, and rendered him great aid in all of his undertakings. All
the advantages of his superior education, rare library and great wealth
were at Carlile's service. Not less advantageous and benificial was his
brotherly love and companionship; for, indeed, they were akin in their
virtues. Both were gentle, loving and patient in their private lives.
Both were bold to recklessness in the defiance, publicly, of wrong.
Julian Hibbert delivered many lectures at the Rotunda while Richard
Carlile and Robert Taylor were in prison, and wrote much during his
short life.
He compiled a chronological table of the principal freethinkers of the
last three centuries, a galaxy of names that adds lustre to the pages
of literature, science, poetry and reformed religion. These tables show
considerable research. He was also a poet of no mean order, and Carlile
published many pieces of his.
The following short specimen does equal credit to his heart as to his
talent.
"TO RICHARD CARLILE.
"Read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest.
When honest virtue sinks beneath the arm
Of tyrant power, when terror and alarm
Stalk o'er the country with gigantic stride,
And hungry, dismal want spreads far and wide;
When Liberty, long harassed and oppressed,
Prepares to leave the land she once caressed;
When patient labor, too, may yield its toil
That fools may live, or quit its native soil;
Shall I be silent and my voice refuse,
And smother in my breast the sacred muse?
Oh! no, I own I feel her power inspire
And fill my soul with Freedom's sacred fire.
Oh! that my pen could pierce the coward's heart,
Who dar'd confine thy limbs, Carlile. I smart--
My soul does smart--whene'er I think of thee,
Thou dear devoted Son of Liberty!
But droop not thou; in Britain still are men
Will wake to Liberty, thy mighty pen
Has rent the mask away and thousands see
Corruption in its own deformity.
Then droop not thou! we yet shall sweep away
The juggling fiends who bar the light of day.
"Julian Hibbert."
To which the following was added by Carlile:--
"I will not droop! but sweep away
The juggling fiends who tax and pray,
And though in jail with limbs confin'd,
I still am free in soul and mind!"
"Julian Hibbert to ye Invincible Richard Carlile.
"Health and tranquillity!
"Thanks for your kind note. I am surprised to hear that you are already
free. I thought that the Whigs would have detained you another half
year for your rejection of a mere formality. However, as it is, you (and
Admiral Napier) have dared more than you ought, and have been gloriously
successful--though rashly.
"I hope that now you will turn over a new leaf, i.e., that you will
cease to insult the Unions, and to applaud the Duke of Wellington. Leave
to the _Times_ newspaper the inglorious task of trampling on the low
and exalting the powerful. You are at present the most unpopular man in
existence. But you are in the prime of life and full of vigor. You may,
therefore, if you choose, as easily write yourself up, as during the
last few years you have been writing yourself down. If you want any more
of this disagreeable advice, you will call on me whenever you may happen
to pass this way. I am most generally here between four and five p.m.,
but sometimes I am so ill that I do not come to London for a week at a
time. Farewell, and try to be more a friend to committees which are the
essence of republicanism.
"30 West Norton Street,
"Friday, 9th August, 4 p.m."
The munificence of Julian Hibbert to Carlile as the advocate of
Freethought, etc., excelled that of anyone else, though there were many
instances of bountiful generosity which might be related. In the ten
years or so of their personal acquaintance, Mr. Hibbert gave to Carlile
for the cause sums amounting to L7,000 (nearly $35,000). On visiting
Carlile in prison one day, the conversation turned upon the fact (which
had just been published) of a political leader having been presented
with a cheque for L1,000 by his supporters, Mr. Hibbert, saying that
it ought not to be said that the advocates of Freethought were less
generous to their exponent, sat down and wrote a cheque for the same
amount, which he handed to Carlile. This most generous man and most
dearly beloved friend died at the age of thirty-four, after a very
short illness. His death was supposed to have been caused by a ruffianly
verbal attack made upon him by Charles Phillips, a magistrate, who was
presiding at a trial to which Mr. Hibbert had been subpoenaed, and was
in consequence of Mr. Hibbert's avowal of being an Atheist, when called
on to swear upon the Bible. Phillips was known as one of the most
ruffianly and ungentlemanly of presiding magistrates, and many stories
are extant of his abusive manners. Julian Hibbert, though a giant
mentally, was of a peculiarly delicate constitution, and the attack
really killed him. He lived but a very few days afterwards. Carlile
grieved long and deeply for this dear and sympathetic friend who had
stood by him through all his sufferings and weary imprisonments, and in
a burst of grief and sorrow at the news of his sudden death, bewailed
him as the great, the god-like Julian Hibbert.
Lines written on the death of Julian Hibbert.
"There was praise of the good from the lips of the just,
And Julian it taught us to know thee;
To prize what we held and to feel what we've lost,
And to scan the huge debt that we owe thee.
"There are none could have heard with an unmoistened eye,
That most simple and eloquent story,
Which told us of virtues, so rare and so high,
That we paused to admire and deplore thee.
"Oh thine was the spirit and thine were the deeds,
Which told us of hope, light, and promise,
We talked not of dogmas, we thought not of creeds,
We but felt what a heart had gone from us."
Joseph Harris.
The Joseph Harris mentioned in several of the letters of Isis and of
Carlile was one of the volunteer shopmen who received a sentence of
six months' imprisonment; he again served them when prosecution had
well-nigh ceased, but was fined and locked up for one night during the
Church tithes trouble. Harris was, like all the other young men who
volunteered, an exceedingly intelligent, upright and moral man, and
he endeared himself to Carlile and Isis by his upright conduct and
exemplary manners. He was of a studious habit, and Isis took great
pleasure in assisting him with his studies; he became to her as a
brother in the confidence she reposed in him, and he in turn gave to
her and all of the name of Carlile his best friendship and assistance in
time of need. It was to Joseph Harris Isis turned in her widowhood for
advice and sympathy, and received such as a loving brother might give to
a sister.
Some time after Carlile's death Harris entered into the London Post
Office service as a letter-carrier, and by dint of pure merit rose
step by step till he came to-occupy the position of paymaster--a most
responsible post--which he held for several years.
Later on he went to America and was elected to-the State Senate of
Wisconsin in 1863; he had been a newspaper man before that time,
publishing a paper called the _Advocate_. The life work of Mr. Harris
was the promoting and carrying through of the Sturgeon Bay Canal, and is
best known in this connection. To-this work he devoted many years of
his life, and almost every dollar he had. He was librarian to the United
States Senate for eight years, and was special agent for the Impeachment
Committee that was organised against Andrew Johnson, President of the
United States. Later in his life he was private secretary to Senator
Sawyer of Wisconsin. In all these offices he conducted himself as a
strictly moral and upright citizen. In every sense a worthy specimen of
the sort of young men who earned the name of being pupils and followers
of Carlile. This testimony to his noble and superior qualities is given
by one who has his history almost from birth.
Gratitude and respect for Joseph Harris is compulsory, for he was indeed
the widow and orphan's friend. As he helped Isis and her fatherless
children, so he helped the widow and nine orphans of Carlile's eldest
son Richard, when he died on shipboard, or rather in hospital, on his
return to America after visiting London in 1855.
Mrs. Sarah C. Chichester and Mrs. Welch.
The "West Country friends" to whom Carlile so frequently alluded to
in his letters to Turton, sometimes calling them "My Gloucestershire
friends", the "Ebworth ladies", and "My lady friends", were two very
highly connected ladies, sisters, and both widowed. They were Mrs. Sarah
C. Chichester and Mrs. Welch, grandnieces of the Archbishop of York.
They were great admirers of Carlile and his principles, and sent him
large sums of money to assist him in his various enterprises. They first
commenced a correspondence with him under the assumed name of "Clay",
but afterwards revealed their identity and invited him to their home,
where he spent several happy weeks on different occasions. Isis
was, too, a favorite friend and guest, and for some years a constant
correspondent. These generous friends always urged Carlile on in his
public work, assuring him that they would provide for his wife and
family, should he be unable to leave them a support, and an allowance
of L200 a year was agreed upon, but for some reason or other this money
never reached Isis, possibly through the dishonesty of their chosen
agent. These were the ladies who furnished the money to start Bronson
Alcotts Concordium at Ham Common, near Richmond, and they sunk large
sums of money in that venture, which did not prove a success. Many
letters are extant to show how close was the friendship existing between
these ladies and Carlile and Isis. Mrs. Welch also made some provision
for Carlile's three children in her will, but this provision, like the
L200 a year, did not mature. It goes to prove, however, that Carlile's
friends were among the best people in the country. These ladies were
advanced thinkers, always ready, too, to accept any new thought or help
on any new project, and were humanitarians in the largest sense of the
word.
I extract the following from Carlile's letters to Turton:--
"June 22nd, 1837.
"Some unknown lady has sent me L30 from Gloucestershire in sympathy for
my loss in the _Phoenix_."
"September 20th, 1837.
"Did I tell you that my West of England friends had sent me another
handsome remittance before I left, and still promise future good? Mrs.
Carlile has been put in fine spirits and is delighted at this."
"Manchester, September 30th, 1857.
"My new friends remitted me L35 for my present excursion."
"December 8th, 1837.
"My friends are very lavish in their gifts of useful books and in
supplying me with money. Their remittances already amount to L200. Mrs.
Carlile and I are to visit these ladies before I return to Lancashire."
"I have a commission for you; my valuable friends in Gloucestershire
write me thus...." [This was a commission to purchase and distribute L10
worth of the pamphlets of one S. Roberts, who wrote and worked in behalf
of the poor and ill-used chimney sweeps.]
"London, May 4th, 1838.
"I came on to Cheltenham to visit my new and great and good friends,
with whom I spent a most happy week."
"May 15th, 1838.
"I spent eight days with my new and good friends in Gloucestershire,
where I was superlatively happy."
Mrs. Susannah Wright.
The only woman outside of the Carlile family to suffer imprisonment in
the cause of a Free Press was Mrs. Susannah Wright. This plucky little
woman took charge of the shop in Fleet Street, after the Carlile family
had all been put in prison; and taking her turn at martyrdom, was
indicted and sentenced. She, with her six months' old baby, was treated
with great severity and harshness at first, as if she were a felon. She
spiritedly resisted the treatment, and was removed afterwards to Cold
Bath Fields Prison. There she was treated with more humanity, but
being a very delicate woman, she came near dying in consequence of
the treatment she had received at Newgate. One month of her term of
imprisonment was remitted as well as her fine of L100. Carlile always
regarded Mrs. Wright as a model for women to copy, and paid her
the highest tribute for her enthusiasm, perseverance, coolness, and
dauntlessness. To him individually she was the source of the highest
gratification, and he took every opportunity of lauding the work she had
done. Immediately on her liberation she paid a visit to Dorchester Gaol,
and received hearty thanks and congratulations from Carlile. She soon
afterwards removed to Norwich, where, with Carlile's assistance, she
opened a little shop for the sale of liberal works. Here she at first
met with much opposition, but by dint of her own courage and intrepidity
on becoming better known her persecutions ceased, and she was left to
follow her vocation in peace. She bears in history the distinctive honor
of being the only woman (other than Jane and Mary Anne Carlile) who
suffered imprisonment for their services in the battle for a Free Press.
In a letter to Holmes, on Mrs. Wright, Carlile writes:--
"September 21st, 1825.
"I did not write last week for I had Mrs. Wright with me, in whom, after
all the slanders that have passed, I can find no fault You will see that
I have called her the Pink of us all. She is quite ready to go to the
shop again if prosecutions are renewed. Her sufferings as to health have
been dreadful since she left the prison, indeed, through all the winter,
no one thought of her living, which accounts for nothing having been
heard of her. Like you, she is one-eyed, and, as at your visit, I sent
her with a letter to Lawrence to see if her sight be recoverable."
In another letter to W. V. Holmes, Carlile says:--"I by no means
coincide with what you say of Mrs. Wright, there is scarcely another
woman in England who would have done for me what that woman has done,
and from my knowledge of her in 1817-18 and 1819, I know that a love of
principle has been her ruling motive."
George Jacob Holyoake.
It was the last year of Carlile's life that Mr. Holyoake was tried and
imprisoned for Atheism, and it was almost the last public action of
Carlile's life to aid and encourage the young warrior in this, his first
real battle with the enemies of free thought and free speech. Carlile
sat by Holyoake's side during his excellent defence, which lasted nine
hours. Holyoake being a delicate man would probably have been exhausted
had not Carlile kept him refreshed with raspberry vinegar, etc. Carlile
did everything in his power to get the conditions of Mr. Holyoake's
imprisonment modified, but with small success. Mr. Holyoake was happily
the last man to be imprisoned for so-called "Atheism".
Herewith is appended some correspondence showing the impression Holyoake
made upon Carlile, and also some letters which passed between the two
men:--
"Richard Carlile to Thomas Turton.
"I wished you present, yesterday, in the Court of Gloucester, to have
heard the truly grand display of character, talent, and integrity, made
by George Jacob Holyoake.
"I honor your discrimination in seizing upon his great worth and
exception to the common run of Radicals and Socialists. He spoke nine
hours admirably. I made sure of his acquittal while his defence was in
progress, but the judge was an alarmed bigot, and pleaded against him
unmercifully without allusion to his noble defence.
"The stupid jury said guilty, after five minutes putting their heads
together. He is to have six months' imprisonment.
"In your name, and as a present from you, I shall go to the gaol this
morning and present Holyoake a pair of your razors. It is the only thing
I have with me here to offer him. I was proud of him, and of myself too,
to think I had brought forth such a state of mind. Holyoake was heard by
a court fall of ladies, and had they been his jury, he would have been
acquitted.
"The more I see and hear of Holyoake the more I like him.
"You would not have grudged the cost (of travel) to have seen Holyoake
on Monday. It was a truly beautiful scene to see this young Jesus before
the Jews and Pontius Pilate."
Carlile often wished that Holyoake had been his son, and Holyoake as
often wished, too, that he had been. Mr. Holyoake expressed this wish
quite recently in a letter to the writer. This friendship mutually
existing between Carlile and Holyoake is as gratifying and sweet in its
remembrance as is the odor of the rose after the vase is shattered,
and their freely spoken appreciation of each other speaks well for
both:--
"There was praise of the good from the lips of the just."
"July, 1842.
"R. Carlile, Esq., Enfield.
"My Dear Sir,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of July
11th. Am sincerely obliged by your kind offer of further advice as
far as you can assist me. I am lost in London, as you will guess, and
scarcely know where I am, or I should have replied to yours before. From
your letter to Mr. Ryall, I find that my kind friend Mr. Turton, of
Sheffield, has done me the honor to mention me in his letters to him.
Mr. Turton is a gentleman whom I highly respect.
"I feel not a little encouraged by the courtesy with which you offer
your assistance, and, indeed, have rendered it, as on Sunday last.... I
have written to Cheltenham for a _Free Press_, containing your letter on
my case, and will forward it the moment received.
"Yours very truly and respectfully,
"G. J. HOLYOAKE."
"London, July 24th, 1842.
"My Dear Sir,--Thank you for your advice. Shall be, I believe, in
Cheltenham, before I go to Gloucester. Will write you before that. I
elicited some warm cheers for you this morning at the Rotunda.
"Yours truly and respectfully,
"G. J. Holyoake."
"Birmingham, July 30th, 1842.
"R. Carlile, Esq., Cheltenham.
"My Dear Sir,--I am much obliged for your frank and candid advice. It
is the most welcome, because you leave me free to reject where I may not
approve without fear of offending you. You say, 'I have always thought
for myself; do you so'. How many talk of free thought without even
extending that privilege, as you do, to others. I am satisfied of your
good intention in writing to ------. I object to no proceeding your
kindness and experience may suggest so far as you alone take part in it.
I thank you for expressly saying that I did not sanction any overtures.
I cannot do so. I have no faith in Christians. My experience is limited,
I grant, but as far as it goes I feel that any concession on my part
would only increase their malignity. Men who have begun with the
ferocity they have begun with me will never end by doing me justice.
"Your opinion as to the public, princes, women, and myself, I entirely
accord with, and I scarcely know which to admire more, the correctness
of the sentiment, or the beautiful manner in which it is expressed. I
know the public, etc., is fickle, and have sought a higher reward, the
_consciousness of rectitude_; this is not all-enduring, and when it
fails I have done. Your estimate of -------- curiously coincides with
many I have heard; his objection to discuss theology is puerile indeed.
It is, as you say, to object to discussion of the cause of the evils he
professes to eradicate.
"Yours obligedly,
"G. J. HOLYOAKE."
"County Gaol, Gloucester, August 18th, 1842.
"R. Carlile, Esq., Cheltenham.
"My Dear Sir,--I was much obliged by your kind letter, and although I
must regard your remarks rather as those of a friend than of a critic,
yet am I much gratified that my exertions should have met your approval.
Your good opinion will compensate me for the unpleasantness of my
condition. I shall take care of my health as far as is possible. I learn
from Seymour that you have sent him a communication for the _Oracle_
[Holyoake's paper]. Your name will do the cause infinite service
independently of what you will write. "With many thanks, etc., etc.,
"G. J. HOLYOAKE."
"Gloucester Gaol, October 22nd, 1842.
"My Dear Sir,--I am certainly gratified that you should have taken the
trouble to write me so long a letter. The sovereign you so kindly caused
to be remitted, duly came to hand by seven o'clock on Monday morning,
and at the same time and hour my eldest little girl died, so that
it arrived opportunely to assist in defraying the expenses of the
melancholy obsequies of the grave.
"You say the word Christian originally meant wisdom and goodness. What
it originally meant you can better say than I can; certainly it means
nothing of the kind now, therefore I have acquired a distaste for the
title. I do not cavalierly adopt that of 'Atheist', names little entice
me, and in this case, you will archly rejoin, 'there are no principles
to allure.' What you say about the prices of lectures, working-out
reforms by poor men's instrumentality, etc., interests me very much,
and will occupy my consideration. Your remarks concerning scarcity of
subscribers for my support little surprises me. I did not expect what I
have received. Enquiring into that subject prior to my imprisonment,
or rather to my incurring it, did not present itself. It shows little
knowledge of the world, and perhaps insufficient attention to the
wants of those depending upon me. Busy with what I conceived to be an
important principle, other things had few attractions. Shall I find
at last that principles are to be talked of and the world to be lived
in?... Should be gratified if you would present my regards to Mrs.
Carlile [Isis].
"Yours truly,
"G. J. HOLYOAKE."
THE FALLEN HERO.
What though the head be weary,
What though the hand be tired,
The rest of a sweet contentment,
Shall be by peace inspired.
What though the hero falleth,
In the heat of the battle's strife,
If he naileth the waving colors,
To the mast of a noble life.
If he breast and conquer the tyrant,
Who our cherished rights assail,
Shall he sink in the sea's oblivion,
Or pass beyond memory's pale?
Not so, for his deeds we'll emblazon,
On the 'scutcheon of Liberty bright
As one who feared not to be foremost
In hope's forlorn Battle of Right.
And longer still longer and ever
Will the roll of his virtues unfold,
How he fought on, in lonely endeavor,
Like the "Lion Heart Richard" of old.
And the eyes of the maiden will moisten,
And the spirit of youth grow bold,
As they learn of his love and his daring,
Wherever his story is told.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I. TRIAL OF MR. CARLILE
FOR THE PUBLICATION OF PAINE'S "AGE OF REASON".
The first days' defence was devoted to the reading of the "Age of
Reason", the book for which Carlile was prosecuted. He read and
commented on it all as he went along, and in this way made the immense
concourse of people acquainted with the arguments there used. It
is almost unnecessary to say that the sale of the book after the
publication of the trial reports was something enormous. Many thousands
of Englishmen who never thought on such subjects before dated their
awakening of mind from this event. The real "passage of arms" between
Carlile and his accusers commenced on the second day.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL. From the "British Press", October
14th, 1819.
SECOND DAY.--Wednesday, October 13TH, 1819.
The interest excited by this trial continues unabated. A considerable
concourse of people assembled before the great entrance at Guildhall,
between eight and nine o'clock. To the gentlemen connected with
the public Press every facility was afforded by the secondary, Mr.
Collenridge, and by Mr. Temple, the hall-keeper. The former admitted
them into the body of the Court at an early hour, where they were
accommodated with seats at the table. At a quarter before nine o'clock,
the Court was regularly opened; and in a few minutes it was completely
filled.
The Counsel for the prosecution, the Attorney and Solicitor General, Mr.
Littledale, and Mr. Campbell, took their seats soon after.
At a quarter after nine, Mr. Carlile entered the Courts He was preceded
by two friends, who placed on the table an immense pyramid of books, in
folio, quarto, octavo, and duodecimo.
At twenty minutes before ten, the jury having arrived, and having
answered to their names, the cause of the King v. Carlile was called,
the Chief Justice having previously taken his seat.
After a short pause, Mr. Carlile rose, and proceeded with his defence.
He said he had endeavored yesterday, by going through the whole of
three parts of "The Age of Reason", to show to the jury that it did not
contain one immoral sentiment or expression; but that any expressions,
which were at all questionable in that work, were quoted from other
publications. He endeavored, satisfactorily, he hoped, to prove that
Paine's object was to rescue the character of the Almighty from the
account which was given of him in those books called "The Bible". He
(Mr. Carlile) was anxious as far as possible to make the writings of
Paine justify the composition, and the doctrines laid down by him in
"The Age of Reason ". In order to do this, he would read a discourse
pronounced by Mr. Paine before the Society of Theophilanthropists, at
Paris. That discourse contained a complete refutation of the statement
that Paine was an Atheist. His character was in fact most remote from
Atheism. He had indeed proved that he entertained a more correct idea
of the character of the Almighty than was to be found in the Bible. Mr.
Carlile then proceeded to read the "Discourse", which is printed along
with Paine's "Theological Tracts". [The whole _gist_ of this production
may be collected from a single paragraph, "The _un verse_", says the
author, "is the Bible of a true Theophilanthropist; it is there that
he reads of God; it is there that the proofs of his existence are to be
sought and to be found. As to written or printed books, by whatever name
they are called, they are the work of man's hands, and carry no evidence
in themselves that God is the author of any of them. It must be in
something that man could not make that we must seek evidence for our
belief, and that _something is the universe_--the true Bible--the
inimitable word of God." In going over this tract, the whole of which he
read, Mr. Carlile made no observation, except in one place, where the
text set forth "that persecution had ceased". "Happy", said he, "would
it be for me, if persecution had indeed-ceased!" Having concluded the
tract, he said this little discourse had been published by some persons,
who were so convinced that it was a perfect refutation of Atheism that
they sent it into the world with Mr. Paine's name to it. Having gone
through so much of "The Age of Reason" as, at present, was necessary for
his purpose, he would lay it aside; but he would in a future stage of
the trial again to refer to it, for the purpose of supporting certain
principles connected with his defence. He would now proceed to examine
the book of which Mr. Paine's work was an investigation. But before he
went further, he must observe that the Bible was not the only book
supposed to be a revelation from God. The Koran, for instance, was
supposed, by millions of people, to be of divine origin.
The Attorney-General here interrupted the defendant. He submitted that
he could not proceed further with such a line of defence. The expression
of the defendant was, that he would go into an examination of the book
of which Paine's work was an investigation. He contended that he could
not go into such an examination. The question was whether, according
to the law of the country, the defendant had been guilty of the offence
with which he was charged? It was neither competent for his lordship
nor the gentlemen of the jury to go into such an examination as the
defendant proposed--an examination of the truth of the Scriptures.
The Chief Justice: You hear the objection taken by the Attorney-General?
Mr. Carlile: Yes, my lord. The Attorney-General states that it is not
competent for your lordship or the jury to go into such an examination
as I propose; but he has quite forgotten that it is necessary to my
defence. I have been brought into this Court to answer charges, and must
avail myself of every means of defence. The Attorney-General has stated
that I have published a work in which the Scriptures are spoken of as
containing obscene stories, voluptuous debaucheries, cruel and tortuous
executions, inconsistencies, and contradictions. Now I feel it to be my
duty to justify what has been published by appealing to the Bible, which
contains them.
The Attorney-General: I did not at all forget that the defendant is very
deeply interested in the result of this trial; but this, like all other
causes, must be proceeded in according to the rules of law. And, looking
to those rules, it is not competent for a defendant, charged with this
offence, to go into such an investigation. I beg to call your lordship's
attention to the trial of an individual charged with a similar
offence--I mean Williams. When he was brought up to the Court of King's
Bench to receive judgment, Lord Kenyon said, that "having re-considered
what had been done during the trial, he took blame to himself for having
listened even to the arguments used on that occasion". In that case of
the King and Williams, the whole Court expressed their opinion that they
could not allow anything to be said against the established religion of
the country--the Christian religion. That is the proposition for which I
contend. I trust it will receive the sanction of your lordship, and that
the defendant will not be suffered to promulgate blasphemous doctrines
as part of his defence.
The Chief Justice: The charge against the defendant on this occasion is
the publication of a book calumniating and reviling the Holy Scriptures.
It is not that, in any book published by him the doctrines of revealed
religion were discussed with that respect, temper, and moderation which
ought to be applied to the discussion of every subject, human or divine,
public or private. It can be no defence of such a charge that the party
against whom it is preferred should reiterate, in his address to the
jury, the same sort of calumny as that which is contained in the book,
for the publication of which he has been called on to answer; and I
should very ill discharge my duty, as a Judge or a Christian, if I
suffered this Court to be made a theatre for uttering calumny against
the religion of the country. Any thing the defendant can advance to the
jury, to explain away what is contained in the book, and to show that
its tendency is proper, I am most ready to hear. I wish to give to this
defendant, as well as to every other person, an opportunity to defend
himself fully and fairly, according to the established law of the land.
But I am not to suffer the law of the land to be calumniated by such a
defence. I cannot permit it.
Mr. Carlile: The only object I have in view is to clear the book,
entitled "The Age of Reason", from the charge make against it, and to
justify the observations which it contains on the Old and New Testament.
I presume that book cannot be founded on any law of this country. Your
lordship has spoken of the law of the land as applicable to this case. I
should like to have that law pointed out.
The Chief Justice: I state that the Christian religion is a part of
the law of the land--and the most important part--because it is that on
which all its institutions are founded, and to which they all refer. I
speak of the Christian religion generally. There is one particular
mode of faith amongst those who follow the Christian religion which
constitutes what is called the Established Church; the law of England,
however, admits every other class of Christians to adhere to their
religious worship, according to their own particular faith, tenets, and
creed; but it permits to no man the right to impugn the whole sum
and substance of the Christian religion, and to treat the book which
contains its doctrines as a mass of lies and falsehoods. I cannot permit
such a defence.
Mr. Carlile: I cannot submit to have my course of defence marked out for
me.
The Chief Justice: Whether you submit to it or no, I have stated
the law, as was my duty; and it is not for a man, accused of having
infringed the law, to rise in this place and declare what is or what is
not law. I speak in the hearing of gentlemen who have often attended in
this Court, and such of them that know me will answer for the truth of
what I assert when I say that, though I lay down the law to them, as
I conceive it to be, according to my judgment, yet, when a question of
fact arises, I leave it in the fullest manner to their consideration.
But I never will suffer the Holy Scriptures to be examined in this Court
for the purpose of calumniating and reviling them.
Mr. Carlile: I appeal to your lordship, what proof have we that they are
_divine?_
The Chief Justice: I will not answer such a question as that. You have
not, I say, been brought here to answer for any work containing a fair
and dispassionate consideration of the Christian religion; but for a
publication reviling and calumniating the Scriptures. And calumnies and
revilings, whatever the subject may be, are contrary to the law of the
land. Is it to be supposed that the law, which affords protection to
every individual, has not the power to protect itself? Is it not to
protect those who, from their youth, from want of education or from
weakness of mind, are not so deeply confirmed in their religious
feelings as they ought to be, from being exposed to all those
aberrations which, not the force of reason, but the influence of
calumny, may occasion?
Mr. Carlile: I wish to arrive at the same end; but we take different
ways of effecting it.
The Chief Justice: The discussion is somewhat early; but I will let
you go on, advising you to keep within the bounds I have pointed out.
I cannot suffer this book to be defended by reviling the Christian
religion.
Mr. Carlile: If these writings are of divine origin, they cannot receive
any injury from investigation or from any comment made on them. I will
therefore go into a full investigation of this question, and I cannot do
that without examining the book itself, which gave rise to this work.
The Chief Justice: We shall see in what mode you conduct your defence.
Mr. Carlile: I have stated to you that there are many books existing on
the face of the earth which are, by certain individuals, believed to
be the revealed word of God. One of these I now hold in my hand. It is
believed in by a greater number of persons than believe in the Bible. I
mean the Koran. I will read to you the manner in which it is represented
by its author to have been sent down by the Almighty. It is contained
in the 14th chapter, which is headed, "Abraham--revealed at
Mecca--supposed to be sent to Mahomet ". The book, it may be observed,
is filled up with a great portion of the history of those persons whose
names are to be found in the Old Testament. [Mr. Carlile read the whole
of the chapter, which embraced various topics, but particularly set
forth the joys which God would bestow on those who served him, and
the vengeance he would shower down on those who disobeyed him.] This,
gentlemen, continued Mr. Carlile, is a specimen of what is called
revealed religion, and which they say came down from heaven to Mahomet.
It is believed by many millions of men, more than compose the body of
Christians--and yet, is there anything in it comparable with the idea of
the Almighty which is given by Paine? Certainly not. And yet those who
believe it dislike the Christians, and treat them with reproach and
contumely. Why, therefore, should such books be considered as the will
of God? and how can we tell that they are worthy of being so called
unless we examine them? I will read no more of the Koran. What I have
read is a fair specimen. There are some fine moral lessons in that work,
and some beautiful ideas of the Deity, but they are mixed up with
trash which spoils the whole. Mr. Paine is not the only man who has
investigated the Old and New Testament, and doubted of their validity.
I hold in my hand the work of a man who ranks very high in this
country--who was Ambassador to the Court of Naples--and is at present
a member of the Privy Council. I allude to Sir W. Drummond--who has
canvassed the Scriptures very freely. The book, though never published
(a few copies only being printed for the author's friends), shows what
the opinions of Sir W. Drummond were. [Mr. Carlile proceeded to read
extracts from the work, which we are unwilling to publish at any
length, in consequence of an observation that subsequently fell from
the Attorney-General.] Sir William commences by stating that it would
naturally be asked, by those who saw this volume, why he caused a book
to be printed which he had not published? The reason was, because he
had treated of a work which was said to be sacred--and, to avoid the
calumnies and falsities to-which it might give rise, if published,
he had confined it to a narrow circle. Indeed he did not wish his
opinions-to be handed about _amongst the mob_. After observing that the
ancient Jews had their _isoteric_ and _exoteric_ doctrines, which were
signified by types and figures, the meaning of which was not now known,
he proceeds to express an opinion that the language of the Old Testament
was symbolical, and he censures those descriptions of the Deity in which
he was painted with human passions, and those none of the best. Nothing
could be more absurd than to describe the Deity as a material being who
dwelt in a box of shittim wood in the temple.
The Attorney-General: I object to such observations.
The Chief Justice: They are indeed very offensive. I caution the
defendant against taking that course of defence.
Mr. Carlile: If it be in opposition to the sense and feelings of the
jury, I only do myself harm. I wish to-show that others wrote on this
subject as well as Paine.
The Chief Justice: That is not the question. The question is whether the
book published by you is a blasphemous libel.
Mr. Carlile: I know of no law that takes cognisance of blasphemy.
The Chief Justice: There is such a law.
Mr. Carlile: Then I wish your lordship would define it.
The Chief Justice: I have done so, and will not again.
The Attorney-General: The defendant ought to know, or those who advise
him ought to have informed him, that he will have an opportunity of
appealing to the Court out of which this process proceeds--the Court of
Kings Bench--and, if he pleases, to the last resort in the country, the
House of Lords. There he may discuss whether the charge be or be not
according to law. This is not the place for that discussion. To the
charge preferred against him he has pleaded "Not guilty", and the
question now is, whether he be or be not guilty.
Mr. Carlile: I must, as it is necessary for my defence, go through these
books.
The Chief Justice: You are not now examining any book--you are merely
stating the opinion of another person. You cannot justify one libel by
proving that another of the same nature had been written.
Mr. Carlile: It is not proved to be a libel, as yet.
The Chief Justice: I will call it by what name I think proper; but leave
it ultimately to be decided by the jury.
Mr. Carlile: You may certainly give it what name you please; but I must
defend it to the best of my judgment.
The Chief Justice: I wish you to do so; but I cannot allow the calumny
of another person to be introduced as a defence for yours.
Mr. Carlile: I am aware that I need look for nothing from your lordship.
I stand alone, unsupported, the array is against me. Sir W. Drummond's
work is only a repetition of what may be found in the Old and New
Testament. He quotes those works and reasons on them, and he has a right
to do so.
Mr. Carlile was proceeding with the passage which had just been objected
to, when Mr. Gurney requested his lordship's interference.
Mr. Carlile: You have nothing to do in this cause.
Mr. Gurney: I have the honor of assisting the Attorney-General.
The Chief Justice: I have told you, that you cannot justify one calumny
by introducing another.
Mr. Carlile: Is it not actually the case, that God is represented in the
text as dwelling in a box of shittim wood in the temple?
The Chief Justice: Certainly not, sir.
Mr. Carlile: If my defence be bad, I only injure myself. He then
proceeded to read some remarks of Sir W. Drummond, condemning the reason
assigned for God's determining not to curse the earth any more, when he
was interrupted by
The Attorney-General, who said: I do trust your lordship will interpose.
I say, when a defendant is charged with a publication attacking the
truths of Christianity, he cannot be allowed to defend himself by making
new attacks. No man can be suffered to make this Court the arena where
the calumnies from the pen of Paine, or of any other writer, are to be
promulgated. The object of the defendant is evident. He wishes that
those calumnies should come forth to the public in a shape more
disgraceful than they have hitherto appeared; but in the discharge of my
public duty I will take care that such publications shall not pass
unnoticed or unpunished.
Mr. Gurney: The Court cannot hear the statute law, as well as the common
law of the land, treated with contempt. Those who put the law in motion
proceeded on the common law; but the statute of William and Mary is
still in force.
Mr. Carlile: The Attorney-General has not founded his information on the
statute of William and Mary. He wishes for a different punishment than
that statute provides.
The Chief Justice: I am free to confess that I am placed in a very
delicate situation. I am unwilling to prevent the defendant from going
on with what appears to him fit and necessary for his defence; but, as a
Judge, I am bound not to admit the law of the land to be insulted in my
presence.
Mr. Carlile: I am not aware of having insulted any law.
The Solicitor-General: I wish to state to your lordship what Lord
Ellenborough said on Eaton's trial. When the defendant was addressing
him, his lordship interrupted him. "You have already," observed his
lordship, "begun a passage, of which I caution you. This is not to be an
opportunity for you to revile the Christian religion; and if you persist
in doing so, I will not only prevent you, but perhaps animadvert on your
conduct in committing an offence which was of the most heinous nature
in the eyes of the Court." Defendant answered: "I have no intention of
offending the Court." Lord Ellenborough observed, "You have got to a
passage that is abominable--you must not read it". Now, my lord,
the defendant before you says: "I will prove the truth of what Paine
asserts, namely that there are obscenities, inconsistences, and
contradictions in the Bible." This, I submit, he can only do by pursuing
the course which Mr. Eaton was checked in, which cannot be permitted.
The Chief Justice: Let the defendant go on, if he can advance anything
relevant and serviceable to his cause.
Mr. Carlile: It would be as well if the Solicitor-General read a little
further, that the Court might see the result of that discussion.
The Solicitor-General: Mr. Eaton observed, "I believe what I am come to
is inoffensive"; and nothing offensive was afterwards said.
Mr. Carlile: The fact is, Lord Ellenborough grew angry, and called out
repeatedly, "Read it all, read it all!"--which was done.
The Chief Justice: The Christian religion shall not be reviled here.
Mr. Carlile: In what I say, I found myself on the late statute.
The Chief Justice: You made some remarks on it yesterday. At first I
thought your idea was erroneous; and on looking into the subject, I see
that an Act was passed, in the time of King William, for the punishment
of those who impugned the doctrine of the Trinity. An Act was recently
passed, respecting that particular part of the statute of William,
which it repealed; but it leaves untouched all that is contained in that
statute and the common law of the land, for the punishment of those who
impugn the truth of Christianity in general. The work in question does
not impugn the opinion of any particular sect, but impugns the whole
of the doctrines contained in the Old and New Testament. It is directed
against the tenets of every sect who believe in the Scriptures as the
foundation of revealed religion.
Mr. Carlile: I have been told that the Christian religion is the law of
the land. Now that religion is founded on the doctrine of the Trinity;
and here is a statute dispensing with a belief in the Trinity, and
thereby making Deism a part of the law of the land.
Chief Justice: I say it does not, and I will not hear such a defence.
Mr. Carlile; I stand here alone, and I best know what shape my defence
ought to take.
The Chief Justice: In your own opinion it may be so; but it is for me
to look to the legal course of defence. If you cannot proceed without
reviling the Christian religion, you cannot defend yourself.
Mr. Carlile: The law in question allows me to proceed in this course,
for it tolerates Deism.
The Attorney-General: One part of the statute of William and Mary is
repealed, but the remainder is in force. It is there treated as a great
offence for any persons to deny the Christian religion to be true,
or the Scriptures, namely the Old and New Testament, to be of divine
origin.
Mr. Carlile: I do not know on what the Christian religion is founded,
except on the doctrine of the Trinity.
The Chief Justice: If you have any good legal defence, proceed with it.
Mr. Carlile: I do not know that I am wrong. If there be an allegation
that I have published a work in which it is stated that there is
an obscene story in the Bible, surely you would not prevent me from
referring to the Bible to prove the truth of the assertion?
The Chief Justice: I cannot hear this. The Bible is the history of a
sinful people, and of the vengeance of God on them.
Mr. Carlile: I do not think the Bible is true, as a history.
[Considerable agitation was created in Court by this declaration.
Murmurs of dissatisfaction were heard from every quarter.]
Mr. Carlile was proceeding with another passage from Sir W. Drummond's
book, when he was interrupted by The Solicitor-General, who objected
that he was going on in the way which had already been deprecated by the
Court.
The Chief Justice: I cannot allow it. If I am mistaken there are means
of correcting my error; but I think I am not mistaken when I say, that I
cannot and ought not sit in my place and suffer any person to revile the
Holy Scriptures.
Mr. Carlile: I have no wish to revile, but merely to examine them.
The Chief Justice: Examination does not consist in, and cannot be
supported by, bold denials. It is a repetition of the offence.
Mr. Carlile: Can we compel our minds to receive as true what we do not
believe because there is a law in support of it?
The Chief Justice: As long as a man keeps his opinion to himself, it
is of no consequence to the community, and no human power can take
cognizance of it.
Mr. Carlile: Your lordship's observations argue nothing but the
absurdity of legislating on matters of opinion. He was proceeding with
Sir W. Drummond's work, when The Solicitor-General again interrupted
him. The defendant, he said, wanted to prove that other persons had
written on the subject as well as Mr. Paine, which he contended formed
no point of defence.
The Chief Justice: I cannot allow such a course to be taken.
Mr. Carlile: I have a right to go on with what I think necessary for my
defence.
The Chief Justice: You have no right to go on with a defence of a
mischievous nature. It would be a high misdemeanor in me to allow it.
Mr. Carlile: My wish is to defend my conduct from the imputation of
malicious intention. In the course of their practice, these learned
gentlemen quote precedents on all occasions; why then should not I quote
Sir W. Drummond, a man of great talent and research?
The Chief Justice: His book has nothing to do with the case before the
jury.
Mr. Carlile: The authority of Sir W. Drummond is as good as that of Lord
Ellenborough.
The Chief Justice: You had better conduct yourself with propriety.
Mr. Carlile: In my mind, the authority of Sir W. Drummond possesses far
greater weight.
The Chief Justice: Don't suppose, because great forbearance has been
shown, that there may not come a time when forbearance must end.
Mr. Carlile: I don't want forbearance, I only want justice.
The Chief Justice: Justice you shall have, according to law; but to let
you proceed contrary to law would not be justice. It is no justification
for you to say that others have committed the same offence.
Mr. Carlile: I am not willing to take your lordship's-opinion that it is
an offence.
The Chief Justice: I have said, all along, that the character of the
publication would be ultimately left to the decision of the jury.
Mr. Carlile was proceeding, but the Solicitor-General again interposed.
The Chief Justice: I say it is no justification; but still I would not
prevent the defendant from going on if the quotation be not offensive. I
do not know that to be the work of Sir W. Drummond.
Mr. Carlile: It is his, for it has been answered by the Chaplain to the
Archbishop of Canterbury. That is the best way to elicit truth. Sir W.
Drummond's name is to it.
The Chief Justice: No matter by whom it is written. I cannot stay in
this place and hear the doctrines of Christianity impugned.
Mr. Carlile: It is not yet proven that I have committed error.
The Chief Justice: I know that--I have stated so all along; but you must
not revile and calumniate the Christian religion.
Mr. Carlile: I do not calumniate. I wish to enter on a fair examination.
The Chief Justice: You are not allowed, neither is any man, to read in
this place matter calumniating the Holy Scriptures.
Mr. Carlile: It is not calumniating.
The foreman of the jury now addressed his lordship. He said the
gentlemen of the jury thought the defendant could not do himself any
service by going on with such a defence
Mr. Carlile: Am I to understand that to be the sentiment of the jury?
Several Jurymen: Certainly.
After a short pause, Mr. Carlile proceeded. He at length came to a
passage in which Sir W. Drummond stated that he did not believe God had
ever spoken to Moses.
Mr. Gurney submitted that was the denial of the truth and divine origin
of part of the Old Testament, and was punishable by the statute law. It
could not therefore be tolerated in that Court.
Mr. Carlile: To what are we to appeal, if not to reason?
The Chief Justice: You are charged with publishing a calumny on the
Christian religion; show that the book does not contain such calumny.
You cannot prove that there is no calumny in it by reading works of a
similar nature.
Mr. Carlile: There are passages in the Bible which I view with as much
horror as your lordship does this book. I do not believe them--your
lordship does, or you profess that you do. Now it is only by reading
controversial disputes on the subject of religion that we can know what
is right or what is wrong.
The Chief Justice: We are not here trying the verity of passages
of Scripture. I cannot put it to the jury to say whether the Holy
Scriptures contain the will of God. This cannot be done in a Christian
country.
Mr. Carlile: I am obliged to read, in my defence, things that are
disgusting to myself, and which I would not read if I were not compelled
to do so.
The Chief Justice: You are not compelled. It can do you no service to
read passages of a similar tendency with those which you are charged
with having published.
Mr. Carlile: As there is no other passage in this book essential to my
defence, I shall now go to the Bible. In reading that work, which the
information charges me with calumniating, I can only express my own
opinion, as a justification of what I have done. If that opinion is not
satisfactory to the minds of the jury, still it would afford some ground
for believing that I act from conviction.--[Here Mr. Carlile exhibited
a large Bible, which was interleaved for the purpose of entering remarks
on different passages.]--The Old Testament, like many other books,
begins with giving an account of the creation.--[Mr. Carlile here read
several verses from the book of Genesis: "In the beginning God created
the heaven and the earth," etc.]--Now (continued he) I have to state to
you that that part of society who believe in this book differ in
their ideas of the account of the creation. Some believe it to be an
allegory--others consider it a statement of a real transaction. Some of
the greatest fathers of the Christian Church, one of whom was Origen,
considered it an allegory. When we see persons, who call themselves
Christians, and who rest all their future hopes on this book, differing
on such a passage, I think an individual, whose mind is not made up on
the subject, is at liberty to enquire into the reasons offered for
one party believing it to be an allegory, and the other for taking it
literally. Moses is stated to be the author of the book of Genesis, but
I think it is proved by Paine that he did not write it. Whether it was
written by him or not did not, however, invalidate the work. When you
read, "In the _beginning_ God created the heaven and the earth," the
philosopher naturally asks, what beginning? If it were said, from the
beginning of time, then the world had existed through all eternity, for,
to deny the eternity of time, is to deny the eternity of God. But this
doctrine did not coincide with that of the Old Testament, although it
was founded in reason.
Mr. Carlile was then proceeding with an enquiry into the nature and
probability of such a revelation as was mentioned in the Old Testament,
but was interrupted by
The Attorney-General, who submitted that no such enquiry could be gone
into.
The Chief Justice: It is a very difficult thing to stop a person on his
defence, at the commencement of every sentence. I would wish to err on
the side of forbearance rather than of severity. Of all cases that can
be brought into a Court of Justice, this is the most painful to a Judge.
It is not connected with the politics or property of the country,
but with its religion. The person on the floor says I profess to be a
believer in Christianity. I feel myself called on to say, that I am a
firm believer in Christianity. It is most painful to me and to the
gentlemen of the jury to hear the observations of the defendant, but
still it is a nice and difficult point to stop him.
The Attorney-General said an enquiry into revelation could not be
allowed.
Mr. Gurney: His lordship has declared it cannot be admitted.
The Chief Justice: I have said over and over again that we are not to
enquire into the truth of the Christian religion; but I am unwilling to
stop the defendant till his observations become offensive.
Mr. Carlile: The information charges that the book which I have
published describes the Old Testament to contain obscene stories and
voluptuous debaucheries, and to be a history of wickedness that has
served to corrupt and brutalise mankind. Another account charges me
with publishing a book in which the Bible is stated to be full of
inconsistencies and contradictions. Now, how can I defend myself but by
showing the truth of the book I have published? If I do prove its truth,
I can plead that I published it with a good intention.
The Chief Justice: You cannot go into the truth of the Christian
religion.
Mr. Carlile: It is a most improper question, I admit, to be brought
before a Court of Justice.
The Chief Justice: Whatever you can state to the gentlemen of the jury,
that is proper and relative to your case, shall be heard.
Mr. Carlile: But I must enquire into the truth of the Old Testament.
The Chief Justice: No, sir. As I have said before, it is the history of
a sinful people, and of the divine vengeance. The gentlemen of the jury,
I have no doubt, are well acquainted with it.
Mr. Carlile: You have not pointed out the divine origin of the
Scriptures. I am not of opinion that it is divine; and I wish to state
my reasons for holding that opinion.
The Chief Justice: Behave with decorum, and I will not interrupt you.
Mr. Carlile: I do not wish to offend any person. It is not my intention.
But what I conceive to be truth, I will promulgate, be the consequence
what it may.
The Chief Justice: I will take care that you shall not promulgate in
this place anything that is improper.