Old Bailey New Court, Thu...
v r nwaus9 tssL plAU=DI5 ulaapuetnU5 2nez. After thejurywereaworn.thedefendant said he wished to ask the jury if any of them had aiready tried an indictment for this offence. . The REcoRpnin infonned him, that it WaS too late to ask that question now, when the jury were aworn; but he understood that none of them had. . - The Juuy signified that they had not; but one of them said e had been on Carlile's trial somc years ago. 1Ir. BERNAnD observed, that that.was for.a different publication. The learned gentleman then roceeded to open the indictment to the jury in the abaence of Br. toIUand who, be'sald,was obliged to be- at 'vestminster; and this would adiord'an illustration of the truth of a statement contained inma morning paper, alleging-that the Trea.. sury Salicitor had come down to court with a host of 'counselto pro. secute these defendants. The host of counsel consisted at present of his humble self. The libel in question was contained in a work, cafled Tihe Rcpblican, which was published in sixpenny weekly numbers. It had been said thatthis was awL of epinionsa Itwas no such thing: it was one thing to entestain an opinlon, and an- other thiln to ublish when it vosn ed pnci;le lc uae I tlhrow society off Its binges. fr. Bernatd then read two extracts from the work, in which the Bible was described as a book of fables, contrAdictions, and nonsense; and our S5 iour, and several other scriptural characters, as i band of liars, drunkardis impostors murderers, adulterers,&c. This Was the first time, iMr. Bernard 1 observed, that the moral purity of our Saviour's life b. been questioned,' even by Deists.' William Cozens, Bo v.street patrol. purchased the 17th number of the Republicani at Carlile's shop, in Fleet-street, of the defendant, 'on the 17th of May last. On his cross-examination by the defendant, the witness stated that he ins employed bv M ur. Menle, the solicitor- to the Treasury, to purchase the vwork. ne had received nothing for so doing. Ple also asked defendant for Paine's Age of Reason, and Palmer's PsinciPle of MNature; defendaiit replied that he had not them then, but he sheuld hive them in a couple of days, when he would be happy to servehim. WVitness had received his orders from Mr. Raven, sn Mr.jllaule's presence. Defendant said he wished to a-k somequnstions of Mr. Raven. Mlr. Raven, clerk tO Mfr. Maule, was put into the box. Mr; Bet. bard declined puttinz any questions to him. In reply to the defendant's questions, witness said that he had read the 17th number of the Repablicfn before he had instructed Cozenstopurchase it: he considered itblasphemous. Byblasphemy, he meant that which vilified or scoffed at the Bible, the Christian religion, or Jesus Christ. Defendant.-..lhere did you learn that that vwas blasphemy. RECORDER._.The law says so Defendant.-Whcre is the law that says it ? I can't find it. RECoRDEL.-Pretended ig oranceof the law will not avail you; for every manis supposed to knov whatis lawful or otherwise. Defendant-,I conceive the commands of tGed higher than those of man. Blasphemy has nothing to do with the law. REconILDE.you are mistaken there. The libel was then read, and the case for the prosecution closed. Thedefendant,after examining theindictment, proceedee with his defence. He desired neitber favour nor mercy of the jury; he only demanded justice. Lord Mensfield had said, ' that if the devl came into court, he was entitled to justice." He contended that these piosecutions ere unust and impious, for that God, being omnipotent, was able to fight bis own battles, and did not want the assistance of the prosecutors However, he (the defendant) was thankfiul to George Maule, Esq., forthin prosecuton, because it gave him a conspicuous place in the nation, and would send his name down to osterit, which would otherwise have sunk into oblivion. He then read a long defence in justification of the libel; ndarguedtat lish his opinion upon that which was the opinionoF the Bishop of Clogher. If his opinion were wrong, it mieht be relkie,. YVhatwas theuse of 70,?}09 ministers antd bi8hops, if they could not refute an humble mechanic without the aid o' the-arm of po-crp He was ready to engage those 70 000 mi- nisters ins arusenDe on aty terms theypleased; and his Mlajesty King George fliTght Bit as umpire between them, if he would condo- scentSto Lake thetrouble. He insisted that the dissemination of Carlile'3 works had greatly improved the morals of the lower orders; and sead some extracts from them to prove their moral ten. dency. These were only brought to him this morning; for good morals werc xs inrafted i hibnself, that he did not require such in- structions. In consequence of thrse publications, he could name a hundred respectable men, who, within. the last year, instead of dranken Chnstians, had become sober philosephers. He then went on to justify the publication in question from a' comparison, with other works, and from.the tents of Unitariaiism, which were pro- fessed bymembers of the legislature; -and he complained that MIr. Shelton's clerk had said he considered a blasphemer worse than a thief. He-also cotnplained of what he called " the ma- lignantstatement in The Times, concerning Campion's defence;" e editor misht do the-samne of him, if he thought proper.. He expressed his admiration of Paine and Carlile; and gloried in being one of the followers of the latter, whose works he had pre- served for him, wben they were about to be seized by the Crown. Wien he had eonclueid his written statement, lie commenced read- ing the whole of the Bible from beginning to end, to prove the trth of the libel. After he hrd been a couple of hours reading it, The RECORDERt advised him to consider whether the course he was pursuing was likely.to servehim or not. T he defendant, howrever, persisted; but being again remonstrated witb, he said he would perhaps sk;ip some verses and chapters here and there. He fhen continued to read on for some hours, and oc- casionally commented upon some of the passages, making the gross. est observations upon the Christian relizion. The RECOliDEn informed him thathe was adding every possible aggravation 'to his case. The defendant still proceeded as before. One of the jury at length rose, and asked the Recorder if this might not be stopped, as it was doing the defendant no good, and had already lasted for four hours. The RECORDER again admonished the defendant, that he was not serving hirusclf. he defendant insisted that he was julstifying what he had pub. lhshed: but k,eiog exhausted, and supposing the jury to be ex- hausted too, he requested they would indutlge him for five minutes to refresh him self. The RECORDER told him to go on with his defence. The defendant accordingly resumed his reading, and continued until he again said he was exhausted. The RECORDER told him, that he had wasted Itis imne in read- ing what could not possibly apply to his defence. If, therefore, he had exhausted himself, it was his own fault. The defendant said he should require some time to finish his defence., The RECORDEIR asked him whether he intended to do any thing more than he had bcen doini forsometimepast? Had lieanymeans of sbowing that he did not publish the libel? The derendant admitted that be had published the work; but if he were allowed time, he tbought he should be able to prove that it We., true. The RECORDEn said he certainly should receive no indulgence for that purpose. The defendant, in that case, must leave his case with the jury, as he was so exhausted, and had such a dizziness in his head, that be no longer knew what he was saying. The RECORDER then proceeded to charge the jury, who instant- ly returned a verdict of guiltv. The defendant being asked what he had to say why he should not receive judgment 'as in case of a misdiemeanour, replied that he had been rendered incapable of insking his defence. The RECORDER, after dwelling on the various circumstances of aggravatien containebibhis defence, sentenced him to imprisonment for three years in Newgate, and to enter into his own recognizances in the sum of 1001. for his good behaviour during life. There are two more defendants tobe tried for similar offences; but as the present case occupied the Court to at late hour, their trials were postponed to to-morrow. OLD BAILEY NEW COURT, Tu.RSDAP, .TUNB 10J. - , SCAaLILE'S SHOPMEN.