Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

bringing it before a jury by whom he was unknown; when, in fact, he might have tried his case at Nottingham either in March or July last. Such conduct on the part of the defendant was decisive judgment against himself. Admitting, however, that the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict, the only remaining question was the amount of damages. The defendant had put no justification on the record, and therefore he had not aggravated the supposed cause of offence. The jury should recollect, that the amount of damages they should give must be measured by the amount of the injury; and he who did not bring his action and try his case where he affected to have received the injury, and where the injury could have been best estimated, gave the strongest judgment against himself that the injury had been little or none.

The Chief-Justice, in charging the jury, said, no man could doubt that the matter contained in the alleged libel was calculated to injure the character of the plaintiff; and as no attempt had been made to justify it, the necessary consequence was, that it must be taken to be untrue. Several topics had been addressed to the jury, on the one side and on the other, which, in his Lordship's humble judgment, could in no way be involved in the case. This court had nothing to do with the policy or impolicy of the Legislature in suspending the Habeas Corpus Act; whether the long detail of matter contained in the libel was true or untrue had nothing to do with the question which the jury were to try, the only consideration being the damage which the plaintiff had sustained by having his name coupled with the disgraceful and highly criminal acts detailed in the libel. It appeared that this statement was pub

lished at the time the plaintiff was in confinement upon charges for which he was likely to be brought to trial; and certainly such a publication was calculated to prejudice the minds of those by whom he would probably have been tried, had the proceedings gone further. Nothing was more improper than publications tending to prejudice the cases of persons merely committed on suspicion of offences, because nothing was more likely to affect the interests of public justice. It had been very properly observed, that the plaintiff had declined to bring his action at Nottingham, where his character might be supposed to be best known; and the jury would take that circumstance into consideration in estimating the damages; and in doing so they would exercise that temper and discretion which the due administration of justice required.

The jury retired for about half an hour, and returned a verdict for the plaintiff.-Damages L.600.

Spring Assizes, Lancaster, April.

PRIVATE LIBEL.

Mr J. Edward Taylor, a respectable cotton-broker of Manchester, was indicted by Mr J. Greenwood, boroughreeve of Salford, for having libelled his character, in writing him a letter in which the terms liar, slanderer, and scoundrel, were applied to him.

Mr Scarlett having stated to the jury the malignity of the offence,

Mr Taylor rose (being attended by his attorney,) and delivered a speech to the jury, in which he protested against the mode of conducting criminal prosecutions in cases of libel, charged the jury to make themselves judges both of the law and the fact, and proved the fol

lowing facts in justification of the epithets applied to Greenwood: In July last a public meeting was called in Salford, for the purpose of choosing four assessors, and Mr Taylor's name was one of the number. When his name was called over, Greenwood said, "I think I heard some one object to Taylor." Some person then said, "Who is Taylor?" To whom Greenwood replied, "O, one of those reformers who go about the country making long speeches ;" adding, "I understand he was the author of a hand-bill in 1812, headed 'Now or never,' which caused the mob to set fire to the Exchange." In consequence of this assertion Mr Taylor's name was struck off the list, and another substituted in its place. In a day or two Mr Taylor heard of the calumny Greenwood had thrown upon him, and sent a polite note, requesting to know his authority for the statement he had made. To this note no reply was sent. A second met the same fate; when Taylor thought proper to cause a respectable friend to wait on Greenwood, and demand an explanation. This friend, Greenwood thought proper to insult, by advising him to mind his own business, and not to interfere in politics; treated Taylor's name with great disrespect; said he wished to have nothing to do with him; and added, "You may tell him what you like." These circumstances led Taylor to write and tell Greenwood, that, as he refused to give his authority for having used such expressions, he should consider him the author of the calumny; that he was" a liar, a slanderer, and a scoundrel;" and that he should take the earliest opportunity of tell

ing him so personally. In his defence Mr Taylor took an opportunity of ridiculing the technicals of the indictment, which charged him with being of a wicked, malicious, and evil disposition, and apologised to the bar for invading their province.

Mr Scarlett, in his reply, delivered an address to the gentlemen of the robe, something in the manner of the silversmith of Ephesus, and stated that their craft was in danger. He reminded the defendant of his temerity, and said, if he had employed any of the learned gentlemen around him, it would have saved much time to the Court. would have prayed for a mitigation of punishment, and the sentence would have been so much more lenient than it could possibly be expected now, seeing the defendant had indulged in new and reiterated calumnies against the prosecutor.

They

Baron Wood, in summing up, told the jury he thought Greenwood's advice to Mr Taylor's friend respecting politics very seasonable; that he did not know whether Taylor did go about making long speeches, but that he had made one there that day long enough; that it was the regular course for such defendants as this to go to London to receive sentence; and if they had any recommendation to make when they delivered their verdict, it would be considered in mitigation of punishment, when sentence came to be passed upon him.

The jury retired, and were copfined during eleven hours and five minutes without fire, candle, or food. At length they were escorted to the Judge's bed-room, where they delivered their verdict of Not Guilty.

Court of King's Bench, Adjourned Sittings at Guildhall, Tuesday, October 12.

BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL.

THE KING V. RICHARD CARLILE.

Guildhall, and all the avenues leading to it, were this morning crowded to excess with individuals anxious to obtain admission to hear the trial of the defendant for the republication of Paine's Age of Reason. The sheriffs made every possible preparation to prevent the confusion usually resulting from so numerous an assemblage. The City Marshals were directed by the Lord Mayor to be in attendance, with a body of constables to aid in preserving order, and every other necessary precaution was adopted. Within the Hall, and in the immediate avenues of the Court, barriers and strong railings were erected to counteract the effects of strong pressure, and hatches were constructed, which precluded the admission of more than one person at a time. Across that part of the Court which is usually appropriated to the public, two strong beams were introduced, within about six feet of each other; so that the inconvenience which would have resulted from the influx of the crowd was completely obviated. In order to give the gentlemen connected with the public press those facilities which are so essential to the performance of their duties, the Sheriffs had given directions that they should be admitted, at an early hour, by a back entrance; and they remained in a private room till the arrival of the officers of the Court, by whom they were afforded every accommodation consistent with the size of the building.

About nine o'clock Mr Sheriff

Parkins ordered the public door of the Court to be opened. The rush. was tremendous; but from the prudent precautions which had been taken, the Court was immediately filled without any accident.

The following is an abstract of the several counts of the indictment, charging the defender with the publication of several impious and blasphemous libels against the Christian religion.

The first count charged, "that Richard Carlile, late of London, bookseller, being a wicked, impious, and ill-disposed person, &c. did, on the 17th of December, and in the 59th year of the reign of our present Sovereign Lord George the Third, &c. print and publish a certain scandalous, impious, and blasphemous libel, of and concerning that part of the Holy Bible which is called the Old Testament, according to the tenor and effect following, that is to say, "Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, and the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible," (meaning the Old Testament,) "is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a Demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind.”

The second and other counts charged the publication of several libels, which they respectively set forth in similar terms. "Did the book called the Bible," (meaning the Old Testament,) " excel in pu rity of ideas and expression, all the books that are now extant in the world, I would not take it for my rule of faith as being the word of God, because the possibility would, nevertheless, exist of my being imposed upon; but when I see throughout the greater part of this book,

scarcely any thing but a history of the grossest vices, and a collection of the most paltry and contemptible tales, I cannot dishonour my Creator by calling it by his name."

Third count. "To charge the commission of acts upon the Almighty, which in their own nature, and by every rule of moral justice, are crimes, as all assassination is, and more especially the assassination of infants, is matter of serious concern. The Bible tells us that those assassinations were done by the express command of God. To believe, therefore, the Bible to be true, we must unbelieve all our belief in the moral justice of God; for wherein could crying or smiling infants offend? And to read the Bible with out horror, we must undo every thing that is tender, sympathising, and benevolent in the heart of man. Speaking for myself, if I had no other evidence that the Bible is fabulous than the sacrifice I must make to believe it to be true, that alone would be sufficient to determine my choice."

Fourth count." It," (meaning the Old Testament,)" is a book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy."

Fifth count." As it is nothing extraordinary, that a woman should be with child before she is married, and that the son she might bring forth should be executed, even unjustly, I see no reason for not believing that such a woman as Mary," (meaning the blessed Virgin Mary,) "and such men as Joseph and Jesus," (meaning our Saviour Jesus Christ,) existed; their mere existence is a matter of indifference, about which there is no ground to believe or disbelieve, and which comes under the common head of-It may be so, and what then? The probability, how ever, is, that there were such persons, or at least such as resembled

them in part of the circumstances, because almost all romantic stories have been suggested by some actual circumstances as the adventures of Robinson Crusoe, not a word of which is true, were suggested by the case of Alexander Selkirk. It is not then the existence, or non-existence of the persons that I trouble myself about. It is the fable of Jesus Christ, as told in the New Testament, and the wild and visionary doctrine raised thereon, against which I contend. The story, taking it as it is told, is blasphemously obscene. It gives an account of a young woman engaged to be married; and while under this engagement she is debauched by a ghost, under the impious pretence, (Luke, chap. i. ver. 35.,) that the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee."

Sixth count."What is it the Testament," (meaning the New Testa ment)" teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married! And the belief in this debauchery is called Faith!"

Seventh count." But the case is, that people have been so long in the habit of reading the books called the Bible," (meaning the Old Tes tament,)" and Testament," (meaning the New Testament,)" with their eyes shut, and their senses locked up, that the most stupid inconsistencies have passed on them for truth, and imposition for prophecy. The allwise Creator hath been dishonoured by being made the author of fable, and the human mind degraded by believing it. 1 forbear making any remark on this abominable imposition of Matthew; the thing glaringly speaks for itself; it is priests and commentators that I ought rather to censure for having preached falsehoods so long, and kept people in

darkness with respect to those impositions. I have now, reader, gone through and examined all the passages which the four Books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John quote from the Old Testament, and call prophecies of Jesus Christ. When I first sat down to this examination, I expected to find cause for some censure; but little did I expect to find them so utterly destitute of truth, and of all pretensions to it, as I have shewn them to be. The practice which the writers of those books employ is not more false than it is absurd. They state some trifling case of the person they call Jesus Christ, and then cut out a sentence from some passage of the Old Tes tament, and call it a prophecy of that case. But when the words thus cut out are restored to the place they are taken from, and read with the words before and after them, they give the lie to the New Testament." "These repeated forgeries and falsifications create a well-founded suspicion, that all the cases spoken of concerning the person called Jesus Christ are made cases on purpose to lug in, and that very clumsily, some broken sentences from the Old Testament, and apply them as prophecies of those cases; and that so far from his being the Son of God, he did not exist even as a man; that he is merely an imaginary, or allegorical character, as Apollo, Hercules, Jupiter, and all the deities of antiquity were. There is no history written at the time Jesus Christ is said to have lived that speaks of the existence of such a person even as man. Did we find in any other book, pretending to give a system of religion, the falsehoods, falsifications, contradictions, and absurdities, which are to be met with in almost everypage of the Old and New Testament, all the priests of the present day, who sup>

VOL. XII. PART II.

posed themselves capable, would triumphantly shew their skill in criticism, and cry it down as a glaring imposition; but since the books in question belong to their own trade and profession, they, or at least many of them, seek to stifle every inquiry into them, and abuse those who have the honesty and courage to do it." "Now, had the news of salvation by Jesus Christ been inscribed on the face of the Sun and Moon in characters that all nations would have understood, the whole earth had known it in twenty-four hours, and all nations would have believed it. Whereas, though it is almost 2,000 years since, as they tell us, Christ came upon earth, not a twentieth part of the people of the earth know any thing of it; and of those who do, the wisest part do not believe it." "The story of Jesus Christ has not one trait, either in its character or in the means employed, that bears the least resemblance to the power and wisdom of God, as demonstrated in the Creation of the Universe. All the means are human means, slow, uncertain, and inadequate to the accomplishment of the end proposed, and therefore the whole is a fabulous invention and undeserving of credit. I will define what it is: he that believes in the story of Christ is an infidel to God."

The eighth and ninth counts merely repeat the above blasphemies.

Tenth count.-"For my own part, I do not believe there is one word of historical truth in the whole book,' (meaning the New Testament.) "I look upon it at best to be a romance, the principal personage of which is an imaginary, or allegorical character, founded upon some tale, and in which the moral is in many parts good, and the narrative part very badly and blunderingly written."

B

« AnteriorContinuar »