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 G.o.d. 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 G.o.d 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 G.o.d? 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 Amba.s.sador to the Court of Naples--and is at present a member of the Privy Council. I allude to Sir W. Drummond--who has canva.s.sed 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 pa.s.sions, 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 s.h.i.ttim 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 repet.i.tion 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 pa.s.sage 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 a.s.sisting 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 G.o.d is represented in the text as dwelling in a box of s.h.i.ttim 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 a.s.signed for G.o.d'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 pa.s.s 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 pa.s.sage, 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 pa.s.sage that is abominable--you must not read it". Now, my lord, the defendant before you says: "I will prove the truth of what Paine a.s.serts, 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 pa.s.sed, in the time of King William, for the punishment of those who impugned the doctrine of the Trinity. An Act was recently pa.s.sed, 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.