founded? If the "Age of Reason" was an attack on an indivi dual, who could stand up before you and prove that attack to be false and malicious? Then, and not till then, can you with justice convict me of libel. If the charge be for blasphemy, allowing that such an offence could be committed (which I have clearly proved cannot), this Court hath no power to try it. I found my objection in the following clause, in the reports of law, Coke's fifth volume, in the celebrated case of Caubrey: "So in causes ecclesiastical and spiritual, as namely, blasphemy, apostacy from Christianity, heresies, schisms, &c. and others (the conservance whereof belong not to the Common Laws of England), the same are to be determined and decided by ecclesiastical judges, according to the King's ecclesiastical laws of this realm: for that as before it appeareth the deciding of matters so many, and of so great importance, are not within the cognisance of the common laws." Yet in spite of this plain case, numerous indictments have been brought against us, numerous convictions have taken place at Common Law. You will naturally ask, on what authority? On what law? I answer, on no law, and on very weak, very questionable authority. You will first observe, that the Common Law, as handed down to us from the Saxons, has no mention of any such cases. The other part of what is called Common Law is composed of the decisions of different Judges and Courts of Law. Now as we cannot allow a man to be infallible, so neither can we allow human laws to be infallible, as these are only the emanations of the human mind, and are good or bad according to the maker or maker's knowledge of right or wrong as regards the case to which the law, or laws are made to apply. Yesterday, from the Learned Judge, I for the first time heard on what authority, on what precedent those prosecutions were carried on at Common Law. The first and foundation of all this is the ipsi dixit of Judge Hale, the able, the good, the lenient, the pious, the eminent, the enlightened Judge Hale; this Judge, so profoundly skilled in the Common Law of the land, so enlightened as to believe in witchcraft; so good, so lenient, so pious, as to condemn two old women to be burned at the stake, under the idea of their being witches. And yet, Gentlemen, on the ipsi dixit of this same enlightened believer in withcraft, this same pious burner of old women, is founded the present prosecution. But how weak then is the authority of such a man? If he was in error as to the offence of witchcraft, which he undoubtedly was, may he not be in error also as to the offence

of blasphemy?-Blasphemy, as well as witchcraft, according to their general acceptation are but words, they relate to no person or thing; and consequently are not such as to be within the cognizance of this or any other Court of Law. The learned Judge will no doubt quote to you many other what he calls authorities; but let me again beg you to remember that they are all founded on the precedent handed down from the unenlightened and bigoted Judge Hale. I do not mean to say that he was unenlightened in comparison of the age in which he lived, but unenlightened as regards the present advanced state of knowledge. The most illiterate of the present day are aware that he was in error as regards witchcraft; and the enlightened are equally well aware of his, and all others who believe like him, being in error as regards blasphemy. Seeing, then, Gentlemen, the entire want of proof, either of evil intention, or injury done by the sale of this publication; but on the contrary, that the motive was good, and the publication in every res pect calculated to do good; and that neither law nor justice requires that I should be punished; by a verdict of "Not Guilty" put a stop to this system of persecution a system emanating from ignorance, and supported by bigotry; which, with unlawful stretch of power, and perversion of law, bad long, and still attempted, to tyrannize over the mind.

Gentlemen, before I conclude, I must once more request you to consider the uselessness, injustice, and impolicy of these prosecutions, whose authors, while they are with hypocritical cant pretending to support morality, are, at the same time, sapping its very foundations. Consider, likewise, that it is not only me as an individual, who am interested in your decision; neither is it confined merely to the question as to the right of debating on theological subjects, but that, through your verdict, our enemies are aiming a blow at the principal bulwarks of the liberty and happiness of mankind-the LIBERTY OF THE PRESS, and FREE DISCUS

SION.

To you, then, Gentlemen, I now leave my case. If you consider me to have been acting from pure motives, and conscientiously doing that which to me appeared right, against which not the shadow of a proof has been adduced, as you are in duty bound, acquit me. You will then return to your homes with the consciousness of having done unto others as ye would they should do unto you, and accompa

nied with the thanks and good wishes of thousands of your fellow men; while, on the other hand, by giving an unlawful verdict against the liberty of your fellow-manby becoming the tools of a corrupt, bigoted, and persecuting faction, your own minds would condemn and torment you; mankind would despise you; and you would sink into oblivion, covered with the curses of millions, of whom it is now in your power to command respect, gratitude, and esteem.

Mr. French called several witnesses to speak to the moral and religious character of O'Conner.

Mr. Wontner, the Governor of Newgate, said he was particularly attentive at Divine Service on Sunday, in the Chapel of the Gaol.

The Recorder summed up, and said the only question the Jury had to decide was this-did the defendants publish the work? they would take the law from him, and he pronounced the work to be a blasphemous, wicked, and most dangerous work. If the Jury had a doubt of O'Conner's guilt, they would give him the benefit of it.

The Jury retired for about a quarter of an hour, and on their return, Acquitted O'Connor, and found Hassell Guilty. The Court sentenced him to two years' imprisonment in Newgate, and to enter into his own recognizance of £100. to keep the peace for life.

Hassell said, "My Lord, I congratulate myself that I have fortitude to bear the infliction of so severe a sentence."

MR. WILLIAM CAMPION.

PARALELL BETWEEN THE CASES OF MR. CAMPION
AND ST. PAUL THE APOSTLE.

MR. CAMPION was tried in the New Court, in the Old Bailey, on Tuesday, June 8, 1824, for having published a blasphemous libel.

While Mr. Campion was making his defence he was frequently interrupted by the JUDGE and by Mr. Alderman CLAUDIUS STEPHEN HUNTER, aud in one of those occasions a Juror, exclaimed, "Are we to sit here and hear all this, My Lord? I am quite sick of hearing it." When the case was ended the Jurors retired for about an hour to con

sider their verdict, and then the forman said, Guilty. Upon this verdict being pronounced the Judge immediately sen· tenced Mr. Campion to THREE YEARS' IMPRISONMENT IN NEWGATE*.

The Judge before whom Mr. Campion was tried, was Mr. NEWMAN KNOWLYS, Recorder of the City of London.

At the close of Mr. Campions defence, MR. KNOWLYS Summed up the case to the Jury, and after stating the offence the prisoner stood charged with, said, there could be no doubt of his crime being punishable at common law, and cited a number of cases from James I. down to the present reign, tried before JUDGES HALE, Rolfe, Mansfield, Kenyon, Ellenborough, &c. He particularly adverted to the case of a prisoner tried before JUDGE HALE, for publishing a work, in which he said "Christ was a bastard, and religion was a cheat," and on being convicted, was sentenced to be fined 1,000 marks, thrice to stand in the pillory, and to find sureties for life. He also alluded to the case of Peter Annet, for publishing a work called the "Free Inquirer," who was tried before Lord Mansfield. This work libelled the Bible and the Christian religion, declaring that the books of Moses were forgeries, and the Christian religion an invention and fraud. He was convicted, and sentenced to one month's imprisonment in Newgate, to stand in the pillory at three different places, to be afterwards imprisoned in Newgate for twelve months, and to enter into security for his good behaviour for the term of his natural life. In this case the defendant was seventy years of age, he admitted his guilt, and put in affidavits of mitigation; but the court, although the defendant expressed his sorrow for his offence, (a mode of conduct very different to that displayed by the defendant at the bar) thought proper to inflict a sentence apparently severe, that being the only mode, in the opinion of the Judges, likely to suppress the sale of such diabolical publications. The present defendant was, therefore, mistaken in saying, that he had not offended the law, and that in publishing a libel of that malignant character which had been read to the Jury, he had done no wrong, and ought not to be punished. The Court were determined, as far as in its power lay, to suppress the sale of these publications, which diffused irreligious and diabolical opinions throughout the kingdom-publications not containing fair and candid arguments, but horrid expressions and false assertions, which he would not repeat, but would call the attention of the Jury to one sentence, viz. "that those who believed in the fabulous story of Christ were infidels to God."

* See the whole trial in No. 25.

The following remarks on this extraordinary proceeding, and the closeness of the parallel between the case of MR. CAMPION and that of ST. PAUL the APOSTLE, deserve a careful perusal. A candid examination can hardly be expected from a zealot, but it can scarcely fail to produce a permanent impression on every one not totally blinded by superstition.

The heading of the Chapters from the Acts of the Apostles respecting the proceedings against Paul, are first inserted, to serve as a key to the history.

"ACTS OF THE APOSTLES."

Chap. xxi. “Paul cometh to Jerusalem, where he is apprehended and is in great danger, but by the chief captain is rescued and permitted to speak to the people."

Chap. xxii. "Paul declareth how he was converted to the faith, and called to his apostleship. At the very mentioning of the word Gentiles, the people exclaim on him. He would have been scourged, but claiming the privilege of a Roman he escapeth."

Chap. xxiii. "As Paul pleadeth his cause, Annanias commandeth them to smite him.-Is sent before Felix the Governor."

Chap. xxiv. "Paul accused by Tertullus the orator,—answereth for his life and doctrines."

Chap. xxxv. "The Jews accuse Paul before Festus,―he answereth for himself, and appealeth unto Cæsar."

These heads of chapters are nearly as applicable to Campion as to Paul, and if Paul was justified so is Campion.

In chap. xxi. Paul, although he knew he should be persecuted, resolved against the advice of his friends to go to Jerusalem.

Verse 13. Paul says to them: "What mean ye to weep and break my heart? For I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem, for the name of the Lord Jesus Christ."

Paul then went to Jerusalem, as Campion did to London; Paul preached his new doctrine, Campion sold his book. Verse 27, says, "When the Jews saw him in the Temple they stirred up the people, and laid hands on him,"

28. Crying out, men of Israel, help; this is the man that teacheth all men every where against the people and the law of this place; and further, hath brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.

30. And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul and drew him out of the temple. And forthwith the doors were shut.

31. And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief Captain of the band that all Jerusalem was in an uproar. 32. Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them. And when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.