against blafphemy; the fecond on the heinoufnefs of infulting the king; and the third on a more delicate point, with which the public could have little concern, that of his private behaviour to his wife.

That each of thefe is a great crime, I will readily allow; but in proportion to the enormity of the crimes, every honeft man would be more than ordinary cautious of prejudicing mankind against a fuppofed criminal, who was foon to be brought to trial. The affize preacher at Oxford, who preached against parricide, the day the unfortunate Mifs Blandy was to be tried, fo incenfed the people against the miserable, unheard culprit, that innocent or guilty, fhe was devoted to deftruction, was univerfally cenfured by every man who regarded juftice. It is a maxim in law, confiftent with the ftricteft juftice and good fenfe, that every perfon fhould be fuppofed innocent till found otherwise by his peers; and a man must be void of chriftianity, humanity, decency, and common regard to the laws of his country, who could endeavour to incense a body of people against a perfon, who was in a fhort time to come before the tribunal of juftice, and, perhaps, thofe very people to be his judges.

But what a horrid aggravation must it be to the crimes of such a time-serving preacher, if he knew that the perfon, he was for reward abufing, was abfolutely innocent of the blafphemy; that the work referred to was wrote by a fon of the church; and that the whole crime of the perfon he prostituted the pulpit to abufe, was, keeping that, at the defire of a deceased friend, which his regard to the living ought to have made him commit to the flames! keeping for the entertainment of a fet of JEMMY twitchers, what the twitchers are making the inftrument of his deftruction.

The fecond objection fo artfully used to preju dice mankind against this perfon, whose zeal for liberty has made him fufpected of going indecent lengths in oppofition to the fervants of the crown, is a matter to be tried; and therefore, the contraft, who is equally zealous for the royal prerogative, and the juft liberties of the fubject, will leave this to be debated before, and determined by, the proper judges, a free and impartial ENG

LISH JURY.

The meanly taking an opportunity in a public pulpit to declaim against a man for private tranfactions, fetting him in the moft obnoxious light for his behaviour to his wife, when the preacher is intirely ignorant of the fact, and does not know whether the feparation was obtained by the interested schemes, and base intrigues of a few peevish, old, ill-natured relations, as is often the cafe, is what ill becomes a chriftian preacher, a gentleman, a man of honour, or a man of common honesty.

I own the present malevolence of the people in power to their opponents is a very alarming circumftance; the little paultry arts made ufe of by their emiffaries to prejudice mankind against those who are fuppofed to be the champions of liberty, is what ought to put every friend of our conftitution on his guard, not to give credit to what is reported, without being better fupported than by the meer affertions of an interefted party; who, with one hand, fupport the moft abandoned and profligate that ever difgraced a free country, and with the other declaim against vice in an individual, whose principal crimes, and moft fufpicious part of his character, is, being once the beloved friend and companion of these hypocritical wretches.

Whatever are the crimes of either party, I fincerely wish they may be punished with that proper and decent feverity that is confiftent with our laws;

but

but it must give the greatest pain to every man of integrity to see the laws ftrained to punish one fet of men, while another is tolerated and protected in crimes ten times more enormous.

To Mr. Kidgel, preacher of St. John's Berkeley Square, chaplain to the earl of March and Ruglin, rector of Horne in Surry, and AUTHOR of a MALI

CIOUS NARRATIVE.

That I may not offend you by dropping a title which in great humility you have given yourfelf I will begin with:

Reverend fir,

those who are well acquainted with your

Tprudence and turn of mind, it was no furprife

"You

to hear of your officioufnefs, in difcovering and bringing to light the fcandalous, obfcene, and exceedingly profane libel,' about which you have made fo much noife. Had you dropped this defign too, as well as the other, which you fay, ' had formed in your temerity,' it would have been in character of the rector of Horne, but not in character of Mr. Kidgel. But give me leave to tell you, that of all the tribe of fneaking, felf-interefted wretches, who are a difgrace to mankind, a fawning, hypocritical, intriguing prieft, is the most defpicable. However, in my expoftulations with your reverence about your narrative, I fhall not repeat what others have already faid to you. They have lashed you very fufficiently for the part you have acted, as a gentleman, a good man, and a clergyman: the fmart of whofe lafhes you will feel, if I mistake not, as long as you live; even if you thouid gain your end with a miniftry exceedingly fedulous in rewarding merit. I fhall now hold you out in another light, as a fcholar; and if it has already appeared

Q4

peared to the world, that your zeal for preferment has out-run your probity, it may now perhaps appear, that your learning is fuperficial; which to a man of yourself importance, and who deals fo much in words, will be a difcovery, I believe, not highly pleafing.

Not to mention the impropriety of the epithet genuine to a narrative which is adulterated, I fhould be glad to know, fir, by what rule of language you give the appellation of a LIBEL to the effay on woman? Was you really ignorant of the meaning of the word LIBEL, or did you chufe that appellation because of the late frequent ufe of it, as a word which you imagined would catch the attention, and engage the prejudices of the public on your fide? Whatever were your motives, I must inform you, that the effay on woman, by your own account, (for I know nothing more of it) is no LIBEL. A LIBEL is a malicious defamation of any perfon, expreffed either in printing or writing, in figns or pictures, in order to afperfe his reputation.' But where a writing inveighs against mankind (or if you please womankind) in general, though it may be fcandalous, though it may be obfcene, and exceedingly profane, yet it is no LIBEL; and it has been agreed in the court of king's bench, that a writing full of obfcene ribaldry, without reflection upon any perfon, is not punishable at all by any profecution at common law.' It is likewife neceflary, in order to conftitute a LIBEL, that it be publifhed to the contumely of another perfon. Now, fir, in neither of these cafes, does the effay on woman come up to the definition of a LIBEL. It is no invective against a particular perfon: and though it is printed, it was never published, nor intended fo to be, as you very well know, notwithstanding your pretended zeal, not to promote its impunity and fuc'cefs by your unfeafonable and paffive filence.'

Indeed the lawyers will tell you, and perhaps to your coft too in Weftminster-hall, that you yourfelf, reverend fir, have incurred the guilt of a malicious and infamous libel, by charging the writer of this work on a man who did not write it, in order to afperfe bis reputation. For though you defire to be excufed from an abfolute declaration who the author is,' yet you have given a defcription which nobody can mifapprehend: and that, in the conftruction of the courts of juftice, is as properly a libel, as if it had expreffed the whole name at large. What adds to your offence is, that you know this perfon was not the author, and that the poem was written by a worthy fon of a worthy archbishop of Canterbury. But if the effay on woman fhould be allowed to be a LIBEL (which with all your dexterity you can never prove it) the crime of its publication is not Mr Wilkes's, but Mr. Kidgel's: and if the exceedingly pious perfonage who complained of it, was to be impartial, you are in danger to be pu nifhed for repeating any part of it, because in the eye of the law, fuch a repetition is an unlawful publication; and he who is only proved to have had a libel in his cuftody, fhall not be adjudged the publisher of it.' The next time therefore that you use terms of art, my advice to you is, to know the meaning of them; and the next time your zeal goes beyond your knowledge, take care not to burn your fingers.

6

'Deliberately, and in a few words, I might ask,' where was your honour,' where your veracity, ' and your good intention,' in reprefenting this work as intended for publication, when you knew in your own confcience, that no fuch thing was ever thought of; Was it actually poffible, that in your curiofity to know the origin of this poem,' you should not have discovered, that it was written for the ufe of a certain SOCIETY, inftituted and supported by a

man