ceed against opinion by law, the mere existence of such proreedings, or their frequent repetition, cannot make it so. What is the solemn nothingness of the bench? what is the learned quibbling of the bar? What are musty parchments and the dusty records of legal oppression, if they are opposed by the plain dictates of Reason!! and the eternal principles of Right!! We have thought the idea of the Attorney-general's defending the Christian religi ridiculous enough, but when he declared himself "an advocate for the freedom of the press,' and a protector of moral, political, and religious freedom of discussion," surely the gravity of my Lord Ellenborough must have relaxed into laughter.-The professions of the lawyer will be credited, when people can be brought to believe that the inquisition asserted and protected the rights of conscience. The concluding observation of the Attorney-general deserves notice, inasmuch as it tends to develope the whole secret of this prosecution; for it comes out, that it is the national religion, after all, about which this alarm has been raised. "There was no doubt (said the learned gentleman) but the publication was punishable, and not only in this but in every civilized state it had been held politic so to punish all such attempts to subvert the national religion." Undoubtedly the policy of states would punish every attempt to subvert the national religion, for national religions have been one of the principal means by which the traffic of governments have been carried on. If national religions have tended to prevent the growth of intellect to damp the ardour of enquiry to obstruct the progress of truth-to degrade and enervate the human mind-and to form and fit men for oppression-the policy of states in punishing every attempt to subvert it, is readily ac counted for. But the learned gentleman need not be told, that the national religion is not the Christian religion-that they are as much opposed to each other, as truth is to false hood-virtue to knavery-or the professions of an Attorneygeneral to his practice, who declares himself horror-struck at reading a pamphlet against the Christian religion, and yet was not ashamed to defend, in the face of modesty and the world, a Royal Adulterer in the violation of all its precepts. If I could suppose for a moment that the Attorney-general is a Christian (pardon the supposition, gentle reader), and that he is addressing a Christian jury-what can be more truly inconsistent than to hear him arguing the propriety of punishing every attempt to subvert the national religion," when Christianity itself subverted all the national religions of the countries where it was propagated? Equally ridiculous is the learned gentleman's reasoning, as a member of the established church, and as addressing a Protestant jury-when this very national religion which he undertakes to defend, owes its existence to the subversion of the national religion of England POPERY. On my Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury there is little room for remark-almost every thing that can be said being already anticipated in the observations on the Attorney-general's speech; for by some strange co-incidence it always happens, that the opinions of the Judged Attorney-general are precisely the same on the prosecutions for libel from the crown; in fact in all such trials there is scarcely any other means of distinguishing the speech of the judge from that of the counsel for the crown, but from his Lordship's name being prefixed to it. Lord Ellenborough took occasion to confirm the opinions of Hale, Kenyon, and Raymond-that the Christian religion is the law of the land. As this appears the principal point of law which was brouglit against the defendant, it is worth examining the assertion has been so often made by judges, and delivered with all the gravity of the bench, that some persons may be disposed to attach a vast deal of consequence to it. The subject will be too long for this letter, so that I shall have occasion, Mr. Editor, to trespass on your patience in a future communication, when I purpose particularly to examine this opinion of the learned judges. The point on which Lord Ellenborough laid the greatest stress, was, that the jury were Christians, and sworn on the evangelists-tacitly inferring, that if they believed the gos pels true, they must find the defendant guilty. This would naturally place the jury in this unpleasant situation, that if they gave a verdict of not guilty, it would seem to imply their disbelief of the scriptures. But what, after all, is the mere form of an oath ? Do the persons who are sworn on the evangelists think any thing about their truth at the time? I have frequently seen the oaths administered, and as to the effect which the mere kissing the Testament appears to have, or in fact can have, on the minds of honest or even dishonest men, I am persuaded they might just as well kiss the judge's great toe; though in this trial there was something peculiarly appropriate even in the form of the oath, for it might have occurred to the jury, when they were considering their verdict, that they had been sworn on a book, which taught a religion abstracted from the policy of this world--a religion which inculcated candour and liberality, and disclaimed all dominion over the faith of men-and that the great teacher of this mild and generous system was drag ged into a court of justice, under the charge of blasphemy, and crucified for attempting to subvert the national religion ! The judge concluded by saying he should leave it to the jury, as Christian men, sworn on the gospel of Christ, to say whether the present was not an attrocious libel on the Christian religion.' It is unnecessary to say they "immediately found the defendant GUILTY!" Your's, &c. A FRIEND TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. EXTRACTS FROM A PORT-FOLIO. HOW COURTS. OW dangerous a situation is royalty, in which the wisest are often the tools of deceit! A throne is surrounded by the train of subtlety and self-interest: Integrity retires, because she will not be introduced by importunity or flattery: Virtue, conscious of her own dignity, waits at a distance till she is sought, and princes seldom know where she may be found; but Vice and her attendants are impudent and fraudful, insinuating and officious, skilful in dissimulation, and ready to renounce all principles, and to violate every tie, when it becomes necessary to the gratification of the appetites of a prince. How wretched is the man who is thus perpetually exposed to the attempts of guilt, by which he must inevitably perish, if he do not renounce the music of adulation, and learn not to be offended by the plainness of truth.--Fenelon. ANNUAL EXPENCE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH ESTABLISHMENT. £35,000 100,000 20,000 15,000 100,000 30,000 7,000 .1,000,000 500,000 10,000 Church Clerks 100,000 £1,907,000 The above statement is considerably under-rated, and a number of items are omitted; but it is sufficient to enable the reader to form a tolerably correct idea of the enormous expence attending the church establishment, for doing nothing, or rather worse than nothing. THE INQUISITION AND LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. The inquisition is incompatable with the liberty of the press, which has been decreed with the applause of the whole nation; for that tribunal once re-established, no public writer could be free from alarm, even should he abstain from every topic of religion. While discussing any political question, or explaining the very rudiments of the science of government, he would expose himself to the risk of being accused and punished by that tribunal. We all know, by unfortunate experience, how easy it is to torture the meaning of an expression, and to represent as scandalous an insulated proposition, which, joined with the context, would appear perfectly innocent. We all know with what cunning policy our kings have availed themselves of the inquisition, to prohibit useful works, which were guilty of no other offence than that of exposing the abuses of despotism. We have not forgotten how many wise and patriotic men have been persecuted as impious or irreligious; neither have we forgotten, that the doctrines of the sovereignty of the nation, of its authority to dictate laws, and of the delegated power of monarchs, have, by a base abuse of texts of holy writ, been condemned as antichristian, and their propagators persecuted, and immured in the dungeons of the inquisition. With such recent facts before our eyes, where is the writer so rash or thoughtless, who would think of instructing the people while such a tribunal existed? The inquisition and the liberty of the press !it is quite sufficient to mention them, to show that they are placed in the most determined state of mutual hostility.-Tortado's Speech in the Cortes of Spain, 1811, MAGAZINE. No. 18.] JUNE, 1812. [VOL. 2. AN EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES OF. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Ν To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine. SIR, IN treating of the church of England, my design is to shew that she is not entitled to the name of a Christian church, to' which she so arrogantly pretends; and that it is the duty of Christians, not only to refuse the assistance she now asks of training up children in the belief of her doctrines, but by every lawful means to prevent her succeeding in accomplishing so pernicious an object: and as it is a first principle with the schools intended to be established by them, that the children shall be taught the catechism, I shall make it the business of this letter to examine the real merits of this sacred composition, and to shew that it is calculated to promote ignorance and superstition; that it is contrary to reason and scripture; and that the learning of this popish catechism necessarily leads to an implicit belief of doctrines not understood, and by its false declarations lulls men into a fatal security of future hap-> piness, without any regard to the conditions on which alone it is promised in the sacred writings. Catechisms were unknown to the first Christians; but when priests got into the church-when the multitude were to be made Christians-when Christianity, to suit the rabble, was made to consist in sound and not sense-to be a mere repeating of words, and not a rational conviction producing a principle of action-then a list of articles was drawn up, and this was called a catechism; an obscure word, for the purpose, no doubt, of giving an air of mystery to the thing itself. This practice the church of England has adopted from the church of Rome, with some little alteration, to suit her present notions. Absurdity and falsehood salute us at the very threshold; for after having answered the useless questions of what is your name? and who gave you that name?" the child is made to assert what is absolutely false, and which even if true he is incompetent to understand; for he says, that in his baptism (and by baptism he here refers to the priest having sprinkled him with a little water, and made the form of a cross on his forehead, `VOL II. KK |