and pernicious errors should be exposed to all the censure and contempt which they deserve.

Gentlemen, You have heard this day the body of evidence brought against the Defendants; you have heard and witnessed how they have met it: but, that you may be guided in your verdict only by the evidence adduced, and that you may not be led away to the one side or to the other, by either the justification of the Defendants, or by the allegations of the learned advocate, I proceed to recapitulate the testimony of each witness as it has been given, and I beg to observe that I shall forbear making a single comment of my own as I proceed, that you may be swayed by nothing but your own clear and unbiassed judgment in returning such a verdict as your consciences approve.

His Lordship then recapitulated the evidence as it is here given, when he proceeded to observe :

I have now fully detailed all the particulars of the case, as the witnesses have severally deposed to it; and have therefore only further to observe, that Christianity is a part of the law of England, and was so held from the earliest periods of our history. At the Reformation, and by several subsequent acts in the reign of Edward the Sixth, and of Elizabeth, the form of the national religion was established ; but after the restoration of Charles ths Second, the Act of Uniformity, as it was called, was passed, and provided that form of public prayer which was

inserted in the "Common-Prayer Book," and ordained to be kept in all parts of the country as a record, to be produced, if necessary, in courts of justice. Now, though the Law, as I have before observed, does not forbid the decent discussion of the theological subjects to which it referred, it does not allow the Scriptures to be scoffed at, or treated with irreverence and contempt; much less does it permit any part of them to be upheld as false and unworthy of belief. It is for you, Gentlemen, to consider whether in your judgment, the several writings of the Defendants which have been brought before you, and which they have acknowledged to be theirs, do not come under the description of those forbidden by the statute; and whether, if so, they are not gross libels upon the Holy Scriptures; upon the Christian Religion; and, consequently, upon the Religion of the State as by the Law established. If, in your opinion, the Defendants have erred only in judgment, and not from any evil intention either to Religion or to the State, it is still your duty to find them guilty; because, the conviction of their having offended against law or not, rests upon your verdict; the degree of punishment is to be determined by the Court; and, be assured, that will be measured in exact proportion to the intention with which the offence has been committed. If, on the other hand, you are of opinion that the Defendants by their writings have not traduced the Holy Scriptures

and the Christian Religion,—that they have not impugned that holy doctrine which the Law protects, and declares to be the fundamental doctrine of Christian faith and practice, that they have not committed the offence imputed to them; then you are to pronounce them not guilty. But, in either case, if you have the least hesitation upon these points, and cannot at once come to a clear and certain decision upon them, I must tell you, that you are then bound in conscience to give the Defendants the benefit of your doubts.

The Jury conferred together without leaving the box; and in about ten minutes returned by their foreman a verdict of ― GUILTY.

The Attorney-General and the Judge conferred together; after which the Lord Chief Justice thus addressed the Defendants:

JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, THEOPHILUS LINDSEY, HENRY BELSHAM:- You have heard the verdict which a most enlightened jury of your country, after a long and attentive investigation, have now delivered. I studiously abstained, in my charge, from giving the opinion which the evidence adduced before the Court led me, in my own mind, to form of the nature of the publications which have here been called in question; that opinion, however, without prejudice to your case, I may now state,

and I do so by declaring it to be in perfect unison with the verdict just pronounced. It has been well observed, "that, in spiritual matters revealed by God, the ground of our certainty lies not in the evidence of the things, but in the undoubted veracity of God who has revealed them." This, however, is not admitted by those who take reason for their only guide in matters of religion. They affirm that the veracity of God assures them that they must have a clear and distinct perception of things in the natural world before they can give belief to their reality; and, therefore, if they cannot have this clear and distinct perception in matters above their comprehension, they hold, that they are not bound to believe them. As this objection is made by those who have assumed the name of "Rational Christians," I think it not incompatible with my duty to show them that the objection is not well grounded, and that it is the cause of that unbelief which I conceive to be the rock on which yourselves have split, and which must prove hazardous to the future happiness, as well as to the present peace, of all who adopt the same principle.

It is evident that the foundation of all certainty of knowledge must be laid upon a clear and distinct perception of that which cannot be comprehended, upon the belief of a Being absolutely perfect; for if we have not a clear and distinct perception of God, then the foundation of all cer

tainty is destroyed at once, and there is no ground left, even for the belief of the existence of such a Being. They, therefore, who say that there can be no clear perception of God without comprehending his nature, contradict themselves; for if he be an infinite Being, he must be "past finding out." Hence it is evident, that there may be a clear perception when the object itself is above our capacity. Now, whatever foundation there is in nature for such a perception without understanding it, the same and greater there must also be in such things as are revealed by God, though they may be above our comprehension. The idea of God which the mind conceives cannot be so strong a proof of the existence of an incomprehensible Being, as the evidence of revealed matters of faith is a proof of their truth, though our senses are lost in attempting to understand the nature of them, and the manner of their existence. The objection made to this is most unreasonable; namely, that we are to embrace nothing for truth, though divinely revealed, but what our reason is able to comprehend, both as to the nature of the thing proposed for our belief, and the manner of its existence. On these grounds, the doctrine of the Trinity, Incarnation, Satisfaction, and consequently the whole mystery of the Gospel of Christ, must be rejected as incredible; because, though these doctrines have the support of Scripture, yet