Review, professing its high tone of piety and its zeal for the extension of scriptural truth, should have put forth such an article on the subject as appears in its last Number, was more than I had anticipated. I certainly thought, that every good man, of every name, was rejoiced to find that our laws had the power of restraining such abuses of the press, as those which had called forth such general indignation against the high priest of the pseudo "Temple of Reason." But it seems, either that I was mistaken, or that Eclectic Reviewers are not all good men; an alternative, how ever, which I by no means wish to follow from the remarks which I have felt it my duty to make upon this subject. I can concede much where I cannot prove a criminal intention. The very temperate and truly Christian speech of the Honourable Justice Bailey, in passing sentence on Carlile, appears to me well-calculated to meet most of the false ideas which are taken up by those who object to the interference of the magistrate in affairs of blasphemy. This speech was very imperfectly reported in many of the daily journals; and, I believe, scarcely a shred of it is embodied in the monthly literature of the country. I think, therefore, Mr. Editor, you will do your readers a service by preserving the greater part of it, as being well calculated to vindicate the proceedings against which so much has been unjustly fulminated. I need not, however, add what I believe is quite undeniable, that both the prosecution and the verdict gave very general satisfaction throughout the country at large

FIDEI DEFENSOR.

Court of King's Bench, Nov. 16, 1819. Mr. Justice Bailey addressed the prisoner in the following manner:-" Richard Carlile, it is now my duty-my painful duty, I say to pass upon you the sentence of this Court, for two most heinous offences, of which juries of your country have found you guilty. Those offences are what are known to the laws of this country by the name of Blasphemy. That is to say, you are convicted of attacking the purity of that which we believe to be true, and of attempting to undermine that faith upon which all our hopes of happiness here and hereafter are founded. I hope, as you say, that the judgment of this Court will be administered upon you, with that pure temper of Christianity which our religion enjoins. You do not now stand upon the floor of this Court, to receive its judgment for your offence against God; but you stand here to receive judgment for that part of your offence which operates against man. The laws of this country give every man the enjoyment of his own free opinion. They impose upon no man articles of faith. Each is left to himself, to worship or not to worship, or to worship in such way as he may think fit; and so long as each man's opinion is confined within his own breast, the laws have no right to make him answerable for that opinion.

1

"But the offence for which you are to answer here, is an offence of a different description: it is not that you have disbelieved, but that you have attempted to introduce disbelief into the minds of others; and to introduce disbelief to such an extent, as to destroy the foundation of our future hopes. If, unfortunately for yourself, you have so unsettled the faith of others, as to induce men to commit crimes, which, had they not read your doctrines, they might have been deterred from committing-if, I say, you have subverted those principles of rectitude which are in

stilled into the consciences of men by the Deity, by the dissemination of your doctrines-before that tribunal which we believe can see the heart and mind of man, you have much to answer for. Your punishment there, is for the administration of your offended Deity; but on earth, it becomes the law of this country to protect the public at large against the mischief which must result from the dissemination of infidelity.

"It is of importance, perhaps, to you, that these works are not works of your own. One of them is a work published some consider able time ago; and the other, I think I may say, for the honour and glory of our own country, is the offspring of another land: it is a work of foreign importation. One of them had undergone discussion before a public tribunal, and the result was, what might be naturally expected-the condemnation and punishment of the individual by whom that publication was disseminated. But you, with a knowledge of that fact, took upon yourself, in defiance of that tribunal, and in opposition to that which you must have known was wrong and contrary to the laws of this country, to republish that blasphemous work. This book does not contain a calm discussion upon this solemn subject-it does not fairly argue upon those evidences of truth on which Christians stand -but it casts them behind the back,' and it abuses that which we call the great foundation on which our faith is fixed. You traduce that which possibly yon may not believe, and you defame that which possibly you may not have calmness to consider. In courts of justice, all communications between man and man there, are ou certain principles which we look upon as principles of morality. Then let any man, in justice, look at the purity of those holy principles which you presumed to attack. Let any man look at the purity of the con

have

tents of that book upon which your assault has been made. Let any man examine the holy rectitude of the precepts which it inculcates, and his nature will not permit him to dispute the sanctity of what he examines. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,' is one of the admirable precepts of this holy religion. Thou shalt do to others, as you would wish they should do unto you,' is another noble precept of the same religion; and if you ask forgiveness of Heaven for sins upon earth, no man can expect it in his conscience, unless he forgive others to the extent to which he asks to be forgiven. No man, as far as I can contemplate, can look upon a page of the holy Bible in any part of it, without finding therein rules of conduct, which will benefit himself and benefit mankind. Another precept in the same holy book, is to wish 'peace upon earth and good-will towards man:' and can the imagination of human beings contemplate anything more charitable, or any thing more magnanimous? The same book inculcates the doctriue of future rewards as we shall deserve them, and future punishments as we shall draw them on our heads; and, thank Heaven, that principle is the solemn tie which is made the sanction and foundation of all our moral establishments within this realm. The king upon his throne is bound by the solemn obligation of an oath; and he swears that he hopes the Almighty may so help him in the life hereafter, according as he shall abide by the principles of rectitude and justice upon his throne. What is the sanction under which the proceedings of our courts of justice are carried on? The solemn obligation of an oath. You have had the benefit of that oath, at the time of your very patient trial. You have had, perhaps, patience exerted upon your trial beyond that which has ever been exerted for the benefit of any other man, and perhaps be

yond what was ever exerted in any court of justice. You have been heard, to an extent which some, perhaps, may blame; but you have been heard to the utmost extent you have wished, before every branch of the tribunal to which you have been brought, and you have been only checked when the rules of decency and decorum were outraged. Going to the tribunals of our country, let me ask, under what sanction is property protected; or by what means, by what human means, are crimes to be prevented, or are crimes to be punished? Why, the constitution of the realm has established, that these objects are alone to be accomplished by juries being put on their oaths, to declare that, according to their hopes of reward or punishment hereafter, they will give their verdicts founded in truth and justice, according to their consciences. Through the medium of oaths administered to witnesses, the truth is to be elicited from them. This is the case now: it has been the case for centuries; and I trust it will continue to be the case as long as this world shall last. If then an attack is to be made upon those bonds and rules which embrace together all our moral and social institutions in life, what can be expected as the consequences here and hereafter? When an attack is made upon these institutions, and upon the religion on which they are founded, you tell us that you do not believe in the truth of that foundation upon which we are acting, and that, according to the laws of this country, you are warranted in disseminating your opinions, and in propagating your infidelity. The Jaws sanction no such conduct. The laws warrant no such course; but you are endeavouring to remove those obligations of truth and justice on which our law is founded.

"You have stated, that it is for intentions that man ought alone to be punished. It is part of the religion which we profess to believe, That

God trieth the heart of man;' but to appearances and actions can we alone look when we try him by our moral institutions upon earth.. Courts of justice are to act here according as they can judge from the acts and conduct of men. They are to consider things as criminal or not, according as they produce mischievous effects in others. Our religion teaches us forgiveness of injuries, and teaches us also to hope for forgiveness hereafter. If any sense of the immorality and enormity of your crime pervades your mind, I trust forgiveness may be granted, and pardon may be extended where we can alone expect to receive it. But still, if you have the power of reflection left, think, in the moment that you ask forgive ness from your Maker, to what extent you may have injured others -to what extent you may have injured society. You have stated that this is not the place for the discussion of the truths of Christianity; and in that respect I shall follow your example, and I shall forbear entering into any discussion of that kind. I entertain, from the examination of the holy Scriptures, a lively hope of a salvation hereafter; and I am, I trust, well grounded in that belief. have examined the doctrines promulgated in the holy Bible, and by my Redeemer; and I hope and trust from my soul, that the result of my examination will be beneficial to myself here and hereafter. I wil take care it shall not be prejudicial at least to others; but I must state, that the result of my examination has been, that I am confirmed in my faith of the Redeemer, and that I am a firm believer of that holy and charitable religion which this country professes*.

I

"You have stated that no man

Here a silent awe of sacred reverence seemed to pervade the whole Court, and the slightest noise might have echoed through the solemn silence which

existed, during this part of his lordship's address to the prisoner.

can tell what your intention is, in this publication; to which I accede: but the object of punishment is, not only to reform the individual criminal, if that can be accomplished, but to prevent the commission of the same crime in others, and to deter other persons from pursuing the same illegal course. From the affidavits that have been filed in this case we have reason to believe, that considerable profit has been the result of your traffic in these publications. There has been an insinuation to-day, that the profit has not been so extensive to yourself as was imagined by the Attorney-General. But let us look to your own acknowledgment of the sale of one of the works, no less than 3,000 copies of which have been sold within an inconsiderable period; some at the retail price of half-aguinea, and others, probably, at the trade price, very considerably under that amount: but it is the bounden duty of this Court to take care, that traffic of this kind shall not be ultimately profitable to any individual; and if a man should act in this way, from sordid motives, or from hope of gain, the laws of the country will at least attempt to disappoint him in that respect. In considering the whole of your case, Richard Carlile, most anxiously, it is determined that the punishment which it is our duty to inflict should not fall beavier upon you than we think absolutely necessary for the purpose of preventing the people at large of this kingdom from being affected, or led to believe that your crime is a light one. We are bound conscientiously, in looking at the wickedness of this work, to contemplate the welfare of the people at large. Many persous into whose bands it may unhappily fall, have not time for examination or inves

tigation into the question; and they lay hold of a dangerous work, the doctrines of which they have not an opportunity of comparing and examining with religious truths. have one more observation to add, and I have then done. It is thisThe work you have published is not a fair, reasonable, open, and temperate discussion of the religion of this country; but it is a tissue of doctrines submitted to the public mind without any qualification or examination whatever. If at the time the publication was committed to those who might become purchasers, you had recommended publications on the other side the question, your conduct might in some degree be palliated. If you had referred to the eloquent speech of Mr. Erskine in Williams's case; if you had referred to the learned publication of the Bishop of Llandaff; or if, indeed, you had referred to the works of laymen, Mr. Addison, Mr. Soame Jennings, or my Lord Lyttleton upon the Conversion of St. Paul; then indeed, with a selection of works contrary to the doctrines which you put forth, you might claim the merit of merely promulgating a fair discussion upon the subject, to the public; but you have pursued no such course. You have made an attack upon the faith of your country, and upon that holy religion upon which our consciousness of rectitude here, and upon which our expectations of rewards or punishments punishments hereafter, are founded."

Mr. Justice Bailey then proceeded to pronounce the sentence of the Court; namely, a fine of 1000l. and two year's imprisonment, for the first offence; and for the second 5007. and one year's imprisonment, with security for good behaviour for life.

Original Sin, Free Will, Grace, Regeneration, Justification, Faith, Good Works, and Universal Redemption, as maintained in certain Declarations of our Reformers, which are the Ground-work of the Articles of our Established Church upon these Subjects: with an important Account of the Subscription to the Articles in 1604; and an historical and critical Introduction to the Whole. By the Rev. H. I. TODD, M. A. F.S.A. Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty, and Keeper of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Records. London: Rivingtons. 1818. pp. lxii. and 244. Authentic Documents relative to the Predestinarian Controversy, which took place among those who were imprisoned for their Adherence to the Doctrines of the Reformation by Queen Mary: containing A Treatise on Predes tination, &c. by J. Bradford; Cause of Contention, by John Trewe, the unworthy marked Servant of the Lord. Published from a MS. in the Bodleian Library, with an Introduction. By R. LAURENCE, LL. D. Canon of Christ Church, Regius Professor of Hebrew, &c. Oxford: Parker. 1819. pp. xliii, and 70.

OUR closing Number for last year contained a reference to what we were happy to designate as a long neglected controversy, by giving some account of the history of the Synod of Dort, translated from the Latin by the Rev. Thomas Scott, the well known and respected champion of the moderate Calvinistic hypothesis. We shall now perform an act of fairness, and, we trust, in the same spirit of candour and impartiality as before, by presenting to our readers the substance of the publications at the head of the present article, sent forth by

persons not less known, at least the latter, as advocating the anti-Calvinistic hypothesis. Perfectly aware of the proper use which may be made of either hypothesis, as well as the lamentable consequences that have attended on the abuse of both, we desire to be particularly understood as wishing to press neither on our readers as an abstract question in contradistinction from the other. Our own invaluable Church-formularies, Articles, Liturgy, and Homilies, are, of all human standards, that to which we most gladly refer both ourselves and others for every thing Scriptural, both in faith and practice. With these we are fully satisfied; and if we should, in the course of our present examination and details, be led to any pointed animadversion on the conduct of the works before us, wé shall hope these animadversions will be found only to apply to such parts and points as would raise a question even amongst the most zealous orthodox defenders of their own side. Could we receive only those grand fundamentals of faith and practice, on which, as Christians and churchmen, we ought to be all agreed; were we not called upon from time to time to investigate the very articles of a standing or falling church, of which we most fully believe that of justifi cation by faith only to be one ;-did we not see controversies whicli

slept, awake in all their pristine life and vigour, just at the moment we had hoped that the subject was exhausted, and the question settled to the mutual satisfaction of all parties;-did we not see, in short, that even Christians will often be controversialists; that is, men will be men; we should be most happy to decline the most ungracious part of our public duties. We should rejoice to shrink from that of which we see little profit and no