Prisoner for Blasphemy

ock the clock registered five minutes past ten. We were provided with chairs, and there were pens and ink on the narrow ledge before us. It was not large enough, however, to hold all my

, and owing perhaps to the unfortunate structure of the article, it seemed as though he was being shot out every time he leaned forward. His countenance was by no means assuring to the "prisoners." He smiled knowingly to Sir Hardinge Giffard, and treated us with an insolent stare. Watching him closely through my eye-glass, I read my fate so far as he could decide it. His air was that of a man intent on peremptorily settling a troublesome piece of business; his strongest characteristic seemed infallibility, and his chief expression omniscience. I saw at once that we should soon fall foul of each other, as

he would not shock public decency by reading; and our woodcuts as "the grossest and most disgusting caricatures." And then, to catch any juryman who might not be a Christian, though perhaps a Theist, he declared that our blasphemous libels would "grieve the conscience of any sincere worshipper of the great God above us." This appeal was made with uplifted forefinger, pointing to where that being might be supposed to reside, which I inferred was

poil my defence. How different was the action of Lord Coleridge when he presided at our third trial in the Court of Queen's Bench! The case for the prosecution closed at one o'clock, exactly as it did on our first trial at the Old Bailey. But the Lord Chief Justice of England, with the instinct of a gentleman and the consideration of a just judge, did not need to be reminded that an adjournment in half an hour would make an awkward br

l, but simply punished people for openly desecrating sacred places or railing at any sect in the public thoroughfare, on the ground that such conduct tended to a breach of the peace; and that under the very same law members of the Salvation Army had been arrested and imprisoned because they persisted in walking in procession through the streets. Under the Indian law, no prosecution of the Freethinker could have been initiated; and, in support of this statement, I proceeded to quote from a letter by Professor W. A. Hunter, in the Daily News. Judge North doubtless knew that I cou

ad published in the Freethinker abounded in high-class publications, but Justice North endeavoured (vainly enough

told you before tha

the present prosecu

d blasphemous libel

asked you to bear i

expensive books, pub

L1 and more. I thi

have some proof of t

similar views are ex

, perhaps, in precise

expected that the pa

conducted on just th

esthetically speaki

pensive book, which

telligence and leisu

by the most prominen

expect to find diff

matter of course, dif

ces of taste affect th

id, they actually le

like this there ought

. Surely the man wh

nished, while the m

y is to go scot fre

men on grounds of

a parliament of aes

made Prime Minister,

eight before the jur

d opinion, I do not

accepted by you. No

first of all to a bo

an the old and well-

he author o

h: What is the n

s the 'Autobiography

What are you going

ng to refer to one

ce North:

at identical views to

e court are expressed

shall not hear anythi

ion, nor are the jur

ersons are sound or

ty of a blasphemous

for them to say wheth

his

ll your attention, m

e Cockburn in

will hear anything re

you was to find out w

te a l

ill quote a ve

North: I c

se against Charles Brad

: By whom is your

rbatim report publish

e shorthand notes of

ination and the jud

ere is no evidence of

ersonally hear it, but

will hear you state a

Lord Chief Jus

sant was about to

ram Sh

You have not prov

my lord; but althou

e report of a case, I

object t

ed in a copy of the

the Lord Chief Just

ant from committing

books as if reci

will allow you to g

ing from the book;

whether this i

proposing that. I

hose expressed here

That is not the que

, so much the worse

t person may be, cann

his

ord, might it not af

not themselves, by

to a breach of the pea

y are asked

I think not, and it

mere waste of time

een said in the all

lse has said t

rials the same proc

It will not be allo

rdship will pardon me

f the King against W

ere Hone read ext

ery possibly it migh

hat

rd, it was precisely

libel. Lord Ellenbor

ce North:

Ellenborough allowed

icatory of his own p

ase of the Queen agains

We have nothing t

y author has taken

libels, whoever

rdship mean that I am t

o on with your addre

ou to do. But you ca

the book you mentione

u ind

r lordship does not m

against a very grave c

on, go on, Foote. I

add

hip, these questions

the jury), no less a

st distinguished

ow, again, I cannot

the sake of putting

he passage you referr

e pointed out that th

ction, my lord, of t

to the reading. He

e any passage as a

ice Nort

person than the broth

rne

did I not tell you that

lordship give me a mo

s c

am ruling that you

g to

orry, my lord, I

I am sorry for it.

lf c

lordship mean that

ow justificati

here is no justifica

e to decide is whethe

guilty of a libel or

nsider whether the m

y will have also to

dants are guilty of

ibel, and that you h

the only two questi

thems

n an ordinary libel c

sho

ice Nort

t wish to occupy t

really I think yo

position in which I

g which I consider to

y de

have pointed out to

the jury have got t

the lines I have poi

I am very reluctant

hing which he consid

I hope you will not

I am maki

be very sorry, my lo

nsider ne

heir notice, that I had a perfect right to do so, and that it was a legitimate part of my defence. Since then I have conversed with many gentlemen who were present, some of them belonging to the legal profession, and I have heard but one opinion expressed as to Judge North's conduct. They all agree t

the latter having absolutely no standing in court except so far as he represents a first party in a suit. "May they not have a copy of the Act, my lord?" I inquired. "No," replied his lordship, "they will take the law from the directions I give them; not from reading Acts of Parliament." This is directly counter to the spirit and letter of Fox's Act; and I suspect that Judge North would have expressed himself more guardedly in a higher court. If juries have nothin

a single gas-jet. On each side there was a little den with an iron gate. One of these was filled with prisoners awaiting trial or sentence, who gazed through the bars at us with mingled glee and astonishment. They were chatting merrily, and I imagine from their free and easy m

evidently subdued to what he worked in. His world consisted of two classes-criminals and police; and without any further ceremon

half unconscious; and to our great surprise, it turned out to be Mr. Cattell, who had surrendered to his bail at the same time as we did, and had been shivering there ever since ten o'clock. After we left him he continued shivering for three or four hours longer in that black-hole of the Old Bailey, which struck a chill into our very bones even in the brief period of our tenancy, and which could hardly be warmed by a

d the use of a tin knife in Newgate, but even that, which used to be common in prisons, is now proscribed. The only carving instruments allowed the guests in her Majesty's hotels is a wooden spoon, although the tin knife still lingers in the Houses of Detention. Among other elaborate precautions again

d till it was emptied. It was probably a good honest bottle, but in the circumstances it seemed a despicable fraud. We tried hard for another supply, but we failed. Being anxious to prevent a display of inebriety in the dock, or desirous to repress rather

ke braves on the warpath; and, by way of relieving the tedium, we speculated on the number of laps in a mile. Our proceedings seemed to strike the wild beasts in the opposite den as unaccountable imbecility. They grinned at us through

erged into it, the sea of faces, suddenly caught en masse, seemed cold and alien. The feeling was only momentary, but I fancy it resembled the weird thrill that must have s

nold, the author of "The Evolution of Christianity," Swinburne, Byron and Shelley, I proceeded thus: "Now, gentlemen, I have given you a few illustrations of permitted blasphemy in expensive books, and I will now trouble you with a few instances of permitted blasphemy in cheap publications, which are unmolested because they call themselves Christian, and because those who conduct them are patronised by ecclesiastical dignitaries." Here I produced a copy of the War Cry

w, Foote, I am going

more of these illus

hemy in cheap public

e of them pu

I will use them fo

ll all

You will not use th

y not be used, my

religious symbols, a

all classes of lite

No they may not. I

n evidence, and I re

documents as par

ntlemen, I will now

another branch

t the War Cry till the last. It naturally ended my list of

those, however, who are not so curious or so painstaking, I give here the peroration only, to show what se

you at the outset t

ll questions affecti

of free speech and F

refer to specific do

fer to the great righ

neither so low as a

like the soaring az

oth with equal case

press, to show by y

to others the same

k you not to be misl

out by the prosecution

mighty and rich Corpo

d the money for it, a

rosecute. I ask you

ns, but rather to rem

us probably because

struck at again and

engaged in this pro

wing day by day in

t, as blasphemy has

gainst during the pa

and fewer proceedings

ver be another prose

ld not like to have i

struments of the las

ast jury who sent t

whose honesty there

will not allow yours

ch men to herd with

all the indignities s

end me, as well as m

iends, who do not t

which we stand: th

ed, giving a verdict

, instead of a verdi

s, as English juries

te the glorious prin

t all the religious

o impugn it for

accents. My expression and gestures were doubtless full of that dramatic power which comes of earnest sincerity. I felt every sentiment I uttered, and I believe I made t

alient points of our defence, and pressed them on the jury with all his might. His own sentiments, naturally expressed, in homely language, would have had a greater effect than any literary composition. After an experience of three trials, I would give this advice to every man who has to defend himself before a jury on a charge of blasphemy or sedition-"Write out on a sheet of paper the heads of your defence. Number them in the order you think they should be treated, so that your address may have a logical continuity. Fill in your sub-divisions, similarly numbered, under the chief heads, beginning the lines half-way across the page, so as to catch the eye readily. Think every clause out carefully. Fix every illustratio

nsistent with the dignity and impartiality of a judge. His tone was even worse than his words. He had no sympathy with us in our desperate effort to defend our liberty against such overwhelming odds, nor did we solicit any; but we had a right to expect him to refrain from constant expressions of antipathy. That, however, was not the whole of his offence against the rule

hemy. But as he made a very different statement four days later on at our second trial, I prefer to wait until, by placin

sorted to a paltry trick. Notwithstanding the late hour, he had Mr. Cattell brought into the dock for trial. By procuring a verdict against him our jury might be influenced. According to theory, of cou

he had employed counsel. That gentleman admitted the "horrible character of the publication, so eloquently denounced by the learned judge." He said that his client could not for a moment think of defending it; in fact, he had only sold it in ignorance, and he would never repeat the offence. On the ground of that ignora

ase completely into his own hands, examined and cross-examined. His summing-up was a disgusting exhibition. Naturally enou

nce in court, and as the jury filed into their seats a painful sense of expectation pervaded the assembly. His lordship said that he had called them into court to see whether he could assist them in any way, and especially by explaining the law to them again. The foreman, in a very quiet, composed manner, replied that they all understood the law, but there was no chance of their agreeing. His lordship invited them to try a further consultation, to which the foreman replied that it would be us

tunity to prepare another defence for the second trial, to which his lordship replied, "You will have the same opportunity then that you have now." He then hurriedly left the bench, and we were in custody of the Governor of Newgate. Sev

ds. The rich City Corporation was prosecuting us regardless of expense, and their case was conducted by three of the most skilful lawyers in London. Reason, justice and humanity, alike demanded that we should enjoy freedom and comfort while marshalling our resources for a fresh battle. Judge North, however, thought otherwise; in his opinion we required a different kind of "opportunity." He locked us up in a prison cell